(February 28, 2019 at 7:10 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: if the standards and criteria aren't specific to atheism, then they aren't a part of atheism proper, contrary to what you seem to have been arguing this whole time.  What the hell is your point?

That's right. There are standards and criteria which aren't themselves atheism, which lead some people to conclude that atheism is the correct view of things. These people have reached their beliefs concerning religious questions according to their prior beliefs. (Logically prior, not necessarily temporally prior) 

Therefore they have beliefs (things they hold to be true). Therefore when they assert that their beliefs concerning god are good beliefs, they do have things which can be challenged and discussed. Atheism is not a lack such that an atheist need not defend it.

Atheism doesn't claim that atheists have no beliefs.

---

(Honestly, I think that you're talking about some knowledge claim x, rather than atheism. If, for example, I said "fuck religions, they're the leading cause of infant mortality" - that would certainly be the kind of claim I'd better be prepared to defend with facts, lol.)

(February 28, 2019 at 7:22 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: Atheism doesn't claim that atheists have no beliefs.

Thank you for acknowledging this.

Some beliefs that atheists hold may be more defensible (e.g. "only scientific evidence is reliable"). Or they may be less defensible (e.g. "all Christians are idiots"). 

But in every case, for an adult atheist in a society, his beliefs are an intrinsic part of his atheism.

What was there to acknowledge?  Atheism doesn't claim that a person has no beliefs, only that they don't have god beliefs. I believe that my kids will one day grow into real human beings, lol.

(February 28, 2019 at 7:56 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: What was there to acknowledge?  Atheism doesn't claim that a person has no beliefs, only that they don't have god beliefs.  I believe that my kids will one day grow into real human beings, lol.

Not believing IN a god isn't the same as just happening to lack a belief.  I'd say most atheists are pretty much "I'm not buying what you're selling."  At the very least, they see that religious person carrying their shovel and think "I don't believe I feel like listening to this guy."  But I suspect that's because you already suspect you're not going to believe him, and to such a great degree that you aren't even willing to invest in a few minutes to listen to him.

Life's too short for bullshit, and thinking that a religious idea is bullshit is, I'd say, a belief.

(February 28, 2019 at 8:11 pm)bennyboy Wrote: thinking that a religious idea is bullshit is, I'd say, a belief.

Yes, thank you.

This is one of those beliefs which no doubt sustains many people in their atheism.

(February 28, 2019 at 8:11 pm)bennyboy Wrote: Not believing IN a god isn't the same as just happening to lack a belief. 

What is, then?  Let's start there.

(February 28, 2019 at 6:17 pm)Belaqua Wrote:

(February 28, 2019 at 5:58 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote: You don't get to tell other people how they are thinking.

I agree that in some cases, a person's beliefs concerning god or the lack thereof may NOT be reasoned conclusions based on conscious premises. 

A person might believe that there is no reason to believe in a god based on a whim, or a prejudice, or force of habit. We might call such things reasons, but bad ones. 

The point I am trying to make is that calling such a condition a lack does not mean that the atheist has nothing to defend.

Until a coherent definition of a a "god" is offered, there is nothing to defend. 
Atheists are not in any defensive position simply because theists claim they believe in some crazy shit.

(February 28, 2019 at 10:45 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote:

(February 28, 2019 at 6:17 pm)Belaqua Wrote: I agree that in some cases, a person's beliefs concerning god or the lack thereof may NOT be reasoned conclusions based on conscious premises. 

A person might believe that there is no reason to believe in a god based on a whim, or a prejudice, or force of habit. We might call such things reasons, but bad ones. 

The point I am trying to make is that calling such a condition a lack does not mean that the atheist has nothing to defend.

Until a coherent definition of a a "god" is offered, there is nothing to defend. 
Atheists are not in any defensive position simply because theists claim they believe in some crazy shit.

God(s): mystical beings created by people to help explain things they didn't understand and developed into beings used to incite fear and control the masses.

(February 28, 2019 at 7:51 pm)Belaqua Wrote:

(February 28, 2019 at 7:22 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: Atheism doesn't claim that atheists have no beliefs.

Thank you for acknowledging this.

Some beliefs that atheists hold may be more defensible (e.g. "only scientific evidence is reliable"). Or they may be less defensible (e.g. "all Christians are idiots"). 

But in every case, for an adult atheist in a society, his beliefs are an intrinsic part of his atheism.

And there's your problem.

If I were to claim that inside whatever device you are using to post there exists an army of pixies equipped with shovels and brooms who move all of the computer bits around to make it appear that your device does amazing magic things, instead of declaring it, as an idea, to be bullshit (which it obviously is), you would painstakingly sit down and draw up a set of criteria upon which such a claim might possibly be judged. Having drawn up the criteria, you would then set about rigourously applying said criteria to the claim and meticulously assessing the results. You would then proclaim a ponderous conclusion wherein you might allow that the very idea could potentially be ill-founded, perhaps. Job inconclusively accomplished, you would then pat yourself on the back for being so, so clever.

Everyone else has looked at the notion, declared it bullshit and moved on before you have even figured out your criteria.

That is why it is pointless to engage with you. You are not interested in the topic at hand, only how you can use it to appear "intellectual".