I see no value in atheism

[McBell]

What is your point...what definition of atheist is it that you believe is correct that you think i do not?

Another false dichotomy.
You rather fancy them, don't you?

You keep making the claim that atheists HAVE to reject god.
That is plain flat out not true.

I understand your whole worldview may depend upon your belief that atheists have to deny god.
However, the fact of the matter is that an atheist is ALSO someone with out a belief in god.

An atheist does not have to deny god in order to be an atheist.

 

[McBell]

.atheism implies exposure to the concept of theism in order to be able to judge it not credible and thus to reject it...

No, it does not.

 

[leibowde84]

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?

1. I am a theist, so I can honestly say I dont have an atheist agenda.
2. I'm not sure why you thought that was necessary, but I'm sorry for any confusion. I understood what you were saying. Didn't mean anything by it.

That is my point. An affirmative belief in Atheism in general is a logical fallacy (speaking of those who merely lack a belief), because there is no declarative statement. They would say "I'm undecided". Those would be weak atheists (still under the parent category "atheist") or agnostics. Again ... all atheists by definition.

Do you have an issue with my logic or my linguistic choices?

Btw, great debate. This is interesting.

 

[leibowde84]

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.

Fair enough, but they still don't believe actively that God does not exist.

 

[leibowde84]

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

Thank God (no pun intended). I thought our minds wouldn't meet all day.

 

[Sapiens]

No, it does not.

You are right, I was raised as an atheist, with no focus on religion. I did not know such a thing existed until I was six or seven, it seemed to me that it was just clubs that people belonged to and went to on the weekends when we went to the beach (I thought I had a much better deal). I can still remember when someone tried to explain religion to me, it made me giggle and my response was, basically, "You must be kidding ... I'm too old for Santa Claus tales."

 

[Ben Dhyan]

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.

I am glad that you called it your logic, because it not logic by normal standards.....why is your logic such that, no decision is necessary for atheism.....for that would mean that people who have no belief in atheism, are classified as atheists..and that is sort of lunacy....

It is a logic that would be consistent with say a communist who claims that because no decision is necessary for communism, anyone who is not familiar with capitalism is a communist...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

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

Oh..err. ....and here was I thinking you had an affirmative belief that God did not exist....haha

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Another false dichotomy.
You rather fancy them, don't you?

You keep making the claim that atheists HAVE to reject god.
That is plain flat out not true.

I understand your whole worldview may depend upon your belief that atheists have to deny god.
However, the fact of the matter is that an atheist is ALSO someone with out a belief in god.

An atheist does not have to deny god in order to be an atheist.

No...all I am saying is that a person who does not believe in atheism should not be classified as an atheist....

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No, it does not.

Nonsense...prove it...

 

[leibowde84]

I am glad that you called it your logic, because it not logic by normal standards.....why is your logic such that, no decision is necessary for atheism.....for that would mean that people who have no belief in atheism, are classified as atheists..and that is sort of lunacy....

It is a logic that would be consistent with say a communist who claims that because no decision is necessary for communism, anyone who is not familiar with capitalism is a communist...

I'm not sure where you got that analogy from, as both of those terms are not limited in the same way at all. my argument rests on the simple fact that atheism is a general term, requiring only a lack of belief. communism and capitalism are not even on comparable footing when speaking of definitions. that is merely a straw man argument. further, you've provided no reasoning for your claims about my logic. please humor me and do so specifically so I can understand what you're talking about. I'm going to discuss so please be respectful enough to explain your argument. and irrelevant analogies will not cut it.

 

[leibowde84]

I am glad that you called it your logic, because it not logic by normal standards.....why is your logic such that, no decision is necessary for atheism.....for that would mean that people who have no belief in atheism, are classified as atheists..and that is sort of lunacy....

It is a logic that would be consistent with say a communist who claims that because no decision is necessary for communism, anyone who is not familiar with capitalism is a communist...

by the way, it's very simple. The term atheism does not require a decision to be made. it is extremely clear of the word lack.

 

[McBell]

No...all I am saying is that a person who does not believe in atheism should not be classified as an atheist....

"does not believe in atheism"?
What does that even mean?

Seems to me you ar merely trying to over complicate it in order to make your claim look plausible.

 

[McBell]

Nonsense...prove it...

How many times does the definition of atheist have to be presented?

I mean, what is the point if you are just going to flat out ignore the definitions you do not like?

Here it is again for you to ignore:

a·the·ist
ˈāTHēəst/
noun
noun: atheist; plural noun: atheists

1. a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.
   "he is a committed atheist"
   synonyms: nonbeliever, disbeliever, unbeliever, skeptic, doubter, doubting Thomas,agnostic;
   nihilist
   "why is it often assumed that a man of science is probably an atheist?"
   antonyms: believer

 

[Ben Dhyan]

1. I am a theist, so I can honestly say I dont have an atheist agenda.
2. I'm not sure why you thought that was necessary, but I'm sorry for any confusion. I understood what you were saying. Didn't mean anything by it.

That is my point. An affirmative belief in Atheism in general is a logical fallacy (speaking of those who merely lack a belief), because there is no declarative statement. They would say "I'm undecided". Those would be weak atheists (still under the parent category "atheist") or agnostics. Again ... all atheists by definition.

Do you have an issue with my logic or my linguistic choices?

Btw, great debate. This is interesting.

Sorry to mistake you for an atheist...

According to what religious or philosophical authority, does an affirmative belief in atheism ay an atheist be considered a logical fallacy?

"Atheism may be defined as the mental attitude which unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at establishing a life-style and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and scientific method, independent of all arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds."

Aims and Purposes | American Atheists

 

[JoStories]

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?

I don't my friend. I think either I wasn't clear or maybe you misunderstood me. One can be undecided, of course. But the same one can't say they haven't heard of the idea of God. Once you know,the concept you either look into it because it strikes a cord or one dismisses it or maybe they are undecided. But in this age, it would be difficult to find someone who had not heard of God. It is then that they make a choice or sit on the fence.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

"does not believe in atheism"?
What does that even mean?

Seems to me you ar merely trying to over complicate it in order to make your claim look plausible.

No..I mean it as a legitimate question....do you believe in atheism?.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

How many times does the definition of atheist have to be presented?

I mean, what is the point if you are just going to flat out ignore the definitions you do not like?

Here it is again for you to ignore:

a·the·ist
ˈāTHēəst/
noun
noun: atheist; plural noun: atheists

1. a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.
   "he is a committed atheist"
   synonyms: nonbeliever, disbeliever, unbeliever, skeptic, doubter, doubting Thomas,agnostic;
   nihilist
   "why is it often assumed that a man of science is probably an atheist?"
   antonyms: believer

I have no problem with the definition...I only dispute the calling of non-atheists, atheists, even though they do not believe in atheism.

 

[JoStories]

Thank God (no pun intended). I thought our minds wouldn't meet all day.

Rolfmao.....of course they would. We are, for the most part, of like minds, with a few differences. I just see the world,through different eyes owing to the extensive travel I have done and the fact that not only am I a FNP, but also a master's in theology. I am one of those who look at things from outside the box, and all angles. If nothing else, it makes life interesting. Off to meditate my love. See you later..sweet dreams.

 

[Willamena]

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?

He would be lacking belief in nothing ...which, if you think about it, means believing in everything, i.e. the world. That I believe.

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.

The eliminative stance, right. But we don't lack something unless we've something to lack; we can't acknowledge, "There is no TV," unless TVs exists for us.