Are cats atheists?

[Zen Badger]

In the world of science, you'd be laughed at if you went around believing in theories with no evidence, why should anything regarding religion be any different?

Do you believe in the theory that human reason is currently capable of determining what doesn't exist in all of reality, an arena we can not currently define in even the most basic way? Like for instance, how big is reality, what are it's dimensions?

Which scientists are laughing hysterically at the theory that we can know what doesn't exist in an arena that we can't define?

So in effect you are saying in a round about way that because we can't disprove god therefore we should believe he exists?

[Norfolk And Chance]

Atheists are generally very clear that they want atheism to be defined as a lack of belief in God, and not the belief or claim that there is no God. If this is so, why aren't cats and trees and birds and mentally challenged people who cannot think about things like the supernatural realm atheists?--they all lack belief in God too.

Short answer is cats and trees and birds aren't atheists.

Neither are they theists.

[Creed of Heresy]

...Hm...

"the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate" (1 Cor. 1:19)

"Never argue with a stupid person. They'll drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience."

[WhatIfGodWasJustAMyth]

Atheists are generally very clear that they want atheism to be defined as a lack of belief in God, and not the belief or claim that there is no God. If this is so, why aren't cats and trees and birds and mentally challenged people who cannot think about things like the supernatural realm atheists?--they all lack belief in God too.

Your logic astounds me. <= sarcasm

[jonb]

Some cats are bad ass mother fcukers, but sadly not all.

[Reforged]

Do you believe in the theory that human reason is currently capable of determining what doesn't exist in all of reality, an arena we can not currently define in even the most basic way? Like for instance, how big is reality, what are it's dimensions?

Which scientists are laughing hysterically at the theory that we can know what doesn't exist in an arena that we can't define?

So in effect you are saying in a round about way that because we can't disprove god therefore we should believe he exists?

Yes and how dare you mock him for it, its a perfectly legitimate point entirely based on the plausible logic you should take things for granted you can't actually prove.
Why anyone would have a problem with this bewilders me intensely.
I actually saw the face of God once, I woke up and drew it immediately and when I did I felt the most holy glow emanate from that beautiful drawing.
If you don't believe me, have a look;

*Now* do you believe? :-)

[libalchris]

I think this video explains it just about perfectly





(if you're too lazy to watch the whole thing, the pertaining part is at 5:00, but the whole video is worth watching)

[CliveStaples]

Atheists are generally very clear that they want atheism to be defined as a lack of belief in God, and not the belief or claim that there is no God. If this is so, why aren't cats and trees and birds and mentally challenged people who cannot think about things like the supernatural realm atheists?--they all lack belief in God too.

Short answer is cats and trees and birds aren't atheists.

Neither are they theists.

So atheism isn't defined as the lack of a belief?

I'll renew my claim that atheism refers to a class of belief systems--specifically, those systems which do not include (or imply) the proposition, "At least one god exists". In this way, in order to be classified as an 'atheist', one must have a belief system that falls into the Atheist class; cats and trees don't have belief systems, so in particular they don't have belief systems that fall under Atheism.

[Anomalocaris]

Short answer is cats and trees and birds aren't atheists.

Neither are they theists.

So atheism isn't defined as the lack of a belief?

I'll renew my claim that atheism refers to a class of belief systems--specifically, those systems which do not include (or imply) the proposition, "At least one god exists". In this way, in order to be classified as an 'atheist', one must have a belief system that falls into the Atheist class; cats and trees don't have belief systems, so in particular they don't have belief systems that fall under Atheism.

You are amazing. I thought it was physically impossible to achieve a higher level of stupidity and disingenuousness then I had attributed to you yesterday. But your god has worked another miracle and made you even stupider and more disingenuous than even my wide ranging and far reaching imagination had thought possible.

[CliveStaples]

So atheism isn't defined as the lack of a belief?

I'll renew my claim that atheism refers to a class of belief systems--specifically, those systems which do not include (or imply) the proposition, "At least one god exists". In this way, in order to be classified as an 'atheist', one must have a belief system that falls into the Atheist class; cats and trees don't have belief systems, so in particular they don't have belief systems that fall under Atheism.

You are amazing. I thought it was physically impossible to achieve a higher level of stupidity and disingenuousness then I had attributed to you yesterday. But your god has worked another miracle and made you even stupider and more disingenuous than even my wide ranging and far reaching imagination had thought possible.

Let's see, we've got ad hominem, and...well, that's about it. Do you have any actual logical arguments to make? Or are you just not that interested in rational debate?