It's not arbitrary. It's what the word means. There's really nothing more to it than that.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I see no value in atheism
- Thread starter The Transcended Omniverse
- Start date
leibowde84
Veteran Member
I'm confused. I have no problem with atheism being the opposite of theist. One holds a belief that God exist. The other does not hold a belief that God exists.Fair enough, I have already stated I am fine with the various definitions, but let's just be aware that the inclusion of the I don't knows and the inapplicables is arbitrary. It comes from distinguishing atheist as not theist. We could just as well define atheist and theist as not atheist.
As long as we are aware of the consequences of the definitions that we use and set the parameters I think we are fine. It is pointless to quibble over the definitions of we are all aware of the semantic nuances.
But that said, if we are all chiming in on how things should be categorized banana is not to fruit what unknown is to negative.
The premise is "there is a god."
The premise "belief in god" is a different horse.
Lots of conflating going on.
Curious George
Veteran Member
Is the opposite of happy angry?
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Theism and Atheism have to do with the belief in the existence of God. They are are only based on a person's beliefs and are not limited by whether or not God ACTUALLY exists. They are merely based upon belief. That is the only defining factor, unless you can provide another.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
No, the opposite of happy is unhappy. There are a lot of people who enjoy being angry I think.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
The terms describe world views or systems of belief, not reality as it exists.
Curious George
Veteran Member
It adds no value to the term atheism, it unnecessarily expands term atheism, if we were to switch the defining term at least two thirds of the groups that fall into atheist would then fall to theist where they would add no value to that term.
Curious George
Veteran Member
But isn't angry not happy, along with sad, and every other feeling?
An analogy I've on occasion tossed around is: positive integers; negative integers; and zero.
The "opposite" of a positive integer, arguably, is a negative integer; and vice versa.
But the more relevant term here would be "non-positive integers". That set includes both zero (analogous to weak atheists) and negative integers (analogous to strong atheists).
Emotions make for a poor analogy. I can be happy and unhappy simultaneously. I believe there's even a word for that emotional state in German.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Not necessarily. There are some who enjoy being angry.
Curious George
Veteran Member
Fair enough more semantics at play, is or possible to be neither happy or unhappy?
A theist stands on one bank of the river. A "strong atheist" stands on the opposite bank. A "weak atheist" is in the middle of the river not knowing which bank to aim for.
I would contend that one could reasonably describe one's emotional state as neither happy nor unhappy.
Whether or not any value is contributed by the definition is a purely subjective viewpoint. The word means what it means. I'm sure someone far more qualified than me could speak toward its etymology.
As repeatedly mentioned, for purposes of clarification, additional terms have been established to further distinguish between two categories of atheists: strong; and weak. That these aren't singular words is hardly meaningful or important, I daresay. Describing someone as a strong atheist is sufficient, it would seem to me, to separate that person from another fellow who happens to be a weak atheist.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
And the atheist ACTUALLY does not believe in God, which is not the same as actively believing that God does not exist. It can be, but not necessarily.
Curious George
Veteran Member
But if we define by the term happy unhappy the same way theist and atheist are herein defined we get that the state of being neither happy or unhappy as being unhappy. That makes sense how?
leibowde84
Veteran Member
I agree. But, would you agree that both the "strong" and "weak" are "atheists", by definition?