Fundamentalist Atheists

[CynthiaCypher]

Yet if there is no theism then what becomes of atheism? Is the word merely erased because there is no theism?

Well...yes. If we lived in a world were there was no decontrasurbolism, then adecontrasurbolism or anti-decontrasurbolism would not only be irrelevant but nonsensical.

Well we do happen to live in a world were there is no decontrasurbolism, so if I were to say I was an anti-decontrasurbolist it would be meaningless.

 

[yoda89]

Seriously, that doesn't even make sense to the subject at hand.
You cant even relate that to atheism
"I lack the belief in having hair",

Due to theism there is atheism, but theism is about belief in god and atheism is too.

Its a point against believing in nothing is actually believing in something. It expands the discussion to include other examples.

Is having no substance still having substance?

Is lacking of food still having food?

Is thinking of nothing actually thinking about something?

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

True if we do include them as human beings who do not believe. I do wonder about zombies.

Zombie babies or zombie adults?

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

We live in a world where the definition is a lack of belief in a diety. Yet if there is no theism then what becomes of atheism? Is the word merely erased because there is no theism? We therefore disregard the definition of atheism even though it is what is.

What I don't understand is why there is even a term for the lack of a belief in something though. I do not believe in unicorns, am I an a-unicornist? I do not believe in one-eyed-one-horned-flying-purple-people-eaters, am I an a-one-eyed-one-horned-flying-purple-people-eaterist?

 

[Sunstone]

[yawn] Another "What's an atheist" debate. [/yawn]

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

[yawn] Another "What's an atheist" debate. [/yawn]

In a thread about atheists, who would have guessed?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

What I don't understand is why there is even a term for the lack of a belief in something though.

Convenience.

 

[yoda89]

again with the "if's".
It makes no difference, man has believed in God since the beginning of time, you cant just erase it to have some sort of point.
Its part of our existence

How exactly do you have knowledge that man has believed in God since the beginning of time?

 

[IHaveTheGift]

Due to theism there is atheism, but theism is about belief in god and atheism is too.

Its a point against believing in nothing is actually believing in something. It expands the discussion to include other examples.

Is having no substance still having substance?

Is lacking of food still having food?

Is thinking of nothing actually thinking about something?

So what... you are not making a point at all
Man has always believed in God...you cant erase that

and again, lacking food(ect) is not the non belief in food
You are not making sense
I am thinking of nothing,... impossible to do

How exactly do you have knowledge that man has believed in God since the beginning of time?

early man

 

[Sunstone]

In a thread about atheists, who would have guessed?

I guess it just goes to show we atheists know how to party.

 

[Uberpod]

Points of clarification:

1) Contemplate the difference between prefixes a- versus anti-.
Think antisocial versus asocial.

2) Atheist includes BOTH those who have contemplated theism and do not see sufficient evidence AND those who have not really ever even contemplated a god or gods.

 

[yoda89]

What I don't understand is why there is even a term for the lack of a belief in something though. I do not believe in unicorns, am I an a-unicornist? I do not believe in one-eyed-one-horned-flying-purple-people-eaters, am I an a-one-eyed-one-horned-flying-purple-people-eaterist?

Good question. What would you actually purpose?

 

[LuisDantas]

What I don't understand is why there is even a term for the lack of a belief in something though. I do not believe in unicorns, am I an a-unicornist? I do not believe in one-eyed-one-horned-flying-purple-people-eaters, am I an a-one-eyed-one-horned-flying-purple-people-eaterist?

Do you know of any societies which assume people to believe in unicorns or horned flying purple people eaters? Which treat them weird when they do not? Which expect them to give up some of their personal space and rights on stead of those that do believe?

 

[LuisDantas]

Clarity?

Sorry, I am just not understanding what the problem is.

 

[LuisDantas]

No puzzling necessary. Infants, like inanimate objects, are simply not capable of holding any beliefs, so pointing out and labeling one, specific belief they can't hold doesn't add any useful information about infants. Nor does it add any useful information about atheism or belief, since something that can't hold beliefs is logically exempt from the classification of holding/not holdling beliefs.

In other words, labeling an infant an atheist is logically equivalent to labeling a rock an atheist. As I've said before, some people may find calling rocks atheists to be a meaningful or useful exercise. Personally, I don't.

So you understand my point but will simply arbitrarily, for no stated or discernible reason whatsoever, disagree with it anyway?

I will keep puzzling for a little while then.

 

[Sunstone]

No puzzling necessary. Infants, like inanimate objects, are simply not capable of holding any beliefs, so pointing out and labeling one, specific belief they can't hold doesn't add any useful information about infants. Nor does it add any useful information about atheism or belief, since something that can't hold beliefs is logically exempt from the classification of holding/not holdling beliefs.

In other words, labeling an infant an atheist is logically equivalent to labeling a rock an atheist. As I've said before, some people may find calling rocks atheists to be a meaningful or useful exercise. Personally, I don't.

I agree with this. I was once of the opinion that babies were atheists, but your reasoning here and elsewhere has caused a change of mind.

 

[Revoltingest]

Infants, like inanimate objects, are simply not capable of holding any beliefs, so pointing out and labeling one, specific belief they can't hold doesn't add any useful information about infants. Nor does it add any useful information about atheism or belief, since something that can't hold beliefs is logically exempt from the classification of holding/not holdling beliefs.

In other words, labeling an infant an atheist is logically equivalent to labeling a rock an atheist.

This is sound reasoning for your perspective, but I see another.
A person who was born not believing in gods, & continued all his life not believing in gods certainly passed a phase in life where he became aware he didn't believe, & gave thought to not believing. The when & how long of this phase would vary from heathen to heathen, & perhaps be indeterminate. Moreover, some of us could've been predisposed to be atheists because of hardwiring &/or cultural environment. (This is almost analogous to a Jewish infant being a Jew.) So I've always been an atheist, & always had such an orientation. It's not the "truth", but it's true enuf.

Btw, I wouldn't say all babies are atheists.
(It's not something I discuss with them.)

 

[IHaveTheGift]

If I am to ponder a babies mind, i wonder what goes on in their tiny heads, they have no words yet, so do they think in picture form?
That is more interesting then arguing if they are Atheists

 

[CynthiaCypher]

If I am to ponder a babies mind, i wonder what goes on in their tiny heads, they have no words yet, so do they think in picture form?
That is more interesting then arguing if they are Atheists

Well if you ask us who actually have babies...they're pretty much animist if anything. It's cute how they imbue self into everything but that is the way they are.

 

[IHaveTheGift]

Well if you ask us who actually have babies...they're pretty much animist if anything. It's cute how they imbue self into everything but that is the way they are.

yah, do you think they think the same way ones pet does, neither know what words are?

Gee I hope I my words are not twisted by wanna be know it alls and them say I consider a baby no more valuable then a kitty cat or what ever they may do,