Originally posted by LemonJelloWhat could the half way point be between two absolutes that are complete opposites and in direct conflict with one another? Like it or not, some things are simply either this or either that with no in between or compromise position. This may not be a politically correct way of looking at it, but it can hardly be called naive.
Again, you're still projecting your 0/1 black and white perspective of belief. As I already remarked, this perspective is naive at best.
Originally posted by twhitehead"I think that if you read the thread carefully, nobody has made any such attempt at avoidance."
I have no problem saying I believe God does not exist. I reject the claim that my belief system is founded on the absence of a god - which is how Kelly would like to portray it.
There are of course atheists that simply lack belief in God.
[b]ImNsHo atheism works out to either being unnecessary denial, or just plain old fashioned stupidity dressed up i ...[text shortened]... bit more carefully at the thread title, it is about a 'belief system' not a 'belief'.
I only looked at a handful of messages, but I did see at least one where someone clearly stated atheism is not a belief. So what in your estimation are the odds of me finding something you say isn't there after only looking at a few messages?
"I think you are setting up a strawman."
Of course you do, and you have an army of strawmen at your disposal to counter an attack by anyone elses strawmen.
"If you look a bit more carefully at the thread title, it is about a 'belief system' not a 'belief'."
Oh wow, you're right! I don't know how I could have missed that! Placing the word system behind the word belief completely changes the meaning and intent of the thread title! Just because you might be part of (or agree with) a belief system in no way implies or denotes what you might or might not believe.
Originally posted by lemon limeI strongly recommend you read a bit more. Most of what you are saying has been covered in detail, your comment to LemonJello was addressed in detail by him over and over.
I only looked at a handful of messages,
but I did see at least one where someone clearly stated atheism is not a belief.
That is because it is not. If you read a bit further you would see that 'atheism' is not a belief that there is no God, but a lack of belief in a God/gods. Atheism covers everything from strong atheism to weak atheism to ignorance.
So what in your estimation are the odds of me finding something you say isn't there after only looking at a few messages?
Pretty good. Lets see if you can actually find someone saying that they believe God doesn't exist and that is not a belief.
Oh wow, you're right! I don't know how I could have missed that! Placing the word system behind the word belief completely changes the meaning and intent of the thread title! Just because you might be part of (or agree with) a belief system in no way implies or denotes what you might or might not believe.
And no, we are not talking about a belief system as in a religion, but a belief system as in the set of beliefs that you create for yourself and thus how you view the world and life in general. Atheism is not my belief system.
Kelly would have us believe that a denial of God is central to our belief systems (us atheists). I say that God/gods have nothing to do with my belief system.
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadSo what in your estimation are the odds of me finding something you say isn't there after only looking at a few messages?
I strongly recommend you read a bit more. Most of what you are saying has been covered in detail, your comment to LemonJello was addressed in detail by him over and over.
[b] but I did see at least one where someone clearly stated atheism is not a belief.
That is because it is not. If you read a bit further you would see that 'atheism' is not a be elief systems (us atheists). I say that God/gods have nothing to do with my belief system.[/b]
"Pretty good. Lets see if you can actually find someone saying that they believe God doesn't exist and that is not a belief."
I think I just now found such a person, but a simple test can confirm this one way or the other:
1. Do you believe God does not exist?
2. Do you believe God could possibly exist?
3. Do you believe God probably exists?
4. Do you believe God exists?
By the way, what do you mean by "...someone saying that they believe God doesn't exist and that is not a belief." Just to be clear I did not say believing God does not exist is not a belief, I'm saying it is a belief.
Originally posted by lemon limeI believe God does not exist, and I am perfectly happy calling that a belief. It is however not a belief system nor is it a significant part of my belief system.
I think I just now found such a person, but a simple test can confirm this one way or the other:
1. Do you believe God does not exist?
2. Do you believe God could possibly exist?
3. Do you believe God probably exists?
4. Do you believe God exists?
By the way, what do you mean by "...someone saying that they believe God doesn't exist and that is n ...[text shortened]... did not say believing God does not exist is not a belief, I'm saying it is a belief.
And it remains the case that atheism is not a belief.
Originally posted by KellyJay
Look at the name of the thread! Atheism rejects God and gods, now if you
want to include those that do accept God or gods we are no longer talking
about Atheism now are we? If you reject the tools outright or don't use
them because you don't know about them, you are still not using the tools.
You are really working hard to include those that keep God ...[text shortened]... han 1!
You are trying very hard to make this much more complex than it needs
to be.
Kelly
Look at the name of the thread! Atheism rejects God and gods
No, that's just question-begging, KellyJay. Have you not been paying attention from the very beginning? The point of this thread was to foster discussion about whether or not 'atheism' requires belief. It doesn't in its most general sense. It does if the sense of the term is restricted in certain qualifying ways. That's the basic answer. And I disagree with apathist that there is a clear consensus in the literature regarding how the term is to be construed in the absence of those kinds of qualifications.
But what I have been addressing with you is your other claims about how one who lacks belief in P is in the "same place" as one who believes that not-P. Again, that's false, and I have tried to provide reasons why.
Originally posted by lemon limeI don't understand your question, and your remarks in this thread haven't convinced me that you understand the context of my remarks in my back and forth with KellyJay. I'll play along with your jumping in, but only if I think you have exhibited some due diligence with respect to doing your homework first. So far, it seems your typical MO is to skip that type of preparation work.
What could the half way point be between two absolutes that are complete opposites and in direct conflict with one another? Like it or not, some things are simply either this or either that with no in between or compromise position. This may not be a politically correct way of looking at it, but it can hardly be called naive.
3 edits
Originally posted by KellyJayNone, KJ. This goes back to the uninteresting point that both the person who neither believes God exists nor believes that God does not exist and the person who believes that God does not exist are not theists.
How many gods or God does a Atheist accept?
Kelly
One thing that does NOT follow from this uninteresting point is that these two persons are in the "same place" with respect to their attitudes concerning the question of God.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by lemon lime
[b]So what in your estimation are the odds of me finding something you say isn't there after only looking at a few messages?
"Pretty good. Lets see if you can actually find someone saying that they believe God doesn't exist and that is not a belief."
I think I just now found such a person, but a simple test can confirm this one way or the othe ...[text shortened]... not say believing God does not exist is not a belief, I'm saying it is a belief.[/b]
By the way, what do you mean by "...someone saying that they believe God doesn't exist and that is not a belief." Just to be clear I did not say believing God does not exist is not a belief, I'm saying it is a belief.
Well it might help if you read the entire sentence.
LemmonJello was challenging you to find anyone in this thread claiming both that they believe that gods don't exist and that that belief is not a belief.
Neither he, nor I, think you will succeed.
Originally posted by LemonJelloEveryone alive builds a belief system, their own personal world view ofLook at the name of the thread! Atheism rejects God and gods
No, that's just question-begging, KellyJay. Have you not been paying attention from the very beginning? The point of this thread was to foster discussion about whether or not 'atheism' requires belief. It doesn't in its most general sense. It does if the sense of the term i ...[text shortened]... who believes that not-P. Again, that's false, and I have tried to provide reasons why.
how and why things are the way they are. God and gods are major parts of
many people's beliefs, not having God or gods removes them from all
things. The system of beliefs that all Atheists have they use to build up
their reasons for everything without God or gods, resting in just a godless
view of every thing, all things are put together and explained without God
or gods. That will be the system, the beliefs they live their lives by, and
those things they used to describe things in a godless point of view.
Kelly
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by KellyJayLook KJ... We know you think that.
Everyone alive builds a belief system, their own personal world view of
how and why things are the way they are. God and gods are major parts of
many people's beliefs, not having God or gods removes them from all
things. The system of beliefs that all Atheists have they use to build up
their reasons for everything without God or gods, resting in just a ...[text shortened]... eir lives by, and
those things they used to describe things in a godless point of view.
Kelly
We can read and you have said the same thing over and over and over again.
But while you have repeated yourself ad nauseum, your arguments/points have
been rebutted.
People have presented counter arguments that rebut (or even refute) yours.
What should happen is you read peoples rebuttals and then respond to them
by producing new arguments that rebut their rebuttals... or by conceding the
point and moving on.
You have not done this.
You have simply kept repeating the same position you started with.
This is rude/disrespectful, as it shows you have not paid any attention to what
anyone else has said, and you have refused to engage with us and our arguments.
And it also makes the entire discussion utterly pointless for all parties.
If you are not prepared to actually engage with our arguments then why bother.
We have rebutted or refuted your arguments and thus will consider you wrong
no mater how many times you restate your position, unless and until such a time
as you give us some reason to think our arguments are wrong. Which requires
engaging with and addressing those arguments. (a first step towards which is
actually reading them)
And you are certainly not going to get anything out of our arguments if you ignore them.
So, the question is, can you at least TRY to engage with LemmonJellos arguments?
By carefully reading his posts, understanding his arguments, and then if you still disagree
with them, coming up with counter arguments that address the points that they were making.
2 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadOkay, thanks for clearing that up. So now I know that:
I believe God does not exist, and I am perfectly happy calling that a belief. It is however [b]not a belief system nor is it a significant part of my belief system.
And it remains the case that atheism is not a belief.[/b]
It is your belief that God does not exist
Good, so now we've established that this is indeed a belief.
It is not a belief system
This makes sense, because I don't know how an entire system could be developed by simply believing something does not exist.
This belief is not a significant part of your belief system
This means it is only part of a system of belief you adhere to. This also makes sense...
[I'm starting to wonder where the disagreement is]
Then you say it remains the case that atheism is a not a belief
So now you make the case that atheism, which either is or is only part of your belief system, cannot in and of itself be called a belief, because technically speaking a system built on beliefs cannot in and of itself be defined as a belief. So Systems are systems, and beliefs are beliefs, and beliefs aren't systems and systems are not beliefs.
You've explained the difference between a belief and a system containing a belief, then claim the system itself is not a belief. So if atheism is system that contains a belief there is no God, it doesn't logically follow that atheism itself is a belief.
Your argument is essentially an attempt to shift attention from beliefs to systems and then claim a system is not a belief. People who believe in the non existence of God are defined as atheists, whether this particular belief is part of their system or not. Being found within a system does not change the definition of what a belief is. And just because atheism is not belief, it does not then follow that atheists do not have beliefs.
By the way, I never claimed a system is (or can be) a belief, so I don't know where you got that idea. It could be that one of your strawmen whispered it into your ear, because I know you didn't hear it from me.
Originally posted by lemon limeThe disagreement started when you said:
[I'm starting to wonder where the disagreement is]
Why are atheists so resistant to calling what believe a belief?which is a total strawman because nobody has shown any resistance to calling what they believe a belief.
You then proceeded with some remarkable amount of speculation about atheists motives all based on that strawman.
So now you make the case that atheism, which either is or is only part of your belief system, cannot in and of itself be called a belief, because technically speaking a system built on beliefs cannot in and of itself be defined as a belief. So Systems are systems, and beliefs are beliefs, and beliefs aren't systems and systems are not beliefs.
No, you have completely misunderstood. If you go back and read my post and maybe a bit more of the thread you will see that 'atheism' (at least the way I use it) isn't the belief that there is no God, it is the lack of belief that there is a God. So someone who is ignorant of the possibility of God is an atheist and has no belief with regards to God, hence I say atheism is not a belief.
You've explained the difference between a belief and a system containing a belief, then claim the system itself is not a belief.
When did I say atheism is a belief system? It is not.
My belief system is not atheism.