The logical fallacy of atheism

[Bunyip]

The word and the term are different uses. I can use the term without defining the word, because the term refers only to the concept and the word refers to the thing.

Neither the term, nor the word have meaning unless defined. You are not making sense.

 

[Willamena]

The word and the term are different uses. I can use the term without defining the word, because the term refers only to the concept and the word refers to the thing.

The meaning that the word has needn't populate the meaning that the concept has, though of course if it's defined then it does. That's why a person can go through 60 years of their life relying on just the concept of god in discussion, and then in their 60th year find out what 'god' means and go, "ooh!"

The atheist who denies the concept of god is simply declaring "that's nothing I believe" of what they themselves have populated for the word in their vocabulary, having nothing better to go on.

 

[Willamena]

Neither the term, nor the word have meaning unless defined. You are not making sense.

Both have meaning.

 

[Bunyip]

The meaning that the word has needn't populate the meaning that the concept has, though of course if it's defined then it does. That's why a person can go through 60 years of their life relying on just the concept of god in discussion, and then in their 60th year find out what 'god' means and go, "ooh!"

The atheist who denies the concept of god is simply declaring "that's nothing I believe" of what they themselves have populated for the word in their vocabulary, having nothing better to go on.

That's absurd. Atheists don't deny the concept of god - there are many conceptions of god that I not only accept, but know that those gods exist. Atheism is the position of not being a theist, not 'there is nothing I believe'.

Atheism has meaning only in response to a specific God - generally Yahweh, but describe any other gods you know of to me and I can tell you whether I am atheist towards them or not.

 

[Bunyip]

Both have meaning.

Only if defined - I honestly cannot see how you can fail to grasp such a simple fact.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If you genuinely believe something, it's true to you. The atheist isn't the person who goes around claiming that there is no god--atheism is just a belief that he holds. There is nothing for him to have to prove. We don't prove what is already true for us.

So on your world, people don't try to verify or refute their preconceptions? Strange.

 

[TheGunShoj]

What makes them each a "concept of god?" What do they have in common?

The only thing they have in common is the label of "God" which is bestowed on them.

 

[serp777]

Ah... no? Is this a trick question?

It is partly a trick question. i can't talk about ___ because I have no concept of it. But then how could we even talk about ___? So either we can't talk about ___ or I can use a term I don't have a concept of.

 

[Willamena]

So on your world, people don't try to verify or refute their preconceptions? Strange.

Where do preconceptions come into it?

 

[Willamena]

Only if defined - I honestly cannot see how you can fail to grasp such a simple fact.

I never denied it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Where do preconceptions come into it?

Where you say "if you genuinely believe it".

 

[Willamena]

Where you say "if you genuinely believe it".

If it's genuinely believed, we won't even consider testing it, preconception or not.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If it's genuinely believed, we won't even consider testing it, preconception or not.

And that's where my problem is with what you're saying. I don't know about you, but I try my best to continually evaluate my beliefs - even the ones that are "genuinely believed" - and consider how much justification they really have.

As Socrates supposedly said, "the unexamined life is not worth living."

If you take a different approach, I suppose that's your prerogative, but I suggest you not assume that your approach is universal.

 

[Willamena]

And that's where my problem is with what you're saying. I don't know about you, but I try my best to continually evaluate my beliefs - even the ones that are "genuinely believed" - and consider how much justification they really have.

As Socrates supposedly said, "the unexamined life is not worth living."

If you take a different approach, I suppose that's your prerogative, but I suggest you not assume that your approach is universal.

"Your beliefs" are statements--isolated, verbalized and made concrete so that they can be examined.

I'm talking about "belief," such as in the engagement of the sensorium or thought, for which the attitude is held that a thing is true. That's where I believe we properly find the theist and the atheist, believing and not believing in god/gods.
Belief (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

 

[Willamena]

It is partly a trick question. i can't talk about ___ because I have no concept of it. But then how could we even talk about ___? So either we can't talk about ___ or I can use a term I don't have a concept of.

I see. ___ effectively does not exist to you if you know nothing of it, so you have no word or concept of it, so you can't talk about it. Right?

You could use the term 'nothing' for that, if you need to discuss it; but in discussing it, you've supplied a term, and its concept.

Eris wins again.

 

[serp777]

I see. ___ effectively does not exist to you if you know nothing of it, so you have no word or concept of it, so you can't talk about it. Right?

You could use the term 'nothing' for that, if you need to discuss it; but in discussing it, you've supplied a term, and its concept.

Eris wins again.

Just cause you use a term does not mean there is a concept.

Let me make one up:

sdlfksdqjkfhldhksjafhlksdhfklahjdfs

newly invented term.

 

[Ouroboros]

Just cause you use a term does not mean there is a concept.

Let me make one up:

sdlfksdqjkfhldhksjafhlksdhfklahjdfs

newly invented term.

So what does it represent?

Terms, in language are: "words and compound words that in specific contexts are given specific meanings—these may deviate from the meanings the same words have in other contexts and in everyday language." (wiki)

A term means something when you use it or it's not a term.

You can't invent a new number that is not a number. If it's a number, then it's a number. So... what does the term above mean? What is its specific meaning in this specific context?

If you don't have one, then you didn't invent a term, but you just invented a word without meaning or definition.

 

[Sonofason]

I disagree! First, are we discussing the possibility of god's existence, or the possibility of mortal existance after death?

Second! Argument form ignorance is the argument that something IS true, because it HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN FALSE. It may be difficult for you, but it is the theist argument that is the argument from ignorance.

The belife that god exists, because his existence has not been disproven, IS THE ARGUMENT FROM IGNORANCE.

I disagree. I believe most Christians have personal knowledge of God. They believe in God because they experience God. This is not an argument of ignorance, but an argument from evidence.

It is the atheist's argument that is an argument from ignorance.

If you have not experienced God, you might have cause not to believe in God. But you certainly have no cause to believe that no God exists.

I do not believe in God because His existence has not been disproven. I believe in God because He has blessed me with evidence of Himself.

 

[Sonofason]

It is not a fallacy to say there is no pink elephant in the room when no pink elephant is evident in the room.

If there were a pink elephant in the room, it would have to mean that an object was in the room, because as far as we know, only objects can reflect visible light. Chances are, if you don't see a pink elephant in the room, then there is no object resembling an elephant capable of reflecting visible light in the room.

God is not an object. There is no reason to think that if God were standing in the room that you would see Him. That is not to say that He could not appear in the room, but there is no reason to think that you should see Him in the room.

It is my Guess that God does not reflect light. And so it is no surprise to me that no one sees Him in the room, even when He's present in the room.

 

[Sonofason]

How would you test for the existence of god? Which god(s)? Which theory of god? I suppose you could throw a nickel in the air and demand that god produce a heads up. If it came up tails that would clearly prove god doesn't exist. Or is hard of hearing. Or doesn't give a rat's ***.

Here's a test.

Assume for a few months that the God of the Bible is true. Start praying to this God. Start obeying Him. After a few months of this, let me know what you find.