"Atheist"--the term itself

[9-10ths_Penguin]

A lack of belief doesn't need to be a belief in itself. A simple illustration

Person 1: "I saw a flying saucer."
Person 2: "I don't believe you."

Person 2 does not hold a belief that flying saucers don't exist. He just doesn't believe that Person 1 saw a flying saucer. There is a fundamental difference between believing something is not true ( let's call it active atheism) and not believing something is true (passive atheism).

See the difference? When you believe something is not true, you must have reasons for that belief.

Whereas not believing until proven is the default and logical stance.

Right. I think it's important to also point out the distinction - and I think that this might be where Augustus is having trouble - between having a belief about the validity of an argument and having a belief about that argument's conclusion. I can reject "the sky is blue because pixies paint it that way" without rejecting "the sky is blue."

 

[Willamena]

Atheism deals with belief. No belief.

As in zero. None.

No negation. Merely value. Zero.

Remind me again. What value does zero have? Would that be no value, as in the negation of any value?

 

[prometheus11]

Remind me again. What value does zero have?

None. That's the point.

All ideas of rejection of negation are red herrings. If belief isn't present, it's not there.

 

[Willamena]

None. That's the point.

All ideas of rejection of negation are red herrings. If belief isn't present, it's not there.

I think you're missing out on the value of negation, especially the negation of value.

 

[Sunstone]

I think you're missing out on the value of negation, especially the negation of value.

That's a pretty negative attitude to take, Willamena!



(tee hee. Just kidding)

 

[Willamena]

That's a pretty negative attitude to take, Willamena!



(tee hee. Just kidding)

Actually, it's positive.

 

[prometheus11]

I think you're missing out on the value of negation, especially the negation of value.

I'm not missing out. If you'd like to start a thread about negation and values, I'll give it a read. Sounds interesting.


Where'd that red herring get off too, now?

 

[Sunstone]

I'm beginning to wonder if I might not be the only person in this thread who really doesn't care how an atheist defines his or her atheism, so long as they make their views clear when appropriate or necessary for communication.

 

[Willamena]

I'm not missing out. If you'd like to start a thread about negation and values, I'll give it a read. Sounds interesting.


Where'd that red herring get off too, now?

It's the most misunderstood beast.

 

[Sunstone]

I'm beginning to wonder if I might not be the only person in this thread who really doesn't care how an atheist defines his or her atheism, so long as they make their views clear when appropriate or necessary for communication.

*is beginning to feel lonely*

 

[prometheus11]

*is beginning to feel lonely*

There's plenty of herring and scarecrows around.

 

[Willamena]

I'm beginning to wonder if I might not be the only person in this thread who really doesn't care how an atheist defines his or her atheism, so long as they make their views clear when appropriate or necessary for communication.

*is beginning to feel lonely*

You've made your view clear.

But this is an Internet forum. It's only purpose is to make views clear.

Edit: Go you!

 

[Willamena]

There's plenty of herring and scarecrows around.

They make an excellent stew. I can post the recipe.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm beginning to wonder if I might not be the only person in this thread who really doesn't care how an atheist defines his or her atheism, so long as they make their views clear when appropriate or necessary for communication.

Kinda sorta. At the end of the day, what a person believes is more important than the label we place on those beliefs.

That being said, there are all sorts of bizarre assumptions built into defining atheism as "active disbelief" that I think are interesting to unpack.

 

[prometheus11]

That's why we wrote this song.

 

[Mister Emu]

I'm beginning to wonder if I might not be the only person in this thread who really doesn't care how an atheist defines his or her atheism, so long as they make their views clear when appropriate or necessary for communication.

Grand scheme of things, you are of course correct. But, It is all good fun when the silliness like "babies are atheists" comes out.

 

[Sunstone]

Kinda sorta. At the end of the day, what a person believes is more important than the label we place on those beliefs.

Exactly!

That being said, there are all sorts of bizarre assumptions built into defining atheism as "active disbelief" that I think are interesting to unpack.

Interesting? Yes, I agree with you there. Especially since -- in my view, at least -- there seems to be a "political" agenda that is often enough involved in insisting that atheism means and only means "active disbelief". In fact, I don't think this thread, or so many similar threads, would go on for as long as they do if none the participants wanted to score "political" points against atheists. But perhaps I'm wrong about that.

 

[Sunstone]

But, It is all good fun when the silliness like "babies are atheists" comes out.

Granted. I have to agree with you there. Although I'm not sure we have the very same reasons for thinking "babies are atheists" is a bit silly.

 

[Ouroboros]

1. Duh.
2. Duh. But they either believe or they don't.

Or they don't have the ability to do either.

 

[Mister Emu]

Yes, it's a different term. Different meaning.

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/insist?s=t

To indulge your pedantry: What theology insists on the framework you espouse and why should anyone other than its adherents be beholden to it?

The label "atheist" includes the "deity neutral".

Is the term agnostic no longer meaningful?

Although I'm not sure we have the very same reasons for thinking "babies are atheists" is a bit silly.

Now you have to tell, you can't tease us like that.

Things I've learned: Babies are amoral atheist holocaust deniers. Maybe the Medieval Church had it right with limbo after all!