14
   

All atheists and theists are agnostics?

 
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jul, 2014 12:49 pm
@BL0CPARTY,
Quote:
An athiest is a person who disbelieves of lacks a belief in god
I am a person who lacks a belief in god
Therefore I am an athiest


No. An atheist is a person who believes that there is no god.
It is an active belief: "There is no god", says the atheist, and believes it to be true.
If you don't believe in god that doesn't make you an atheist. Only the firm belief that there is no god does.
Small difference perhaps, but you are not an atheist according to that logic. You are just a person without belief in god.

I am not an atheist either. I don't believe that there is no god.
I also am not a theist, because I do not believe that there is any god.
If that sounds contradictory to some it is only because their imagination sets their limits.
Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jul, 2014 02:24 pm
Quote:
Frank Apisa said to me: But you are absolutely certain there is a god....so your "Nah mate" is nonsense.
I doubt you can see that.
I'm willing to guess that almost everyone else here can.

Depends what you mean by "God" mate!
If you mean the stereotype old chap with a beard, nah!
Dawkins and his atheist chums say in their infamous bus advert "There's probably no God".
But Christians would say "There probably IS a God", so the balance is even..Smile
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jul, 2014 04:24 pm
This is one atheist who says there is no god. I don't care what the other people who call themselves the same thing think about it. That's their quandary or solution or whatever it is they do.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jul, 2014 11:53 am
@edgarblythe,
Of course you care....Very Happy
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Jul, 2014 12:23 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Only as a friend might care.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 02:19 am
@Cyracuz,
Bullsh*t.

Let me modify this somewhat--you're not even a native speaker of English, never mind being some kind of crypto-Buddhist. You have no business attempting to make authoritative statements about the meanings of words, or of any one else's ontological positions.
Cyracuz
 
  2  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 02:51 am
@Setanta,
Yes, because 'atheism' and 'theism' are English words.... They exist in a shitload of languages, including Norwegian.

Also, I am not an atheist because I do not forswear the possibility that there may be a god.
This does not contradict the fact that I do not believe firmly that there is a god either.
So I am neither atheist or theist. Check definitions if you like. I am right whether or not you comprehensive powers are such that you can realize it. Most people actually are too undiscerning to make these distinctions, but I had thought you had a better grasp of language than that.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 03:03 am
You want to check definitions? Check the definition of a "weak" atheist. Check it as implicit atheist, too. You're just defining the term to suit your selection bias. All that atheist means, from its roots, is without god. It does not stipulate why and individual would be without god.

EDIT: You can also keep your snotty remarks about my powers of comprehension where they belong--up your ass.
Cyracuz
 
  2  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 03:14 am
@Setanta,
a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
b : the doctrine that there is no deity

from Merriam on 'atheism', a source you seem to trust, if I recall correctly.

I have neither doctrine nor disbelief. I find the entire matter self-indulging and vain.

And you are the one defining the term to suit your bias.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 03:25 am
@Cyracuz,
No, you are doing that. You are the one who asserts that an atheist is someone who believes there is no god. The first hit from Google:

a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.

Apparently, that is a distinction which is too subtle for your comprehension.

I guess you didn't trouble yourself to look up weak atheist or implicit atheist. Goodness, that might interfere with what you choose to believe!
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 05:24 am
@Setanta,
The first hit on google is a wikipedia article. At least it is so for me.
In case you don't know, any numbskull can write on wikipedia, and for that reason it is considered a questionable source.
Stick with the merriam-webster definition I offered, rather than the mediocre layman musings of wikipedia.

Quote:
Apparently, that is a distinction which is too subtle for your comprehension.


You are making a fool of yourself. I am the one who brings further distinction, while you are the one who seeks to generalize it and say that anyone who doesn't embrace the idea of god or gods is an atheist.
By the same token I could call anyone who doesn't actively oppose racism a racist.
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 06:52 am
@Cyracuz,
Right, stick with the definition you chose because it supports your bias. AT no time did i offer a definition from Wikipedia. It's pathetic how far you'll go in lying to make your case. It supports your basis for questioning people's comprehension, for calling them silly and vain. You're making a fool of yourself, and the fact that you apparently have still not looked up "weak" atheist, or implicit atheist is evidence of that. I am not generalizing and you have absolutely no basis for your idiotic accusation. I recognize that there are people who assert that there are no gods, but i also know that there are atheists who don't say that. Your attempted analogy fails becuase the cases are not analogous.

Before you make more of a fool of yourself, why don't you try searching for "weka" atheist? Whye don't you try searching for implicit atheist? What's the matter, are you afraid to find that you might have been wrong?
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 07:01 am
@Setanta,
Once again you display your meager powers of comprehension.
You make reference to "the first hit on google" without supplying a link to it so I can see for myself.
Then I say that the first hit when I google it is wikipedia. Where is the lie?

I suspect that your first hit was indeed wikipedia. I think that if it was a credible source you would have linked it. ******* sophist. Lol
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 07:08 am
From Religious Tolerance-dot-org:

Quote:
The term "Atheism" is ambiguous by itself; it really requires a modifier -- as in "strong Atheist," "weak Atheist," "apathetic Atheist." etc. in order to accurately refer to a specific belief system.

Among the general population, the most common meaning of the word "Atheist" describes what many would call "a strong Atheist:" a person who definitely asserts that all the thousands or tens of thousands of god(s), goddess(es), ghosts, demons, Satans, angels, etc. recognized by humans in the present and past do not exist in reality but were all created by humans.

The most common meaning among Atheists themselves refers to a weak, negative, soft, or skeptical Atheist: one who simply lacks a belief in and knowledge of any supernatural entities whatsoever. (emphasis added)


Of course it's inconvenient to your snotty, insulting thesis. It doesn't support your decision to call atheists silly and vain, it doesn't support your decision to question my comprehension and to call me a fool. How sad for you.

Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 07:09 am
@Cyracuz,
The lie is your denial that there can be a definition not comprehended by your narrow view.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 07:09 am
@Cyracuz,
By the way, stop the name-calling, you f*cking idiot.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 07:11 am
First hit for "define atheist" on Google, you snotty asshole.
Cyracuz
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 07:22 am
@Setanta,
Hmm.. I have never heard of religious tolerance-dot-org....

What is that? Someone's blog?

I can probably find a web page that says gold fish rule the universe. If it's written it must be true.

Look at the merriam-webster definition of the word. That's a credible, well known source. An authority, in fact, when it comes to the English language, wouldn't you say?
What are the merits of the maker of your local Ontario blog?
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 07:24 am
@Setanta,
This is retarded...

What if you didn't like sex with women? Would that make you gay? No.

Only liking sex with men would make you gay. But I am sure that the vast majority of males who could not comprehend your distaste for women would see no distinction between being gay and not liking women...
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2014 07:32 am
@Cyracuz,
No, kt's not a blog. And it's not local to Ontario, either, you snotty douche-bag. Because i conduct the search from Ontario, that's where it takes me.

I see you still haven't done a search for weak atheist or implicit atheist. I suspect you're afraid of what you'll find, you close-minded bigot.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 3.43 seconds on 12/25/2024 at 12:14:25