Weak Atheism. What a joke.

L

lixluke

Refined Reinvention
Valued Senior Member
Atheism is not a lack of belief.

Accoring to the very useful Official Rules of Debate, all debates are defined by a specific proposition:

God (gods/all powerful, all intelligent entity) exists.

Positions:
True: God exists.
False: God does not exist.


The Theist takes the "True" position.
The Atheist takes the "False" position.

The debate moves forward.


Unfortunately, some nutbags are under the impression that atheist means "lack of belief".


The 'A' in atheism signifies the false position regarding this proposition.
Theism is the position that God exists.
'A'theism is the opposite position.

Atheism is a disbelief. Atheism is a denial of the belief that God exists.
I disbelieve in the existence of God = I believe that God does not exist.

A disbelief is not a lack of belief. It is an active belief that there is no God. There is no such thing as weak atheists or strong atheists.

You either believe true or false. If you believe in neither, you are neither a theist or an atheist. You might be an agnostic or have taken some other view regarding this debate.

A <- Disbelief. Denial of belief. Not lack of belief. It is a position that states whatever is infront of it is false. 100% false. Absolutely false. No weak or strong. Plain simple logic false or no false (true).

Not True = False.
Not False = True.

The belief that God does not exist = The disbelief that God exist.
The belief that God does not exist does not equal the lack of belief that God exists.
Lack of belief = Absence of belief. This is not atheism. Atheism is not a lack of belief or an absence of belief. It is a denial/disbelief.
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure 'a-' means "not, without" and not "disbelief; denial of belief, etc." May I ask where you claim "a-" means what you have said?


[Renrue]
 
Renrue said:
I'm pretty sure 'a-' means "not, without" and not "disbelief; denial of belief, etc." May I ask where you claim "a-" means what you have said?


[Renrue]
Click to expand...
Yes it does.
Without in terms of with/without. True/false.
Theism is with.
Atheism is without.

"Lack of belief" has nothing whatsoever with atheism. Agnostics have a lack of belief in God because they believe that it is impossibe for humans to ever know if God exists or not. Atheism is an absolute position that there is no God. "A" = not, denial, disbelief, without. Not the same thing as "lack of belief."
 
Last edited:
The Greek language is origin of the word atheism, or atheos, and its meaning, for anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of the Greek language, is clear: "without gods."

Babies, infants and toddlers, therefore, are atheists. They don't disbelieve in god since they've never read any of the mythology surrounding the various gods that religious nutters go on about in their superstitions.

One can say, then, that the atheist that doesn't accept superstitious bullshit after having to put up with the nonsense that various cult followers or spout or even after reading scholarly texts written about gods disbelieves in the gods being mentioned. I can agree with that.

But, by that line of reasoning, that makes everyone an atheist. That is, assuming there are not those that believe in whatever gods they read about in human mythology. I'm willing to bet that even Cool Skill doesn't believe in Zeus, Athena, Ptah, Quetzacoatl, or Amun Ra. He is, therefore, an atheist. The difference between he and I is that I'm not afraid to take the "disbelief" in human superstition one god further.

The real topic of interest, however, is Cool Skill's continued fixation on atheists. There is some fear or psychological pathology at work here that may or may not require professional attention, but, regardless, he has an unusual fixation on the godless the likes of which even Ann Coulter doesn't exhibit. Fascinating.
 
cool skill said:
Yes it does.
Without in terms of with/without. True/false.
Theism is with.
Atheism is without.
Click to expand...
Alright, here seems to be the problem. How does with/without compare with true/false. I don't ever remember seeing that as one of the synonyms.

And as for linguistics and etymology, 'a-' means "not, without" or somewhere along those lines. But true/false has no basis for comparison whatsoever.

I'd like to see you actually reference something, like a credible online dictionary or etymology reference site. I'm not going to even address the rest of the stuff, because that's just you ranting on about sketchy information.


[Renrue]
 
SkinWalker said:
The Greek language is origin of the word atheism, or atheos, and its meaning, for anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of the Greek language, is clear: "without gods."

Babies, infants and toddlers, therefore, are atheists. They don't disbelieve in god since they've never read any of the mythology surrounding the various gods that religious nutters go on about in their superstitions.

One can say, then, that the atheist that doesn't accept superstitious bullshit after having to put up with the nonsense that various cult followers or spout or even after reading scholarly texts written about gods disbelieves in the gods being mentioned. I can agree with that.

But, by that line of reasoning, that makes everyone an atheist. That is, assuming there are not those that believe in whatever gods they read about in human mythology. I'm willing to bet that even Cool Skill doesn't believe in Zeus, Athena, Ptah, Quetzacoatl, or Amun Ra. He is, therefore, an atheist. The difference between he and I is that I'm not afraid to take the "disbelief" in human superstition one god further.
Click to expand...
You do not know how to read.
The first post explains how all this is completely false.
 
lixluke said:
You either believe true or false. If you believe in neither, you are neither a theist or an atheist. You might be an agnostic or have taken some other view regarding this debate.

.
Click to expand...


The word agnostic would tend to agree with you.

Gnosis meaning knowledge; knowledge of what? knowledge of;
a) god exists
or
b) god does not exist


An agnostic therefore, does not claim to have knowledge of
a) god exists
or
b) god does not exist


An agnostic can therefore be said to lack belief, but lacking belief in a) also means you must lack belief b) if not, one would have knowledge of one option, which would automatically give knowledge of the other option.

an atheist therefore cannot occupy the same ground.
 
SkinWalker said:
But, by that line of reasoning, that makes everyone an atheist. That is, assuming there are not those that believe in whatever gods they read about in human mythology. I'm willing to bet that even Cool Skill doesn't believe in Zeus, Athena, Ptah, Quetzacoatl, or Amun Ra. He is, therefore, an atheist. The difference between he and I is that I'm not afraid to take the "disbelief" in human superstition one god further.
.
Click to expand...

That is false logic... to be a theist, one has to believe that 'a' god exists. Theists may then debate amongst themselves about the exact definition / desciption of that god.

A theist does not have to agree on all definitions / descriptions of what a god (or gods ) maybe in order to not become an atheist.

In the same way an atheist does not have to state that all supernatural occurances are false not to believe in god i.e. an atheist that believes in ghosts say - does not automatially become a theist - by reverse logic your argument is false. ;)
 
Atheism, is literally, a non-god based belief system about the empirical evidenses of the sciences, caused and created solely out of fear and hate for the GOD concept.

This fear and hate has prompted those to always precieve and twist what they find in the sciences as being always daily, more and more evidense to prove their biased views and satisfy their inner hate, and nuetralise their inner fears of hell.

we all as humans, still religion or not... know right from wrong.
we do.. you do...

and we all do alot of wrong..... have done... and it scares people... even scientists.
and since the intelectual communty at the time, in schools and so forth was and is still secular, the perfect enviorment has existed for atheist views to take a dominate hold over our entire culture.

freedom... and liberty to be gay, stupid, and wild and immoral, has been the basis of or developing civil rights movements.... more and more freedom to be as perverse as i as an adult want to be.... with other adults....

bill boards.. now flaunt sexauality left and right... magazines are nothing but...
tv.. has become all about sex... in every show... sex... sex.. sex..

radio, is about the only semi clean thing around, and even still... in los angeles, several morning shows, such as 98.7.. is all about sex jokes...

this behavior... has only come about due to the constant loosing of standards all across the board, as sexual liberalism has been forced on us by atheists in the name of 'NO GOD'.... any arguements about the morality of putting young girls on bill boards is met with the common atheist arguement, which can follow many lines of thought.... but all in the end serves only to justify immoral behavior.

everyone recognises.... advertising works.

it does... our media is based on it.

and yet, the secular humanist in control now adays, knowing this, have NO problem with advertising sex to children in every availible media.... all of them.

you cant talk to strange kids about sex....
you cant touch strange kids...

but you can make availble to them... tons of sexy ads.. sex on tv... left and right.
sex on billboards... in some places... west hollywood.. ads, offering gay sex cruises, 30 feet high, on major streets... streets children walk down.
you can expose kids to all kinds of suggestive stuff... but only if your making money doing it.... commercial sin... is ok?? immoral behavior by mass distribution is ok??


athesist, have alot to answer for... and i havent heard of one secular atheist, ever who wants to do anything about the liberal perversion which has taken over western culture...

and i doubt i will hear from one here.

Athesist are all weak... because they rather loosen standards, than take a hard line agasinst the loosing of what should be unshakable social norms....
they all cave in.... soon they will cave into nambla... and lower the age of conscent.. to 16 nationally....

but will the atheists cry out??? no... they are weak and will just party with kids.

-MT
 
SkinWalker said:
And my post demonstrates how the first post is nothing but bullshit.
Click to expand...
No it does not.
Atheism: The position that God (dieties) does not exist.

The lack of a position is not atheism.

Eat that.
 
And then there is the notion of agnostic-atheist, which Cool Skill has, in the past, said he cannot understand. After mentioning that I consider myself to be an agnostic-atheist, I recall his ad hominem insults then and in later threads where he referred to me as an "idiot" but only succeeded in demonstrating his own intellectual shortcoming rather than my own.

The person who fails to find a legitimate reason to believe in a god can easily be said to be an atheist (whether you call it "lack of belief" or "disbelief"). But that same person can also, readily admit, that there is no method of proving that a god doesn't exist and that knowledge of a god is, therefore, impossible.

The only intellectually viable standpoint is that of agnostic-atheist. All others are either deluded or haven't actually applied reason to the issue.

I'm sure the member formerly known as Cool Skill will have some version of an ad hominem insult that will include "idiot," "moron," or some other intellectually suitable term for someone unable to apply reasonable arguments why this cannot be so, leaving us all to wonder who "luke" is and why one should wish to lick him.
 
Light Travelling said:
The word agnostic would tend to agree with you.

Gnosis meaning knowledge; knowledge of what? knowledge of;
a) god exists
or
b) god does not exist


An agnostic therefore, does not claim to have knowledge of
a) god exists
or
b) god does not exist


An agnostic can therefore be said to lack belief, but lacking belief in a) also means you must lack belief b) if not, one would have knowledge of one option, which would automatically give knowledge of the other option.

an atheist therefore cannot occupy the same ground.
Click to expand...
An atheist in no way occupies the same ground as an agnostic.
Agnostics lack the belief in God. They also lack the belief in no God.

Agnostic:
I do not believe that God exists.
I do not believe that God does not exist.
I believe that man can not have this knowledge.

Atheist.
I believe that God does not exist.
 
lixluke said:
No it does not.
Atheism: The position that God (dieties) does not exist.

The lack of a position is not atheism.

Eat that.
Click to expand...

The Greeks invented the Greek language, not Cool Skill. The "a" in "atheos" refers to "without." Without theism. QED.
 
Mosheh Thezion said:
Athesist are all weak... because they rather loosen standards, than take a hard line agasinst the loosing of what should be unshakable social norms
Click to expand...
Right.
There are very few atheists that actually know what they are talking about.
A real atheist is one that stands on the position that God does not exist. No weak or strong about it.
 
Mosheh Thezion said:
Atheism, is literally, a non-god based belief system about the empirical evidenses of the sciences, caused and created solely out of fear and hate for the GOD concept.
Click to expand...

Is that all gods of humanity, or just yours? I'm just curious which god I should direct my hate and fear towards. LOL.
 
SkinWalker said:
The Greeks invented the Greek language, not Cool Skill. The "a" in "atheos" refers to "without." Without theism. QED.
Click to expand...
As I stated the same exact thing moron.

This idiot really does not know how to read:
lixluke said:
Yes it does.
Without in terms of with/without. True/false.
Theism is with.
Atheism is without.

"Lack of belief" has nothing whatsoever with atheism. Agnostics have a lack of belief in God because they believe that it is impossibe for humans to ever know if God exists or not. Atheism is an absolute position that there is no God. "A" = not, denial, disbelief, without. Not the same thing as "lack of belief."
Click to expand...
 
Agnostic for me seems to say that it means there is a 50/50 chance of the universe being created by sentience. I don't think it works that way at all since there is a far more likely chance of this fantasy being untrue, just like the teapot going around the sun. So I am an atheist without of course being 100% certain... just 99.9% or so.
 
Light Travelling said:
That is false logic... to be a theist, one has to believe that 'a' god exists. Theists may then debate amongst themselves about the exact definition / desciption of that god.
Click to expand...

I agree, but only to a point. If I held a belief in a god that you did not, and we each think that our god is the correct one, then I might be inclined to believe that your god is not a real, but a "false" god (I admit there were, in antiquity, many cultures that believed in a polytheistic universe and accepted the gods of other cultures as existing but not the right god to recognize/accept). If so, then why should I not equate you to be anything but an atheist since the god you "worship" doesn't exist. Semantics, I agree, but interesting nonetheless. But I accept your point.


Light Travelling said:
In the same way an atheist does not have to state that all supernatural occurances are false not to believe in god i.e. an atheist that believes in ghosts say - does not automatially become a theist - by reverse logic your argument is false. ;)
Click to expand...

Actually, I think there is a strong correlation between credulous beliefs about ghosts, ufos, esp, etc. and the physiological reasons for religious belief. But this is only my own speculations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top