Atheist VS Naturalist - the latter sounds more appealing to me...

[Belacqua]

The form of the good.


You rejected the definition by begging the question. We've been through this.

No, I used your definition to show that there could not be a supernatural based on that definition. That was simple logic.

I asked if you had a different definition.

No, you asserted that anything we can observe is in the nature of the thing observed. That's your definition of what a nature is. It begs the question. For most people, the nature of a thing has limits. See my post to LadyforCamus above.