No "not believing" IS NOT "disbelief" in the context of "not believing and disbelieving"
Just like how "Not yes" is not "no" in the context of "not yes and not no"
VitalOne's Fallacious Rants Against Atheism
- Thread starter VitalOne
- Start date
No "not believing" IS NOT "disbelief" in the context of "not believing and disbelieving"
Just like how "Not yes" is not "no" in the context of "not yes and not no"
can you guys get a room already!
Again, flawed analogy. Not believing is ALWAYS disbelief, unless used in a figurative way such as to exclaim surprise (ie. I don't believe it!). That's because it's the friggin definition.
Not yes and no don't share the same relationship, the definition of no isn't not yes.
I'm an exhibitionist.
haha. so you are a "not no" exhibitionist
Correct, I'm no not exhibitionist.
No, it's not a flawed analogy
NOT believing BY ITSELF ALONE is ALWAYS disbelief
NOT believing AND disbelieving IS NOT disbelief
Why? Because you say so? Look at the definition!
dis·be·lief /ˌdɪsbɪˈlif/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[dis-bi-leef] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. the inability or refusal to believe or to accept something as true.
In ANY AND ALL instance where there is an inability or refusal to believe, it's disbelief! You're basically trying to tell me the dictionary and definition are wrong!
Right....so you proved your ownself wrong...ROFL
NOT BELIEVING AND DISBELIEVING = "not accepting and not refusing that something is true"
DISBELIEF = "the inability or refusal to believe or to accept something as true"
I proved myself wrong?? Look at what you wrote!
NOT BELIEVING AND DISBELIEVING = "not accepting and not refusing that something is true"
What do you think that means?? It's the very definition of disbelief, as stated in your own post!
No it isn't, ROFL, what are you talking about?
If someone possesses pure uncertainty whether or not something is true or false they neither believe nor disbelieve
Thnk of "yes, no, and maybe"
If someone possesses pure uncertainty, that means they are not in a state of belief. That puts them in a state of disbelief. Note that this does not mean that they're refusing to believe, but that they're unable to. But it doesn't change the fact that it's disbelief.
No, you are confusing something, they are not in the state of belief nor disbelief, it IS NOT THE SAME AS DISBELIEF ALONE
disbelief alone means "the inability or refusal to accept something as true"
They are not refusing nor are they accepting
Your reasoning is so funny, by your logic "maybe = no" even thuogh maybe is not no
You're still using flawed analogies. The state you're trying to talk about and use for your argument DOES NOT EXIST.
Look Vital, let's use ME as a guinea pig. You ask me if I think God exists, and I say I don't know if he exists. At that particular moment, from that answer, am I believing in God? Obviously not, right? But then, why wouldn't you call me an atheist?
It depends....
If you say "I don't know, but I don't think so" then yes
If you say "I don't know, but I think so" then no
If you say "I don't know if God exists, and make no claims regarding the existence or non-existence of God since the existence of God is unknown" then I would say neither (agnostic)
But could you say in that instance that I believe in God?
No, I couldn't
But I also couldn't say that you disbelieve in God
You should give up your atheistic propaganda
But we've already established that if someone doesn't hold belief, they're in a state of disbelief, as that's the very definition of disbelief.
I don't know if I can do this anymore Vital. I don't know how I'm supposed to teach you English 101 over a forum.
Thoreau
Valued Senior Member
But we've already established that if someone doesn't hold belief, they're in a state of disbelief, as that's the very definition of disbelief.
I don't know if I can do this anymore Vital. I don't know how I'm supposed to teach you English 101 over a forum.
I gave up a while ago when it comes to trying to get VitalOne to... think for himself.