Naturalism and atheism are not the same.Atheism is a lack or or denial of beliefs, NOT a belief, NOT a system of faith, and sure as hell NOT a religion.
I am atheist, and would even go so far to say that like Omega, I do not believe that there is anyway a deity could exist.
Atheist are Naturalists. If you have a different opinion though, please go ahead and give it.
Atheism is a belief that no God exists. You can not have disbelief, without a belief. It is also a faith, by very definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_naturalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
Don't sound the same to me!
And no, atheism is NOT the belief that there is no god(s). It is a LACK of belief in a deity. There is a difference. And it is not a faith, either.
Don't sound the same to me!And no, atheism is NOT the belief that there is no god(s). It is a LACK of belief in a deity. There is a difference. And it is not a faith, either.
It doesnt sound the same?
Here is the definition for
Naturalism : Philosophy. The system of thought holding that all phenomena can be explained in terms of natural causes and laws.
Atheism : a disbelief in the existence of deity
Now tell me what exactly about that sounds different? Im not talking about the wording either.
Lastly, your argument is completely flawed. A lack of a belief in God is a belief that there is no God. This is unequivocal.
It is most certainly a faith too. Believing that everything is the result of random chance most certainly qualifies as such.
I dont understand how you can even to object to something so straightfoward.
Gee, now did you read anymore than just those first lines? Apparently not.
And having no belief that something exists does not mean you have any sort of faith. Or is this concept just too much for you to wrap your narrow little mind around?
I do not believe that anything exists unless there is evidence of it. And as there is NO evidence that any sort of deity exists, or can exist, I do not believe that such a thing is possible.
Gee, now did you read anymore than just those first lines? Apparently not.And having no belief that something exists does not mean you have any sort of faith. Or is this concept just too much for you to wrap your narrow little mind around?
I do not believe that anything exists unless there is evidence of it. And as there is NO evidence that any sort of deity exists, or can exist, I do not believe that such a thing is possible.
Insulting me wont make your points legit, keep that in mind. I know the definition for both and ive yet to hear you point how what exactly the fundamental difference is between those two beliefs.
This isnt about being "narrow minded" either. Your claiming that I am is extremely laughable. If you are remotely as intelligent as you presumably assume yourself to be, you should understand this concept.
Check this out.
"And no, atheism is NOT the belief that there is no god(s). It is a LACK of belief in a deity."
For one, are you trying to differentiate between God and Diety? For two, dont you understand that a disbelief in something is a belief that it isnt true?
If you were to tell me that you were an alien and I did not believe that. Then what can you gather my belief is on that subject? That I do not believe you are an alien. Good good. With me so far?
I hope this is not too difficult for you. Now, moving on.....
If you do not believe that such a thing is possible. Then what can be gathered from that, in terms of your belief? That it is your belief, that such a thing is not possible.
Do you follow?
Need more examples?
BTW, yes I read past those lines however that wasnt remotely helpful to the discussion. The definitions that I pulled were from the dictionary and clearly of what I was refering to.
When I speak about naturalism, it is that. Got it? Need me to elaborate?
Mind informing me when this spontaneous generation took place that you so claim happend?
a·the·ism n.1.
1. The disbelief or denial of the existence of a diety.
2. The absence of belief in the existence of a diety.
Having no belief about the existence of God is not the same as not believing in the existence of God.
Ok and you decided to say that...... Why?
The definition does not say, having no belief about. The definition is having no belief in the existence of a diety.
Do you see the difference?
Added to which, let me just give one more definition for atheism just because I feel like it.
Atheism:
b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
Having no belief about the existence of God is not the same as not believing in the existence of God.
Granted, I dont disagree with that.
This "The absence of belief in the existence of a diety" means this
"a disbelief in the existence of deity".
It does not mean, having no belief about the existence of God.
Dont know what else to say......
I might be able to find something else to say if you require it though.... Alright.....
🙂
Originally posted by clickclick
Granted, I dont disagree with that.This "The absence of belief in the existence of a diety" means this
"a disbelief in the existence of deity".It does not mean, having no belief about the existence of God.
Dont know what else to say......
I might be able to find something else to say if you require it though.... Alright.....
Many cultures do not have a concept of a diety and therefore, hold no beliefs about the existence of one. This absence of a belief in a diety, makes these people atheist. The absence of a belief in a diety is not the same as the disbelief in the existence of a diety. Think before you post.
Many cultures do not have a concept of a diety and therefore, hold no beliefs about the existence of one. This absence of a belief in a diety, makes these people atheist. The absence of a belief in a diety is not the same as the disbelief in the existence of a diety. Think before you post.
I should give you that very same advice and the difference would be that you actually need it.
Somebody who doesnt believe there is a God is not the same as somebody who believes there isnt a God? That would only be possible if somebody had no concept of God and even then, they would still be believing that God didnt exist.
Tell me how you think somebody can not belief in the existence of God and at the same time, believe in God. Otherwise...... 🙄
Also, the definition you quoted stated "the absence of a belief in the existence of a diety".
Just giving you that little correction.
Anyway, whenever you want to THINK before you post............ Just do so.... Surprise me
clicky, an atheist does not have to be a naturalist - many atheists do NOT believe in natural laws and causation - they are metaphysicians, sceptics, idealists, etc. Also, logically, one can only have a religion when one holds a belief in something, thus, when one do NOT belief in the existence of any deity - like an atheist, one simply does not belief, hence no religion nor belief system. Disbelief is a condition of someone not believing what he observes. Moreover, when one postulates the existence of something like a deity for example, one can belief therein, BUT when one does not postulate the existence of something, one simply does not postulate it - then it's not a matter of not believing or disbelief - it's simply negation or rendering a postulation as an impossibility.
Originally posted by clickclick
I should give you that very same advice and the difference would be that you actually need it.Somebody who doesnt believe there is a God is not the same as somebody who believes there isnt a God? That would only be possible if somebody had no concept of God and even then, they would still be believing that God didnt exist.
Tell me how you think somebody can not belief in the existence of God and at the same time, believe in God. Otherwise...... 🙄
Also, the definition you quoted stated "the absence of a belief in the existence of a diety".
Just giving you that little correction.
Anyway, whenever you want to THINK before you post............ Just do so.... Surprise me
For one who believes himself to be so intelligent, you are certainly having quite a bit of difficulty understanding such a simple concept; For one to believe or disbelieve in the existence of a diety, he must have some concept of a diety.
There are many cultures that have no concept of a diety, therefore these people have no beliefs about the existence or non-existence of a diety. These people are also atheists.
Not only are you wrong that absence of belief and disbelief are equivocal, but by extention, you are also wrong that atheism is a belief system.
In the future, I suggest you reserve your condescention for someone else because on your best day, you are not half as smart as I am on my worst day.
Poe, you are correct. Disbelief and lack of belief are not the same thing.
As far as the condescention, yeah that wasnt very nice of me. As far as your intelligence, ill let your comment slide because it was silly.
Not only are you wrong that absence of belief and disbelief are equivocal, but by extention, you are also wrong that atheism is a belief system.
Dont recall stating that it was and I dont recall you saying why it wasnt.
Originally posted by clickclick
Philo - I didnt call atheism a religion.
You DID call atheism a religion/faith/belief:
Atheism is a belief that no God exists. You can not have disbelief, without a belief. It is also a faith, by very definition.
See, you called it a faith, which is tantamount to religion.
Atheist are Naturalists.
Above you call atheists naturalists.
Below you all of a sudden agree with me that the two are not indicative of each other.
You are right about atheism vs naturalism too.
Anyway, I'm glad you see the sense in what I'm saying at last.
Peace to you to.
😉