So.. "have no opinion", and therefore "lack a belief" is possible. Glad to hear after all that we finally agree. It doesn't matter if, in your personal opinion, it does not define atheism. It's like me defining all theists as people that go to church every day, dont eat meat on a Friday yada yada.. A theist is someone that has a belief in gods - end of. An atheist is someone that lacks belief in gods - end of. You can add anything you want to that but it is ultimately meaningless.
If atheists are right - how come there are so few of them?
- Thread starter John J. Bannan
- Start date
So.. "have no opinion", and therefore "lack a belief" is possible. Glad to hear after all that we finally agree. It doesn't matter if, in your personal opinion, it does not define atheism. It's like me defining all theists as people that go to church every day, dont eat meat on a Friday yada yada.. A theist is someone that has a belief in gods - end of. An atheist is someone that lacks belief in gods - end of. You can add anything you want to that but it is ultimately meaningless.
Perhaps we're not using the same definition of opposition. The one I, and I believe SnakeLord, am using is "antagonism or hostility." And I don't believe I'm hostile towards theists. I disagree with them, I reject their concepts, but I don't think I'm hostile. Thus, I'm not an anti-theist.
However, if you had an atheist that constantly degraded theists and antagonized them, then you would have an anti-theist. Just like how you at times degrade or antagonize atheists, you are an anti-atheist.
See, so does the concept embrace the emotional repercussions in and of itself. When you say anti-theist, does that mean you degrade theists? Or does it mean you oppose theists?
e.g. if I am anti-smoking, does that mean I randomly attack smokers? Can I be an asmoker and have an indifferent attitude to it but not just smoke?
Sorry does not fly. What for example would you consider evidence of God?
So all those no smoking signs are put up by those who hate those who smoke. I see.
The one that you lack belief in for lack of evidence, of course.
Difference between anti-smoking and anti-smoker S.A.M. One can be both of course, but there's a difference. Not to mention that there are many other reasons why those no smoking signs are put up.. but yes, anti-smoking is a factor. It's not rejecting the idea of smoking, but an active campaign to destroy or minimize it.
No. They are put up by those obeying the law, those that do hate smokers, and those that simply have to take into account the non-smokers lungs.
My wife doesn't smoke, (she used to). She never says a word about my smoking habit.. not a word. There's a colleague I know that often says: "smoking should be banned, I hate those that smoke and make the rest of us suffer yada yada". One is an asmoker the other is an antismoker. Work it out.
Define it. I don't know what your definition in this god is and thus I can't have a belief either way. I have no choice but to have a lack of belief.
Yes, apparently there are words in atheist dictionaries that we haven't been privy too
So if you have no concept of God at all, no evidence would ever convince you, huh? Since you would not even recognise it for what it was?
Anti, (and the very definition of it), has been in dictionaries since what.. the 1700's? You have always been privy, you've just always been lazy.
I dunno, is a child ever convinced of santas existence even though the day before that it didn't even recognise what santa was?
I meant asmoker. Next time I see an anti-smoking campaign, I'll avoid those nazis.
Are you comparing your conceptless mind to that of a child? Is that how you see yourself?
Oh I always sleep like the dead, please feel free to explain your unbelief.
You know.. it was probably a weird occurrence with me but I shall try:
I was born. I lacked a belief in everything and anything, from gods to hamburgers, cars to nice bottles of red. I didn't believe either way, I just simply lacked a belief. In time I learnt that bottles of red were real - (I gained an almost compulsive belief in them). My lack of belief in gods just never developed. It was like the goose egg that never hatched. It wasn't a choice, it was just the way the cookie crumbled.
Looking back I completely blame my parents. If they had have espoused a belief in some god then I most likely would have too. They didn't, my lack of belief never changed.
I have since heard hundreds if not thousands of claims that people label "god". I remember one of my teachers talking about Apollo and I'm like.. "pfft". I remember one of my teachers talking about yhwh and I'm like.. "pfft". It's a long list, trust me. I noticed that I relied on some human definition - and that is where the problem lied. So many billions of humans, so many definitions to laugh at. I suppose in hindsight at least these people had the courage to supply a definition. I realised that if, according to some, 'god' could not be defined then it was no wonder I lacked a belief and continue to do so. Define me a god and you'll get an answer, refuse to do so.. and what answer would you honestly expect?
Ah so you lack the ability to grasp concepts unless they are predefined within a context. That makes sense, thanks.
Not really, some people use assumptions to make inferences, based on observations or previous inferences.
Of course, he knew something was going on since everyone around him was excited.