Originally posted by Alliance
Athiesm and Intellectualism? 😛
Atheism...not so much
Atheism
Def.
1)
a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
2) Godlessness; immorality.
The immorality part of the definition drops it.
Intellectualism
Def.
1) Exercise or application of the intellect.
2) Devotion to exercise or development of the intellect.
I think Intellectualism would work
Originally posted by AOR
I believe the five virtues that we find, or come to an agreement to, should be five virtues that help the person attain other virtues. For exmple, the top of my list virtue would be Charity. Because with Charity I can also excel in acceptance, compassion, cooperativeness, courteousness, fairness, fidelity, and so on...So here's me:
1).Charity
2).Faith
3).Understanding
4).Wisdom
5).Self-discipline
Originally posted by Regret
Atheism...not so muchAtheism
Def.
1)
a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
2) Godlessness; immorality.
Oh Gosh.... 🙄
I just LOVE your bias definition of Athiesm, as if ALL Athiests are immoral.
Many religious people are just as immoral, if not MORE immoral.....some people who do not beleive in God, are more "godly" than those who do beleive in God.
If you are going to present an actual definition, present a truthful and universal one, not a biased or one-sided one ok? 😉
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Oh Gosh.... 🙄I just LOVE your bias definition of Athiesm, as if ALL Athiests are immoral.
Many religious people are just as immoral, if not MORE immoral.....some people who do not beleive in God, are more "godly" than those who do beleive in God.
If you are going to present an actual definition, present a truthful and universal one, not a biased or one-sided one ok? 😉
It wasn't an attack at atheists. The definition leads to a negative attribute, another term is needed that does not have the possibility of negative connotation. Interpretation messes with most writings, so a term that could be interpreted as such should be avoided.
Originally posted by Regret
It wasn't an attack at atheists. The definition leads to a negative attribute, another term is needed that does not have the possibility of negative connotation. Interpretation messes with most writings, so a term that could be interpreted as such should be avoided.
Then why include that definition????
Define Atheism for what it truly is: A lack of beleif in a God or Gods.
Why bring up the immoral definition, when that is purely subjective and not entirely truthful?
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Then why include that definition????Define [b]Atheism
for what it truly is: A lack of beleif in a God or Gods.Why bring up the immoral definition, when that is purely subjective and not entirely truthful? [/B]
Because it is a definition of the term. I do not necessarily agree with the it, but it is there. Too much history is based in interpretation to leave an ambiguity present. My decision to remove chastity was due to its definition. Part of the definition is "a personal integrity", as well as "purity in conduct and intention" and "restraint and simplicity in design or expression". But it connotes sexual abstinence which is not a definition that I see fitting with my view of the 5 top virtues, even alliance jumped on the sexual definition and not the one I meant. Atheism is tied to that definition, and like chastity it is a term that could be interpreted in a manner that I would not be intending it. Above that, if it did not include the immorality part it would still fail as I don't believe a persons stance on religion is a necessary virtue.
Originally posted by Regret
Because it is a definition of the term. I do not necessarily agree with the it, but it is there. Too much history is based in interpretation to leave an ambiguity present. My decision to remove chastity was due to its definition. Part of the definition is "a personal integrity", as well as "purity in conduct and intention" and "restraint and simplicity in design or expression". But it connotes sexual abstinence which is not a definition that I see fitting with my view of the 5 top virtues, even alliance jumped on the sexual definition and not the one I meant. Atheism is tied to that definition, and like chastity it is a term that could be interpreted in a manner that I would not be intending it. Above that, if it did not include the immorality part it would still fail as I don't believe a persons stance on religion is a necessary virtue.
Despite historical definition, why include it here? Why now, when it is made clear that Atheism does not equal immorality, the same way being religious does not equal absolute morality?
And I'll agree that being religious, or NOT being religious is not a virtue. 😉
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Despite historical definition, why include it here? Why now, when it is made clear that Atheism does not equal immorality, the same way being religious does not equal absolute morality?And I'll agree that being religious, or NOT being religious is not a virtue. 😉
My reason for including that definition is because even here there are people that may read the post and not know that it is made clear that Atheism does not equal immorality, the same way being religious does not equal absolute morality. There are those that may read it and not understand, and thus interpret different than those of us that have frequented the forum would.