What kind of atheist converts to a theist?

[Monk Of Reason]

The total lack of belief in God, no doubt about it?

Why would a lack of belief mean no doubt? By default lacking of belief means doubt. The purest form of atheism is total doubt.

 

[nash8]

Why would a lack of belief mean no doubt? By default lacking of belief means doubt. The purest form of atheism is total doubt.

I was stating that at one point in my life, I had a lack of belief in God. It was without doubt that I was an athiest. Not that athiesm does not lack doubt.

But I digress, on further introspection, it is more that, for an extended period of my life I never thought about God, so I guess you could say I had a total lack of thiesm as well as athiesm. Can you hold a belief that you don't think about?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I was stating that at one point in my life, I had a lack of belief in God. It was without doubt that I was an athiest. Not that athiesm does not lack doubt.

But I digress, on further introspection, it is more that, for an extended period of my life I never thought about God, so I guess you could say I had a total lack of thiesm as well as athiesm. Can you hold a belief that you don't think about?

Not thinking about a belief is still a lack of a belief. Its one of the grand things of Atheism as a philosphy or ideolog or lack of an ideology. Theism is the minority and the crazy idea. Not Atheism. Atheism isn't even an idea. Its the rejection of an idea.

By strict definitions rocks, trees, babies and planets are all atheists. For not sentient beings is really a moot point but it does give you a better view on how to think about Atheism.

 

[nash8]

Not thinking about a belief is still a lack of a belief. Its one of the grand things of Atheism as a philosphy or ideolog or lack of an ideology. Theism is the minority and the crazy idea. Not Atheism. Atheism isn't even an idea. Its the rejection of an idea.

Ehhh, i dunno about that. I would wager to say that you believe in more things than things you do not believe in.

By strict definitions rocks, trees, babies and planets are all atheists. For not sentient beings is really a moot point but it does give you a better view on how to think about Atheism.

By strict definition yes, but considering that we really have no idea as to what gives human's sentinence, we can't realistically qualify whether other things are sentinent or not. We really have no criteria for defining whether other things are sentinent or not.

We can assume that it some function of the brain, so things without brains can be excluded, but then with the "quantum mind" and other such theories, sentinence would be caused by quantum particle interaction, and all "entities" have that to differing degrees.

But generally speaking, I would agree with you.

On another note, would thinking about God, irrelevant of existence be qualfied as an athiest or a thiestic thought?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Ehhh, i dunno about that. I would wager to say that you believe in more things than things you do not believe in.

There are an infinite number of things we don't believe in and a finite number of things we do. So I humbly disagree.

On another note, would thinking about God, irrelevant of existence be qualfied as an athiest or a thiestic thought?

Neither. It wouldn't be a theistic or atheistic thought. No more than it would be a fat or thin thought. Or a smart or dumb thought.

If something expressed a "belief" in god then it would be theistic. If something under any circumstance does NOT hold a belief in god then it would be by definition...atheist.

 

[nash8]

There are an infinite number of things we don't believe in and a finite number of things we do. So I humbly disagree.

It depends on your perspective. Do believe you sleep? Do you believe in gravity? Do you believe in electricity? You believe in these things you just don't conciously realize it in my opinion.

There are an infinite number of things you can believe in, just as their are an infinite number of things that you can't believe in. It's all about perspective in my opinion.

[/quote] Neither. It wouldn't be a theistic or atheistic thought. No more than it would be a fat or thin thought. Or a smart or dumb thought. [/quote]

I thought that you said earlier that my lack of thought about anything concerning God something would be considered athiestic. But my thought without respect to existence, would qualify as athiestic as well?

So if you don't think about something you can't believe in it? But also, if you think about something irrelevent of holding it as true, it would also be qualified as athiestic?

If something expressed a "belief" in god then it would be theistic. If something under any circumstance does NOT hold a belief in god then it would be by definition...atheist.

So when I'm meditating sometimes, i hold no thoughts, therefore no beliefs, atleast conciously. Although, I hold the belief in God in my everyday life. Would I be considered an athiest during meditation, and a thiest while not meditating?

In concious retrospective, I see it as I hold both beliefs simultaneously. God exists, and God doesn't exist simultaneously.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

It depends on your perspective. Do believe you sleep? Do you believe in gravity? Do you believe in electricity? You believe in these things you just don't conciously realize it in my opinion.

There are an infinite number of things you can believe in, just as their are an infinite number of things that you can't believe in. It's all about perspective in my opinion.

I subscribe to numberphile on youtube and they brought up something very similar to this. There are different sizes of infinity. An example would be how many numbers are between 1 and 2? An infinite amount. But how many numbers are between 1 and 3? Its an even larger "infinity" if you will.

Your talking about the infinity between 1 and 2 while I am talking about the inifinity between 2 and infinity.

Neither. It wouldn't be a theistic or atheistic thought. No more than it would be a fat or thin thought. Or a smart or dumb thought.

I thought that you said earlier that my lack of thought about anything concerning God something would be considered athiestic. But my thought without respect to existence, would qualify as athiestic as well?

So if you don't think about something you can't believe in it? But also, if you think about something irrelevent of holding it as true, it would also be qualified as athiestic? [/quote]
I didn't say they were atheistic in quality. I meant that they could be categorized as atheists by the strict definition of the word. A rock cannot think atheistic thoughts as it doesn't have thoughts (to my knowledge). And if it had a thought the thought would be no more atheistic or theistic as it would be ice cream loving vs hating ice cream as a qualifier.

Why does theism suddenly become important as a qualifier?

So when I'm meditating sometimes, i hold no thoughts, therefore no beliefs, atleast conciously. Although, I hold the belief in God in my everyday life. Would I be considered an athiest during meditation, and a thiest while not meditating?

In concious retrospective, I see it as I hold both beliefs simultaneously. God exists, and God doesn't exist simultaneously.

Or do you consider neither? Neither still means lack of. An unconcious state wouldn't really define what you consider to be "your" belief? For example I can be drunk and I mean really really drunk and be incapable of the english language. However does that mean I don't speak English?