(April 3, 2018 at 3:41 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(April 3, 2018 at 3:21 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Cabbages are neither conscience, nor intelligent.  That’s the worst analogy ever, lol.

Perhaps but it also works against the inane notion that everyone is "born atheist".

Are you saying that they're born theists?

(April 3, 2018 at 3:45 pm)robvalue Wrote: Cabbages could be called atheistic, but they are not atheists. The definition has another part to it, as Chad/Neo well knows; as I've pointed it out to him numerous times before. Yet here he is, more dishonest and more irrational than a cabbage.

HEY MAN CABBAGES ARE PEOPLE TOO!

---

(April 3, 2018 at 4:01 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote:

(April 3, 2018 at 3:41 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Perhaps but it also works against the inane notion that everyone is "born atheist".

Are you saying that they're born theists?

I understand the point he's trying to make, and we both agree at least partly on it. He's just making his point very poorly. Of course people are born atheists at least in a very weak sense. As indeed, they're certainly not theists.

(April 3, 2018 at 2:44 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Ergo, I am a cabbage.

...Exactly. So, logically...
If you weighed the same as a duck... and you're a cabbage . . .

YOU'RE A WITCH !!!

Catholic_Lady Wrote:But when talking about "God" (like the OP did), most people will assume you're referring to THE God. The one that the vast majority of people in the 21st century believe in. And you've already said you have disbelief in that God lol. So that's what people are going to think of, and that's what people mean when they get the impression that atheists have disbelief in God, rather than just not believing or disbelieving.

As of 2005, 54% of the world's population followed one of the Abrahamic faiths (about 3.6 billion people). Your mileage on what's 'vast' seems to differ from mine.

Disbelief: inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real.

I'm afraid 'disbelief' also covers both 'not believing' and 'believing not'. Disbelief is a fine description of the agnostic atheist position.

I appreciate that you're trying to clarify though, I think you've got the gist of it: most people probably do assume most atheists they hear from are gnostic atheists; but agnostic atheists can be just as vocal, though perhaps with slightly more of a tendency to be polite about it.

(April 3, 2018 at 4:55 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:

Catholic_Lady Wrote:But when talking about "God" (like the OP did), most people will assume you're referring to THE God. The one that the vast majority of people in the 21st century believe in. And you've already said you have disbelief in that God lol. So that's what people are going to think of, and that's what people mean when they get the impression that atheists have disbelief in God, rather than just not believing or disbelieving.

As of 2005, 54% of the world's population followed one of the Abrahamic faiths (about 3.6 billion people). Your mileage on what's 'vast' seems to differ from mine.

Disbelief: inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real.

I'm afraid 'disbelief' also covers both 'not believing' and 'believing not'. Disbelief is a fine description of the agnostic atheist position.

I appreciate that you're trying to clarify though, I think you've got the gist of it: most people probably do assume most atheists they hear from are gnostic atheists; but agnostic atheists can be just as vocal, though perhaps with slightly more of a tendency to be polite about it.

I was referring to the people who believe in a god of any sorts. Of those people, most believe in THE God.

More accurately,  one of "the" gods. It's only the same god when someone needs to bolster a populist claim. That's one of the more interesting things about the development of judeo-christian monotheism, to me. The plurality of monotheistic gods contained in the conceptual set.

Catholic_Lady Wrote:

LadyForCamus Wrote:For me, my lack of believe denotes that I am open to changing my
Mind if sufficient evidence can be presented.  I’m not closed off to the idea of God; I just have never heard an argument that wasn’t fallacious, and I’ve never been presented with any evidence.  If it happens I’ll change my mind. I am one of the few atheists here who would prefer it if god were real, so I’m
completely open-minded about it.

This is the first time I've seen this sentiment here lol. I'm curious to hear your perspective. Why would you prefer God exist?

Not directed at me, I know, and I have to say that most 'capital G' gods aren't often described in a way that would make me prefer their existence, apparently because the carrot and stick approach worked in the past to get people to believe; but a deity of some sort who's activities and morals inspired my admiration and it does the occasional helpful miracle or provides a not-unpleasant afterlife for its creations as long as they want it, I would prefer that being to actually exist.

It's a matter of definition, of course. Using different definitions doesn't prove any kind of point or win arguments, it just means one party needs to use the definitions of the other, for the purposes of the conversation.

The simplest definition is that an atheist is a person (not a fucking vegetable) who is not a theist. Never before have I heard such discomfort and outrage at the simple splitting of the people of the world into two categories. Like I said, if you want to come up with other words to further split these categories, be my guest. But that doesn't invalidate my definition, nor its application. Some atheists have a positive belief that there are no gods, some don't. (Call the latter "just agnostics" if it makes you happy to do so.)

Notice that it doesn't say anything about why someone may not be a theist. It may be because they've never heard of a "God". It may be because they've heard of it, but thought it was a joke, or just gave it no further thought. Or it may be they've thought about it and rejected the idea. It's not important to the above definition.

Neo-Scholastic Wrote:Cabbages lack belief in God. Ergo, cabbages are atheists.

You make a good point. I think the whole 'babies are atheists' is an error. An etymology error, and I don't think I'm making the etymological fallacy in this case. The root structure of 'atheist' isn't 'a-theist' (not a theist), but 'athe-ist', a person who is connected to the concept of 'a-the' (without god/God). A bicyclist is a person with an active connection to the act of bicycling, an atheist is a person with an active connection to not believing in God or gods, whether due to absence of belief or certainty that no deity is real.

Interesting factoid: the word 'atheist' appears in Greek earlier than the word 'theist', and was likely coined first.

---

LadyForCamus Wrote:

Neo-Scholastic Wrote:Cabbages lack belief in God. Ergo, cabbages are atheists.

Cabbages are neither conscience, nor intelligent.  That’s the worst analogy ever, lol.

Yet it's similar to one that I've heard many atheists make, so it doesn't come out of thin air. The arguments used to support the idea that babies are atheists, come to mind.

---

Catholic_Lady Wrote:I was referring to the people who believe in a god of any sorts. Of those people, most believe in THE God.

Including Hindus? Not disagreeing, just seeing if what you mean stretches as far as believing the Creator God is one god among many, like Brahma. Buddhism and Jainism don't feature a creator deity. Atheists, Buddhists, and Hindus represent about 2 billion people. And it seems like at least some of the 'Nones' who don't identify as agnostic or atheist don't believe in THE God. Belief in 'Something' or 'letsism', a belief in an undefined transcendent reality is pretty common.

But 'vast' is a very subjective term. It's probably at least 70% of the world's population that believes in a capital 'G' god, and you may consider that a vast majority.

The term The God is nonsense there is no god above any other god just because capitalize one means nothing