What is atheism?

James R said:
Two good examples of religious people who apparently can't comprehend how anybody could really have no god or religion. And so, we have from Signal the assumption that atheists must consider themselves gods, and from ggazoo the assumption that atheism must be like a religion in itself.

To really understand atheism, you're going to have to get past the idea that everybody needs a god.
Click to expand...

All in due time, my son, all in due time.

:eek:
 
My issue is only with people who deny that atheism by definition is the denial or rejection of God.
Click to expand...
Yes, I've noticed. You spend a lot of time arguing over semantics.
 
SAM:

SAM said:
JR said:
Oh, pardon me. I thought that it wouldn't take you to long to come to a decision about whether or not you believe in the existence in India of giant yellow and purple spotted pandas.
Click to expand...

Actually, I have no opinion on the subject.
Click to expand...

No thoughts at all, eh?

So, you'd say the existence of giant purple and yellow spotted Indian pandas is about a 50-50 chance, would you?
 
James R said:
SAM:



No thoughts at all, eh?

So, you'd say the existence of giant purple and yellow spotted Indian pandas is about a 50-50 chance, would you?
Click to expand...

Couldn't care less. When I say I have no opinion, I mean it.
 
Just to jog your memory, SAM, let's get back to the point. In essence, you claimed that Tyler couldn't have "no opinion" on the existence of God. You assert that he has "chosen the side" that denies the existence of God. He doesn't just lack a belief in God, he actively does not believe in God.

Yet, when it comes to your own belief status concerning purple pandas, you're somehow allowed to sit on the fence in a way that you do not allow for Tyler. You assert that you have "no opinion" on the existence or non-existence of purple pandas. In other words, you lack a belief in purple pandas, but you do not commit to a disbelief in purple pandas. Yet when Tyler does the same thing with God, you complain that he "really" must have an active disbelief.

Why the double standard, SAM?
 
Sure, if Tyler was not pontificating in a religion forum, I would not have said he can have no opinion. Note that I do not care if people who do not post in the religion forum have any opinion on God. If I were posting in the Purple Panda forum, for example, it would be disingenuous to claim I had no opinion on them.
 
If you call yourself an athiest you have a position on God.

Like if I was a denier of Purple Pandas.
 
Everyone has the freedom to decide who they are. If you adopt labels that other people assign you, you adopt the characteristics of that label.

Or you can be like me and challenge every single label.:D
 
SAM said:
If you call yourself an athiest you have a position on God.
Click to expand...

Yet Tyler calls himself an atheist but says he merely does not have a belief in God, in exactly the same way that you don't have a belief in Purple pandas and yet you do not think of yourself as a Panda denier.

It seems to me that you are attempting to define "atheism" in a way that atheists themselves (such as Tyler) do not.

What gives you the right to tell atheists how they ought to define atheism?
 
What gives you the right to tell atheists how they ought to define atheism?
Click to expand...

You can call yourself a secular humanist and still support torture, but it defies credibility.
 
S.A.M. said:
Everyone has the freedom to decide who they are. If you adopt labels that other people assign you, you adopt the characteristics of that label.

Or you can be like me and challenge every single label.:D
Click to expand...

I can live with the label because it makes conversation about the subject easier. But you are redefining the entire concept for your own agenda.

I've said this before: If I don't except the label 'atheist' then what am I ?
 
If you do not deny God but simply refute the evidence presented to you, I would call you a skeptic. I would also say that you have no position on God.

I would also assume that skepticism is something you carry over into all spheres of your thinking.
 
S.A.M. said:
If you do not deny God but simply refute the evidence presented to you, I would call you a skeptic. I would also say that you have no position on God.

I would also assume that skepticism is something you carry over into all spheres of your thinking.
Click to expand...

Are you not getting it, or is this on purpose ?
 
I gave an example to clarify my POV, its called an illustration.

The meaning of atheist is one who denies God. To redefine a word to twist its representation is rather spurious.

What do atheists with such a definition call someone who denies God? Is there a word other than atheism in their dictionary?

As for what gives me the right? I am a theist. If you are an a-theist, you deny what I believe in. Its directly related to my belief.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top