Originally posted by inimalist
however a dictionary chooses to explain the usage of a term is a subjective thing based on the dictionary editors, not a statement of phisophical absolution nor of the truth behind what it means, psychologically, to believe in something.a) yes, there are atheists who can be said to "believe in" atheism.
b) this is not true of all atheists
c) the main reason for this is that the term 'atheist' is not a clear doctrine in itself, but rather a description of disbeliefso, I would certainly agree with you that there are people who have simply used atheist literature to replace the things in their belief system which religion used to maintain. They normally have very similar beliefs and probably love Richard Dawkins [but only after writing the god delusion].
but, this is not true of all people. For many 'atheists', the idea that some ideological principal unites them is ridiculous. Though I do not believe in God, I don't identify as an atheist because the term seems useless to me, like identifying as an anti-racist or anti-sexist. Because of this, though both Dawkins and I are, taxinomically, atheists, there is little about us that can be ascertained through the usage of that term. In fact, with regard to religion, Dawkins and I disagree on most things there are to disagree with, whether God exists being the few places of agreement.
This might appear to be true of other faiths, but it is not. If two Christians engage in a debate, regardless of interpretation, there is a theoretical way the problem could be solved. They just must discover the proper way to interpret the scripture. Thus, all religions are a sort of closed logic system. There is a process through which all debates can be settled. For Dawkins and I, there is no such comparison. Theoretically, we could never settle our disagreement, because neither of us need to appeal to the same authority on matters of, well, anything. There is no such closed loop to 'atheism'.
This goes further though. Surely, there must be a difference between believing in something and not believing in that same thing, or else there is no real purpose for the word "believe". To have any use as a symbol, a word has to define something. Belief, as in religious belief, cannot be the same as no religious belief, by definition. If it is, then saying you believe in something is not actually saying anything, because believing could also be non-belief.
While that may not be clear, it is more apparent if put like this: There is a difference between 'belief' defined as in a fact that you believe about the universe versus 'belief' as in a statement you would answer yes or no to. So, today the weather here is awesome, for March in Canada. So, I do believe that the weather is great. However, someone from further south, who is indifferent about the weather, may not think so. If you asked them "do you believe the weather is nice today?", they would say "no". However, that doesn't mean they have a systematic belief that the whether is not good that is similar to my belief that the weather is good. It means they have an opinion on a question that was asked, not that they have a belief system based on that opinion.
i already said fine. 😐
that is my way of acknowledging ur argument/opinion without having a retort... 📖
Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't think being athiest is a belief. If it is, then there would be no such thing as not having a belief, which makes the term belief itself of no value to discussion.
But would you agree that there are people who use the word Atheist as a label which describes their belief? I would agree that there are people who do not believe in god or gods, and the word that would be used to describe these people would be atheist.
Originally posted by inimalistbut it so long to read and i have such a short attention span i had to reread it 4 times b/c i kept jumping from paragraph speed reading to finish it faster.. till i finally manage to focus and read it all in its proper context.
but, this is a much more powerful retort than most arguments would have been...you sneaky bastard
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
but it so long to read and i have such a short attention span i had to reread it 4 times b/c i kept jumping from paragraph speed reading to finish it faster.. till i finally manage to focus and read it all in its proper context.
no worries, i ramble incoherently, i get it
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But would you agree that there are people who use the word Atheist as a label which describes their belief? I would agree that there are people who do not believe in god or gods, and the word that would be used to describe these people would be atheist.
Originally posted by King Kandy
If so, they're using the term incorrectly and what they're actually describing is something like humanism. I say that i'm an athiest, and I subscribe to most of the beliefs media athiests do. However, that's a label used for simplicities sake. If I was pressed by someone who actually understood these sort of things, i'd identify as a humanist/socialist and also an athiest.
we get those people all the time on the religion forums though, don't you think?
Originally posted by King Kandy
People who identify athiest? All athiest means is not believing in god. Other beliefs aren't under the athiest label, though they may use it as a starting point.
people who think identifying as atheist is an encompassing system of beliefs with ideas about science that are akin to moses' tablets?
I can't remember any recently, but you don't know what I'm saying? People who like religify evolution...
hold on, this guy:
Originally posted by Saskaswan
People who believe in some fictional character who created every single thing in this universe and determines the outcome of our lives is obviously very stupid, also some of you believe the world is around 6000 - 8000 years old when there is scientific evidence that it is 4.5 billion years old. Although the mention is science must be fake to you. The Tooth Fairy is more realistic than God.
If you really just sat there and thought about what you believe in you would think like i do.
knowwhatimsayin?
Originally posted by inimalist
people who think identifying as atheist is an encompassing system of beliefs with ideas about science that are akin to moses' tablets?I can't remember any recently, but you don't know what I'm saying? People who like religify evolution...
hold on, this guy:
knowwhatimsayin?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, other then the Buddhists in Tibet, but they are just trying to protect themselves from the Chinese.
i luv to see some militant Buddhist compound here in the states.. i would laugh my @$$ when the ATF and FBI try to use propaganda against them to justify an attack with a warrant for wpn confiscation as an excuse.