Magical thinking.

kudzu said:
Atheism is, in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.
Click to expand...
just stop.....you do not have right to change the meaning of words......atheists are atheists and agnostics are agnostics......I can see why you are embarrassed by the stupid things atheists say but man up.....either admit what you believe or stop saying you're an atheist......
 
Frank Apisa said:
Okay...but I want to discuss this issue with you, Anarchon, and I am not a theist. So my perspective will be that of an "agnostic." **

First of all, if we "define" any X as something that cannot exist...we will always (and correctly) conclude that X does not exist. Conversely if we "define" any X as something that MUST exist...we will always (and correctly) conclude that X exists.

We agree that if a god (however it eventually is “described”) exists…it EXISTS and is not supernatural. In fact, we seem to agree that the word “supernatural” is incongruous…so using it as a descriptor in a discussion about whether gods exist...is incongruous. (Theists using that descriptor are making a huge mistake…lexicographers using that descriptor are making the same mistake.)

Ancients did NOT make that mistake. They made their gods part of nature…and they made their gods “godS” rather than “God”…plural and sorta uncapitalized. The step to monotheism…may have been a step forward (I sometimes think NOT), but the move to “supernatural” was definitely a step backward. The god of Abraham was NOT originally supernatural. That is a relatively recent investiture.

Okay…enough for initial remarks right now. Some comments, if you will, about what is here so far.



**I prefer not to use descriptors like "atheist" or "agnostic" except as a shortcut, because they mean so many different things to different people. So to be sure we are on the same page when I use "agnostic" to describe me, I essentially mean:

I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

...so I don't.
Click to expand...

You are an agnostic, a.k.a. weak/soft/negative, atheist. Your position is not uncommon.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
just stop.....you do not have right to change the meaning of words......atheists are atheists and agnostics are agnostics......I can see why you are embarrassed by the stupid things atheists say but man up.....either admit what you believe or stop saying you're an atheist......
Click to expand...

Have you dumped your gyro? I posted definitions for both atheists and agnostics... and neither is a religion.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
no......agnostics lack a belief.......atheists deny......
Click to expand...

Gnosticism speaks to knowledge, where theism speaks to belief. They are different issues. You can be an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist. You can also be a gnostic atheist or a gnostic theist.

A gnostic theist knows that god exists.
An agnostic theist believes god exists, but lacks knowledge.
A gnostic atheist knows god does not exist (a.k.a. strong or positive atheism).
An agnostic atheist lacks belief that god exists (a.k.a. weak or negative atheism).

The Greek "a" simply means without. If the meaning were as you claim, it would be called antitheism (and some people do call it that).

KtYcmiG.jpg
 
kudzu said:
Why is it necessary for you to identify atheiism as a religion?
Click to expand...

Your lying loses the debate for you. I wrote, "Faith belief is theism is similar to faith belief in atheism".

You are acting, though, like an evangelical religionist in the smarminess of your defense.
 
kudzu said:
Why is it necessary for you to identify atheiism as a religion?
Click to expand...

Anarchon said:
Agreeing with you on that matter is another thing that is not a requirement for being an atheist. You keep making all kinds of claims about atheists that aren't true. Why is that? Are you a habitual liar? That would fit, seeing how you support religion the way you do.
Click to expand...

You don't have the tools to disprove God: that is true.

My points are in fact: true.

Calling me a liar makes you a very weak opponent: true.

I don't support religion at all, kid. You don't need to believe. But you simply can't prove that gods do not exist.
 
Anarchon said:
You are an agnostic, a.k.a. weak/soft/negative, atheist. Your position is not uncommon.
Click to expand...

Bad start.

My position on the question, "Do any gods exist?" is:

I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

...so I don't.

If you want to insist that perforce I am an "agnostic"...or one of those other pieces of bullshit, we are going nowhere.

Internet discussions of the question often (almost always) devolve into fights over the "meaning" of descriptors that have no reason for being...except to act as a deflection from an actual discussion of the subject.

That is what is happening here.

Too bad. The discussion is actually an interesting one...for people willing to get past all that descriptor nonsense.
 
jimmymccready said:
You don't have the tools to disprove God: that is true.

My points are in fact: true.

Calling me a liar makes you a very weak opponent: true.

I don't support religion at all, kid. You don't need to believe. But you simply can't prove that gods do not exist.
Click to expand...

I did prove that no gods can exist.
 
jimmymccready said:
Atheism is a faith. It is a belief. "I believe there are no gods."

Sure, it is. Why are you defensive about your faith belief that no gods exist.
Click to expand...

I'm a strong atheist, a.k.a. a gnostic theist. It actually goes beyond belief. I know that no gods can exist. However, not all atheists are strong.
 
Frank Apisa said:
Bad start.

My position on the question, "Do any gods exist?" is:

I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

...so I don't.

If you want to insist that perforce I am an "agnostic"...or one of those other pieces of bullshit, we are going nowhere.

Internet discussions of the question often (almost always) devolve into fights over the "meaning" of descriptors that have no reason for being...except to act as a deflection from an actual discussion of the subject.

That is what is happening here.

Too bad. The discussion is actually an interesting one...for people willing to get past all that descriptor nonsense.
Click to expand...

You cannot have a meaningful discussion without the parties agreeing on definitions. Most "debates" on the internet are not meaningful because of this, amongst other reasons.
 
kudzu said:
Atheism is NOT a religion.
Click to expand...

Except negatively perhaps. There are many things I don't believe in, but I don't define myself by them. There are huge problems with all emotionally-powerful labels. I think, on the whole, that Marx gave the best description of human development so far, but to call oneself a Marxist is to get oneself associated with people who clearly weren't, so I tend not to do it because it isn't worth the fuss, whereas Darwinist, a similar term in many ways, is, outside the US, safe but pointless. I approve highly of most of the non-religious statements reported of Jesus of Nazareth similarly, but simply couldn't face being considered to think as nonsensically as some of the evil persons who use the 'Chrisdtian' label. And as to God, what conceivable point would there be?
 
Anarchon said:
You cannot have a meaningful discussion without the parties agreeing on definitions. Most "debates" on the internet are not meaningful because of this, amongst other reasons.
Click to expand...

One can avoid debating the meaning of the word "atheist"...if one simply avoids using it...and instead states a position.

You can see this thread devolving into a discussion about what "atheist" means...and whether atheist is a religion...and what "religion" means.

It is absolute bullshit...because it can be avoided.
 
Anarchon said:
Gnosticism speaks to knowledge, where theism speaks to belief. They are different issues. You can be an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist. You can also be a gnostic atheist or a gnostic theist.

A gnostic theist knows that god exists.
An agnostic theist believes god exists, but lacks knowledge.
A gnostic atheist knows god does not exist (a.k.a. strong or positive atheism).
An agnostic atheist lacks belief that god exists (a.k.a. weak or negative atheism).

The Greek "a" simply means without. If the meaning were as you claim, it would be called antitheism (and some people do call it that).
]
Click to expand...
you are afraid to admit your own beliefs....
you people love to change the meaning
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top