This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Something Unfinished

13»

Comments

  • So then what do we call the belief of no god? And what is it that makes atheism different from agnosticism?

    Thanks for the texture.
  • edited December 2009
    I think it's cute when people try to categorize people of no faith into little cubbies like strong/weak/militant atheist. It's similar to the people who try to make the distinction between micro/macro evolution.
    So then what do we call the belief of no god? And what is it that makes atheism different from agnosticism
    Uhh nothing. Just like there is nothing to call the belief of non-astrology or the belief of Elvis is dead.
    Post edited by Andrew on
  • At least in my case, and I suspect in the cases of Neito and Kate, you presume incorrectly. Why do you think it's all about you? Why are you taking this so personally?
    Whose arguments could you be referring to? And if to none here, then why bring it up?
    The more i see these arguments, the more I realize something: People who believe in a religion cannot help but see atheism as similar but opposed to their own beliefs.
    I also don't like the seemingly automatic compliance with Scott. Were you so uncritical to not notice or ignore it?
  • edited December 2009
    Whose arguments could you be referring to? And if to none here, then why bring it up?
    I'm referring to people who talk about "the religion of evolution" or "the religion of science". No one in this thread brought those up, but Neito made a comment that I wanted to respond to. I brought it up to further discussion. We're not terribly strict about staying on topic on this forum, if you hadn't noticed.

    Anyway, it seems to me that your entire issue in this thread is about what the word "atheist" means. It's a bit beside the point, isn't it? If you think that people who positively assert that there is no god are not thinking clearly, almost no one on this forum will disagree with you. Where is your issue?
    Post edited by Funfetus on
  • Uhh nothing. Just like there is nothing to call the belief of non-astrology or the belief of Elvis is dead.
    So you're telling me that every resource I've read that defines 'atheist' as 'one who denies the existence of god' is wrong?

    To all: The words' (atheism and atheist) roots are Greek. Theos means god, not belief/faith in god.
  • edited December 2009
    So you're telling me that every resource I've read that defines 'atheist' as 'one who denies the existence of god' is wrong?

    To all: The words' (atheism and atheist) roots are Greek. Theos means god, not belief/faith in god.
    Holy shit, dude, are you being intentionally dense? Here, I'll paste the definition from dictionary.com for you:
    a?the?ist
    ??/?e??i?st/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ey-thee-ist] Show IPA
    Use atheist in a Sentence
    See web results for atheist
    See images of atheist
    –noun
    a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
    Denies or disbelieves. Either of those fit the definition of "atheism". No one is claiming that people who claim there is no god are not atheists.

    Also, for good measure:
    the?ism
    ??/??i?z?m/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [thee-iz-uhm] Show IPA
    Use theism in a Sentence
    See web results for theism
    See images of theism
    –noun
    1. the belief in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation (distinguished from deism ).
    2. belief in the existence of a god or gods (opposed to atheism ).
    What's the opposite of that?
    Post edited by Funfetus on
  • And what is it that makes atheism different from agnosticism?
    I answered this already. The two words answer two different questions. A/theism concerns belief, a/gnosticism knowledge. The two are not mutually exclusive. You can be both, neither, or a combination of the two.
  • Anyway, it seems to me that your entire issue in this thread is about what the word "atheist" means. It's a bit beside the point, isn't it? If you think that people who positively assert that there is no god are not thinking clearly, almost no one on this forum will disagree with you. Where is your issue?
    In names, it is almost entirely in names. I think people like the word 'atheist' too much, and so choose to use it over what their statement truly is. I have issue with this so I am now trying to push the conflict to its breaking point.
  • So you're telling me that every resource I've read that defines 'atheist' as 'one who denies the existence of god' is wrong?

    To all: The words' (atheism and atheist) roots are Greek. Theos means god, not belief/faith in god.
    No, there definitely is a word Atheist that has a specific meaning, but it's a personal preference. Non-believers can call themselves whatever they want (Atheist, Non-believer, pastafarian, etc.) but for me it's just nothing. I'm not quite sure what the point your trying to make is though...
  • I think people like the word 'atheist' too much, and so choose to use it over what their statement truly is.
    Atheism means "a belief in no god" in the same fashion that theism means "a belief in a god." Everything else is irrelevant excess belief.
  • I have issue with this so I am now trying to push the conflict to its breaking point.
    The only conflict is between you and the dictionary. :)
  • Denies or disbelieves. Either of those fit the definition of "atheism". No one is claiming that people who claim there is no god are not atheists.
    That's it, there is a problem with atheism being a category that contains two different stances, one of them obviously containing more merit than the other. The disbelieving atheist by being generalized with the denying atheist is subject to attacks against the latter.
  • edited December 2009
    For the record, I think the name and label of "atheist" is totally bullshit. To restate Andrew's analogy, you wouldn't call people who don't believe in astrology "a-astrologers" and you don't call people who believe Elvis is dead "aelvisians". If you lack a belief in something, to have to be subjected to the terms of that which you don't believe in is ridiculous. The fact is that, while atheism is so tragically phrased in terms of belief, it is in actuality as much separated from the matter as a-astrologers are from astrology.

    I don't know if this is what is even being argued about, but I wanted to say this.

    And now I should really go study for my final before I let myself get sucked into one of these arguments.
    Post edited by Sail on
  • edited December 2009
    So, let's take a common position of theists: "God wants you to do X". This is an unsubstantiated claim of the supernatural, which means that it is also equally valid that "God wants you not to do X". The result of this is that, given any action, the negative supernatural consequences are equal in weight to the positive supernatural consequences. This gives a simple, practical result - as far as theism is concerned, believing in the absence of a deity is equivalent to considering an infinity of equally likely deities. Consequently, for practical decision-making, it is a good idea to be strongly atheist.
    I think I understand what you're saying and I agree. Whether an agnostic or moderate atheist (that's less pejorative than 'weak', right?) when making a decision they do not base the choice on any theistic beliefs or stances.
    To summarise my own position, I am an agnostic atheist: philosophically agnostic, but practically atheist, and strongly so.
    i.e. I believe that we cannot know for sure of the existence of deities, but for practical purposes I will consider them not to exist until I am shown sufficient evidence of it.
    Post edited by lackofcheese on
  • Just to derail this arguement on how to define an atheist.


    A) How many agnostics does it take to screw in a light bulb?
    B) I don’t know, how many agnostics does it take?
    A) I don’t know.


    An agnostic is rowing his boat on Loch Ness when he spots the infamous huge monster moving straight at him. As Nessie towers and lunges at him, the agnostic shouts, "Please God, help me!" Time freezes. A voice from heaven asks, "Why should I help you now? You didn't even believe in me five seconds ago." The agnostic replies, "Hey, give me a break. Five seconds ago, I didn't believe in the Loch Ness Monster, either!"


    An agnostic dies and finds himself being greeted by Moses and Mohammed.
    'How is it I got here? I didn't believe', asks the agnostic.
    'Well', says Moses, 'it is not what you believe, it is how you lived. Anyway follow me'.
    As they walk along Moses points out the Jews, the Muslims, and Buddhists. They came up to a wall and as the agnostic starts to ask another question, Moses whispers, 'Quiet, on the other side are the Christians, and they don't think anyone else is up here'...



    During the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution, one morning's executions began with three men: a rabbi, a Catholic priest, and an agnostic.
    The rabbi was marched up onto the platform first. There, facing the guillotine, he was asked if he had any last words. And the rabbi cried out, "I believe in the one and only true God, and He shall save me." The executioner then positioned the rabbi below the blade, set the block above his neck, and pulled the cord to set the terrible instrument in motion. The heavy cleaver plunged downward, searing the air. But then, abruptly, it stopped with a crack just a few inches above the would-be victim's neck. To which the rabbi said, "I told you so."
    "It's a miracle!" gasped the crowd. And the executioner had to agree, letting the rabbi go.
    Next in line was the priest. Asked for his final words, he declared, "I believe in Jesus Christ the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost who will rescue me in my hour of need." The executioner then positioned this man beneath the blade. And he pulled the cord. Again the blade flew downward thump! creak! ...stopping just short of its mark once more.
    "Another miracle!" sighed the disappointed crowd. And the executioner for the second time had no choice but to let the condemned go free.
    Now it was the agnostic's turn. "What final words have you to say?" he was asked. But the agnostic didn't answer. Staring intently at the ominous engine of death, he seemed lost. Not until the executioner poked him in the ribs and the question was asked again did he reply.
    "Oh, I see your problem," the agnostic said pointing. "You've got a blockage in the gear assembly, right there!"


    A Jew, A Catholic, and an atheist are rowing in Lake Erie when their boat springs a huge leak. The Jew looks skyward, and says “Oh, Adonai, if you save me, I promise I’ll sail to Israel and spend the rest of my days trying to reclaim the land you gave us.” The Catholic looks skyward, and says, “Oh, Jesus, if you save me, I promise I’ll fly to the Vatican and spend the rest of my days singing your praises.” The atheist says, “Oh, guys, if you pass me that one life preserver, I promise I’ll swim to Cleveland.” “And how will you spend the rest of your days?” the Jew and the Catholic ask. “Well,” says the atheist, “I’m not sure, but I can tell you one thing: I’ll never go rowing with other atheists.”


    An atheist buys an ancient lamp at an auction, takes it home, and begins to polish it. Suddenly, a genie appears, and says, “I’ll grant you three wishes, Master.” The atheist says, “I wish I could believe in you.” The genie snaps his fingers, and suddenly the atheist believes in him. The atheist says, “Wow. I wish all atheists would believe this.” The genie snaps his fingers again, and suddenly atheists all over the world begin to believe in genies. “What about your third wish?” asks the genie. “Well,” says the atheist, “I wish for a billion dollars.” The genie snaps his fingers for a third time, but nothing happens. “What’s wrong?” asks the atheist. The genie shrugs and says, “Just because you believe in me, doesn’t necessarily mean that I really exist.”
  • edited December 2009
    I think this stems from their inability or unwillingness to properly define the concepts of belief and faith. It appears that many that describe themselves as believing in a deity or deities or having faith attempt to support that faith with "proof". This is nonsensical when faith is to believe in something without proof. This confusion of concepts leads them to surmise that any opinion or school of thought is approached with the same attitude of reason muddled with faith, because they cannot step outside themselves and separate the concepts.
    Look at you, you armchair-psychologists! How profound, your insight, and how penetrating, your wisdom. And I presume it is I who is your poor, confused, theistic subject who can't make the difference between the evidence of lack and the lack of evidence.
    Not at all, I was specifically addressing creationists and those that genuinely muddle the concepts.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
Sign In or Register to comment.