Atheism or theism relates to beliefs about gods Clive....not the sum of 2+2...........If you were interested in wiping the slate why are you rehashing the same garbage?

(July 6, 2012 at 1:26 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Atheism or theism relates to beliefs about gods Clive....not the sum of 2+2...........If you were interested in wiping the slate why are you rehashing the same garbage?

I'm asking you how you know when a belief system is atheist. I didn't say it had anything to do with 2+2; that was according to a different definition that you aren't using.

Your answers aren't very informative. Let's say that someone sat down in front of you, and would truthfully respond to any question you asked him. What questions would you ask to find out if he was an atheist, and what responses would let you know?

If you asked him if he believed in god and he said "no"

^^^-------

Thank you Plumb.

(July 6, 2012 at 1:33 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: If you asked him if he believed in god and he said "no"

Right, so let's call this method M1. That is, if you want to know whether someone is an atheist, under M1 you ask them if they believe in god; if he says no, then you know he's an atheist.

This corresponds to the definition I was using earlier:

A belief system B is atheist if and only if B does not include the belief, "At least one god exists".

Let's call this method M2. That is, if want to know whether someone is an atheist, you look at their belief system; if it doesn't include the belief, "At least one god exists", then it's atheist.


I'll prove the correspondence, in case you don't believe me.



Suppose you ask the guy--let's call him Norman--if he believes in god and he says no. So Norman is an atheist under M1. Let B be Norman's belief system. By definition, x in B <=> Norman believes x is true. By hypothesis, Norman doesn't believe x is true. Therefore x is not in B. Thus Norman is an atheist under M2.

Conversely, suppose Norman is an atheist under M2. Then "At least one god exists" is not in B. Since x in B <=> Norman believes x is true, and x is not in B, "Norman believes 'At least one god exists' is true" is false. Since Norman always responds truthfully, he will answer "no" to the question, "Do you believe in god?" Hence, Norman is an atheist under M1.

Therefore, Norm is an atheist under M1 <=> Norm is an atheist under M2.



Now, suppose that the following is Norm's belief system:

{"Two plus two equals four"}

So the only thing this guy believes is true is "Two plus two equals four". Under M2, Norm is an atheist; therefore, under M1, Norm is an atheist.


Now, we should all agree with this so far, right? This is all demonstrably true stuff.

Ah I see, you were trying to suggest that the statements given were the sum total of every belief a person might hold, well, that does change things, sure. Still doesnt mean that the statements themselves have anything to do with a god, even if the person making them is an atheist. IOW, you could characterize the person as an atheist, but the statements...not so much.

(July 6, 2012 at 1:23 pm)CliveStaples Wrote:

(July 6, 2012 at 1:20 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Is a red car a Red, or a car that is red? Might the car also be other things, in addition to being red? If it happens to be an SUV does that have anything to do with it being red? If it's an suv does that mean it must be red? Relationships between things are important.

So...what does it mean for a belief system to be atheist? How do you know when a belief system is atheist?

---

(July 6, 2012 at 1:20 pm)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote: Idiot, do you see the statement, "2+2=4" or "this is a tree" as being "either atheist or theist, pick one!"?


Are you really THAT fucking stupid?

Well, given the definition of atheism as "The lack of theism", those would indeed be atheist. But it seems like you think that's a bad definition. What definition would you propose?

I propose you go back to fucking grade school and ask the nice teachers to explain "Black/White distorted thinking" to you. That or do a helluva lot of praying, because every math problem you work is an atheistic statement straight from the Pit of Hell.

(July 6, 2012 at 1:54 pm)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote: I propose you go back to fucking grade school and ask the nice teachers to explain "Black/White distorted thinking" to you.

I propose you go open a book on predicate logic and bash it against your face for a few hours and see if anything sinks in.

(July 6, 2012 at 12:34 pm)CliveStaples Wrote: I mean, I guess math seems pretty 'loony' to you. I mean, sets? Negation? Implements? Crazy talk!

Nope, just you and the complete nonsense you spout mainly.

(July 6, 2012 at 1:47 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Ah I see, you were trying to suggest that the statements given were the sum total of every belief a person might hold, well, that does change things, sure. Still doesnt mean that the statements themselves have anything to do with a god, even if the person making them is an atheist. IOW, you could characterize the person as an atheist, but the statements...not so much.

So let me take a crack at drawing a distinction then:

Everyone who uses a theistic justification must be a theist. That is, if B is the motivating set of beliefs for some action, and B is Theistic (includes or implies "At least one god exists"), then anyone who is motivated by B must be a theist.

On the other hand, merely because a justification is atheist doesn't mean that everyone who uses it must be an atheist. That is, if B is the motivating set of beliefs for some action, and B is Atheistic (does not include or imply "At least one god exists"), then merely because a person is motivated by B doesn't mean that the person must be an atheist.

For example: "I robbed him because I wanted his money." This is an atheistic justification, in the sense that "I wanted his money" and the implicit claim "I am entitled to take what I want" do not include or imply "At least one god exists." But that doesn't mean the robber was an atheist; the robber might very well be a theist, but could have used an atheistic justification. Like if a Christian looks both ways before he crosses the road, it's not because of his faith; it's because of (atheistic) common sense.

---

(July 6, 2012 at 2:01 pm)Ace Otana Wrote: Nope, just you and the complete nonsense you spout mainly.

Well, if logic is nonsense to you, then I guess atheism isn't the Bastion of Reason it's cracked up to be.