(July 4, 2014 at 4:55 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Finally, some sense in a concise form!
Now then, what word would describe "not theism"?
If not atheism, then what?
I manage it sometimes.
Not sure if there's single term just for that, since it describes every non-theist. Strict agnostics aren't theists, but aren't atheists on my view either, and I think they'd agree. They don't think theists or atheists are justified in affirming their positions.
Perhaps ignostic/theological noncognitivists.
(July 4, 2014 at 5:27 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: Yes, it is a necessary condition of atheism to be "not theism". But it doesn't follow from "not theism" to "theism is false".
Sorry, but I should have been clearer. When i say atheism is "theism is false", I mean that statement is a belief. But I did not say that "not theist" = "theism is false". I said atheism = "theism is false".
Quote:I've pointed this out to you previously, that you are trying to respond to 2 prongs of a dilemma simultaneously.
There are 2 truth claims with regards to the existence of a god;
1. a god(s) exists
2. a god(s) do not exist
Only one of these can be true.
But disbelieving the 1st truth claim does not mean that one accepts the 2nd truth claim by default. The both have to be evaluated separately.
I agree. I never said those were the same. I said the only sensible definition of atheism would be to those who affirm belief that #2 is, or is probably, true. I also said strict agnostics (and ignostics) cannot be called an atheist or theists, and that to do so just seems unwarranted, & requires redefining things weirdly to do so.
"The reason things will never get better is because people keep electing these rich cocksuckers who don't give a shit about you."
-George Carlin
-George Carlin