Focus. You are not paying attention.
You had this exchange with Sam:
superluminal said:
To which I commented:
greenberg said:
Atheism is a belief.
- Thread starter Tht1Gy!
- Start date
Focus. You are not paying attention.
You had this exchange with Sam:
To which I commented:
Right. I misunderstood apparently.
Yup exactly like theists.
I fully accept that when I am practising science, I am not practising philosophy, poetry, or religion. And vice versa.
Because empiricism is modelled in science, one does not REALLY remove all independent variables from the equation. One does not REALLY believe the dependent variable is ONLY affected by the independent variables finally selected. What one does is study a microsystem created artificially and induce conclusions from the results observed, at all times realising that our results reflect the model and not the reality. If the results are useful, they are adopted as standards for inference, but that does not make them complete in themselves.
So, atheism is not a belief, right? We've now concluded this beyond a doubt. Yes?
If it's in your mind, it is a belief, whatever it is or whatever it is about.
Here's a nice definition:
Belief: any cognitive content held as true
In terms of my atheism, what cognitive content do I hold to be true?
Yes.
So you could say that I believe that I have no beliefs about god. Yes?
Is this what you would call a meta-belief? A belief about beliefs? I would.
Unfortunately, you can extend this recursive meta-meta-meta... belief structure to infinity.
If the definition of a belief is Belief: any cognitive content held as true, then I won't argue that I hold the cognitive content that I have no beliefs about god to be true. Therefore, my belief about my lack of belief is true.
If we agree on this, then the only thing that remains is to identify the subjects of my cognitive content.
My belief in my disbelief in gods holds as it's subject my disbelief itself. This is clear. My disbelief in gods holds as it's subject, gods.
So, we're left with a conundrum. We must either disallow the word disbelief or accept that you can indeed hold cognitive content that, while in itself is a belief, represents a disbelief in an objective thing, namely, a god.
But so what?
What role does your lack of belief in God play in your life?
Does it make you feel good to lack belief in God?
Do you feel your life is more meaningful, richer, more fulfilled because you lack belief in God?
I sure hope so, because otherwise, this whole "lack of belief in God" thing is nothing but a sham to boost your vanity.
What role does your lack of belief in God play in your life?
Does it make you feel good to lack belief in God?
Do you feel your life is more meaningful, richer, more fulfilled because you lack belief in God?
I sure hope so, because otherwise, this whole "lack of belief in God" thing is nothing but a sham to boost your vanity.
A role not governed by indoctrinated superstitions and myths.
As much as a lack of belief in the Celestial Teapot orbiting the sun.
The abuse of childhood indoctrination into a cult certainly cannot make ones life meaningful in the least as it is the afterlife that cults purport to be more important than life itself.
Then, does your lack of belief in the Celestial Teapot, leprechauns or unicorns boost your vanity?
According to your definition of faith.SAM said:
Trolling, again. Of course people have faith. Some even have faith in gods.
Some don't. That is not a belief, that lack of faith in gods.
Aside from occasionally giving me introspective insights in arguments about religion and gods, not a thing.greenberg said:
I don't advertise it, of course.
This reply to your post is evidence of my existance.
(420 dude!:m: )
as in my 420th post
Last edited:
None other than to highlight the behavior of others that do believe in god(s).
Err.. no. I feel lucky to have avoided the mindless indoctrination that many other people have such a hard time overcoming. I'd like to think that my innate sense of logic and selfawareness would have gotten me free no matter what, but who knows?
As (Q) put it:
But on a more philisophical note, I do count myself fortunate (per my previous statement) that I don't have the baggage of undefined, unknowable, supernatural entities defining my behavior for me.
This really irritates the crap out of you, dosen't it? We've all said it before. Theists and whatever-it-is you-are have a very difficult time with the null proposition for god(s). I have to say that (Q)'s cult indoctrination theories are probably largely accurate.
I don't think (and correct me if I'm wrong) any theist or "whatever" on this board has ever responded with a simple answer to their position on the famous, but non-existent china teapot in orbit of the sun.
Why do you suppose this is? I'll tell you why. The fact is, it's a null proposition for you and you find it uncomfortable because it illuminates our own null proposition for your god(s). You come to realize that our position on your deity is just as valid as your position on the orbiting teapot.
Please explain the teapot thing, thx.
A link to said discussion will work fine. Again thx.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
I guess he's talking about this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot
Yes.