Neither a Theist nor an Atheist Be?

[Shadow Wolf]

You cannot bully people into being tidy thinkers,

Exactly that!

 

[exchemist]

Except it is not a demand.
It is the way it is.
Your not liking it has absolutely no bearing on the truth of it.
You are either a theist or an atheist.
There is no in between.
You can be one then the other then the other then the other every minute of every day, but you are one or the other at any given time.

You cannot bully others into your favourite fantasy if they do not wish to attend.

If I walk up to someone in the street and ask them, and they reply, "I don't know", or "I haven't really thought about it much", or "Sometimes I think there may be a God and and at other times I think there probably isn't ", what category are they in, according to you?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The question is "do you believe god exists?"
If your answer is affirmative, then you are a theist.
Any answer other then affirmative makes you an atheist.

And yet few seem to understand the significant and utter importance of first defining "god." We cannot proceed if that has not yet first been established.

 

[McBell]

If I walk up to someone in the street and ask them, and they reply, "I don't know", or "I haven't really thought about it much", or "Sometimes I think there may be a God and and at other times I think there probably isn't ", what category are they in, according to you?

How would I know?
More importantly though, why would a give a crickets fart?

 

[exchemist]

How would I know?
More importantly though, why would a give a crickets fart?

Because if you can't categorise all such people, then your assertion that everyone can classed as either theist or atheist is evidently incorrect.

 

[McBell]

Because if you can't categorise all such people, then your assertion that everyone can classed as either theist or atheist is evidently incorrect.

What I wonder is why is it so important for YOU to know what box to put them in?
That they will not tell you if they do or do not believe in a deity has no bearing on the dichotomy.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You continue to demand that everybody either "believes" or does not "believe". This is not the state in which many people find themselves. Such people may not have made up their minds, or they may be inclined to believe some of the time and inclined not to, at others, in a Schrödinger's Cat sort of way.

You cannot bully people into being tidy thinkers, just to suit a simple scheme of logic that you like.

If you haven't made up your mind, then you won't be answering the question "do you believe" with a resounding "yes", right?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If I walk up to someone in the street and ask them, and they reply, "I don't know", or "I haven't really thought about it much", or "Sometimes I think there may be a God and and at other times I think there probably isn't ", what category are they in, according to you?

I'ld consider them atheist, except during the moments they think there is a god. In those moments i'ld consider them theist.

 

[exchemist]

What I wonder is why is it so important for YOU to know what box to put them in?
That they will not tell you if they do or do not believe in a deity has no bearing on the dichotomy.

No, these people are not refusing to tell me. They have told me, honestly, the state of their thinking on the question.

The proposition I am disputing is the notion that everyone is either a theist or an atheist. I maintain there is a substantial group of people to whom neither label can be applied. If you deny the existence of further categories, you should be able to tell me how I should classify the people I have described.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

And yet few seem to understand the significant and utter importance of first defining "god." We cannot proceed if that has not yet first been established.

I'm not a believer and the fact that god isn't properly defined is one of the reasons why.

If you want a definition of "god", then ask a theist.

Not that that definition will likely be unique to that theist. In my experience many people define god in many different ways, even within the same religion.

 

[exchemist]

If you haven't made up your mind, then you won't be answering the question "do you believe" with a resounding "yes", right?

Nor will you necessarily be answering it with a "no", whether "resounding" or otherwise.

 

[Ayjaydee]

For theism/atheism to be binary positions you have to show that they are positions first. You can define atheism on theism as "not theism" but without being circular you have to define theism.
Defining theism as "believes in god or gods" doesn't cut it without defining god. So theism is still not a position.

Theism is a belief in the existance

Nor will you necessarily be answering it with a "no", whether "resounding" or otherwise.

What an hilarious way to waste time! When does the Angel's on the head of a pin thing begin? I wish you guys could see how silly you look

 

[exchemist]

Theism is a belief in the existance

What an hilarious way to waste time! When does the Angel's on the head of a pin thing begin? I wish you guys could see how silly you look

At least I don't wear a stupid Casey Jones hat, though.

 

[Augustus]

If I walk up to someone in the street and ask them, and they reply, "I don't know", or "I haven't really thought about it much", or "Sometimes I think there may be a God and and at other times I think there probably isn't ", what category are they in, according to you?

They are in the category of people that I will show this table to while saying "SEE! you're an agnostic atheist!!!"

but, actually I think...

No, no, no, no! OMG! I've showed you The Table and you still won't accept it.

I don't actually agree with it though because...

FFS! It's a table. that's on the internet. Someone made it. How can you NOT agree with it? Atheism LITERALLY MEANS without theism.

Well, actually it also literally means...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Why won't you listen to me you anti-science apologist for Jesus! As an atheist I get to decide what atheism is and you are an atheist. In your face god boy!

 

[SalixIncendium]

For @TagliatelliMonster, @Mestemia, @9-10ths_Penguin, et al who agree with the statement in the OP and hold a hard line that one is either a theist or an atheist.

What would you consider one that does not believe in a god in the traditional sense of deity, but recognizes Nirguna Brahman as the Absolute...the highest principle which has no form or qualities commonly related to a god or gods? No creating. No intervening. Just [a state of] being.

Such a concept requires as much belief or faith for some as one's visage in a mirror.

Which box would you pack such a person in? Atheism or theism?

 

[Heyo]

Theism is a belief in the existance

That is not a statement, it isn't even a complete English sentence.

What an hilarious way to waste time! When does the Angel's on the head of a pin thing begin? I wish you guys could see how silly you look

I'm trying to teach a bit of basic logic. I know it looks silly to some - but only so long as they don't need it.

 

[osgart]

God can be a cumbersome concept, or it can be an uplifting creative thought experiment. So I can get valuable input from sincere theists, or sincere atheists. I am atheist, but I can see God as like an uplifting motivation, or a dreadful mechanism for hate, or control. I would like to believe in God if God was really someone beyond wonderful. I don't think atheism is anti-theism. The only middle ground to me is agnosticism with openness to the possibility that God exists. I used to be that. Even now I see a value to some religious perspectives, or how some people's faiths reflect something positive.

 

[Ayjaydee]

At least I don't wear a stupid Casey Jones hat, though.

You may want to research railroad hats before u embarrass yourself any further

 

[Ayjaydee]

That is not a statement, it isn't even a complete English sentence.

I'm trying to teach a bit of basic logic. I know it looks silly to some - but only so long as they don't need it.

Subject, verb, object. Shame

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

We are talking sets here. We have the set of "believers in god" (X) which contains the sets of "believers in a personal god" (theists) and the set "believers in a non-personal god" (deists).

Deism isn't "belief in a non-personal god." Deism is belief in a non-interventionist, monotheistic creator-god. Plenty of non-personal gods would fall outside deism, and deists can - but don't necessarily have to - believe in a personal god.

In your definition you have to swap "X" and "theist" as you think "theist" to be the umbrella term.

I didn't "swap" anything. Theism is the term for belief in gods in general.

Either way we need a name for "X".

No, we don't. Not every category has its own name. I'd say that desim isn't significant enough - in terms of its numbers of adherents or impact on the world - that we've ever needed a specific term that means "all the people who believe in one or more gods but aren't deists."