(December 18, 2011 at 3:40 pm)amkerman Wrote: If you believe with conviction that anything objectively is true you believe in something that would correctly be termed a monotheistic deity.

That is exactly the point; I do not. I like to believe I am willing to concede that everything I think is true might be false. I can live with a little uncertainty, so to speak.

My brain is fallible; therefore, any thought it produces might be false.

I find it fascinating that some people find it difficult (or even consider it impossible) to live with this realisation.

Darwinning: you are agnostic then. If you are not sure whether anything is objectively true, if you believe that there is a possibility that everything you think is wrong, but have no evidence to support or disprove that claim, that is not atheism. Atheism is a held belief, a conviction. It is a statement. If, deep down, you actually BELIEVE that there is no objective reality beyond your own perception and consciousness then you are an atheist. Atheism, while conceptually rational, is wholly illogical within the sphere of history, scientific observation, and the human experience.

I'm bored, so I'll bite, even though I have seen this worm before.

(December 18, 2011 at 3:08 pm)amkerman Wrote: Atheism is correctly termed as a belief that there are no gods and is no God; it is not a lack of belief, a simple lack of belief is agnosticism. Atheism is a conviction.

Denial is not belief. It is disbelief, at best. The latter half of this is actually incorrect. Agnosticism is not a lack of belief. Agnosticism takes many forms, none of them the above.

Quote:Any belief, if sound, must logically be taken to it's ultimate conclusion to be proven.

Ayup, so do it, theist boy. I presume you have already jumped to your conclusion before discovering this tidbit.

Quote:A belief that some things are inherently good or bad, that there is purpose, value, meaning, or any objective reality aty all outside of human perception, necessitates faith.

Yeah, but who the fuck believes that and what the fuck does it have to do with atheism?

Quote:There is absolutely no empirical evidence that murder is "bad". Such a hypothesis necessarily denotes that value judgements are true.

Value judgements are only possible through observation of a conscious entity.

Try familiarizing yourself with any of the social sciences and then come back.

Quote:A belief that value judgements are true necessitates consciousness as a primary function of the universe, rather than a purely mechanical universe.

Oh, look, word salad. Mmmm . . . salad.

Quote:A belief that consciousness is a primary function of the universe, that consciousness pervades everything and is true apart from time or space, that things are in fact "real", that some things are inherently bad or good, right or wrong, true or not true, would be correctly termed a belief in "God".

All right, I'm full. I'm skipping the next course and getting to the stuff that actually has anything to do with atheism or is at least translatable.

Quote:A belief that this "God" does not exist is illogical. it is committing a fallicy of ignorance and contrary to all scientific observation and acheivment.

Ignorance is not a logical fallacy. It only becomes one when theists talk about god. If you cannot spell fallacy, you should refrain from telling people they are committing one.

Quote:Atheism is a belief that things are not real.

Making up definitions is fun. Did you know that flowers are actually anal beads? I know, weird.

Quote:Most atheists, with their limited intellects (which usually surpass the intellects of their theist counterparts) believe that they attack or disbelieve iin "God" when in reality they are simply attacking religion.

In this case, the parenthetical aside is absolutely true. The latter is ridiculous. Theists just do not understand that you cannot attack something that is not real. We know full well we are attacking religion and sometimes the asshats who promote it like a fucking car salesman.

Quote:Logically, if one was being intellectually honest, most atheists actually believe in what would correctly be termed a montheistic deity, of "God", that truth and reality exist outside of human comprehension and understanding, even if they say they don't.

Oh, goody. I love this one. It makes you feel better to think you have more insight into individuals than you actually do. It saves you from having to face the fact that you understand next to nothing about your self-chosen opponents.

Quote:This is not an attempt to force my beliefs on anyone.

No, it is an attempt to redefine the beliefs of others, which is far more contemptible, in my opinion.

Quote: any argument made by atheists is ultimately not an argument against God, it is an argument against particular religious beliefs.

Duh. We do not argue "against" god. There is no fucking god.

Quote:I encourage lively and respectful debate.

Bah. You'll get whatever you get and be grateful you got the attention you seek. There is nothing to debate. You cannot tell people what they believe and expect them to "respect" your "debate." You're also so wrong that I predict this thread will be a lot of "Hey, look at the idiot." Oh, and you forfeited your right to respect when you called atheists ignorant about four times in your OP. Commence the fart-sucking, dickwad.

(December 18, 2011 at 3:08 pm)amkerman Wrote: Atheism is correctly termed as a belief that there are no gods and is no God; it is not a lack of belief, a simple lack of belief is agnosticism. Atheism is a conviction.

Agnosticism addresses what is knowable not what one believes. Atheism is the disbelief in the existence of God or gods and also a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Quote:A belief that value judgements are true necessitates consciousness as a primary function of the universe, rather than a purely mechanical universe.

No, that's a fallacy of composition.

Quote:If consciouness is a primary function of the universe;

It's not.

Quote:A belief that this "God" does not exist is illogical. it is committing a fallicy of ignorance and contrary to all scientific observation and achievement.

You mean an invincible ignorance fallacy, and no it's not. Define "God" first because I honestly have no idea what you are claiming to be true.

Quote:A truely atheistic world view necessitates that gravity does not "exist", laws of physics are mere conscious observations that have no inherent truth besides that which humans ascribe them. Atheism can not coexist in a sceintifically objective worldview.

Atheism is but a response to theistic claims. Not the demonstrably real fundamental forces of Nature. >.>

(December 18, 2011 at 4:03 pm)amkerman Wrote: Darwinning: you are agnostic then. If you are not sure whether anything is objectively true, if you believe that there is a possibility that everything you think is wrong, but have no evidence to support or disprove that claim, that is not atheism. Atheism is a held belief, a conviction. It is a statement. If, deep down, you actually BELIEVE that there is no objective reality beyond your own perception and consciousness then you are an atheist. Atheism, while conceptually rational, is wholly illogical within the sphere of history, scientific observation, and the human experience.

Nope.

I believe the odds that a God does exist are so incredibly small that they are virtually negligible. I must concede my agnosticism, but I am a de-facto atheist. These are shades of grey, nothing is as black or white as you present it to be.

Even if I were truly and only agnostic, I would have no idea what God not to consider a possibility; there are so many to choose from.

I believe the term used on this forum is "Agnostic Atheist".

welsh cake: you state that consciousness is not a primary function of the universe. I hope you will concede that statement is a belief, not a fact. I did not commit the fallacy of composition when I stated that a belief in objective morality or truth necessitates consciousness as a primary function of the universe. If things actually are "Good" or "bad" it necessarily means that value judgements can be correct or incorrect. Value judgments require a conscious observer. if things inherently have value necessarily consciousness must be a primary law of nature and the universe.

"atheism is but a response to theistic claims" - I completely agree with you. Atheism offers no insight to whether something that would correctly be termed "God" exists at all.

"define God first..." any man-made definition of God would by its very nature be incomplete. From a scientific standpoint the most simplistic term I can come up with is "consciousness as a primary function of the universe"

Geez, just when I was trying to promote the idea that a Christian doesn't have to be a dick about his beliefs you show up and start telling everyone what they believe and what that really means. What would we do without you?

I'm changing my number one requirement for a cool Christian to simple "humility". We're just all just humans here together, each with his own personal perspective and all of us expert users of English. None of us owns the patent on objective reality so whenever someone starts telling everyone else the way it is .. well, eyes will roll. Is this really anyway to treat your cyber neighbors? You say you want a respectful discussion but if that is really true, may I suggest you start over?

Here by the way is the way wikipedia defines atheism so you won't think we're just making it all up.

Quote:Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[2][3] Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.[3][4] Atheism is contrasted with theism,[5][6] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists,[6][7] and with agnosticism, which leaves the matter of existence open.[8]

The underlined part is my emphasis for it describes what I mean when I say I am an atheist, which I am by the way. "A-theism" covers everyone who finds they are "without-theism". Strong atheists will tell you with objective certitude just how wrong and stupid your theist beliefs are while we weak atheist will just stand back and think to ourselves "weird" but we'll defend your right to your weirdness without calling you weird. Is that weird?

(December 18, 2011 at 4:33 pm)whateverist Wrote: Geez, just when I was trying to promote the idea that a Christian doesn't have to be a dick about his beliefs you show up and start telling everyone what they believe and what that really means. What would we do without you?

I'm changing my number one requirement for a cool Christian to simple "humility". We're all just humans here together, each with his own personal perspective and all of us expert users of English. None of us owns the patent on objective reality so whenever someone starts telling everyone else the way it is .. well, eyes will roll. Is this really anyway to treat your cyber neighbors? You say you want a respectful discussion but if that is really true, may I suggest you start over?

Here by the way is the way wikipedia defines atheism so you won't think we're just making it all up.

Quote:Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[2][3] Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.[3][4] Atheism is contrasted with theism,[5][6] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists,[6][7] and with agnosticism, which leaves the matter of existence open.[8]

The underlined part is my emphasis for it describes what I mean when I say I am an atheist, which I am by the way. "A-theism" covers everyone who finds they are "without-theism". Strong atheists will tell you with objective certitude equal to your own just how wrong and stupid your theist beliefs are while we weak atheists will just stand back and think to ourselves "weird". But we'll defend your right to your weirdness without calling you weird. Is that weird?

whateverist. I am sorry if you felt that my post somehow was rude. I guess whenever someone states their beliefs, or even speaks or says anything at all it might be seen as an attempt to "force" those statements on others. I don't have that perception though. If what I said was somehow offensive, know that was not my intention.

---

So many people on here trying to define atheism so it's a lack of belief, but not a belief itself. If I lack a belief in a flat earth, I necessarily believe that the earth is not flat. A lack of belief in "God" is a belief that "God" does not exist, in any form. I am not trying to "force" that belief on anyone, I am not trying to tell people what they believe. I am just stating what I perceive to be true. If that truth is somehow offensive to you, that is not really my problem, it's yours.

(December 18, 2011 at 4:38 pm)amkerman Wrote: whateverist. I am sorry if you felt that my post somehow was rude. I guess whenever someone states their beliefs, or even speaks or says anything at all it might be seen as an attempt to "force" those statements on others. I don't have that perception though. If what I said was somehow offensive, know that was not my intention.

---

So many people on here trying to define atheism so it's a lack of belief, but not a belief itself. If I lack a belief in a flat earth, I necessarily believe that the earth is not flat. A lack of belief in "God" is a belief that "God" does not exist, in any form. I am not trying to "force" that belief on anyone, I am not trying to tell people what they believe. I am just stating what I perceive to be true. If that truth is somehow offensive to you, that is not really my problem, it's yours.

Do you think it follows that if some people believe unicorns are not pink and I do not share their belief that I must therefore think unicorns really are pink? Logically, this is exactly what you are trying to foist on me. Good netiquette requires you to permit me to be the expert on what I believe and what that means to me. In return, I grant you the same leeway. There are many here who have only known pushy, opinionated Christians. If you can't play nice I wish you would play else where. We really only want to talk with good Christians.