2 edits
Originally posted by KellyJayYes we can.
If you want to tell me that Atheism is not a rejection of God or gods, well
than I'll accept your version of Atheism is different than mine and we can
end our discussion.
Kelly
But if you continue to use the term in the way you appear determined to, you will spend many pointless hours on this site having to fend off people who will be calling you out on this.
Trust me, they won't go away or tire of this, as they believe you are deliberately misrepresenting them - and it is an important issue to them. The fact that you call it 'splitting hairs' is just another demonstration of the disregard you have for their views.
Even if you ignore them, your threads will be cluttered with what you would regard as irrelevant material.
Up to you, I suppose, but why not simply add the word 'strong' if you want to talk about atheists who actively reject the idea of god.
It would, I think, save you and and other posters a lot of time and promote a better quality debate, all for the sake of a single word.
Originally posted by Rank outsiderMaybe true atheist would be even better than strong atheist.
Yes we can.
But if you continue to use the term in the way you appear determined to, you will spend many pointless hours on this site having to fend off people who will be calling you out on this.
Trust me, they won't go away or tire of this, as they believe you are deliberately misrepresenting them - and it is an important issue to them. The fa ...[text shortened]... sters a lot of time and promote a better quality debate, all for the sake of a single word.
The Instructor
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsIt's interesting.
Maybe true atheist would be even better than strong atheist.
The Instructor
I never hear atheists argue among themselves who are the 'true' atheists.
Strong atheists do not tell weak atheists that they are not 'true' atheists and vice versa.
Yet some Christian groups never tire of arguing that they are the 'true' Christians, and other Christian groups are not.
Now, being part of the group known as Christians, you do at least know what it is like to be a Christian. So you have some current frame of reference.
But now we see some Christians insisting that they should be able to say who the 'true' atheists are, even though it is a group they don't belong to and, from their postings, do not even understand the range of people in this group.
Yet not only this, but also able to tell atheists what they think and feel, and how they live their lives.
All which such confidence.
I mean, I have read many tortuously long posts by Christians, at the end of which I haven't the foggiest idea what they believe and how they live their lives. But it is pretty obvious that they have a bewildering range of views on all sorts of things, even though they all follow the same religious text. So I wouldn't dream of presuming to ascribe any generic characteristics to 'Christians' as a whole.
But atheists, apparently, can just be lumped into one category who all apparently believe and think the same things by people who aren't even atheists.
I can't help wondering if 'arrogant' might accurately describe this type of mindset.
Originally posted by Rank outsiderAtheists can have different beliefs on various topics just like Christains. However, there must be certain beliefs that make one a true Christian or a true atheist. The main belief that is required of a true or "strong" atheist is the belief that God does not exist. So that part is simple.
It's interesting.
I never hear atheists argue among themselves who are the 'true' atheists.
Strong atheists do not tell weak atheists that they are not 'true' atheists and vice versa.
Yet some Christian groups never tire of arguing that they are the 'true' Christians, and other Christian groups are not.
Now, being part of the group known as ...[text shortened]... t help wondering if 'arrogant' might accurately describe this type of mindset.
The Instructor
Originally posted by Rank outsiderI do not see it as misrepresenting them, I think the position you have taken
Yes we can.
But if you continue to use the term in the way you appear determined to, you will spend many pointless hours on this site having to fend off people who will be calling you out on this.
Trust me, they won't go away or tire of this, as they believe you are deliberately misrepresenting them - and it is an important issue to them. The fa ...[text shortened]... sters a lot of time and promote a better quality debate, all for the sake of a single word.
is just taking both sides of an issue so you cannot be shown as wrong. Hard
to misrepresent someone who can yes and no at the same time and think
they are being as honest as someone who says either just yes or no.
Kelly
From googlefudge's proof that I am wrong, we learn that either the club uses the "rocks are atheistic" position or else admits that "Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities."
This entirely confirms my position. Atheism is a response to theism.
There are two sorts. A belief that there is reason to think gods do not exist; or a belief that there is no reason to think that gods exist.
1 edit
Originally posted by empovsunBoth. Each requires that an opinion be formed about theism. Neither allows rocks or babies to be atheistic. I'm saying that atheism is a belief system about theism. You know, a response to theism, a reaction to the infection? Something that doesn't exist until the meme is encountered.
ehhhh
there are two kinds of atheism
which one are you talking about specifically?
Originally posted by apathistNo matter what they don't want pinned down to a thought they have to
From googlefudge's proof that I am wrong, we learn that either the club uses the "rocks are atheistic" position or else admits that "Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities."
This entirely confirms my position. Atheism is a respo ...[text shortened]... n to think gods do not exist; or a belief that there is no reason to think that gods exist.
defend they can jump from one side or the other, depending on what
someone else is saying.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayNo it hasn't. You haven't asked "an atheist" what he/she believes.
No one has denied that, the discussion has been around what an Atheist
will or will not accept and why.
Kelly
You have asked "atheism" what it believes. Which is meaningless.
If you want to know what atheists believe, can I suggest you take the wholly novel step for you and actually ask them.
Whilst the answers won't always be the same, they will be a damn sight more consistent than the answers Christians give to some questions about the Bible.