Is the Atheism/Theism belief/disbelief a false dichotomy? are there other options?

[Psychonaut]

[ApeNotKillApe]

Why don't you start with simple stuff like god before you take on fundamental mathematical principles?

[robvalue]

Yes, we have to assume certain logical facts are true, such as the negation property. We can't ever be certain of anything; we must make some assumptions at some point. The negation rule seems to work completely universally, and without it we can't use any rules of logic to do hardly anything. So it's a necessary and reasonable assumption. Of course it could be wrong. If we ever found out it is wrong, we would have to go back to the drawing board.

We have to define exactly what the criteria for "believes" is. I'd say a decent measure is "acts as though it is true". If you don't act as though it's true, you don't really believe it.

I mentioned it earlier, but I think it's reasonable to say someone could be both an atheist and a theist, because the brain is very complex. It is capable of holding contradictory beliefs, for different reasons. So maybe it's more accurate to say you're either an atheist, a theist, or both. And of course you can change between these states.

Just don't cross the streams.

[houseofcantor]

That way lies madness, valuable rob. Being all prophet and stuff means starting with simultaneity. There is no logical construction beyond "god both exists and does not exist" even though that statement is essentially true. One must be a flaming nutbag - for which I'm eminently qualified - to posit god. Thus I dismiss all logical argument for god, 'cause there ain't. It's all rhetoric.

[robvalue]

Sure, I'm not saying it's at all helpful to be a theist and an atheist at the same time. It has happened in a split brain patient that I'm aware of, further to that I don't know for sure.

I could imagine that someone could logically see that God is a nonsense concept, and lacks belief, but also has strong emotional ties to the concept which leads to a contradictory belief. Maybe these inform actions in different ways at different times. What do people think?

Personally, I think all God belief is emotional and the logical side tries to rationalise it after the fact, which is why the arguments are all balls.

[Whateverist]

Re the OP: in addition to believing gods do or don't exist, and, the confidence you place in that belief there are at least two other questions you might ask. One, is the 'god' in question well defined enough to permit us to assume any of us are talking about the same entity? And, do you care enough about god questions to be arsed to answer any of them?

God could be like that snark they made you try to catch at night, non-existent and essentially just someone's practical joke. if so, you would be quite reasonable to ask to see an actual photograph of a snark (or god). If none is forth coming you would again be reasonable to answer more promising and potentially more rewarding questions. (File the god questions in the round file pending better intel.)

[AFTT47]

I have found that although the AF party line is that atheism is only the lack of belief the dominant philosophy is materialistic.

Yes, atheism itself is only a lack of belief in God and yes, most atheists are materialists. There is no hard connection between the two though.

[Pyrrho]

[robvalue]

Our new friend bambi seems a candidate for an atheist and theist simultaneously. He seems highly aware that the arguments are suspect and pretty much admits the logical arguments aren't solid. He's aware how ridiculous it seems to us, and how it would have been even to himself not long ago. Yet he is emotionally caught up in believing. (Apologies if I've misrepresented.) Maybe different parts of his brain are in conflict?

I suppose it comes down to how this informs actions. But the brain could send mixed messages. It certainly seems to for people who think God is protecting them yet fasten their seatbelt.

[Pyrrho]