I see no value in atheism

[Willamena]

Why would he need to hear the phrase "god" for the first time to have no belief about it, and hence no opinion? Didn't he already have no belief about it and hence no opinion before he heard the phrase "god"?

Because of what it means to believe and to have an opinion.

The world, for each of us, is composed of all the thoughts and ideas we have about the world. Thoughts and ideas we don't have cannot help compose that world. The ones we do have, we can put into words.

Belief about something you've never heard of is not a belief. It doesn't exist.

To say I have "no belief about something I don't know and never heard of and doesn't exist," is to say an awful lot about it. It contradicts that you have nothing to believe in. You have a very large lot of words there representing what you say you don't believe in.

Or you could just say nothing.

But to say nothing is not to be the atheist. The atheist is the one who doesn't believe in god.

To say nothing is to be the Buddha.

 

[leibowde84]

But these people who don't have a belied in God, also do not have a belief in there being no God....so a theist using your logic can say.....people who do not disbelieve in God must be classified as theists!!!

C'mon...use your brains....

In other words:

Minimum Requirements
Theism = belief that God exists
Atheism (or "weak atheism") = lack of belief that God exists
Strong Atheism = affirmative belief that God does not exist

 

[Willamena]

Alright, I'm losing you. We clearly have something to "lack". We've been discusssing it this whole time. They "lack a belief in God".

We do.

But the guy on the island doesn't.

I lacked belief in the law of attraction, but, at the same time, I surely did not positively think that the law of attraction was false. Nevertheless, I certainly, at that point, "lacked a belief" in the law of attraction, even though I was very familiar with it.

So, why do you feel that it is not possible to "lack a belief in God" without "believing that God does not exist"? Why is it not possible to be familiar with the issue, yet still hold no affirmative belief either way?

I've not seen it, no.

Are you asking me why I think god is false even though I acknowledge that people can lack belief in god? I have already said: there are two sorts of atheists. I just happen to be one of them and not the other.

 

[outhouse]

I have more stringent requirements than you.

You can call refusing academia anything you want.

 

[Nakosis]

But these people who don't have a belied in God, also do not have a belief in there being no God....so a theist using your logic can say.....people who do not disbelieve in God must be classified as theists!!!

C'mon...use your brains....

theist - someone who possesses belief in a God.
atheist - someone who does not possess such a belief.

The only requirements. An atheist doesn't require a lack of belief in anything else.

 

[leibowde84]

We do.

But the guy on the island doesn't.


I've not seen it, no.

Are you asking me why I think god is false even though I acknowledge that people can lack belief in god? I have already said: there are two sorts of atheists. I just happen to be one of them and not the other.

Ok, now we are getting somewhere. Why does the guy on the island not lack the belief simply because it is not available to him? Let's say the guy grew up on the island alone. Eventhough he is not familiar with TV, wouldn't he still "lack" a TV? Eventhough he would not be familiar with sky scrapers, wouldn't he still lack knowledge of sky scrapers?

Remember, by "lack" we don't mean the negative connotation. It is simply the status of being without something.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I mean, "disbelief" is defined as a "lack of belief" as well, but that is besides the point. I would not agree though. You said "people who do not disbelieve in God must be classified as theists", but that makes no sense. "Theism" requires a belief in the existence of God. Only those that have an affirmative belief that God exists is included in that classification. Everyone who lacks such an affirmative belief can accurately be classified as "atheists" (among other things), as the requirement for said term is merely the absence of belief (or "lacking").

Classifying anyone who lacks a belief in God as a Theist is inaccurate, as that is literally the only requirement. Conversely, the only requirement for "atheism" is a lacking of that same belief (that God exists). Thus, classifying anyone who does not hold the belief that God exists as an atheist would be accurate.

Let me be sure we are in sync here as to precisely what we are saying....

I am saying that a person who has never ever heard of, or been exposed to the concept of theism, and or atheism, can not logically be formally classified as an theist or atheist...the reason being that it would be absurdly illogical to do so if they didn't yet have a clue what these concepts even meant..

So if you do not agree with my logic...please be explicit in pointing it out?

 

[JoStories]

Oh ... now I finally get what the issue is in this conversation I think. Real quick, can you clarify this so I can make sure I understand your point.

You are saying that it is impossible for someone familiar with the idea of God to "lack a belief" in God's existence. Is this accurate?

If so, why do you feel this way? I know many people who used to be devout Christians (so they are familiar with the idea of God), but don't hold a belief either way (they don't believe that God exists AND they don't believe that God does not exist). Would you claim that these people are simply confused or something?

Leibowde, I think I understand what she is saying and I agree really. No one, other than a rare few, can say they have not heard the concept of God. Whether they want to believe in it or not is their choice. But once someone has an idea of what God is they have made a choice. I don't really have a dog in this race but I think willamena is right. If you know what the concept is you have made a choice here.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

theist - someone who possesses belief in a God.
atheist - someone who does not possess such a belief.

The only requirements. An atheist doesn't require a lack of belief in anything else.

Sorry Nakosis, I reread your post and I see I was out of order....

theist - someone who disbelieves in the the non-existence of God
atheist - someone who believes in the non-existence of God

The only requirements. A theist believes in the existence of God and disbelieves in the non-existence of God, while an atheist believes in the non-existence of God, and disbelieves in the existence of God...

 

[JoStories]

Alright, I'm losing you. We clearly have something to "lack". We've been discusssing it this whole time. They "lack a belief in God".

How about this. Have you ever read or watched "The Secret"? The law of attraction and such. Now, I have read and watched the secret, and I am a believer now. But, when my Sister first introduced me to it, I was extremely skeptical. I, like many others, erroneously equated it to being able to imagine things and get them. Obviously it isn't that simple, but that is beyond the point. There was a period of time when I did not believe that the law of attraction was real or fake. I was in the process of learning more about it and giving it a try myself. At that point I wasn't so much skeptical, but cautious. I had no reason to believe that it was fake, but I hadn't yet been convinced that it was real. I lacked belief in the law of attraction, but, at the same time, I surely did not positively think that the law of attraction was false. Nevertheless, I certainly, at that point, "lacked a belief" in the law of attraction, even though I was very familiar with it.

So, why do you feel that it is not possible to "lack a belief in God" without "believing that God does not exist"? Why is it not possible to be familiar with the issue, yet still hold no affirmative belief either way?

I suppose, in that context, I see your point. But I honestly cannot imagine anyone not making a choice in the matter. IMO, and I realize you won't agree, once a person has heard of God, they either decide there is something to it or that it's clearly bunk. Perhaps, in the way you say this, someone could just reject the notion without thought and I buy that but they still make the choice to reject that notion.

 

[JoStories]

I never said that atheists don't have world-views, I merely said that "atheism" is not a world-view. Of course, all atheists have world views like secular humanism and strong atheism.

Now that I agree with. My father had many world views but he still rejected the notion of God.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

In other words:

Minimum Requirements
Theism = belief that God exists
Atheism (or "weak atheism") = lack of belief that God exists
Strong Atheism = affirmative belief that God does not exist

Here...fixed!

Minimum Requirements
Theism (or "weak theism") = lack of belief that God does not exist...
Strong Theism = affirmative belief that God exists
Atheism (or "weak atheism") = lack of belief that God exists
Strong Atheism = affirmative belief that God does not exist

 

[Typist]

"Atheism" is often confused as being a system of beliefs or "world view", which it certainly is not.

Atheism, of whatever strength, is the belief that the rules of human reason are binding on the realm under discussion with the God proposal, all of reality.

The only exceptions are those who haven't heard of God proposals, and those who reject God proposals based on something other than reason. Never met one of those so...

Atheism is a faith based belief system which typically is not sophisticated enough to know it is a faith based belief system.

Theists at least know and are willing to admit they are using faith, so they win the intellectual honesty contest on points in my book.

 

[Bunyip]

Atheism, of whatever strength, is the belief that the rules of human reason are binding on the realm under discussion with the God proposal, all of reality.

No wonder you are so confused. No - atheism is the absence of belief in god. No idea where you got that nutty definition from, but no - that is not atheism. Atheism is the absence of faith in god.


I have to say that i am amazed you could participate in a debate like this, and have such an epically misguided notion of what atheism means. Where on earth did you get that bizarre definition from?

The only exceptions are those who haven't heard of God proposals, and those who reject God proposals based on something other than reason. Never met one of those so...

Atheism is a faith based belief system which typically is not sophisticated enough to know it is a faith based belief system.

Again, I can see the source of your confusion - no atheism is the ABSENCE of a specific faith belief, not a belief at all.

Theists at least know and are willing to admit they are using faith, so they win the intellectual honesty contest on points in my book.

Well theists are using faith, atheist reject that faith belief. You seem to have confused atheism for theism.

 

[Bunyip]

Here...fixed!

Minimum Requirements
Theism (or "weak theism") = lack of belief that God does not exist...
Strong Theism = affirmative belief that God exists
Atheism (or "weak atheism") = lack of belief that God exists
Strong Atheism = affirmative belief that God does not exist

An affirmative belief that something doesn't exist? ROLF That's hilarious.

 

[leibowde84]

Let me be sure we are in sync here as to precisely what we are saying....

I am saying that a person who has never ever heard of, or been exposed to the concept of theism, and or atheism, can not logically be formally classified as an theist or atheist...the reason being that it would be absurdly illogical to do so if they didn't yet have a clue what these concepts even meant..

So if you do not agree with my logic...please be explicit in pointing it out?

My logic is that, by definition, no decision is necessary for atheism. Merely the lack of belief, even if that is because one is not familiar with the concept of God, is sufficient. The word "lack", meaning to not have/hold, seems to unambiguously show this. Remember, this is not "lacking" in the derogatory sense.

 

[Sapiens]

No wonder you are so confused. No - atheism is the absence of belief in god. No idea where you got that nutty definition from, but no - that is not atheism. Atheism is the absence of faith in god. Again, I can see the source of your confusion - no atheism is the ABSENCE of a specific faith belief, not a belief at all.Well theists are using faith, atheist reject that faith belief. You seem to have confused atheism for theism.

Typist recognizes the inferiority of theism and strives mightily to put theism and atheism on an even plane by trying to style atheism as a faith based belief system ... it doesn't wash, but the motive and Typist's insecurity are both clear.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You said "people who do not disbelieve in God must be classified as theists", but that makes no sense. "Theism" requires a belief in the existence of God. Only those that have an affirmative belief that God exists is included in that classification. Everyone who lacks such an affirmative belief can accurately be classified as "atheists" (among other things), as the requirement for said term is merely the absence of belief (or "lacking").

In quoting me, you purposely left out my qualifier...'using your logic' which makes me think your agenda as an atheist is more important to you than learning.

Using your logic...everyone who lacks an affirmative belief in theism can be classified as an atheist....and so I ask you how should everyone who lacks an affirmative belief in atheism be classified?

 

[leibowde84]

Leibowde, I think I understand what she is saying and I agree really. No one, other than a rare few, can say they have not heard the concept of God. Whether they want to believe in it or not is their choice. But once someone has an idea of what God is they have made a choice. I don't really have a dog in this race but I think willamena is right. If you know what the concept is you have made a choice here.

That is my issue. I don't agree at all with that. I have been in that position myself. But, I would never expect anyone to consider that as evidence.

Why do you think it is not possible to be undecided about belief in the existence of God?

 

[Bunyip]

[user]Typist[/user] recognizes the inferiority of theism and strives mightily to put theism and atheism on an even plane by trying to style atheism as a faith based belief system ... it doesn't wash, but the motive and Typist's insecurity are both clear.

It constantly amazes me how people actually seem to believe that you can cunningly reword a claim and thus magically transfer the burden of proof. As if by adding a few extra negatives you can turn a disbelief into a positive claim - and thus demolish atheism. It is stunningly silly.