I must keep an open mind for a while yet, ever the optimist see. However the vapidity of that last response was rather disappointing. Whenever anyone opens a debate by denying a dictionary definition, it sets off alarm bells.
Self styled thinkers who have focused on thinking, and thoughts, but failed to examine them with any discipline or real objectivity, and pour forth as if they have deciphered the dead sea scrolls. The enthusiasm with which they reel off unevidenced absolutes is something of a giveaway.
Leaving aside the hilarious and redundant tautology, perhaps you’d care to share some of these facts that support your belief? Note atheists can and do hold the belief no deity exists, but atheism is not a belief.
Lets try a simple analogy:
People who don’t collect stamps may well have hobbies, though they need not, but not collecting stamps is not itself a hobby. Just as atheists my believe there is no deity, though they need not, but atheism is not itself a belief. Note how both groups of atheists are described by the definition of atheism, while your archaic definition would exclude some, me for example?
A particular stupid and vapid assertion, it’s all very well to use your mind more, but if you’re using it for this, how does it differ from the tiresome absolutes and vapid platitudes of religious apologetics?
Now there are three questions outstanding, my apologies there are now four, and if you are not going to bother answering any of them, then I can draw only one rational inference, and assume you came here not to debate but to preach your belief.
No one is interested in your trolling, and this is clearly an ad hominem fallacy. You made it clear you were not interested in debate, and wanted to preach, this is a debate forum. If you think you can offer any cogent or intelligent defence of your previous claims, or answer the questions put to you about them do so, otherwise I’m not interested in listening to anyone preach at me.
1, What objective evidence can you demonstrate for your belief there is no deity. FYI this is an unfalsifiable absolute and would include deities and concepts of deities as yet unimagined, good luck.
2. Since you insist atheism must involve such a belief, and I don’t hod such a belief, but do not believe in any deity or deities, what are you suggesting that be called, as it can’t be atheism as you define it?
I’ll let the others go, from now on I will simply cut and paste those questions until you either answer them or I tire of it.
Oh no. I have been bested! *cries out and clutches breast, falling to knees but lifting face (the good side) to audience (who had better be appreciative) " Woe, Woe, WOE, I have been found out by that giant of intellectual all intellectual arbiters, the great and wonderful CARUSMMM!!!
(waits for applause to die…) (Waits a bit more)_ umm… I AM THE STAR peasant atheists! the Great Carumm singled me out for his libation of accusation. ME! not YOU scum!
When you lot learn that you believe exactly what the Worshipful Crumm tells you, well, you better believe it or he will be even more cryptic (C r y p t i c not crapt-tic Cog sheesh)…and then where will your sorry arses be?
Under the fecken bridge that’s where! With bones a cracking and blood a flowing and the stones ratlin’…you will be sorry then!
A person who is agnostic about thing x can have belief in thing y. Nihilism is a lack of belief in god(s) plus consideration that life is meaningless. There are folks who identify as atheist who have quite a bit of meaning in their lives.
Each individual that posts here has a definition for the word atheist. There is no group.
If you want to identify as someone who believes there is/are no god/s, okay. I would call you a gnostic atheist - a person who says they do not believe in god(s) (atheist) and claims to know no god(s) exist.
A/Gnosticism is about knowledge.
As I define the words, I am an agnostic atheist.
I call myself that because I do not believe claims that any gods exist but I cannot know for certain,
In fact, I think NO ONE can know for certain if any gods exist. So your claim that none exist is, imo, bupkus. Additionally, by claiming that no gods exist, you take on the burden of proof for that.
Words are assigned meaning by invention and by usage…common, or not so common, or, scientific or even religious usage.
Atheism has a dictionary definition and several sub definitions.
Agnosticism has a very specific meaning and a greek root. It is in the dictionaries as well.
Before making superfical (and quite silly comments) it would be good for your literary style to find out before making an absolute pigs arse of yourself. Oh, a word of advice, ‘cherry picking’ quotes and definitions does not go down well amongst this crowd of odiferous barbarians, in case you should be tempted…
Well I don’t have my own logic, as it is a method of reasoning that adheres to strict principles of validation. I am and must rationally be an agnostic about all unfalsifiable claims, and also an atheist as I do not believe in any deity or deities. I disbelieve all unfalsifiable claims, because if I believe some and not others that would involve bias which is closed minded, and to believe all of them would inevitably violate the law of non contradiction, and be irrational.
Atheism is simply the absence or lack of belief in any deity, and agnosticism is the belief that nothing is known or can be known about god, so if a god concept is presented that is unfalsifiable I must remain agnostic, and also atheistic about it. Atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive, why would they be?