(April 18, 2020 at 4:34 am)Belacqua Wrote:

(April 18, 2020 at 4:21 am)Mr.wizard Wrote: The word atheist has the same meaning for someone who has heard of the concept of god and for someone who hasnt heard of the concept god, that is the point. Its a label used to describe the concept of not believing in a god, it is that simple no deeper meaning required. Who cares if thats inconvenient for theists and their bad arguments or for atheists who dont want to use the the label atheist.

Are lizards atheists?

Yes, lizards are atheists.  So are rocks, bottles of milk, apples, roadways, roofing tiles, tins of baked beans, pocket calculators, newspapers, steering wheels, onions (pickled as well as fresh), Bibles, insurance companies, hypodermic needles, bicycles, and roast beef sandwiches.

Boru

(April 18, 2020 at 6:01 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(April 18, 2020 at 4:34 am)Belacqua Wrote: Are lizards atheists?

Yes, lizards are atheists.  So are rocks, bottles of milk, apples, roadways, roofing tiles, tins of baked beans, pocket calculators, newspapers, steering wheels, onions (pickled as well as fresh), Bibles, insurance companies, hypodermic needles, bicycles, and roast beef sandwiches.

Boru

I've been surprised by how many (supposedly) thinking adults are willing to admit that their conclusions considering the existence of God are the same as those of a lizard. 

"Yes, as an atheist, my beliefs concerning the existence of God are the same as those of a bicycle."

(April 18, 2020 at 6:29 am)Belacqua Wrote:

(April 18, 2020 at 6:01 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Yes, lizards are atheists.  So are rocks, bottles of milk, apples, roadways, roofing tiles, tins of baked beans, pocket calculators, newspapers, steering wheels, onions (pickled as well as fresh), Bibles, insurance companies, hypodermic needles, bicycles, and roast beef sandwiches.

Boru

I've been surprised by how many (supposedly) thinking adults are willing to admit that their conclusions considering the existence of God are the same as those of a lizard. 

"Yes, as an atheist, my beliefs concerning the existence of God are the same as those of a bicycle."

It's not a conclusion, but a condition.

And it would be more accurately expressed as, 'The state of my non-belief in God is exactly the same as that of a bicycle.'

Boru

(April 18, 2020 at 6:32 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(April 18, 2020 at 6:29 am)Belacqua Wrote: I've been surprised by how many (supposedly) thinking adults are willing to admit that their conclusions considering the existence of God are the same as those of a lizard. 

"Yes, as an atheist, my beliefs concerning the existence of God are the same as those of a bicycle."

It's not a conclusion, but a condition.

And it would be more accurately expressed as, 'The state of my non-belief in God is exactly the same as that of a bicycle.'

Boru

If you want to assert that you're not a thinking person, that's your option.

Quote:One might say that a newborn is atheist by default, but an adult is atheist by conscious choice (in most cases).

Boru

(April 18, 2020 at 6:38 am)Belacqua Wrote:

(April 18, 2020 at 6:32 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: It's not a conclusion, but a condition.

And it would be more accurately expressed as, 'The state of my non-belief in God is exactly the same as that of a bicycle.'

Boru

If you want to assert that you're not a thinking person, that's your option.

Earlier in this thread, I made the statement 'One might say that a newborn is atheist by default, but an adult is atheist by conscious choice (in most cases)', to which you gave a kudos (thank you).  Do you no longer agree that there is a condition in which one can be atheist by default?

Of course I don't maintain that bicycles or lizards go through a long, sometimes torturous period of research and argument to come to the conclusion that they don't believe in gods (some adults don't go through that as well).  But the term 'atheist' is properly applied to a current state of being - it says nothing about how one got to that state of being. 

If you agree that a newborn is an atheist by default, why can't lizards, bicycles, onions and the rest also be atheists by default?

Boru

apos for being repetitive - I missed your edit.

(April 18, 2020 at 6:48 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: But the term 'atheist' is properly applied to a current state of being - it says nothing about how one got to that state of being. 

That's true. 

Quote:If you agree that a newborn is an atheist by default, why can't lizards, bicycles, onions and the rest also be atheists by default?

As I said earlier tonight, and have said many times on this forum: If you want to use the word "atheist" to apply to things with no beliefs whatsoever, go ahead, it doesn't bother me. I'm not the definition boss.

However, a thinking person's atheism is not simply a "condition" or a default setting. A thinking person has heard religious claims and decided that they are unpersuasive. If he is a thinking person at all, he rejects claims based on criteria of judgment. If he has criteria of judgment, then he has beliefs concerning what constitutes persuasive evidence. 

If someone rejects claims with no criteria for doing so, then he is making up his mind for no reason. He is not thinking. He is going by prejudice, or force of habit. There may well be people who maintain their position on issues without thought or consideration. This is not something they should be proud of. 

I deny that my atheism is the same as that of a bicycle.

(April 18, 2020 at 6:59 am)Belacqua Wrote:

(April 18, 2020 at 6:48 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: But the term 'atheist' is properly applied to a current state of being - it says nothing about how one got to that state of being. 

That's true. 

Quote:If you agree that a newborn is an atheist by default, why can't lizards, bicycles, onions and the rest also be atheists by default?

As I said earlier tonight, and have said many times on this forum: If you want to use the word "atheist" to apply to things with no beliefs whatsoever, go ahead, it doesn't bother me. I'm not the definition boss.

However, a thinking person's atheism is not simply a "condition" or a default setting. A thinking person has heard religious claims and decided that they are unpersuasive. If he is a thinking person at all, he rejects claims based on criteria of judgment. If he has criteria of judgment, then he has beliefs concerning what constitutes persuasive evidence. 

If someone rejects claims with no criteria for doing so, then he is making up his mind for no reason. He is not thinking. He is going by prejudice, or force of habit. There may well be people who maintain their position on issues without thought or consideration. This is not something they should be proud of. 

I deny that my atheism is the same as that of a bicycle.

And I maintain the your atheism is precisely the same as that of a bicycle.  The only difference is how you got there. You came to be an atheist through reason, critical thinking, and (eventually) conscious choice. A bicycle hasn't got the possibility to do that.

Boru

(April 18, 2020 at 7:05 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: And I maintain the your atheism is precisely the same as that of a bicycle.

OK, if it were true that atheism in a thinking person is a lack and nothing but a lack, then what you say would be true.

So you have persuaded me that atheism in thinking adults is not merely a lack.

Atheism in thinking adults consists of beliefs. These beliefs will vary based on the contingencies of what they've heard, but they will include things like:

~ The claims made by religious people are not persuasive.

~ The holy texts are not true.

These beliefs may or not be provable, depending on which religious claims we're talking about, but they are beliefs, in that they are things we hold to be true.

Atheism in thinking adults is comprised of beliefs.

At work.

Hello Bell!

Uhm.... just a few points/questions.

I have mental constructs (A 'Belief' if you will.) of a myriad of things.

When I type the word 'Dragon', then any ond reading said word will have a concept which maps pretty much to the same (Or similar) idea, or concept or belief of a hexapedal scaled and flying creature. (Flames optional).

Are 'Dragons' real? Does the term correspond to something 'Other' in the reality around us?

So, my 'Non-theism' as a term operates in the same way.

The other thing is going back to your disagreement with the lizard's mind thing.

Just what would change if, for example, lizards did in fact demonstrate obedience to dietys?

Say someone stumbles across a reptile (The size is optional) which when presented with the iconography any... heck lets expand and say every diety, assummes the appropriate pose performed by said diety's worshippers.

In all other respects. All we can tell is that it is, in fact, 'Just' a lizard (Well... novel species).

How might such a thing effect those who profess 'Belief'?

Much cheers.

Quote:OK, if it were true that atheism in a thinking person is a lack and nothing but a lack, then what you say would be true.

What he says is true 

Quote:So you have persuaded me that atheism in thinking adults is not merely a lack.

Then you have been persuaded to the wrong conclusion  

Quote:Atheism in thinking adults consists of beliefs. These beliefs will vary based on the contingencies of what they've heard, but they will include things like:

~ The claims made by religious people are not persuasive.

~ The holy texts are not true.

Nope it's 

The claims made by religious people have not convinced the atheist 

Holy texts have not  convinced the atheist 

Quote:These beliefs may or not be provable, depending on which religious claims we're talking about, but they are beliefs, in that they are things we hold to be true.

They are not beliefs they are rejections of claims made by theists ha their holy books are true and their arguments are convincing 

Quote:Atheism in thinking adults is comprised of beliefs.

Thus a thinking person is simply rejecting poor claims .That does not make it a belief .