"Humans are born as atheists"

[Willamena]

to one degree or another, yes.
which is usually not a problem.
However, when one starts denying the real world in favour of their ideal world, it can cause problems.

Ah. Bully on those who know the real world.

 

[McBell]

Cannot believe (as in ignorance) and do not believe (atheism) are not the same thing. We don't "do" not believing, it's something we are. We don't "do" any nots. We do dos.

Now try it with other definitions of "atheist".
Nice try though.

 

[Willamena]

Now try it with other definitions of "atheist".
Nice try though.

I'll just stick to my guns, thanks.

 

[Valjean]

saying a baby is an atheist is absurd in that it is meaningless.
Just like saying a rock is an atheist.

Useless in most contexts, true, but still apt; and in the context it's being used -- as an illustration of weak atheism as the epistemic default position -- it's a good illustration.

For some, it is absurd because of what "atheist" means to them.

"To them" being the salient term. As long as both parties agree on a definition, communication's possible, but when you insist on applying an alternate definition when the rest of the group has made it clear that they're not using your definition in the discussion, well, you get 300+ posts with recurring arguments.

Yes.
Which is why i find it rather comical, and sad at the same time, that so many people are unable to understand there is more than one definition of the word "atheist".

Are they in active denial, deliberately constructing straw men, or just monumentally obtuse? I wonder...

I think Willamena makes some good arguments on here.

I think Willamena's tying herself in knots with convoluted semantics and mental gymnastics.
---- Love ya, W.

 

[paarsurrey]

Cognition is the function of the brain that allows learning, making value judgments, understanding, and the development of the self.

The functioning of the brain of a child starts in the womb of the mother as soon as soul flashes in the fetus:
Fetal Taste
Why people grow up liking hot chilies or spicy curries may also have something to do with the fetal environment. By 13 to 15 weeks a fetus' taste buds already look like a mature adult's, and doctors know that the amniotic fluid that surrounds it can smell strongly of curry, cumin, garlic, onion and other essences from a mother's diet. Whether fetuses can taste these flavors isn't yet known, but scientists have found that a 33-week-old preemie will suck harder on a sweetened nipple than on a plain rubber one.
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/tul/psychtoday9809.html

Regards
#272 #354

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

saying a baby is an atheist is absurd in that it is meaningless.
Just like saying a rock is an atheist.

It's an edge case for a generally meaningful, useful approach that captures how the term "atheist" is actually used in general.

OTOH, saying that babies aren't atheists has implications for the term atheism that create absurdities when we try to apply the term to adults.

 

[McBell]

Are they in active denial, deliberately constructing straw men, or just monumentally obtuse? I wonder...

Some of them are in active denial.
This is evidenced by the fact that it matters not how many times it is explained to them, they still repeatedly make the same false statements over and over.

 

[Willamena]

"To them" being the salient term. As long as both parties agree on a definition, communication's possible, but when you insist on applying an alternate definition when the rest of the group has made it clear that they're not using your definition in the discussion, well, you get 300+ posts with recurring arguments.

@Valjean Yes, to them. That is what we were talking about. Salient atheism.

It's not an alternate definition to them. To them, yours is.

 

[Yerda]

I'm trying to get you to explain in a coherent way what you mean when you say you "rejected the idea". Right now, what you've told me relies on the word "god", which is a term I consider to be incoherent.


Here's what I'm trying to get at: I don't think you've rejected theism, because I think rejecting theism is impossible

I think you may have rejected some forms of theism, but every theist I know has rejected some forms of theism, so that isn't enough to make a person an atheist.


I don't agree that it can be rejected, because the term "god" is so poorly defined that the only way to reject the proposition is to consider each and every god and reject them in turn, but this is something that's beyond human capabilities.


Irrelevant to the question at hand. If we know that they're out there, and if we define atheism in terms of rejecting the proposition "there is a god", then the proposition - and your rejection - has to take their gods into account.

How you're going to do this while knowing nothing about their gods is your problem to solve, not mine.


Then how does a person reject the proposition "there is a god"? If you're not going to reject each god individually - which you agree is impossible - then you need to define "god" in a coherent enough way that we can define "gods" as a category.

... and THAT'S why I asked you to tell us what "god" means.

Thanks.

I undestand where you're coming from now. Let me think about - it may be that I simply haven't thought it through. These are fair points and I don't want to simply say I disagree since you took the time to explain.

 

[firedragon]

How could a Human being be born an Atheist?

Anti Theist means Anti God put simply. Or Anti Divine.

How could a new born be anti anything? How could a child be Anti God or against the concept of God when it doesnt know or have not heard shi(t about God??

 

[ArtieE]

How could a Human being be born an Atheist?

Atheist means literally "not theist". How can a human being be born already believing in the existence of one or more gods?

 

[firedragon]

Atheist means literally "not theist". How can a human being be born already believing in the existence of one or more gods?

I didnt say that HUmans are born with the belief of God.

Nor are they born as Atheists. As a word Atheist does not mean "not theist" literally. Not theist is Not theist. Non theist is Non theist.

No one is born Atheist or Theist.

 

[ArtieE]

Cannot believe (as in ignorance) and do not believe (atheism) are not the same thing.

If you are ignorant of theism you can't be a theist and is per definition not a theist. (Atheist).

 

[ArtieE]

As a word Atheist does not mean "not theist" literally.

Yes it does. The prefix a- literally means "not, without". https://www.englishclub.com/vocabulary/prefixes.htm

 

[LuisDantas]

No, I'm sorry, but they aren't. I have no idea where this idea could have come from other then poor reasoning or ignorance of psychology. The entire concept of there being or not being a god is abstract, and requires abstract reasoning.

Why are you not contradicting yourself here, exactly? It seems to me that you are.

An object that cannot think about such questions, such as plants, would never be considered atheists with intellectual honesty.

Actually, they must[/b] be considered atheists if intellectual honesty is an issue.

Are you perhaps taking as a premise that atheism must be chosen? That there can't be atheism until and unless it is reasonably possible to have an alternative to it?

That sure sounds unreasonably arbitrary a restriction to me.

(...)

Beside the simple fact that kids have no idea what we're even really discussing, the fact is that atheism requires making a judgement call.

Does it? Why so? Atheism requires nothing besides the lack of a belief in the existence of any deities, doesn't it?

Where would a judgement call be necessary? Atheism needs far less justification than you seem to believe.

I'm not saying anything more than atheists consciously weight evidence and arguments to decided there probably is no god, so please save the straw men.

That is one way of being an atheist. Hardly the only one.

 

[firedragon]

Yes it does. The prefix a- literally means "not, without". https://www.englishclub.com/vocabulary/prefixes.htm

So you say that Antimatter is No Matter?

Atheism, the word was not born as anaemia. If a is used as a prefix like aglow, then Atheists are in the process of becoming theists.

The word Atheist was born of Anti-Theism. Even Richard Dawkins had a discussion on this on this point.

 

[LuisDantas]

So you say that Antimatter is No Matter?

Atheism, the word was not born as anaemia. If a is used as a prefix like aglow, then Atheists are in the process of becoming theists.

The word Atheist was born of Anti-Theism. Even Richard Dawkins had a discussion on this on this point.

I am not aware of that discussion, but I sure disagree with that statement.

Atheism exists as a simple contrast to theism. Anti-theism is by necessity far more active than atheism has to be.

 

[ArtieE]

So you say that Antimatter is No Matter?

You don't understand the difference between the prefix a- and the prefix anti-?
a- means "not, without"
anti- means "opposing, against, the opposite"
Did you read the link I gave you? Here it is again.
https://www.englishclub.com/vocabulary/prefixes.htm

 

[firedragon]

You don't understand the difference between the prefix a- and the prefix anti-?
a- means "not, without"
anti- means "opposing, against, the opposite"
Did you read the link I gave you? Here it is again.
https://www.englishclub.com/vocabulary/prefixes.htm

I did read the link you gave.

Again, a is not a prefix like aglow. It is born of Anti Theist. Two words in conjunction. Now you can change it the way you want.

 

[firedragon]

I am not aware of that discussion, but I sure disagree with that statement.

Atheism exists as a simple contrast to theism. Anti-theism is by necessity far more active than atheism has to be.

So you distinguish between Anti Theism and Atheism?

Okay then.