Atheism isn't a worldview, but

[Fred]

I'm still interested as to where we've gone off course, as that seems to be the common sentiment in every one of your threads thusfar. A statement like this would imply that you somehow know "the course".

The course is no secret. It's history. As to where you, if you mean the rational pov went off course, consult the nearest humanities dept, as they will be happy to regale ya for far longer than you will be willing to listen. It's -centro city. Euro, ethno, anthro, phallo, dude, it's a list a mile long, all of it imperialistic marginalizing madness from their pov. Ya freaked them out wholesale, and freak out they did.

The PC, diversity, multi-cult movement in the universities is a big part of the result, never mind a serious distrust and disregard for science as an ultimate arbiter of truth. They fucking hate that idea, just as much as you hate to hear about God's tender love and watchfulness or whatever mythic madness makes your skin crawl.

That's why it's called post-modernism. It's the umbrella term for the reaction to the modern. You guys were big on universal truths and they emphasize the relative nature of truth, and you both think the other is batshit crazy, though you are in agreement that the fundies are even worse. And you know how the fundies feel about you and the relativists.

[The Grand Nudger]

You just let whatever comes to you fall out of your mouth. I've caught the whiff of troll since the moment you walked in the door. Your running bit about universal truths is nothing more than projection.

[Shell B]

Fred, I'm not going to quote for quote you on that last one, but I will say that, in your op, you c&p'd mine and Rhythms question about moral truths, wrote "interesting question that has three answers" and then went on to babble about worldviews in such a way as to make yourself incomprehensible. My responses to you were in response to your "moral truth" answers. You then proceeded to say, "Uh, yeah, I didn't answer them because this is a new thread, duh." Despite the fact that you had said you were answering that question in your OP. If you say you are answering something and fully outline those answers before jumping into your worldview babble, I expect you to stick by what you said you were doing. You're no matador.

P.S. Calling something a war that is not a war is using inflammatory language. It is meant to incite emotion in the face of something that people don't need to be riled up about. You're talking about it as if it is some epidemic of arguments. Why you are taking such an approach is beyond me. I just want to say that I don't have anything against anyone and wasn't implying that I should have one with you. I simply object to the language you use in describing your little echelon of worldviews and I object to you backtracking when given a response that wasn't entirely "Yeah, man. I see how you trying to answer the question of morals and not touching on it at all before delving into worldviews was like answering both questions, even though there was is not but in the question of whether atheism is a worldview."

[Fred]

You just let whatever comes to you fall out of your mouth. I've caught the whiff of troll since the moment you walked in the door. Your running bit about universal truths is nothing more than projection.

What's the problem now? Are you saying that the universal emphasis didn't happen? Uh, why do you think the other guys are called the relativists?

[fr0d0]

I think the OP is a statement rather than a question... a point for discussion. I've never heard it put, the main 3 world view angle but I see it and I like it. It seems to hold true for me.

So the topic up for grabs is...

There are three main world views:

1. Mythic
2. Rationalist
3. Relitavist

Fred has defined them nicely for us in the OP. A bone of contention we all gnaw at is our intolerance for those WV's not our own. I consider myself to be in Group 2 - the rationalists. My favourite atheists are also rationalists. Atheists will of course run screaming from the WV Mythic which would describe them. Fred has outlined how and why in other threads.
I'll leave you guys running with the firework jammed up your asses. Relativists are those weak walters who won't stand up for anything. Deists : *spits* (I jest - we all, in our religious / not religious (supposedly ) groupings can straddle all 3 WVs).

So there you have it. Discuss.

(And try not to be the test specimen demonstrating the point )

[The Grand Nudger]

Have you ever seen gibberish that you didn't like Frodo?

[Epimethean]

I don't think he took a liking to Andros or Castle, but they don't even understand themselves.

[Fred]

Fred, I'm not going to quote for quote you on that last one, but I will say that, in your op, you c&p'd mine and Rhythms question about moral truths, wrote "interesting question that has three answers" and then went on to babble about worldviews in such a way as to make yourself incomprehensible.

What was hard for you to follow? The answer to the question is going to depend on the worldview the person answering it is operating from. Why is this so confusing?

My responses to you were in response to your "moral truth" answers. You then proceeded to say, "Uh, yeah, I didn't answer them because this is a new thread, duh." Despite the fact that you had said you were answering that question in your OP.

Ok, I see the problem here. I said it had three answers, but I didn't mean I was going to answer them. Miscommunication, so my bad there.

If I were going to focus on the answer, I would have stayed in that thread because that was the topic. I wanted to emphasize that worldview aspect of it because it comes screaming out of the debate in general and because it's the context that the whole thing is taking place within.

If you say you are answering something and fully outline those answers before jumping into your worldview babble, I expect you to stick by what you said you were doing. You're no matador.

Uh, I started a thread on worldviews. I started babbling about them out of the gate. I did just what I said I was going to do.

P.S. Calling something a war that is not a war is using inflammatory language. It is meant to incite emotion in the face of something that people don't need to be riled up about.

Like I said, I didn't invent the term, it's common parlance. I've never heard anyone balk about it's use before, so this is a new one for me.

You're talking about it as if it is some epidemic of arguments.

I'm using it like it's used by mainstream everybody. There's a catholic magazine called Culture Wars. I know that because it was one of the 300 million some hits google popped up.

Why you are taking such an approach is beyond me.

It's common usage. I really don't know what else to tell you, as again, I've never heard anyone who was offended by the term.

I just want to say that I don't have anything against anyone and wasn't implying that I should have one with you. I simply object to the language you use in describing your little echelon of worldviews
and I object to you backtracking when given a response that wasn't entirely "Yeah, man. I see how you trying to answer the question of morals and not touching on it at all before delving into worldviews was like answering both questions, even though there was is not but in the question of whether atheism is a worldview."

I don't really follow that, but I'm just sure I didn't do it.

I started a thread about worldviews, said your question had three answers depending on worldviews, babbled about those worldviews using the standard term for the current social climate and somehow, I'm getting taken to task for it.

---

I think the OP is a statement rather than a question... a point for discussion.

Yup.

I've never heard it put, the main 3 world view angle but I see it and I like it. It seems to hold true for me.

So the topic up for grabs is...

There are three main world views:

1. Mythic
2. Rationalist
3. Relitavist

Fred has defined them nicely for us in the OP. A bone of contention we all gnaw at is our intolerance for those WV's not our own.

Just exactly perfect summary.

I consider myself to be in Group 2 - the rationalists. My favourite atheists are also rationalists. Atheists will of course run screaming from the WV Mythic which would describe them.

Right.

Fred has outlined how and why in other threads. I'll leave you guys running with the firework jammed up your asses. Relativists are those weak walters who won't stand up for anything.

Or, as it's often put, stand up for everything. It's all relative, and it's oppressive to say that one is inherently better than another. Whenever you hear stuff about oppression, marginalizing, patriarchal, all that stuff, you know you are on relativist turf. That's why Columbus Day got changed to Indigenous People's Day in Berkeley and other strongholds. That sort of thing.

Deists : *spits* (I jest - we all, in our religious / not religious (supposedly ) groupings can straddle all 3 WVs).

Yer knocking this outta the park, Frodo.

So there you have it. Discuss.

(And try not to be the test specimen demonstrating the point )

Heh. Too late. We all demonstrate it to one degree or another.

[Epimethean]

So we agree that atheism isn't a worldview.

[Fred]

So we agree that atheism isn't a worldview.

Yup. Given the title of the thread, it was funny when somebody insisted I had an obvious mental block because I refused to see atheism was not a worldview.

Regardless, no it's not a worldview, but it is informed by worldviews. I saw that feature at the bottom where it list old related posts. I opened one up and one of the first bits I saw was a discussion akin to the accommodationist vs confrontationist thread going now. This statement was speaking not about atheism, but the particular person's attitudes and behavior as to the way atheists should view fundies.

It's a perfect example of the mix and match nature of the worldview beast: "To me it smacks of fundamentalism at it's worst. Even with rational and reasoned backing, you're acting out what your cause detests."

In worldview speak, this could be rendered as Even with rational and reasoned backing [the rational pov], you are behaving in the same way as the mythic pov you say you hate.