Atheism refutes itself by definition. (Y)=/=( ), ( )=/=(?)

[Desert Snake]

Theism
(Y)=/=( )


Atheism
( )=/=(?)

Atheism cannot relate to theism if it simply means a lack of theism. With no qualifier, it means nothing.

 

[Terese]

Regardless, the concept exists.

 

[Valjean]

Theism
(Y)=/=( )


Atheism
( )=/=(?)

Atheism cannot relate to theism if it simply means a lack of theism. With no qualifier, or oppositional, it means nothing.

It means a lack of theism, that's something.

 

[HonestJoe]

Atheism cannot relate to theism if it simply means a lack of theism. With no qualifier, or oppositional, it means nothing.

What do you mean by “relate” to theism? Why would atheism need to “relate” to theism?

Atheism certainly doesn’t carry as much meaning as a lot of people (for and against) would like to apply to it but it still has a clear meaning; Not believing in the existence of any god or gods.

 

[Desert Snake]

What do you mean by “relate” to theism? Why would atheism need to “relate” to theism?

Atheism certainly doesn’t carry as much meaning as a lot of people (for and against) would like to apply to it but it still has a clear meaning; Not believing in the existence of any god or gods.

Great. And that is not the absence of a position, that is

(0)=/=(Y)

 

[Desert Snake]

Not believing as a position /definition is different from simply a lack of position on the subject, theism

 

[Jumi]

Do opposites of all beliefs refute themselves?

 

[HonestJoe]

Great. And that is not the absence of a position, that is

(0)=/=(Y)

I’m still not clear what you’re trying to say and I’m not familiar with the notation you’re trying to present.

Some people don’t believe in any god or gods and the term we use to describe such people is atheist. There is obviously a whole load more that leads on from that but as soon as you go beyond this basic concept, you’re in to the realms of disagreements and disagreements on definitions, meanings and philosophical positions (and frankly, some wilful misunderstanding and misdirection). Because of that, you need to make you’re self extremely and unconditionally clear on exactly what you’re talking about if you’re going to engage in meaningful discussion in the area.

 

[Desert Snake]

Do opposites of all beliefs refute themselves?

No.

 

[Jumi]

No.

How would you represent the distinction between other beliefs and their opposites and atheism/theism. What makes it special in your mind?

 

[LuisDantas]

Theism
(Y)=/=( )


Atheism
( )=/=(?)

Atheism cannot relate to theism if it simply means a lack of theism. With no qualifier, it means nothing.

Indeed! The very concept should not be necessary.

Its very need is a consequence of the rather aberrant nature of the concepts of "god" and "deity", who attempt to be both meaningful and meaningless at the same time.

One more of many serious flaws of theism. We atheists would often much rather not have to clean up after their mistakes, rest assured.

Why you also say that atheism "refutes itself" I have no idea, though.

 

[Kapalika]

Theism
(Y)=/=( )


Atheism
( )=/=(?)

Atheism cannot relate to theism if it simply means a lack of theism. With no qualifier, it means nothing.

I don't see how this argument makes any sense. It's incoherent to me. It would be like telling me unicorns must exist for anyone to be able to say they don't believe in them.

On one level, ya, they exist but are fictional. But that's pretty different than what most people mean by theism. A theist would say that God is factual, very real in the way that we are real. They believe in a personal god. The atheist just... doesn't believe that. Heck by definition anyone who doesn't know about the concept of a god is automatically an atheist by definition. So that defeats your argument anyway.

I kinda feel this debate can't go anywhere from here. Almost immediately everyone pointed out everything one really could about the argument lol

 

[qaz]

atheism doesn't deny the existence of theism itself. that was your logical misunderstanding.

 

[Desert Snake]

How would you represent the distinction between other beliefs and their opposites and atheism/theism. What makes it special in your mind?

The usage is problematic for the idea, and the label. Atheism actually isn't an opposite, and thats part of the problem.

Why you also say that atheism "refutes itself" I have no idea, though.

The label. The concept of disbelief is still an idea.

 

[Windwalker]

Atheism is connected to theism in concept the way being single is related to being married. Being single does not equate to not believing in marriage. Plenty of people are single without either giving a thought to marriage, or caring one way or the other about it. I think 'nontheistic' is a more apt way to describe it than something which actively rejects theism. That should be called something else, such as anti-theist.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Theism
(Y)=/=( )


Atheism
( )=/=(?)

Atheism cannot relate to theism if it simply means a lack of theism. With no qualifier, it means nothing.

Now you are getting it. This is why it's silly when theists say 'atheists believe this or that'. Atheism is a null set.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Aren't we overlooking the fact that (0)=/=(Y) is a true statement?
(or at least it can be depending on the outcome of the equation...)

Similarly:
4 =/= 8 , -4 =/= 4, and 2=/=20.

So what?

@Jumi asks a valid question. Using @syncretic 's logic, all opposites contradict their subject, and equally form accurate statements.

(Yellow) =/= (Blue)
(Up)=/=(Down)
(Tall)=/=(Short)
(Hard)=/=(Soft)

Those are all just as true as (0)=/=(Y).

More important to this conversation is the fact that you've not supplied us with an equation for how you determined the existence of (Y).

 

[LuisDantas]

The label. The concept of disbelief is still an idea.

Then it seems to me that you should point out how shallow the idea of theism is, instead.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Aren't we overlooking the fact that (0)=/=(Y) is a true statement?
(or at least it can be depending on the outcome of the equation...)

Similarly:
4 =/= 8 , -4 =/= 4, and 2=/=20.

So what?

@Jumi asks a valid question. Using @syncretic 's logic, all opposites contradict their subject, and equally form accurate statements.

(Yellow) =/= (Blue)
(Up)=/=(Down)
(Tall)=/=(Short)
(Hard)=/=(Soft)

Those are all just as true as (0)=/=(Y).

More important to this conversation is the fact that you've not supplied us with an equation for how you determined the existence of (Y).

Baby steps man. Her realization was an important precurser.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Baby steps man. Her realization was an important precurser.

That's fair