Originally posted by ThePittman
If you are trying to define something why would you use the atypical definition of the word?
Because im still alowed to use it. When they decide NOT to put it in the dictionary then come back and complain to me. Hell the encylopadeia britannica could put atheism in slot 2 and 4. The encyclopadia brittanica is a respected source but obvoulsy they are stupid and they dont get it!
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Athiesm is a non-belief. A non-belief is not an activity, attitude, belief, cause, object, practice, principle, or value.
That is implicit atheism whats wrong with you people! Dont you know there is more than one type of atheism.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You could not have stated it clearer. I bet, he will not get it. 😉
If you had bothered to listen you would see I got it ages ago. That applies to implicit atheism not explicit atheism. Even the bloody dictionary says atheism is a doctrine. Obvoulsy the dictionary doesnt get it either. Im not being picked on am I?
Originally posted by AlfheimIf you had bothered to listen you would see I got it ages ago. That applies to implicit atheism not explicit atheism. Even the bloody dictionary says atheism is a doctrine. Obvoulsy the dictionary doesnt get it either. Im not being picked on am I?
You've quite clearly sat at home and read the dictionary, how can you be surprised if you are?? 😛
Originally posted by inimalist
sure, lets use your definitions. Prove the followingatheism is:
1
-something one believes in and follows devotedly
AND
-a point or matter of ethics or conscience2
-a personal set of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
OR
- a institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices3
- a cause held to with ardor and faith
OR
- a principle held to with ardor and faith
OR
- a system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
those are, verbatim, the definitions you want us to use for religion. Now, I don't think they ARE the proper definition for religion and this is more a practice in the subjectivity of language, but even with them, you still need to prove that atheism falls into any of these definitions.
I'm sure you can probably just find more dictionaries, but why not, you know, make a real argument?
Originally posted by inimalist
I'm sure you can probably just find more dictionaries, but why not, you know, make a real argument?
Some people just find it easier to use the work other people have researched rather than be original, it helps to mask the fact that they have no idea what they are talking about
Originally posted by RonnieBarkay
Some people just find it easier to use the work other people have researched rather than be original, it helps to mask the fact that they have no idea what they are talking about
lol, its not even that
words are very easily manipulated in this way. You can make a very compelling argument just talking about words, but in the end that proves absolutely nothing.
hell, let him quote some good sources of people talking about the "religion" of atheism, I don't mind if he uses other people's work, just interested in moving this discussion forward a little.
Originally posted by inimalist
lol, its not even thatwords are very easily manipulated in this way. You can make a very compelling argument just talking about words, but in the end that proves absolutely nothing.
hell, let him quote some good sources of people talking about the "religion" of atheism, I don't mind if he uses other people's work, just interested in moving this discussion forward a little.
It depends on whether the person in question has the depth or the capacity to join you in your forward thinking quest. My advice, start a ''The trouble with athiesm 'Developement' thread'' 😆
Originally posted by inimalist
those are, verbatim, the definitions you want us to use for religion.
I dont want anything. Did I put them in the dictionary? 🤨
Originally posted by inimalist
Now, I don't think they ARE the proper definition for religion and this is more a practice in the subjectivity of language, but even with them, you still need to prove that atheism falls into any of these definitions.
Take it up with the people who put it in the dcitionary it doesnt suit your defintion therefore its wrong because you are always right. Furthermore implicit atheism doesnt fall under any of those categories so it doesnt apply to everything.
Originally posted by inimalist
I'm sure you can probably just find more dictionaries, but why not, you know, make a real argument?
What you mean just agree with you? Ok atheism cant be considered a religon. So i'll just use sources that suit you?
Originally posted by RonnieBarkay
Some people just find it easier to use the work other people have researched rather than be original, it helps to mask the fact that they have no idea what they are talking about
Thats a really stupid statement. What the "orginal"? The earliest example of the word religion didnt have anything to do with religion. You would know that if you were paying attention.
Originally posted by inimalist
lol, its not even thatwords are very easily manipulated in this way. You can make a very compelling argument just talking about words, but in the end that proves absolutely nothing.
So do you want me to ignore the dictionary and all the other sources? Furthermore implicit atheism does not come under those categories. Im not manipulating anything your getting me mixed up with somebody else
Originally posted by inimalist
hell, let him quote some good sources of people talking about the "religion" of atheism, I don't mind if he uses other people's work, just interested in moving this discussion forward a little.
So why were you complaining then? I dont see you quoting jack ****. Its incredible anything that doesnt suit your point of view is wrong and you dont see anything wrong with that?
Originally posted by AlfheimSo why were you complaining then? I dont see you quoting jack ****. Its incredible anything that doesnt suit your point of view is wrong and you dont see anything wrong with that?
Why quote? Why doesn't anyone have THEIR say rather than just finding a web-page or book (including dictionaries) and 'copy and pasting'?! People should be expanding their minds and interpreting what other people THINK rather than what other people can playgurise (i apologise if that is spelt wrong, i don't have a dictionary with me 😉 )
Originally posted by RonnieBarkay
Why quote? Why doesn't anyone have THEIR say rather than just finding a web-page or book (including dictionaries) and 'copy and pasting'?! People should be expanding their minds and interpreting what other people THINK rather than what other people can playgurise (i apologise if that is spelt wrong, i don't have a dictionary with me 😉 )
What your saying doesnt make any sense. Did I say that people should not have their say? Whats wrong with quoting arent the people who wrote the dictionary individuals as well? Should I not listen to their point of view as well?
This is whats going on, anything that I quote that disagrees with their point of view is wrong. That sound fair to you? I do have my own arguemnts using quotes is reinforcing it.
Originally posted by Alfheim
What your saying doesnt make any sense. Did I say that people should not have their say? Whats wrong with quoting arent the people who wrote the dictionary individuals as well? Should I not listen to their point of view as well.This is whats going on, anything that I quote that disagrees with their point of view is wrong. That sound fair to you. I do have my own arguemnts using quotes its reinforcing it.
I mean this with all due respect but if you and other people have conflicting issues then thats between you and other people. All I'm saying is that so far all i've seen you put forward are things from the dictionary and then moan whn people ask you for a bit of originality.. If you have an opinion why back it up with a politically correct form of mambojambo from a book written by someone who you don't even know, why not put YOUR views forward and debate THEM with people, that way their can be civil discussions and everyone can learn from eachother, not the dictionary
Originally posted by RonnieBarkay
I mean this with all due respect but if you and other people have conflicting issues then thats between you and other people. All I'm saying is that so far all i've seen you put forward are things from the dictionary and then moan whn people ask you for a bit of originality..
If you have an opinion why back it up with a politically correct form of mambojambo from a book written by someone who you don't even know, why not put YOUR views forward and debate THEM with people, that way their can be civil discussions and everyone can learn from eachother, not the dictionary
This is nonsense. If I were put forward my views they wouldnt even listen to me. They will only listen to me if I agree with them. If you had actually looked at the posts thats how I started out.
1. Started out with my own views people disagreed so I went to the dictionary
2. People said the dictionary was rubbish
3. I was told that I need to go to the original meaning. I did that then they complain im twisting words around.
4. I tried getting more sources they still complained.
All you doing is coming to an end of the discussion making suggestions that ive already tried and you really dont know whats going on. All that is going on here is athiest facism. If you analysed the posts there not complaining because im not being original.
Originally posted by Alfheim
This is nonsense. If I were put forward my views they wouldnt even listen to me. They will only listen to me if I agree with them. If you had actually looked at the posts thats how I started out.1. Started out with my own views people disagreed so I went to the dictionary
2. People said the dictionary was rubbish
3. I was told that I need to go to the original meaning. I did that then they complain im twisting words around.
4. I tried getting more sources they still complained.All you doing is coming to an end of the discussion making suggestions that ive already tried and you really dont know whats going on. All that is going on here is athiest facism. If you analysed the posts there not complaining because im not being original.
If you stopped trying to force other people to listen then you might get somewhere. So what if they disagree or won't listen to your views properly, thats their perogative! At least you put YOUR views out there!! and people would listen eventually, and if they don't then their pig headed and ignorant. You come out with some of your own beliefs and I would listen 🙂
Originally posted by RonnieBarkay
If you stopped trying to force other people to listen then you might get somewhere. So what if they disagree or won't listen to your views properly, thats their perogative! At least you put YOUR views out there!! and people would listen eventually, and if they don't then their pig headed and ignorant. You come out with some of your own beliefs and I would listen 🙂
..what on earth are you talking about? Serioulsy bro you dont know what you're talking about. This thread has been going on for ages you've just come along at the end of it and you dont even know whats going on.
Im not trying to force anything down anyones throat you would know that if you read the posts. I even changed my mind and learnt some new things.....you would know that if you read the posts.
Originally posted by Alfheim
..what on earth are you talking about? Serioulsy bro you dont know what you're talking about. This thread has been going on for ages you've just come along at the end of it and you dont even know whats going on.Im not trying to force anything down anyones throat you would know that if you read the posts. I even changed my mind and learnt some new things.....you would know that if you read the posts.
Well you gave off the impression in this short space of time, so before you get all condecending again, remember that YOU were complaining that no-on would listen, and that i said I would
Originally posted by RonnieBarkay
Well you gave off the impression in this short space of time,
Er maybe because you just came at the end of a LONG discussion.
Originally posted by RonnieBarkay
so before you get all condecending again, remember that YOU were complaining that no-on would listen, and that i said I would
Boy didnt sound like it. Well to be fair im not sure if I want to discuss this anymore ....not its not a cop out. I started this thread and ive been discussing it for ages. A couple of pages back before you arrived I already said I was fed up.
I might list my points later but im not sure. Just fed up of getting stressed out.