Sharing an observation about atheism here on RF

[leibowde84]

huh? Nevermind.

ok

Why? Expected, by who, and what ''standard''? That's the point, many atheists aren't even aware or capable of determining those things, anyway/ You have made a meaningless statement.


facepalm.

Huh? ''inherent in any theistic argument''? That is complete nonsense.

I think it more ridiculous to waste any more time on this nonsense.

No idea what, or why, you are even bringing this up. Just more off topic nonsense.

You have a tendency to put words into the mouths of others in order to support your own argument. You change what I stated with "It is the responsibility to point out the inconsistencies, logical fallacies, and obvious false assumptions inherent in any theistic argument, which they often succeed at", fraudulently (I might add), to indicate that all theistic arguments contain fallacies. The word "any" indicates that this is, obviously enough, not what I was indicating. I am a theist, and I know many valid and reasoned arguments for the existence of God that don't use logical fallacies (arguments from ignorance, circular reasoning, etc.). I was merely pointing out that, when an atheist who is debating a theist on the existence of God hears a logical fallacy, it is their responsibility to point it out and make it apparent to the one who used it.

 

[atanu]

There's a difference between claims and facts, if you cared to learn.

Yeah. I hope folks will remember this when making claims of 'no belief'.

If you all have 'no belief' can you tell me what all this fuss is about? You have 'no belief', yet you seem to be hell bound to prove that 'you have no belief'.

 

[leibowde84]

This itself is a claim.

It isn't a claim made by atheism. It is a claim made ABOUT atheism. Drastically different things.

 

[leibowde84]

Yeah. I hope folks will remember this when making claims of 'no belief'.

If you all have 'no belief' can you tell me what all this fuss is about? You have 'no belief', yet you seem to be hell bound to prove that 'you have no belief'.

The "fuss" is about theists claiming falsely that there are "beliefs" inherent in atheism. Putting words/beliefs into the mouths of atheists erroneously shouldn't be tolerated.

 

[atanu]

You are kind of all over the place. I will attempt to address your 2 key points here:
1. The phrase "lack of belief in 't'" is the same as saying "without belief in 't'". If one "lacks belief in the existence of God", they are "without belief in the existence of God".

I told you. "I lack belief in the existence of Leib" means I know what or who Leib is and I have not found him in the domain of my assertion.

The "fuss" is about theists claiming falsely that there are "beliefs" inherent in atheism. Putting words/beliefs into the mouths of atheists erroneously shouldn't be tolerated.

When you have no belief what you are defending?

Forget it.

 

[columbus]

This itself is a claim.

But not an atheist claim. Any religious person could also understand that theism is a group of claims, but atheism is the lack of such.
Tom

 

[leibowde84]

I told you. "I lack belief in the existence of Leib" means I know what or who Leib is and I have not found him in the domain of my assertion.



When you have no belief what you are defending?

Forget it.

I agree with your first point. As to the second, they aren't defending their beliefs. They are fighting against those who erroneously (and sometimes maliciously) assign beliefs/claims to them. I think that is completely understandable.

 

[Kirran]

For example, atheism as the term is often used (to describe the atheistic materialist philosophy common in the West in particular) assumes the validity of experience as a method for determining the nature of reality, as evidenced by the great stock it places in science's ability to understand the nature of reality. This is a presupposition, as found in any belief system.

 

[leibowde84]

For example, atheism as the term is often used (to describe the atheistic materialist philosophy common in the West in particular) assumes the validity of experience as a method for determining the nature of reality, as evidenced by the great stock it places in science's ability to understand the nature of reality. This is a presupposition, as found in any belief system.

While I agree that people often misuse the term in this way, I don't think it should be accepted. "Atheism" should remain a very general term just like it's opposite, "theism". Think about how many variations there are under the term "theism". Why on earth would anyone not expect similar variations under "atheism"?

 

[Kirran]

While I agree that people often misuse the term in this way, I don't think it should be accepted. "Atheism" should remain a very general term just like it's opposite, "theism". Think about how many variations there are under the term "theism". Why on earth would anyone not expect similar variations under "atheism"?

Yes, fair enough.

Really, an actual term for people following the philosophy often alluded to under 'atheism' would be really useful.

 

[leibowde84]

Yes, fair enough.

Really, an actual term for people following the philosophy often alluded to under 'atheism' would be really useful.

What about materialism?

 

[Deathbydefault]

Yeah. I hope folks will remember this when making claims of 'no belief'.

If you all have 'no belief' can you tell me what all this fuss is about? You have 'no belief', yet you seem to be hell bound to prove that 'you have no belief'.

Seems as though you are having an understanding issue.

 

[Kirran]

What about materialism?

Two issues: 1) I think that materialistic atheism as is held as the main philosophy in certain societies, and as a minority in many others, is in fact not the only philosophy which is materialist, philosophically. Philosophies which weren't necessarily that similar, but that were materialist, have arisen in Ancient Greece, Ancient China, India, etc.

2) It is easily confused, especially by people not so up on all this, with the other meaning of materialism.

Maybe scientific materialism, something like that. A mouthful.

 

[leibowde84]

Two issues: 1) I think that materialistic atheism as is held as the main philosophy in certain societies, and as a minority in many others, is in fact not the only philosophy which is materialist, philosophically. Philosophies which weren't necessarily that similar, but that were materialist, have arisen in Ancient Greece, Ancient China, India, etc.

2) It is easily confused, especially by people not so up on all this, with the other meaning of materialism.

Maybe scientific materialism, something like that. A mouthful.

Fair point. It just irks me when people make the erroneous assumption that atheism requires materialism for some odd reason.

 

[Looncall]

For example, atheism as the term is often used (to describe the atheistic materialist philosophy common in the West in particular) assumes the validity of experience as a method for determining the nature of reality, as evidenced by the great stock it places in science's ability to understand the nature of reality. This is a presupposition, as found in any belief system.

Not a presupposition, just experience. It works, after all.

 

[atanu]

I agree with your first point.

I have no other point on this issue.

 

[leibowde84]

I have no other point on this issue.

So you agree that statement does not necessarily indicate that you believe leib to not exist, right?

 

[atanu]

So you agree that statement does not necessarily indicate that you believe leib to not exist, right?

You may check please. I said:

I told you. "I lack belief in the existence of Leib" means I know what or who Leib is and I have not found him in the domain of my assertion.

 

[Bunyip]

For example, atheism as the term is often used (to describe the atheistic materialist philosophy common in the West in particular) assumes the validity of experience as a method for determining the nature of reality, as evidenced by the great stock it places in science's ability to understand the nature of reality. This is a presupposition, as found in any belief system.

I have to say that you are addressing a strawman - 'atheistic materialist philosophy'. Atheism is just the disbelief in God.

 

[Bunyip]

This itself is a claim.

No, it was a statement of fact.
Atheism is not a claim.