The default position...

[outhouse]

Not what the credible definition says.


Negative and positive atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Positive atheism, also called strong atheism and hard atheism, is the form of atheism that asserts that no deities exist;


Maybe you do not understand belief is not required for an assertion

 

[ArtieE]

Assert | Define Assert at Dictionary.com

verb (used with object)
1.
to state with assurance, confidence, or force; state strongly or positively; affirm; aver:
He asserted his innocence of the crime.
2.
to maintain or defend (claims, rights, etc.).
3.
to state as having existence; affirm; postulate:
to assert a first cause as necessary.


The word belief is not in the definition

LOL well of course it isn't. You assert a belief!

 

[outhouse]

1.
to state with assurance, confidence, or force; state strongly or positively; affirm; aver:
He asserted his innocence of the crime.
2.
to maintain or defend (claims, rights, etc.).
3.
to state as having existence; affirm; postulate:
to assert a first cause as necessary.


The word belief is not in the definition

 

[ArtieE]

1.
to state with assurance, confidence, or force; state strongly or positively; affirm; aver:
He asserted his innocence of the crime.
2.
to maintain or defend (claims, rights, etc.).
3.
to state as having existence; affirm; postulate:
to assert a first cause as necessary.


The word belief is not in the definition

Of course not. You are now getting so confused that I withdraw from this exchange.

 

[outhouse]

Not what the credible definition says.


Negative and positive atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Positive atheism, also called strong atheism and hard atheism, is the form of atheism that asserts that no deities exist;


Maybe you do not understand belief is not required for an assertion

 

[Deathbydefault]

(Deathbydefault thinks that sometimes it's more entertaining to just watch an argument)

 

[Bunyip]

Yes, they are both atheists, but they are still different positions. There is a difference between saying "I don't believe there is a God" and "I believe there is no God" -

Yes, I know there is a difference - my point is that it is a purely semantic difference.

it is the same as saying "I don't believe the number of grains of salt in the ocean in even" and saying "the number of grains of salt in the ocean is odd"; or the difference between finding a defendant in the murder case to be "not guilty" rather than finding them "innocent". The definition of atheism encompasses both positions in the same way that the definition of theism encompassed both monotheism and polytheism, but that doesn't mean they are the same position.

Sorry, I don't see the relevance of the odd and even analogy - we are discussing a simple polarity, whether a specific entity exists or not. There are only two possible states; 1. The belief that God exists and 2. The lack of that belief.

The position "I don't believe in a God" is a response to the question "Do you believe there IS a God", whereas the position "I believe there is no God" is a response to the question "Do you believe there IS NOT a God". The positions are, themselves, subdivisions of the whole under the heading of disbelief in God (as both positions would give the same answer to the first question), but answering question one as quoted does not require or preclude the quoted answer to question two. You may not believe the number of grains of sand in the ocean is even, but that doesn't require you to believe the number of grains of sand in the ocean is odd.

Sorry, that does not make sense to me - if you don't believe God exists, you therefore believe he does not exist. There is no third position.

To be honest, I think that the point people seem to be missing is that weak and strong atheists are not different groups, they are not exclusive categories. They are responses to different claims.

Strong and weak atheism are frankly pretty silly and arbitrary distinctions, invented by Christian apologists in order to try to paint atheism into some kind of corner. The reality of course is that weak atheism is the stronger and more sustainable position, and strong atheism essentially a strawman. An atheist who says that there is no God is in reality no more making a knowledge claim than is the weak atheist - and the burden of proof, the rationale remains the same.

 

[Bunyip]

The first is a "weak atheist" the other is a "strong atheist". The weak doesn't hold any position, the strong holds the position that God doesn't exist.

Me: "I don't believe God exists"
You: "Then you believe he doesn't".
Me: "No I don't believe that either I don't know what to believe".

Well given you accuse me of trolling in a post to another member, it's a pity you did not have something more rational to say.
Those two positions are identical Artie, the only difference is semantic.

Both are atheist.

 

[Willamena]

Sorry, I don't see the relevance of the odd and even analogy - we are discussing a simple polarity, whether a specific entity exists or not.

Odd/even isn't a simple polarity? It's an analogy.

 

[Willamena]

Strong and weak atheism are frankly pretty silly and arbitrary distinctions, invented by Christian apologists in order to try to paint atheism into some kind of corner.

Actually, they were invented by an analyticist, Antony Flew.

 

[Bunyip]

Actually, they were invented by an analyticist, Antony Flew.

Yeah, not exactly a reliable source. He became somewhat of a lame duck apologist towards the end - although I believe he was terribly exploited by several prominent apologists. He went pretty mad towards the end. Strong and weak atheism is a particularly stupid distinction.

 

[Bunyip]

Odd/even isn't a simple polarity? It's an analogy.

Please read more carefully Willa, I said that belief in God is a polarity.

 

[Willamena]

Yeah, not exactly a reliable source. He became somewhat of a lame duck apologist towards the end - although I believe he was terribly exploited by several prominent apologists. He went pretty mad towards the end. Strong and weak atheism is a particularly stupid distinction.

What does that have to do with his coining the words?

 

[Willamena]

Please read more carefully Willa, I said that belief in God is a polarity.

Yes. Just as odd/even is a polarity. I don't understand your objection to the analogy.

Edit: Or I don't understand why you're not getting the analogy. It's a pretty simple one.

 

[Bunyip]

What does that have to do with his coining the words?

Absolutely nothing Willa, which is why I wondered why you brought it up.

 

[Bunyip]

Yes. Just as odd/even is a polarity. I don't understand your objection to the analogy.

Edit: Or I don't understand why you're not getting the analogy. It's a pretty simple one.

No, you should have read the post concerned - the default in that case is simply not knowing whether there is an odd or even number. So there is a third position - the default.
In the case of belief in God there is just a polarity. Anyone who does not even know about the God and does not even make a guess in regard to it's existence is atheist.

 

[Willamena]

Absolutely nothing Willa, which is why I wondered why you brought it up.

No, actually it's why I wonder you brought it up.

 

[Willamena]

No, you should have read the post concerned - the default in that case is simply not knowing whether there is an odd or even number. So there is a third position - the default.
In the case of belief in God there is just a polarity. Anyone who does not even know about the God and does not even make a guess in regard to it's existence is atheist.

What about the people who don't know whether there is an odd of even number?

 

[Bunyip]

No, actually it's why I wonder you brought it up.

I didn't Willa, you did. This is just silly.

 

[Bunyip]

What about the people who don't know whether there is an odd of even number?

Willa, please read your own post #538, you actually quote me answering it.