Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Since he says it is probably more likely that there isn't, then he probably knows whether or not he believes.
This wouldn't apply to everyone though. Some people may not know whether or not they believe. They would also be neutral where belief is concerned. Not positive or negative.
Since he says it is probably more likely that there isn't, then he probably knows whether or not he believes.
This wouldn't apply to everyone though. Some people may not know whether or not they believe. They would also be neutral where belief is concerned. Not positive or negative.
Still, these people are technically atheists, as atheism includes both "neutral" and "negative" in regard to theistic beliefs. Atheism in its basic form is merely a lack of positive belief in any theism. Only a particular type of atheism, Strong Atheism, is a 'negative' belief (or positive belief that no god(s) exist).
I'm aware that you don't like that definition, but it's necessitated by the differentiation between agnosticism and atheism. People mistakenly use atheist and agnostic mutually exclusively, to refer to strong atheist and weak atheist. The problem with that:
Agnosticism does not mean lacking belief in either direction, it means accepting that knowledge about god(s) is unattainable. This means that agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive, but rather completely independent factors in a person's world view. It also means a person can be an agnostic theist ("Knowledge is unattainable but I am confident god(s) exist anyway"), or a gnostic atheist ("I know for a fact there are no god(s)").
Still, these people are technically atheists, as atheism includes both "neutral" and "negative" in regard to theistic beliefs. Atheism in its basic form is merely a lack of positive belief in any theism. Only a particular type of atheism, Strong Atheism, is a 'negative' belief (or positive belief that no god(s) exist).
I'm aware that you don't like that definition, but it's necessitated by the differentiation between agnosticism and atheism. People mistakenly use atheist and agnostic mutually exclusively, to refer to strong atheist and weak atheist. The problem with that:
Agnosticism does not mean lacking belief in either direction, it means accepting that knowledge about god(s) is unattainable. This means that agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive, but rather completely independent factors in a person's world view. It also means a person can be an agnostic theist ("Knowledge is unattainable but I am confident god(s) exist anyway"), or a gnostic atheist ("I know for a fact there are no god(s)").
No, neutral people are not atheist. People who disbelieve are atheist.
We don't see eye to eye on the matter, but that doesn't mean either of us are going to give way.
You don't see eye to eye with the dictionary, as you don't accept its definition of 'disbelief'. I prefer to use the dictionary as the authority on definitions because language's main purpose is to convey meanings to others, and common definitions are vital to that. You're free to define anything as anything, but you must understand the problems associated with that when trying to communicate with others.
But, except for conveying meanings to others (and ourselves), words are arbitrary and therefore irrelevant, and I have no more interest in a perpetual semantics battle with you.
We disagree that atheism is an ACTIVE disbelief, a CHOICE to not believe, whereas simply not being exposed to the thing does not address belief one way or the other.
I mean, go outside and look at the world around you.
Do you think there is a divine force that made all of this possible and keeps it running smoothly. If so, then you believe in supreme beings.
Or do you think it is simply natural forces at work and there are no supernatural forces present? If so, then you are an atheist.
How can you not reach one of those two conclusions?
Probably by standing on firm ground. An agnostic can be an atheist or a theist or "apathetic agnostic" meaning a type of Secularist. An agnostic can also simply be agnostic because their current and righteously faithful belief is that they are agnostic and everyone else is and always has been and will likely always will be "ungnostic". If you confess "ungnosis" you are agnostic, if you pretent to "gnosis" you are antagnostic.
We disagree that atheism is an ACTIVE disbelief, a CHOICE to not believe, whereas simply not being exposed to the thing does not address belief one way or the other.
You misunderstand the meaning of the prefix a-. It does not mean 'against' or 'actively denying', it simply means without. Therefore atheism is simply, literally, without theism.
Therefore everyone who is not a theist, even those who have never heard of theism, are without theism. thus they are atheists.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
