Atheists and Theists

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Atheism and Agnosticism are not on the oppsite side of the spectrum. I ever said that. But they are different.

One claims no knowldge, and the other claims that something does not exist due to lack of evidence, or that there is nothing which indicates God's existance.

One claims not knowledge, and thus impossibility of obtaining evidence, the other claims no existance due to lack of evidence.

lil b language: Atheism = Strong Atheism, Agnosticism = Weak Atheism.

Now, if we use those translations, what she says actually makes some sense.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
FFS! I said it is a SHIT example, because Santa was created for purposly for FICTION, as was Tooth Fairy.

Second, please explain to me now, how can someone claim lack of existance of God based on no evidence, while at the same time proclaiming no knowledge of God and thus no evidence can be collected.

You're working on narrowed definitions of both atheism and agnosticism. And again you're generalising. Not every atheist holds absolutist views.

I do not believe there is a god. I do not claim to know whether this (lack of) belief is true. If presented with proof of the contrary, my stance is mutable. I do not believe it can be proven either way. Whether or not it is true has no impact on how I live my life. Agnosticism and atheism.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Unfortunately, idiotic version of Atheism is the one most commonly projected.

On here? No doubt about it.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Agnosticism and atheism/theism are not mutually exclusive stances. 😬

Where did I say they were exclusive stances ?

All I said was that Atheists and Theists contain conviction towards one side, while Agnostics usually do not.

However, Atheism is NOT simply the nullification of Theism. It is a belief BASED on Theism.

Can a person with no exposure to the concept of God be an Athiest, simply because he doesn't beleive in something he NEVER heard of ?

In order to be Atheist you must have a beleif in no God, after having been made aware of the concept.

Let me make it simple since you like to make things more complicated then they have to be:

(No) Athiesm----------------GOD--------------------Theism(Yes)
---------------------------Agnosticism------------------------------
-----------------------------(Maybe)--------------------------------

Theism and Atheism are both ends of the SAME SPECTRUM which is the concept of God.

You cannot be an Athiest if you have never been exposed to the concept of God. For example: A NEW BORN BABY cannot be an Athiest (or Theist for that matter) simply because he or she does not believe in God.

Therefore, Athiesm is as much as process of beleif as Theism, and zealotry on the matter can occur on EITHER END. There have been ATHIEST SUMMER CAMPS made for crying out loud !

Atheism is simply less common. So it's zealotry is almost rare. That is all.

And btw, my whole Athiest typo is an honest mistake, especially considering I type a whole lotta crap at a fast pace. Plus I got this whole "I before E bullshit programmed into my puny brain.

Bardock, here is the link of explanation, based on a site American Atheists http://www.atheists.org/Atheism/

Atheism is a doctrine that states that nothing exists but natural phenomena (matter), that thought is a property or function of matter, and that death irreversibly and totally terminates individual organic units. This definition means that there are no forces, phenomena, or entities which exist outside of or apart from physical nature, or which transcend nature, or are “super” natural, nor can there be. Humankind is on its own.

Should the hint have been ''American''? Maybe.

Just run a spellcheck before you post.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Where did I say they were exclusive stances ?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
To claim no knowledge [agnosticism] is not mutually exclusive to claiming a belief or lack thereof [theism or atheism respectively]. Nor are the latter incompatible with indifference. One can hold the view "I don't really know, I think that there could be a god more than the contrary, I don't really care either way." or "I don't know, I think there isn't a god more than the contrary, I don't really care either way."; and these would be theist and atheist views respectively.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
I disagree.

Edit: And you're still spelling atheist wrong. 😐

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Bardock, here is the link of explanation, based on a site American Atheists http://www.atheists.org/Atheism/

Should the hint have been ''American''? Maybe.

Yes, what is your problem with that? That explains my belief exactly. And now I also believe that I can't be sure. That it could be the other way. As I am a sceptic. How can I help you with the problem?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yes, what is your problem with that? That explains my belief exactly. And now I also believe that I can't be sure. That it could be the other way. As I am a sceptic. How can I help you with the problem?

Not really. It does not claim possibility, it claims fact, hence my separation from IT and AGnosticism.

VV

''This definition means that there are no forces, phenomena, or entities which exist outside of or apart from physical nature, or which transcend nature, or are “super” natural, nor can there be. Humankind is on its own.''

X, I disagree with your assertion that a true Thiest would say "I think God exists, but who cares"

Likewise, I disagree with your claim that a true Athiest would say "Maybe God DOES exist, but even if he did, I don't care"

I DO agree, however, with your assertion that Agnosticism is not exclusive and can exist within the mindset of a Thiest or Atheist. Many Atheists and Theists alike do not necessarily claim thier stances as FACT, and recognize thier beliefs are simple beliefs.

However, those people are still more accurately classified as Theists and Atheists because they have chosen one side of the beleif in the concept of God.

Most Agnostics, by definition, do not claim in thier belief whether God does or does not exist. The essence of thier stances is the word "maybe". Most Atheists and Theists will never say "maybe I'm right, maybe thier right" They most often claim they ARE correct, even when they have no proof to support thier beleifs as Truth.

I am not trying to argue that this is a BLACK and WHITE matter, but its Grey Areas are either very dark or very light, if you get what I
m trying to say.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Not really. It does not claim possibility, it claims fact, hence my separation from IT and AGnosticism.

VV

''This definition means that there are no forces, phenomena, or entities which exist outside of or apart from physical nature, or which transcend nature, or are “super” natural, [b]nor can there be. Humankind is on its own.'' [/B]

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
That's nice. But people define words. Words do not define people. 😬

That is true, but the definitions are quite clear. They're not up for intepretation.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
X, I disagree with your assertion that a true Thiest would say "I think God exists, but who cares"

Likewise, I disagree with your claim that a true Athiest would say "Maybe God DOES exist, but even if he did, I don't care"

I [b]DO agree, however, with your assertion that Agnosticism is not exclusive and can exist within the mindset of a Thiest or Atheist. Many Atheists and Theists alike do not necessarily claim thier stances as FACT, and recognize thier beliefs are simple beliefs.

However, those people are still more accurately classified as Theists and Atheists because they have chosen one side of the beleif in the concept of God.

Most Agnostics, by definition, do not claim in thier belief whether God does or does not exist. The essence of thier stances is the word "maybe". Most Atheists and Theists will never say "maybe I'm right, maybe thier right" They most often claim they ARE correct, even when they have no proof to support thier beleifs as Truth.

I am not trying to argue that this is a BLACK and WHITE matter, but its Grey Areas are either very dark or very light, if you get what I
m trying to say. [/B]

Actually, I concur.

Looking at the deffinition I have found on a website, should illustrate your point further.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Not really. It does not claim possibility, it claims fact, hence my separation from IT and AGnosticism.

VV

''This definition means that there are no forces, phenomena, or entities which exist outside of or apart from physical nature, or which transcend nature, or are “super” natural, [b]nor can there be. Humankind is on its own.'' [/B]

It does not say that in there. That is your take on the definition. It does not state that it is not just a belief and that one can also accept that knowledge is not 100%.

It says it is a believe that there is no God and that there can't be? What is your problem with someone also being agnostic?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
X, I disagree with your assertion that a true Thiest would say "I think God exists, but who cares"

Likewise, I disagree with your claim that a true Athiest would say "Maybe God DOES exist, but even if he did, I don't care"

I [b]DO agree, however, with your assertion that Agnosticism is not exclusive and can exist within the mindset of a Thiest or Atheist. Many Atheists and Theists alike do not necessarily claim thier stances as FACT, and recognize thier beliefs are simple beliefs.

However, those people are still more accurately classified as Theists and Atheists because they have chosen one side of the beleif in the concept of God.

Most Agnostics, by definition, do not claim in thier belief whether God does or does not exist. The essence of thier stances is the word "maybe". Most Atheists and Theists will never say "maybe I'm right, maybe thier right" They most often claim they ARE correct, even when they have no proof to support thier beleifs as Truth.

I am not trying to argue that this is a BLACK and WHITE matter, but its Grey Areas are either very dark or very light, if you get what I
m trying to say. [/B]

Ah, yes... the atheists know everything, as usual....

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
That's nice. But people define words. Words do not define people. 😬

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
That's nice. But people define words. Words do not define people. 😬

Yeah, thats nice, but that is a whole different Michel Foucault philosophy which is unrelated to what we are talking about.

These are the group of people, who call themselves Atheists, and who have agreed upon what they believe.

Originally posted by Up In Flames
Ah, yes... the atheists know everything, as usual....

We just know how words in the English language are defined. Sorry about that.

Originally posted by Up In Flames
Ah, yes... the atheists know everything, as usual....