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.
Right now, Atheism seems to have different meanings and understanding that seem to vary from Atheist to Atheist.
No it doesn't. All atheists are on the same page worldwide. We have no belief in the existence of gods. What are you not understanding.
...and even if we did have different meanings and understandings about what atheism is, we certainly would never even get near to the different meanings and understandings of Christianity. More than 30,000 different denominations of Christianity....and you think that WE are fragmented!!
I would try my best; however, first, you and our millions of Atheists friends would need to sit together and figure out an agreeable definition as to what exactly is Atheism, and then update the world wide dictionaries.
Right now, Atheism seems to have different meanings and understanding that seem to vary from Atheist to Atheist.
Nonsense. Nothing that has been said here by anyone gets away from the very simple definition of atheism: lack of belief in any deities. I am consistent with that. Nozz is consistent with that. It is as simple as "one who does not collect stamps" or "one who does not have hair". There is no need to convene a meeting of some council somewhere to clarify a thing that is simply a philosophical concept with a very rock solid and unambiguous definition based on the very etymology of the word itself. a (without) theist (belief in gods).
I am one who does not have a full head of hair and yet never think of myself as "bald". I am partially bald, but it just isn't something that's part of my self-labeling or identity. What I think of myself of, is old, from a family prone to mild baldness, and as a side effect of that fact I happen to be somewhat balding.
That is all that Nozz said about the fact he doesn't believe in god. It's just a knock-on effect of him not believing anything that's not substantiated.
You on the other hand seem to have some need to have Nozz, myself and other unbelievers fit some preconceived definition or identity that you've already tidily assigned us. Sorry to disappoint you on that score, but not believing in any gods means that, only, that, and nothing more than that.
Even your suggestion that "millions of Atheists" would sit down and work out a definition -- something that would NEVER happen -- reveals your stubborn insistence that atheism is just another organized or organizable belief-system rather than a very narrow statement of unbelief. It is not a creed, is not organized beyond a few small civil rights organizations comprising perhaps one percent of atheists and a failing atheist social club movement that appears all but stillborn as I write this.
It is almost as if you have picked up a distorted concept of what atheism is from others rather than from facts on the ground, such that you find it easier to believe in a worldwide conspiracy of atheists to be dishonest about what they are, so as to keep your false image of what we are alive for yourself ... rather than to simply LISTEN to ACTUAL ATHEISTS and take them at their word for what they actually think and believe and, more importantly, WHY they think and believe what they do. And to learn from the vast differences between religious groups based on religious faith and those OUTSIDE religious groups due to a LACK of religious faith.
I can post a list of Christians that have become atheists or Muslim or Buddhists. What is your point?
As a believer, I don't have a problem with it, as its a choice based decision for an individual when he leaves faith and becomes an Atheist and vice-a-versa; however, AmzJ wonders why many believers stay believers and don't become Atheiests?
A re-read of our dialogue may help you understand this scenario.
Quote:
You may call it that. Most people would see it as a fact that people change their minds about what they believe'.
Already answered above. I don't have any issue with it.
We all have a free choice to make this decision to satisfy our needs/wants based on our own research, intelligence, and logic.
And in the end, we will be responsible for our choices based on free will.
As a believer, I don't have a problem with it, as its a choice based decision for an individual when he leaves faith and becomes an Atheist and vice-a-versa; however, AmzJ wonders why many believers stay believers and don't become Atheiests?
Do you wonder why many atheists stay atheist and don't become believers or why many Hindus stay Hindus rather than become Muslim etc?
Quote:
Already answered above. I don't have any issue with it.
We all have a free choice to make this decision to satisfy our needs/wants based on our own research, intelligence, and logic.
And in the end, we will be responsible for our choices based on free will.
Belief is NOT a choice, period. If you think it is take something you TRULY believe and choose NOT to believe it. How did that work for you????
I did. How hard is it for you to read what I write when I write it instead of pretending I did not? See how easy it gets to proceed in a conversation when you take a deep breath and relax yourself, and let it to go to finally (and bravely) read me tell you what I really think?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals
This is EXACTLY where we disagree
If you disagree with my position that there is no arguments, evidence, data or reasoning on offer (least of all by you) to suggest the explanation for our existence is a non-human intelligent and intentional agency.......... then you can disagree with it in a simple way. By PROVIDING the arguments, evidence, data or reasoning that the explanation for our existence is a non-human intelligent and intentional agency.
Simple as that.
But you do not do it. Why?`
Likely because you know as well as I do, that you got nothing to provide.
The cop out "No one can convince you so why bother trying" narrative is not going to fool anyone. Except probably yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals
And by the way, Nozz, and rightly so, does not call himself an Atheist. He DOES believe that there is something out there, while Atheists outright deny it.
Please do not change my words to fit your narrative. All I said was that I think there is an explanation for why we exist. That is all I said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals
So a choice HAS to be made.
Except for many of us it is NOT a choice. We simply can not CHOOSE to believe in a god, or not believe in a god. There is no "free will" there for us. The lack of ANY arguments, evidence, data or reasoning to suggest there is a god.... simply leaves us in a position where we CAN NOT believe there is one.
It might be a choice for YOU, and your credulity may be more labile than others.... but what is true for YOU is not automatically true for others. So stop pretending like it is.
I am curious how labile your credulity is however. If I give you an empty box, that is PALPABLY empty, can you simply CHOOSE to believe it is chock full of cash? Can you simply CHOOSE to believe you were not born of human parents but were actually deposited here by an alien species and you are the one sentient non-human on the planet? Having made the choice to believe that, would you ACTUALLY believe it? How does that work for you? What is that even LIKE to be able to do that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals
I would try my best; however, first, you and our millions of Atheists friends would need to sit together and figure out an agreeable definition as to what exactly is Atheism, and then update the world wide dictionaries.
In general the dictionaries conform nicely with what atheists on here are telling you. As I showed on another thread what YOU do is cherry pick dictionary definitions to suit yourself. On that thread you tried to use the Webster dictionary to force your definition of atheism.
However when I typed "define atheism" into google the first THREE definitions conform with what I was telling you, as did the SIX after that. What YOU did was go down this list of 10 results and simply cherry pick the one you wanted. And ignored the fact that 90% of the results did not fit your agenda. How is this useful? Forget useful: How is this HONEST? I suggested you were not honest earlier and you appear to be on a one many posting campaign to prove me right.
And you are not alone in this as the single person you agreed with was a moderator who then posted his agreement, and locked the thread before he could be rebutted. How biased is that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals
Right now, Atheism seems to have different meanings and understanding that seem to vary from Atheist to Atheist.
Which is what you will get when you define people by what they are NOT rather than by what they are. It gives much further ground for people to interpret the word the way THEY want to interpret it. It is one of the many reasons I reject self application of the term. I see no utility in words that define me by attributes I do NOT have, rather than words that define me by attributes that I DO.
In fact I think the word so silly because a-theism means without a theism. Not without a belief in god. So even from basic etymology the word makes little sense to me. We HAVE a word for people who are a-theism but believe in a god. Deists. Deism. So if I wanted to be linguistically pedantic I would more readily call myself adeist than atheist. But as I said NEITHER word has any utility or interest for me.
Belief is NOT a choice, period. If you think it is take something you TRULY believe and choose NOT to believe it. How did that work for you????
Not too well, but that's not how it works. Let's take something you'd relate to like a personal experience of God. You can either buy into it or tell yourself that it is all illusion. There is an element of choice about how you'd approach it.
Belief is NOT a choice, period. If you think it is take something you TRULY believe and choose NOT to believe it. How did that work for you????
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
Not too well, but that's not how it works. Let's take something you'd relate to like a personal experience of God. You can either buy into it or tell yourself that it is all illusion. There is an element of choice about how you'd approach it.
That is only true for you because you did NOT actually experience it, Arq! The "knowing" is intrinsic, NOT extrinsic. It is not intellectual. All my efforts to explain it to my intellect were.
I did. How hard is it for you to read what I write when I write it instead of pretending I did not? See how easy it gets to proceed in a conversation when you take a deep breath and relax yourself, and let it to go to finally (and bravely) read me tell you what I really think?
If you disagree with my position that there is no arguments, evidence, data or reasoning on offer (least of all by you) to suggest the explanation for our existence is a non-human intelligent and intentional agency.......... then you can disagree with it in a simple way. By PROVIDING the arguments, evidence, data or reasoning that the explanation for our existence is a non-human intelligent and intentional agency.
Simple as that.
But you do not do it. Why?`
Likely because you know as well as I do, that you got nothing to provide.
The cop out "No one can convince you so why bother trying" narrative is not going to fool anyone. Except probably yourself.
Please do not change my words to fit your narrative. All I said was that I think there is an explanation for why we exist. That is all I said.
Except for many of us it is NOT a choice. We simply can not CHOOSE to believe in a god, or not believe in a god. There is no "free will" there for us. The lack of ANY arguments, evidence, data or reasoning to suggest there is a god.... simply leaves us in a position where we CAN NOT believe there is one.
It might be a choice for YOU, and your credulity may be more labile than others.... but what is true for YOU is not automatically true for others. So stop pretending like it is.
I am curious how labile your credulity is however. If I give you an empty box, that is PALPABLY empty, can you simply CHOOSE to believe it is chock full of cash? Can you simply CHOOSE to believe you were not born of human parents but were actually deposited here by an alien species and you are the one sentient non-human on the planet? Having made the choice to believe that, would you ACTUALLY believe it? How does that work for you? What is that even LIKE to be able to do that?
In general the dictionaries conform nicely with what atheists on here are telling you. As I showed on another thread what YOU do is cherry pick dictionary definitions to suit yourself. On that thread you tried to use the Webster dictionary to force your definition of atheism.
However when I typed "define atheism" into google the first THREE definitions conform with what I was telling you, as did the SIX after that. What YOU did was go down this list of 10 results and simply cherry pick the one you wanted. And ignored the fact that 90% of the results did not fit your agenda. How is this useful? Forget useful: How is this HONEST? I suggested you were not honest earlier and you appear to be on a one many posting campaign to prove me right.
And you are not alone in this as the single person you agreed with was a moderator who then posted his agreement, and locked the thread before he could be rebutted. How biased is that?
Which is what you will get when you define people by what they are NOT rather than by what they are. It gives much further ground for people to interpret the word the way THEY want to interpret it. It is one of the many reasons I reject self application of the term. I see no utility in words that define me by attributes I do NOT have, rather than words that define me by attributes that I DO.
In fact I think the word so silly because a-theism means without a theism. Not without a belief in god. So even from basic etymology the word makes little sense to me. We HAVE a word for people who are a-theism but believe in a god. Deists. Deism. So if I wanted to be linguistically pedantic I would more readily call myself adeist than atheist. But as I said NEITHER word has any utility or interest for me.
Man, such a long and useless effort.
Here is a simple one.
Have you done all DNA tests to believe the that a certain human is your mother or a father or a daughter or a son or an uncle or an aunt?
Why you believe a person to be a family member without evidence?
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.
