(November 13, 2016 at 4:59 am)robvalue Wrote:(November 13, 2016 at 4:53 am)RiddledWithFear Wrote: Yes, I have read your article, and have given my reasoning. Again, you're saying the same thing each post, and I've given my reasoning. Nevertheless, I can accept your reasoning. I do not wish to start a heated debate.
Fair enough.
Yes, I'm saying the same thing, because you're making the same mistake. Using different meanings for words to us, to try and point to a difference that isn't there. You can call your position elephant ears if you like, and I'm also elephant ears in that case. To us, we call it weak atheism.
Weak atheism, also sometimes referred to as implicit atheism, is simply another name for the broadest and most general conception of atheism: the absence of belief in any gods. A weak atheist is someone who lacks theism and who does not happen to believe in the existence of any gods no more, no less. This is also sometimes called atheism because most people who self-consciously lack belief in gods tend to do so for agnostic reasons.-http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismquestions/a/strong_weak.htm
I haven't claimed this. I claimed I'm neutral, and I don't claim to not believe, nor do I claim to believe. I'm neutral, because not believe is not the proper way to explain it. I have not stated that do not believe. I simply have not made a choice, because I find it illogical to do so.
