(June 26, 2014 at 4:03 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: Uhhhhh... From Oxford:

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/def...sh/atheist

"A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods"

Why is this so difficult to comprehend, MFM? It's infuriating!

Can you tell me what dictionaries are? Also, it says "disbelief", which clearly indicates one dominant usage of "atheism" is the view that theism is false.

---

(June 26, 2014 at 4:16 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

I guess so. :/

Hey, let me try this, not as a further means of trying to convince you, but to give a better way of understanding what I'm saying:


When someone asks you "Are you an atheist?", what are they asking you? Well clearly, they're asking you "Do you believe no gods exist?" Think about it, if someone asks you "Do you believe Santa Claus doesn't exist?", they aren't asking if you merely lack the belief that he does exist. They want to know whether or not you think he does. They aren't asking for an incidental frame of mind you have ("lacking belief in Santa Claus"), because a newborn baby lacks belief that Santa Claus exists, and doesn't even comprehend the relevant concepts to understand the question, or even the language. Do you or don't you? I think it is valid to say in response to such a question "I don't know" or "I don't think it can be known" and thus you can't answer that question as asked, which is what agnostics typically do.

So, what is my point? Basically, it's that atheists using this "lacking belief" definition of atheism are NOT answering the question really. So when theists ask you to justify your atheism or something to that effect, they're asking you to justify thinking theism is false, not justifying being in the same position as a baby is on the topic.

(June 26, 2014 at 4:17 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote: Also, it says "disbelief", which clearly indicates one dominant usage of "atheism" is the view that theism is false.

Still not correct.

All disbelief is, is that one does not believe a claim or claims.

It does not mean that one necessarily believes the contrapositive claim.

You are trying to force atheism to be a response to 2 prongs of dilemma simultaneously, when it is clearly not.

(June 26, 2014 at 4:17 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote:

(June 26, 2014 at 4:03 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: Uhhhhh... From Oxford:

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/def...sh/atheist

"A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods"

Why is this so difficult to comprehend, MFM? It's infuriating!

Can you tell me what dictionaries are? Also, it says "disbelief", which clearly indicates one dominant usage of "atheism" is the view that theism is false.

---

(June 26, 2014 at 4:16 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

I guess so. :/

Hey, let me try this, not as a further means of trying to convince you, but to give a better way of understanding what I'm saying:


When someone asks you "Are you an atheist?", what are they asking you? Well clearly, they're asking you "Do you believe no gods exist?" Think about it, if someone asks you "Do you believe Santa Claus doesn't exist?", they aren't asking if you merely lack the belief that he does exist. They want to know whether or not you think he does. They aren't asking for an incidental frame of mind you have ("lacking belief in Santa Claus"), because a newborn baby lacks belief that Santa Claus exists, and doesn't even comprehend the relevant concepts to understand the question, or even the language. Do you or don't you? I think it is valid to say in response to such a question "I don't know" or "I don't think it can be known" and thus you can't answer that question as asked, which is what agnostics typically do.

So, what is my point? Basically, it's that atheists using this "lacking belief" definition of atheism are NOT answering the question really. So when theists ask you to justify your atheism or something to that effect, they're asking you to justify thinking theism is false, not justifying being in the same position as a baby is on the topic.

Been looking for a well-written explanation of what I'm trying to say, since I think I'm not being the clearest I could be. I think this is a pretty good illustration of what I'm trying to mean.

http://atheism.about.com/od/aboutagnosti...erence.htm

(June 26, 2014 at 3:38 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote: Anti-theism usually just means something like anti-religious. People can't have a misconception about what an atheist is (on the topic of belief in gods) if all they mean by 'atheist' is something like "one rejects the existence of gods", which is what most people mean by 'atheist'. And since words really have usage, not meaning (or essential meaning, rather), atheist "means" one who thinks gods do not exist.

If people get confused over what someone means by atheist we can always quote Richard Dawkins's formulation of The Spectrum Of Theistic Probabily.

Quote: Dawkins posits that "the existence of God is a scientific hypothesis like any other." He goes on to propose a continuous "spectrum of probabilities" between two extremes of opposite certainty, which can be represented by seven "milestones". Dawkins suggests definitive statements to summarize one's place along the spectrum of theistic probability. These "milestones" are:[2]

1: Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."

2: De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."

3: Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."

4: Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."

5: Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."

6: De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."

7: Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."

Dawkins argues that while there appear to be plenty of individuals that would place themselves as "1" due to the strictness of religious doctrine against doubt, most atheists do not consider themselves "7" because atheism arises from a lack of evidence and evidence can always change a thinking person's mind. In print, Dawkins self-identified as a '6', though when interviewed by Bill Maher[3] and later by Anthony Kenny,[4] he suggested '6.9' to be more accurate.

What Jung actually meant isn't quite as straightforward as it seems, however - Jung's regret over “I don’t need to believe, I know.”

Quote:What Jung tried to do in his letters after the interview was repair some of the damage. He confirmed his assertion that he was convinced there is something there, but also said that none of us knew what is there. In the interview, he would have been better understood if he had acknowledged that there is something very real and mysterious, which we all call God, but the images of God we all hold are different and inadequate.

I lack Jung's belief that the mysterious something is real but I'm not obliged to believe that it's real in order to find Jungian psychology useful.

(June 26, 2014 at 4:17 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote:

(June 26, 2014 at 4:03 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: Uhhhhh... From Oxford:

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/def...sh/atheist

"A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods"

Why is this so difficult to comprehend, MFM? It's infuriating!

Can you tell me what dictionaries are? Also, it says "disbelief", which clearly indicates one dominant usage of "atheism" is the view that theism is false.

Did you miss the "lacks belief" part?

I'm truly sick of people telling me what I believe. I don't actively disbelieve there are gods, I've just never been given adequate evidence. This means I... Wait for it...

Lack belief!

(June 26, 2014 at 4:17 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote: Hey, let me try this, not as a further means of trying to convince you, but to give a better way of understanding what I'm saying:


When someone asks you "Are you an atheist?", what are they asking you? Well clearly, they're asking you "Do you believe no gods exist?" Think about it, if someone asks you "Do you believe Santa Claus doesn't exist?", they aren't asking if you merely lack the belief that he does exist.

No, clearly they are asking if I believe if at least one god does exist.

Quote:Do you or don't you? I think it is valid to say in response to such a question "I don't know" or "I don't think it can be known" and thus you can't answer that question as asked, which is what agnostics typically do.

Belief is the psychological state in which one accepts a proposition or premise to be true. There is no in between, fence sitting position. Either one accepts the premise that a god exists, or they don't.

It is a binary mental state.

Quote:So, what is my point? Basically, it's that atheists using this "lacking belief" definition of atheism are NOT answering the question really. So when theists ask you to justify your atheism or something to that effect, they're asking you to justify thinking theism is false, not justifying being in the same position as a baby is on the topic.

Atheism is simply the response to the claim that a god exists.

All that is required to be an atheist is to not be convinced by the theist claim that a god exists. It does not require claiming a god does not exist.

(June 26, 2014 at 4:30 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: Still not correct.

All disbelief is, is that one does not believe a claim or claims.

It does not mean that one necessarily believes the contrapositive claim.

You are trying to force atheism to be a response to 2 prongs of dilemma simultaneously, when it is clearly not.

I'm sorry, but you are being pedantic. If someone says they disbelieve something, it is nearly always meant as "i believe X is false". You disbelieve in Santa Claus, yes?

Doing that means you think the question cannot be answered (either currently or in principle). For example, I do not have the belief that ETs exist, not because I believe they don't, but because the question of them existing doesn't seem amenable to an answer yet, hence I'm agnostic on the matter.


No I'm not, this has nothing to do with a dilemma at all. I'M an atheist, wjhy would I do that? I just value being clear and inline by what people actually mean by the words they use.

---

(June 26, 2014 at 4:40 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: Did you miss the "lacks belief" part?

No, did you miss the "disbelief" part? Pretty much only atheists use this lack of belief nonsense to mean atheism.

Quote:I'm truly sick of people telling me what I believe. I don't actively disbelieve there are gods, I've just never been given adequate evidence. This means I... Wait for it...

Lack belief!

No one is telling you what you believe, that's just false. We're talking about what people actually mean with these words.

(June 26, 2014 at 4:41 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: No, clearly they are asking if I believe if at least one god does exist.

No, they're focus in the question is obviously centered around an accusation of rejecting theism.

Quote:Belief is the psychological state in which one accepts a proposition or premise to be true. There is no in between, fence sitting position. Either one accepts the premise that a god exists, or they don't.

It is a binary mental state.

Again, you're missing the point. Yes, it's binary if you say the options are either "Believe it's true on one hand, and not believe it's true on the other". The prob is, these sorts of questions are ternary (at least), not binary: Believe (theist), Abstain (agnostic), Believe opposite (atheist).

Quote:Atheism is simply the response to the claim that a god exists.

I agree, however you don't realize that this creates a contradiction on your part. If atheism is a response to god claims, that implies there were no atheists prior to god claims, even though on your "lacking belief" definition they WOULD exist prior to god claims, as everyone would be an atheist.

Quote:All that is required to be an atheist is to not be convinced by the theist claim that a god exists. It does not require claiming a god does not exist.

You're bringing up the same thing I earlier questioned you on, just in different words. When you say you're 'not convinced' by theistic claims, are you saying you're unable to give an answer or that the theist's claims are false?

(June 26, 2014 at 4:44 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote:

(June 26, 2014 at 4:30 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: Still not correct.

All disbelief is, is that one does not believe a claim or claims.

It does not mean that one necessarily believes the contrapositive claim.

You are trying to force atheism to be a response to 2 prongs of dilemma simultaneously, when it is clearly not.

I'm sorry, but you are being pedantic. If someone says they disbelieve something, it is nearly always meant as "i believe X is false". You disbelieve in Santa Claus, yes?

I disbelieve in Santa AND I also believe Santa does not exist.

Quote:No I'm not, this has nothing to do with a dilemma at all. I'M an atheist, wjhy would I do that? I just value being clear and inline by what people actually mean by the words they use.

There are 2 truth claims when it comes to gods;

1. god/gods exists

2. god/gods do not exist

Atheism is a response to the first truth claim, it is not necessarily the second.

Many atheists do take the second position, but only being unconvinced of the first is what defines atheism.

I value using terms correctly, and correcting people when they use them incorrectly.

Yeah... MFM you're being extremely intellectually dishonest. "Lacks belief" is part of the definition of atheism, and whether you like it or not, can be, and is often, independent of "disbelief". Get over yourself. You are not the semantics police.

(June 26, 2014 at 4:55 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: I disbelieve in Santa AND I also believe Santa does not exist.

Yes, and if you ask people what they mean by an atheist, they're talking about the latter with regards to the existence of gods.

Quote:There are 2 truth claims when it comes to gods;

1. god/gods exists

2. god/gods do not exist

Atheism is a response to the first truth claim, it is not necessarily the second.

Many atheists do take the second position, but only being unconvinced of the first is what defines atheism.

Except pretty much no one actually USES the word that way. Usage determines what words mean, so it's kind of important to actually answer what's being asked.

Quote:I value using terms correctly, and correcting people when they use them incorrectly.

Well that's funny, seeing as you're using a definition of a word hardly any english speaker would expect.

(June 26, 2014 at 5:03 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: Yeah... MFM you're being extremely intellectually dishonest. "Lacks belief" is part of the definition of atheism, and whether you like it or not, can be, and is often, independent of "disbelief". Get over yourself. You are not the semantics police.

Again, did you notice the first part stating one dominant usage of it is actually "disbelief"?

Anyway, you've missed the point again. The reason I asked you what a dictionary is was because I was trying to get you to see that you're using a dictionary as a false authority. For example, I recently became a feminist. However, I've seen absurd arguments for why feminism is needed by some of my fellow feminists. They'll sometimes say something that amounts to "Well, the dictionary defines feminism as a movement for the equality of women, which means that women are not treated equally. Therefore we need feminism." But that's clearly a bogus argument. A dictionary saying ideology X is Y doesn't really tell you that such is true, it just tells you that some people use the word that way.

And that's fine, you can use words however you want to. But understand that there are consequences as far as coherence and relevance are concerned when you start ignoring and changing what people usually mean by words.