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.
That would be the semantic diddling I refer to that seeks to muddle the definitions of atheism and theism into confusing and conflated nonsense. Belief is NOT a claim to be evidenced. It is just a belief. Pretending that a belief there is a God is somehow different from a belief there is no God is pure sophistry. The purpose of such semantic shenanigans is to instantiate a default of "No God" and then disingenuously require proof of God. They are BOTH BELIEFS and neither can be the default since we do NOT know. What about that is confusing to you?????
That's not what is being said Mystic. Is what is being said is there is no proof there is a God so until some is provided I remain unconvinced. I don't have proof there is no God so I don't believe that either.
Last edited by L8Gr8Apost8; 02-17-2019 at 09:37 PM..
Reason: meant to say proof and not evidence
That's not what is being said Mystic. Is what is being said is there is no proof there is a God so until some is provided I remain unconvinced. I don't have evidence there is no God so I don't believe that either.
I think that's perfectly rational. Mystic may be referring to the fact that some atheists have said they believe there is no god (or even just claimed it), and/or that some have said there is evidence for strong atheism (the non-existence of a god). We are a multi-faceted group, just as any other.
I think that's perfectly rational. Mystic may be referring to the fact that some atheists have said they believe there is no god (or even just claimed it), and/or that some have said there is evidence for strong atheism (the non-existence of a god). We are a multi-faceted group, just as any other.
Very few will say that. Even Dawkins refers to himself as an agnostic atheist. I wrote evidence before and changed to to proof. Plenty of people believe there is evidence for God but stop short of proof like Mystic did. They still will say there is a God despite this. I thinks the evidence points away from a sentient creator (thus a[theist] ) but I wouldn't say there is proof there is no God (thus agnostic quantifier). My standard for making either claim would have to be proof, not just evidence. I think that's why Mystic keeps screwing this up. His standard is evidence and not proof. I think he is assuming atheists are doing the same.
Very few will say that. Even Dawkins refers to himself as an agnostic atheist.
And yet names his book "The God Delusion"
Quote:
I thinks the evidence points away from a sentient creator (thus a[theist] ) but I wouldn't say there is proof there is no God (thus agnostic quantifier).
That does work as an agnostic quantifier, yes. Still I know of no real evidence that strong atheism is true.
That does work as an agnostic quantifier, yes. Still I know of no real evidence that strong atheism is true.
I'm sure he knows it an impossible thing to prove. He is being consistent calling himself that because the standard to make a claim either way is proof. If atheism is the correct assumption then it will likely remain impossible.
That would be the semantic diddling I refer to that seeks to muddle the definitions of atheism and theism into confusing and conflated nonsense. Belief is NOT a claim to be evidenced. It is just a belief. Pretending that a belief there is a God is somehow different from a belief there is no God is pure sophistry. The purpose of such semantic shenanigans is to instantiate a default of "No God" and then disingenuously require proof of God. They are BOTH BELIEFS and neither can be the default since we do NOT know. What about that is confusing to you?????
Quote:
Originally Posted by L8Gr8Apost8
That's not what is being said Mystic. Is what is being said is there is no proof there is a God so until some is provided I remain unconvinced. I don't have proof there is no God so I don't believe that either.
You have simply denied that you are an atheist. You are some hybrid evidentialist but not an atheist. An atheist BELIEVES there is/are no God/gods, period. The semantic nonsense of there is no proof of God is only a partial description of the belief. The rest of the belief is, therefore there is/are no gods. Stop being so cowardly and disingenuous. If you are atheist just own it and stop trying to pretend that the default position is "No God."
Doesn't follow. Your claim doesn't suddenly become valid just because I can't disprove it. Again, whether it looks like something's being done or not depends on who you ask.
The claim has the advantage of being supported by the (negative) evidence. Yours fails as it is trying to explain it away.
Quote:
You do if you want to claim that that's what's probably happening.
I mean that I don't have to nind any better evidence that the negative evidence that already exists.
Quote:
Ah. So simply agreeing/disagreeing with theists on a few points doesn't make you a theist/atheist. Good to know!
I don't know why as it doesn't make any difference to the ingrained Theistic mindset that you exhibit in almost every post.
Quote:
Doesn't take long to point out how you've failed to establish that x would've been wrong for an omniscient god to allow/command.
Doesn't take long to remind you that you had no answer to the evils in the OT other than sto arguing the case and claim later that you won.
I suspect you're lying about that suspicion. If you get to tell me what I believe, I get to tell you what you believe, remember?[/quote]
And I got to compeltey blow that ploy out of the water. Your 'selective memory' is another theistic characteristic of your method of arguing.
That would be the semantic diddling I refer to that seeks to muddle the definitions of atheism and theism into confusing and conflated nonsense. Belief is NOT a claim to be evidenced. It is just a belief. Pretending that a belief there is a God is somehow different from a belief there is no God is pure sophistry. The purpose of such semantic shenanigans is to instantiate a default of "No God" and then disingenuously require proof of God. They are BOTH BELIEFS and neither can be the default since we do NOT know. What about that is confusing to you?????
You (and other theists) have been shown that Theism and atheism are very, very simple. It just becomes complicated by theistic Semantic Fiddling intended to force a position that atheism does not argue in hopes to try to scrape a point when it has no other valid points to make.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0
Okay then, since it's logically fallacious to say that the absence of evidence for x = evidence that x does not exist, this fails your own definition for "evidence" full circle.
Doesn't fail 'logic'. Nor indeed (valid) 'evidence'. I already explained that absence of evidence can be evidence of absence, depending on how well the parameters are known. Tha parameters for evil in the world (for example) are well enough known to say that nothing (apparently) is being done about it ither than what humans can do. This is valid negative evidence and you have only ever has an excuse without a scrap of evidence to support it.
It is a mark of your theistic mindset that you only see you arguments as valid if one supposes a god to begin with. If you don't, (as an atheist would not) your argument would be seen as mere faith -based denial, and not worth a moments' serious credence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0
I think that's perfectly rational. Mystic may be referring to the fact that some atheists have said they believe there is no god (or even just claimed it), and/or that some have said there is evidence for strong atheism (the non-existence of a god). We are a multi-faceted group, just as any other.
I have said it myself. Personal belief that particular god does not exist does not alter the fact that we are convinced on the evidence but do not claim that it can be totally disproved is logically valid in itself. It is Not a claim to all knowledge that Theist fiddlers try to maintain in hopes to make atheism look illogical. The basis of atheism (agnosticism) is even more rock -solid, logically as it (being a logical position on the god -claim rather than individual personal beliefs) is not expressing a belief, but a lack of one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0
And yet names his book "The God Delusion"
I agree with him. I think that god -belief is a human delusion. There's a good deal of reason to think so.
Quote:
That does work as an agnostic quantifier, yes. Still I know of no real evidence that strong atheism is true.
The sheer lack of any valid evidence for the existence of any kind of god, let along the particular gods of the religions, is all the evidence one needs to opt for disbelief in any of the god -claims. I'm not one to use the term 'strong atheism' myself, as 'weak/strong' atheism seems to be trying to pigeon -hole a very variable sliding -scale of disbelief in the god -claim when just recognising 'no god -belief' is all that is needed for atheism.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 02-18-2019 at 04:45 AM..
You have simply denied that you are an atheist. You are some hybrid evidentialist but not an atheist. An atheist BELIEVES there is/are no God/gods, period. The semantic nonsense of there is no proof of God is only a partial description of the belief. The rest of the belief is, therefore there is/are no gods. Stop being so cowardly and disingenuous. If you are atheist just own it and stop trying to pretend that the default position is "No God."
If, as you say, there is no evidence, why would the default position NOT be "No God?"
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.
.
