Systematically Dismantling Atheism

[KUSA]

@IDScience
What is the objective of this thread, to convert an Atheist to an Agnostic?

[RobbyPants]

Let me first define true atheism

Atheism is a complete and total rejection of all theistic claims. If theists assert God (creator of the universe and all life in it) does exist, atheists must assert the contrary , i.e. God does not exist. The only middle ground in this true dichotomy is agnosticism (undecided), which is not true atheism.

Wrong. Atheism is not believing in any gods. You can do so by making the negative claim "no gods exist" (gnostic/strong atheism) or by simply not making the positive claim that any gods exist (agnostic/weak atheism). Theism and atheism are stances of belief. Gnosticism and agnosticism are stances of knowledge. They're not mutually exclusive. I consider myself both atheist and agnostic.

I didn't read the rest of the OP, as it was based on that definition.

[robvalue]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. I think we need a new word for people who believe the definition of atheism is something other than atheism, as seems to be a substantial proportion of the population.

You can claim to me that the next person to walk through a doorway will be a man. If you give me no evidence to support it, the logical thing to do is reject your claim. I do not believe there is enough evidence to make the claim that the next person through the door will be a man. I am not, however, saying that the next person through the door won't be a man.

I realise this is a subtle distinction, but people need to get their head around this before trying to debate atheists.

[abaris]

I consider myself both atheist and agnostic.

Me too.

But I consider myself a near gnostic atheist as far as the Abrahamic god is concerned. I firmly disbelieve in the concept of an all powerful, yet incredibly petty, angry and vengeful being. Getting the fear of sin and hell driven into my youtful brain, was indeed my first step towards atheism. I simply didn't want to believe in that kind of being.

[Mister Agenda]

That's fine, just as long as you understand that equates you believe God does not exist. Just as not believing in Santa, equates believing Santa does not exist.

Like not believing you have a $50 in your pocket equates to believing you DON'T have a fifty in your pocket...oh, wait, they're not exactly equivalent. Oh, dear.

But I would prefer a logical and rational rebuttal to the position of atheism, rather than "I don't see it, therefore I don't believe it exists"

What would be a better reason to think something doesn't exist than there being no evidence it does?

BTW, we'll probably have something pocket-sized and more than ten times as smart as a human in thirty years. If all it takes to be a god is smart, they'll be a dime-a-dozen before too long.

---

Agnostics are atheists because they lack a belief in god. I personally disbelieve in all the gods invented by man. Any god at all I just find extremely unlikely.

To pick a nit, not all agnostics are atheists. Many are theists.

[Whateverist]

That's fine, just as long as you understand that equates you believe God does not exist. Just as not believing in Santa, equates believing Santa does not exist.

Like not believing you have a $50 in your pocket equates to believing you DON'T have a fifty in your pocket...oh, wait, they're not exactly equivalent. Oh, dear.

The only thing to do is get right back up on that horse and rethink this whole either/or claim of yours, IDKScience. Only this time try to leave off the stupid bit. Atta boy, now go get em'.

[Exian]

IDKScience

[Mister Agenda]

Hardly. I suggest you check a dictionary.

I have "checked a dictionary". Either God exists or he does not exist. Its either A or B, if you reject A you must accept B, and vice versa. Learn the law of exclude middle

Learn 'false dilemma'. It is true that it's either A or B. It it NOT true that you must accept B if you reject A. You can accept neither without rejecting either. If I don't know if A or B is the case, I don't accept A or B, but I don't reject them either. You literally cited agnosticism as an option, yet you've already forgotten it.

So, in my case: I don't accept the proposition that God exists, but I don't accept the proposition that God doesn't exist, either. It's unknowable, especially without a specific definition of God. I reject Yahweh as depicted in the Bible, it's clearly a mess that could never have existed; but I don't reject the God of deism, which merely lacks evidence for its existence rather than being a contradictory pile of omni-attributes clearly derived from generations of playing 'my God is better than yours' like Yahweh. As far as super-intelligent aliens go, they might exist, but that doesn't mean they do...and that's setting the bar awfully low for what you'd consider a god. You're basically saying that advanced aliens wouldn't just appear to be gods, they really would be gods. If you want to worship them go right ahead, but the Raellians have beat you to it.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. I think we need a new word for people who believe the definition of atheism is something other than atheism, as seems to be a substantial proportion of the population.

I propose the term "fuckhead". All in favor?

[Jenny A]

To pick a nit, not all agnostics are atheists. Many are theists.

How can you lack belief in a god and be a theist?

---

To pick a nit, not all agnostics are atheists. Many are theists.

How can you lack belief in a god and be a theist? Or do you mean they believe in god but aren't sure?