RE: How do you become an Atheist?
January 1, 2011 at 12:21 pm
(This post was last modified: January 1, 2011 at 12:37 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
Just because I am without belief in Santa Claus' existence doesn't mean I am making a claim that he doesn't exist. If I did that then I would need proof that Santa Claus doesn't exist, and I haven't got any. I'm not making a claim at all, I am just unconvinced by the claim that Santa Claus does exist. I am without belief in Santa Claus, I don't positively believe that he doesn't exist.
My position is the same for God.
I think the confusion between being without belief and positively disbelieving something is the same between not having a liking for something and positively disliking something. If someone says to me "I like X, do you like X?" and I say "No, I don't like it". They may then say "Why not?" Because they are asking why I positively have a distaste for X, but I might not have meant that I had a positive distaste for X, I might be completely neutral on the matter and have merely meant I don't have a liking for X. So I neither have a liking for X nor do I positively not like X. I am apathetic towards X, I don't care about X.
Another example is popularity. If someone or something is described as "unpopular" by person A, and person B then asks "Why? Why are they (or why is it) unpopular?" they might have confused merely "not popular" with "positively unpopular". The someone or something that is "unpopular" as in "not popular" might be so simply because no one has an opinion on that person or thing, no one really likes or dislikes that thing or person.
So there's an equivocation between disbelieving to mean be without belief, and to positively disbelieve.
There's an equivocation between disliking as in merely not having a liking for and disliking as in positively having a dislike for.
There's an equivocation between "unpopular" as in merely "not popular" and "unpopular" as in notorious, or in other words, positively not popular.
In fact, there's even an equivocation between the word "positive" as I have been using it. I have of course not been meaning "positive" in the sense of "good" or "optimistic" when I have been saying "positively dislike" or "positively unpopular" for example, to some that may seem even oxymoronic if they consider liking and being popular important (And to those who think of "disbelieve" to mean "being in denial about God's existence" such people may even consider "positively disbelieve" to be oxymoronic if they think I am using "positive" to mean "good" or "optimistic"). No, I am of course using "positive" to mean "not neutral", so either positively one way or the other.
For example, when I contrast "positively bad" with merely being "without good", I do not mean "positive" in the sense of "good" because of course that would mean something like "goodly bad" or "pleasantly unpleasant" which would of course be, oxmoronic. And not merely oxmoronic as in relating to an oxymoron, but also oxymoronic as in yes, an oxymoron.
So there's even an equivocation there as well, with the word "positive." I'm starting to see equivocation more and more in fact, at least I think I am. There are obvious equivocations, and then there are very subtle ones that people overlook too.
My position is the same for God.
I think the confusion between being without belief and positively disbelieving something is the same between not having a liking for something and positively disliking something. If someone says to me "I like X, do you like X?" and I say "No, I don't like it". They may then say "Why not?" Because they are asking why I positively have a distaste for X, but I might not have meant that I had a positive distaste for X, I might be completely neutral on the matter and have merely meant I don't have a liking for X. So I neither have a liking for X nor do I positively not like X. I am apathetic towards X, I don't care about X.
Another example is popularity. If someone or something is described as "unpopular" by person A, and person B then asks "Why? Why are they (or why is it) unpopular?" they might have confused merely "not popular" with "positively unpopular". The someone or something that is "unpopular" as in "not popular" might be so simply because no one has an opinion on that person or thing, no one really likes or dislikes that thing or person.
So there's an equivocation between disbelieving to mean be without belief, and to positively disbelieve.
There's an equivocation between disliking as in merely not having a liking for and disliking as in positively having a dislike for.
There's an equivocation between "unpopular" as in merely "not popular" and "unpopular" as in notorious, or in other words, positively not popular.
In fact, there's even an equivocation between the word "positive" as I have been using it. I have of course not been meaning "positive" in the sense of "good" or "optimistic" when I have been saying "positively dislike" or "positively unpopular" for example, to some that may seem even oxymoronic if they consider liking and being popular important (And to those who think of "disbelieve" to mean "being in denial about God's existence" such people may even consider "positively disbelieve" to be oxymoronic if they think I am using "positive" to mean "good" or "optimistic"). No, I am of course using "positive" to mean "not neutral", so either positively one way or the other.
For example, when I contrast "positively bad" with merely being "without good", I do not mean "positive" in the sense of "good" because of course that would mean something like "goodly bad" or "pleasantly unpleasant" which would of course be, oxmoronic. And not merely oxmoronic as in relating to an oxymoron, but also oxymoronic as in yes, an oxymoron.
So there's even an equivocation there as well, with the word "positive." I'm starting to see equivocation more and more in fact, at least I think I am. There are obvious equivocations, and then there are very subtle ones that people overlook too.
