(July 6, 2012 at 2:13 pm)Ace Otana Wrote: You're logic is nonsense to me. Once more and for the last fucking time, atheism simply means without theism. Are....you....really....this....fucking....dense?

That's been my assumption the whole time. My definition perfectly corresponds to the one you gave. But it seems that you guys aren't comfortable with some of the implications--that belief systems like {"Two plus two equals four"} are technically atheistic.

Which is unfortunate. I assumed that you guys would enjoy talking about the implications that your definitions have; apparently, you just want to complain that the guy doing the proofs is somehow being 'fucking dense' for using logic. Odd.

Well, I mean, if those three statements form the entirety of a persons beliefs then it would be his belief system. One might amuse themselves for hours finding ways to twist and tie those three beliefs around themselves in order to make them useful. Might also bore yourself to death in record time...could go either way. It's difficult to determine how these three statements support each other, so they wouldn't really fit the traditional idea of a belief system...but what the hell, let em have it.

(July 6, 2012 at 2:17 pm)Ace Otana Wrote:

(July 6, 2012 at 2:14 pm)Skepsis Wrote: How quaint. I believe he fancies himself "logical".

I know!

Think I'll just put him on ignore.
*Adds Clive to ignore*

He calls that "logic"???

(July 6, 2012 at 2:17 pm)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote: More fucking shell games. It's not an "entire CLASS of belief systems" either. That's even fucking stupider.

It's not shell games. Theism is a big umbrella; it includes Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Greek mythology, and so on and so forth. The common property is that every belief system in Theism includes the belief, "At least one god exists."

Now, it seems to me that Atheism is also a big umbrella; it includes secular humanism, nihilism, naturalism, etc. The common property is that every belief system in Atheism fails to include the belief, "At least one god exists".

Which makes sense from a macro point of view, too; under this view, Atheism is the complement of Theism. It includes everything that isn't in theism--i.e., every belief system that lacks theistic belief.



But again, it seems like you've got a different idea for how to think about it. Can you go into more detail?

(July 6, 2012 at 2:18 pm)CliveStaples Wrote: [quote='Ace Otana' pid='306760' dateline='1341598433']You're logic is nonsense to me. Once more and for the last fucking time, atheism simply means without theism. Are....you....really....this....fucking....dense?

That's been my assumption the whole time. My definition perfectly corresponds to the one you gave. But it seems that you guys aren't comfortable with some of the implications--that belief systems like {"Two plus two equals four"} are technically atheistic.

Which is unfortunate. I assumed that you guys would enjoy talking about the implications that your definitions have; apparently, you just want to complain that the guy doing the proofs is somehow being 'fucking dense' for using logic. Odd.
[/quote

Fucking idiot.

Remember that bit about Black/White distorted thinking?

You have been playing fast and loose with that false dichotomy for how many pages now?

(July 6, 2012 at 2:17 pm)Ace Otana Wrote: I know!

Think I'll just put him on ignore.
*Adds Clive to ignore*

Man, it's like the atheists here are allergic to things like mathematical abstraction, logical formalism, methods of inference, and intellectual curiosity.

I love it! It's just so nakedly hypocritical in light of how fucking superior you act about Science and Reason and so on. I wonder how many of you even know the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus?

---

(July 6, 2012 at 2:23 pm)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote: Fucking idiot.

Remember that bit about Black/White distorted thinking?

You have been playing fast and loose with that false dichotomy for how many pages now?

Taq, I've asked you a few times now if you wanted to give me a better way of thinking about it. You're just repeating stuff you've already said.

I'm giving you the opportunity to enlighten me. Are you really more interested in just throwing out insults?

(July 6, 2012 at 2:22 pm)CliveStaples Wrote: It's not shell games. Theism is a big umbrella; it includes Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Greek mythology, and so on and so forth. The common property is that every belief system in Theism includes the belief, "At least one god exists."

Now, it seems to me that Atheism is also a big umbrella; it includes secular humanism, nihilism, naturalism, etc. The common property is that every belief system in Atheism fails to include the belief, "At least one god exists".

Which makes sense from a macro point of view, too; under this view, Atheism is the complement of Theism. It includes everything that isn't in theism--i.e., every belief system that lacks theistic belief.

One could conceivably believe in god while simultaneously being a secular humanist, just as one example. A nihilist might believe in a god, while also maintaining that it doesn't actually matter if there is a god, or that the concept of god is itself just as real as the concept of self -which is to say not at all, though still on equal footing. One could also be a naturalist and believe that in some far-flung universe unconnected to this one a god operates.

I think you might mean to say that some/most/all secular humanists, nihilists, and naturalists are also atheists. Of course, they don't have to be.

(July 6, 2012 at 2:22 pm)CliveStaples Wrote: Now, it seems to me that Atheism is also a big umbrella; it includes secular humanism, nihilism, naturalism, etc. The common property is that every belief system in Atheism fails to include the belief, "At least one god exists".

Which makes sense from a macro point of view, too; under this view, Atheism is the complement of Theism. It includes everything that isn't in theism--i.e., every belief system that lacks theistic belief.

based on what you said here, atheism, in my personal opinion, doesn't complement theism unless you're saying that theists believe everything considered under your umbrella except for the non-belief of an all-powerful god. i know that sentence was fucked up syntactically. the reason being atheists have only that one common denominator. so if we were bringing everything else to the table to provide a true complement, then fine - but no one is saying that. as a term, it only brings one thought to the table.

(July 6, 2012 at 2:22 pm)CliveStaples Wrote: Now, it seems to me that Atheism is also a big umbrella; it includes secular humanism, nihilism, naturalism, etc. The common property is that every belief system in Atheism fails to include the belief, "At least one god exists".

Which makes sense from a macro point of view, too; under this view, Atheism is the complement of Theism. It includes everything that isn't in theism--i.e., every belief system that lacks theistic belief.

Really and seriously? I can't believe you are seriously arguing the most cliched anti-atheist argument on the books- that atheism is a belief system. Most people go from that to "So you must have as much faith as us" (as if that should be an insult coming from the faithful), or they say, "So, anyways, not that that's established, take my burden of proof".

But you...

You're an odd one. You simply argue to argue, don't you? I think it's silly to argue that atheism is a class as theism is. Atheism, as you freely confess, is the lack of belief. You say that, then you contradict yourself, saying that atheism includes all beliefs that don't fall under the theistic umbrella- which is obviously wrong. Atheism is a lack of belief, or hell, you might even call it the rejection of theistic propositions- but it certainly isn't a belief, and I would happily shoot myself in the foot if you can show me that it's a "belief system".

What utter garbage. Do you even think before you post?
No- Sorry. I don't mean to get too snippy.

But I still think your argument is absolute trash.

Quote:Man, it's like the atheists here are allergic to things like mathematical abstraction, logical formalism, methods of inference, and intellectual curiosity.

We're allergic to arguments that have been covered in detail thousands of times before, on the internet, in real life, and on these very forums. This argument might very well be the oldest and stalest in the "theists' shitty arguments" list.

(July 6, 2012 at 1:11 pm)CliveStaples Wrote:

(July 6, 2012 at 1:08 pm)Rhythm Wrote: No, because none of those statements have anything to do with atheism.

I did answer your question.

So the following definition is not true:

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

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

More shell game. You are trying to sneak your idea of atheism being a belief system in through the back door. When are you going to quit qith the dishonesty? That and all this fast-talking tomfuckery isn't supposed to be the domain of your devil-figure. Why the fuck are you wallowing in it?