What is your justification for believing in the supernatural?

@failures art,

Quote:

It's a logical structure Frank. I don't have a second list of things I believe in. I only have one list: Things I believe in. No gods or supernatural things are on that list.

And you still insist that satisfies the only necessary definition of an atheist?

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank are you by any chance superstitious?

1 Reply

@failures art,

Quote:

I'll accept your non-answer as concession on this point. If you're unwilling to engage, don't post just to beat your chest.

I'm here to engage you, Art. Try to stay calm. No need getting all worked up. If you want to think that I am unable to ask myself the question, "How is it that all this existence...exists?"...and cannot come up with a list that includes the possibility of gods...

...go for it. Ya know...if it makes you feel good...accept it.

Comic relief, as far as I am concerned, but you take it seriously...and that counts.

1 Reply

@failures art,

Quote:

Typo:

"I don't have a second list of things I believe in. I only have one list: Things I believe in."

should have read:

"I don't have a second list of things I don't believe in. I only have one list: Things I believe in."

Oh...that was much clearer (he said sarcastically).

Perhaps further clarification is in order.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

Frank are you by any chance superstitious?

Not so far in my life, and knock on wood, I will not be at any time in the future.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Quote:
It's a logical structure Frank. I don't have a second list of things I believe in. I only have one list: Things I believe in. No gods or supernatural things are on that list.

And you still insist that satisfies the only necessary definition of an atheist?

The above has a typo, which I corrected here: http://able2know.org/topic/189772-15#post-4975330

Yes, Frank, this does satisfy the only strict criteria. Of the things I believe in, gods are not among them.

Beyond this, any other criteria can only be superficial. Nothing can be said about the values or other beliefs of atheists.

A
R
T

1 Reply

Weren't you once a theist, Frank?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Quote:
I'll accept your non-answer as concession on this point. If you're unwilling to engage, don't post just to beat your chest.

I'm here to engage you, Art. Try to stay calm. No need getting all worked up. If you want to think that I am unable to ask myself the question, "How is it that all this existence...exists?"...and cannot come up with a list that includes the possibility of gods...

...go for it. Ya know...if it makes you feel good...accept it.

Comic relief, as far as I am concerned, but you take it seriously...and that counts.

"Includes gods?"

Frank, you're moving your position. What other beings do you give these considerations to? Earlier, the "nature of existence" was your justification for special consideration for gods, and exclusion of other supernatural beings. As I pointed out, such a distinction is arbitrary. Now, the list of things which could relate to the "nature of existence" could "include" gods.

Make up your mind.

A
R
T

1 Reply

@failures art,

Quote:

Yes, Frank, this does satisfy the only strict criteria. Of the things I believe in, gods are not among them.

Okay, I will bite.

Why does this satisfy the only strict criteria?

What is "the only strict criteria"...and why is it the only strict criteria?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

I am trying to trap anyone with this question. I mean that sincerely.

I've finished playing your game now Frank. Enjoy playing it but there's a saying that goes back to the old gramophone days:

"I used to be a broken record but I'm alright now.... I used to be a broken record but I'm alright now... I used to ....

Having said that... this is just a harmless pastime and you have helped pass some time and let me explore what it means to be an atheist and an agnostic and I thank you for that...

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Quote:

Weren't you once a theist, Frank?

I was raised Catholic. Became an agnostic at about age 25 or so (I'll be 76 in August)...although I really did not use the word "agnostic" to describe myself until I began formally debating in letters to the editor...at around age 35.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Quote:
Typo:

"I don't have a second list of things I believe in. I only have one list: Things I believe in."

should have read:

"I don't have a second list of things I don't believe in. I only have one list: Things I believe in."

Oh...that was much clearer (he said sarcastically).

Perhaps further clarification is in order.

The point is, defining oneself by what they don't believe is an infinite process. Atheism shouldn't be considered a statement of disbelief. It's a product of skepticism, and nothing more.

Atheism isn't a position of faith.

A
R
T

1 Reply

@failures art,

Quote:

"Includes gods?"

Frank, you're moving your position. What other beings do you give these considerations to? Earlier, the "nature of existence" was your justification for special consideration for gods, and exclusion of other supernatural beings. As I pointed out, such a distinction is arbitrary. Now, the list of things which could relate to the "nature of existence" could "include" gods.

Make up your mind.

Be delighted to, Art. Thought I might have mentioned this before, but just in case I didn't...or if you missed it:

I do not know if gods exist. I do not know if gods do not exist. I do not have unambiguous evidence upon which to make a meaningful guess.

I hope that explains my position.

0 Replies

@igm,

Quote:

I finished playing your game now Frank. Enjoy playing it but there's a saying that goes back to the old gramophone days:

"I used to be a broken record but I'm alright now.... I used to be a broken record but I'm alright now... I used to ....

Having said that... this is just a harmless pastime and you have helped pass some time and let me explore what it means to be an atheist and an agnostic and I thank you for that...

I thank you, too, igm. Sincerely.

I think more has occurred than you apparently think. I hope I am correct.

0 Replies

@failures art,

Quote:

The point is, defining oneself by what they don't believe is an infinite process. Atheism shouldn't be considered a statement of disbelief. It's a product of skepticism, and nothing more.

Atheism isn't a position of faith.

Careful with that kind of thinking, Art. For some people, atheism is completely about faith...about the guess that there are no gods.

Perhaps it is not for you, but for you to suppose it isn't for all atheists is presumptuous.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Why does this satisfy the only strict criteria?

What is "the only strict criteria"...and why is it the only strict criteria?

The only strict criteria in describing a person as an atheist is that they don't believe in any gods.

The reason there is only one criteria, is because the term "atheist" does not convey any statement of value regarding any other beliefs.

In other words, if a person is presented with a case for god and at the end are unconvinced, they are an atheist.

I think this video does a good job of describing the distinction.

A
R
T

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I really did not use the word "agnostic" to describe myself until I began formally debating in letters to the editor...at around age 35.

Do you think it may be getting close to the time that you start debating other things, "with the same amount of energy that you have the same amount of agnostic respect for? like the spaghetti monster or the Easter bunny?

1 Reply

@failures art,

Quote:

The only strict criteria in describing a person as an atheist is that they don't believe in any gods.

This is so arbitrary, it is almost absurd. Why do you simply assert that the only strict criteria in describing a person as an atheist is that they don't believe in any gods.

I do not believe in any gods...and I most assuredly am not an atheist. I sometimes label myself an agnostic--but I could just as easily label myself a non-theist...or, as I often do, not label myself at all.

How do you come to the assertion that the only strict criteria in describing a person as an atheist is that they don't believe in any gods?

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

Do you think it may be getting close to the time that you start debating other things, "with the same amount of energy that you have the same amount of agnostic respect for? like the spaghetti monster or the Easter bunny?

Nope. I leave that to atheists, who seem to be obsessed with them.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Careful with that kind of thinking, Art. For some people, atheism is completely about faith...about the guess that there are no gods.

Your use of the word "guess" in this thread has been very interesting. It assumes much about the process of belief.

Given the chance to meet and discuss the language of this topic, I'm betting that the atheist you have in your head, would agree the wording I'm using is preferable. Further, how many atheists fall into such a position is mostly due to how the topic is framed. Given a modern cultural context, atheists are placed in opposition to theists (mostly monotheists at that), and asked to discuss their positions. Rarely, but when it happens it's noteworthy, the theist will be put in the position to account for if they believe in any other gods. Because their answer is that they don't, many false conclusions are drawn. For one, their specific status of belief is built on faith, so having their "disbelief" is faith based as well. It is rare to see the theist discuss a being that they don't believe in framed exclusively on their skepticism. Rather, it is presented as I believe this, so that cannot be believed as well. This is dogma. The atheist on the other hand has these projections of faith pushed upon them. It requires no faith or guess work to be an atheist. All it takes is to be unconvinced of the proposals presented.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Perhaps it is not for you, but for you to suppose it isn't for all atheists is presumptuous.

Which is why I stated that the only criteria necessary is not including gods among the things a person believes. Beyond that, atheists are diverse, and can believe any number of things. All other qualities could describe other things, but not atheism itself.

A
R
T

1 Reply

What is your justification for believing in the supernatural?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know