16
   

@MyFellowAtheists: How Big an Atheist Are You?

 
 
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 07:30 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
Who gets to define Atheism now?

Dictionaries do. They don't differ much on the issue, but here's The American Heritage Dictionary's definition:

Quote:
Atheism: n. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
Disbelief: n. Refusal or reluctance to believe.

Actually, dictionaries don't define words either. They just document the common usage of words. Either way, ehBeth is correct and you are mistaken.

Olivier5 wrote:
I could not disagree more with the idea than atheism is 'nothing' or only the absence of something.

As ehBeth correctly notes, you don't get to decide this. Nobody cares what you agree or disagree with.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 07:40 pm
@Thomas,
errrr you've attached my name to Olivier's comment
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 07:41 pm
@Thomas,
Have you been talking to my father, the recovering philatelist ?

Laughing
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 07:41 pm
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

errrr you've attached my name to Olivier's comment

Corrected. Sorry.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 07:42 pm
@ehBeth,
No, not yet. I probably should. Smile
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 07:54 pm
@ehBeth,
'Atheism' may mean several things to several people. Therefore it's not an ideology. I think of it as an idea, personally, or more precisely as a set of closely related ideas. Yet, each individual atheist may have his/her ideology, a personal system of political thought, with various tenets and motivations, combining political and philosophical or personal goals / ideas. As far as atheists are concerned, anti-clericalism is a not infrequent element of these world views. Nothing wrong with it as long as you don't let your ideology dominate you body and soul. But yes, atheists can have ideological motives just like anybody else.
ehBeth
 
  3  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 07:59 pm
@Olivier5,
By definition, atheism is not a belief system or ideology.

As a former theist, I can see it is difficult for some to understand the difference, but there is a real difference between believing (having a belief system) and not believing.

It is an absence of belief.

It is not a replacement of one set of beliefs with another set of beliefs.
Olivier5
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 08:02 pm
@Thomas,
Calm down Thomas. You don't even know what my position is and only bring more confusion.
Thomas
 
  3  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 08:09 pm
@Olivier5,
I'm perfectly calm. More importantly though, you are wrong on the merits whether I'm calm or not, and you can't talk yourself out of that by speculating about my state of mind.
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  2  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 08:39 pm
Here are some statements from the Freedom from Religion Foundation's website: http://ffrf.org/

Quote:
Won’t you join FFRF in our critical work to promote nontheism and defend the constitutional separation between religion and government? With more than 21,500 members, the nonprofit FFRF works as an effective state/church watchdog and voice for freethought (atheism, agnosticism, skepticism).


Quote:
The history of Western civilization shows us that most social and moral progress has been brought about by persons free from religion. In modern times the first to speak out for prison reform, for humane treatment of the mentally ill, for abolition of capital punishment, for women's right to vote, for death with dignity for the terminally ill, and for the right to choose contraception, sterilization and abortion have been freethinkers, just as they were the first to call for an end to slavery. The Foundation works as an umbrella for those who are free from religion and are committed to the cherished principle of separation of state and church.


On the other hand, FFRF doesn't represent all atheists, so it seems to me that some atheists can take on atheism as an ideology, but not all do. Or am I wrong in thinking that the above quotes represent and ideology?

Quote:
ideology

noun ide·ol·o·gy \ˌī-dē-ˈä-lə-jē, ˌi-\
: the set of ideas and beliefs of a group or political party

plural ide·ol·o·gies

1
: visionary theorizing
2
a : a systematic body of concepts especially about human life or culture
b : a manner or the content of thinking characteristic of an individual, group, or culture
c : the integrated assertions, theories and aims that constitute a sociopolitical program
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 08:56 pm
@FBM,
I don't think FFRF represents atheism.

I think it may have some members who are atheists - but there are apparently also agnostics and skeptics.

FRFF has an ideology but that ideology is not atheism.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 08:58 pm
@Olivier5,
Ascribing a state of mind to a listing of facts?

maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 09:58 pm
Is this hate speech? (In my opinion it is.)

Quote:
Surely gays are better off being married in loving monogamous relationships than preyed upon by the church with their fear mongering pedophile clergy.

The church seeks to disorient gays so they can victimize them in their own sick and disgusting plots they have been using for years.


http://able2know.org/topic/267086-1
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 10:00 pm
@Thomas,
Quote:
When it comes to ideological zeal, we atheists are AMATEURS compared to the non-stamp-collectors.


That isn't true at all. I started a thread about non-stamp-collecting. I didn't get a single response.

Unlike atheists, non-stamp-collectors don't seem to care how people define them.

ehBeth
 
  3  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 10:10 pm
@maxdancona,
It does not meet the Canadian definition (or mine).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech#Canada

Quote:
In Canada, advocating genocide[19] or inciting hatred[20] against any "identifiable group" is an indictable offence under the Criminal Code of Canada with maximum prison terms of two to fourteen years.

An 'identifiable group' is defined as "any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation".

It makes exceptions for cases of statements of truth, and subjects of public debate and religious doctrine.

The landmark judicial decision on the constitutionality of this law was R. v. Keegstra (1990).
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  2  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 10:34 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

Quote:
When it comes to ideological zeal, we atheists are AMATEURS compared to the non-stamp-collectors.


That isn't true at all. I started a thread about non-stamp-collecting. I didn't get a single response.

Unlike atheists, non-stamp-collectors don't seem to care how people define them.




As an ardent non-stamp-collector, I resent being defined as someone who doesn't care how people define me.





OK, that didn't work. Never mind.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 10:43 pm
@FBM,
Just admit it FBM, non-stamp-collecting is a hobby like any other hobby.
FBM
 
  3  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2015 10:53 pm
@maxdancona,
http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/sad_shakefist.gif
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Feb, 2015 12:12 am
@maxdancona,
I finally conceded the same about collecting woodpecker holes. Without some wood around them they are so easy to misplace as to become a non-hobby.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Feb, 2015 02:15 am
My goodness . . . i go away for a day and come back to find this place full of more manure than a hog farmer generates in a year's time.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Atheism - Discussion by littlek
The tolerant atheist - Discussion by Tuna
Another day when there is no God - Discussion by edgarblythe
church of atheism - Discussion by daredevil
Can An Atheist Have A Soul? - Discussion by spiritual anrkst
THE MAGIC BUS COMES TO CANADA - Discussion by Setanta
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 12:55:38