I am an atheist, I hold no such belief?
Forget the bloody semantics, mate, use your dictionary less and your mind more.
This bullshit was started by American atheists who thought that they might get trapped by religious “logic”. Where is the flaw in my logic when I say atheists believe in the non-existence of God, in any God, man or beast?!
Arbitrarily defining words in direct contradiction of common usage is not using your mind very effectively, language would soon become meaningless. You might also rein in the hubris a little, as I don’t appreciate your sententious insults.
I should like to see you demonstrate some objective evidence for this claim, but it seems unlikely as the dictionary is not compiled by “sub-groups” of American atheists. I have also never seen a rational argument for a deity, so it seems doubly dubious. All beliefs carry an epistemological burden of proof, what can you demonstrate to support your belief no deity exists? Since it is a generic belief it would seem to be unfalsifiable, and I remain agnostic about all unfalsifiable claims, and withhold belief, as this seems to me the only rational position.
FYI you did not answer my question, since I do not believe in any deities, and do not hold a belief that no deity exists, as this sweeping claim would carry an epistemological burden of proof, you are asserting I am not an atheist, what then do you suggest my lack of any belief in any deity or deities is described as?
In the fact it would exclude me from being described as an atheist, despite my holding no belief in any deity or deities, as I believe I pointed out.
Words, mere words. If you say that you’re an atheist, you’re an atheist. It’s as plain as that.
What are you suggesting we use to communicate ideas if not words? We should at least try and use them as accurately and clearly as we can if our arguments are to make any sense or to carry credence. It appears you have nothing to support your errant claim, beyond facile sweeping assertions, ironically using words, is this an example of using your mind more? If so it doesn’t seem very efficacious.
You have ignored my question twice now. I cannot, according to you call myself an atheist, as though I do not believe in any deity or deities, I do not hold a belief no deity exists. As you insist this belief defines atheism, what is my lack of belief in deities or any deity to be described as?
If as you say it is atheism, then the dictionary definition makes sense, and yours does not, you would be defeating your own claim. You also ignored my request you evidence your belief no deity exists, also your assertion that the dictionary definition came from a sub-group of American atheists, what can we infer from this reticence?
Nothing to see here, folks, nothing to see. Move on, please.
Trickery will not come to pass muster. I am tripping over my own words in trying to convince you of the fact that a belief in the non-existence of any deity is based on fact. Take a look around you, what do you see? Look up, what do you see but “above us only sky”?
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.
Look upon the stars and tell me what you think. You’re just repeating a failed logic experiment.
@Old_man_shouts_at_cl , yeah my apologies you were right, trolltastic.
Old man who shouts, he or she is just repeating what has been repeated to him or her
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!
Perhaps you are tripping over your own words because your message is rather convoluted/contradictory? Just saying!
Well here is that assertion from him:
So I asked him to share any of these “facts”:
This was his response:
By your own logic, Sheldon, you are an agnostic.
I can’t speak for Sheldon, but I certainly am agnostic. Agnostic AND atheist.
An agnostic is a sceptic par excellence. An agnostic believes in nothing. Nihilism is the complete lack of belief.
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.
But it’s all just semantics. What’s your point?