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.
Seems like everyone chooses a definition of atheism depending on what best suits their own argument.
At least the version(s) you put forward in the link says as much:
"It is important to recognize that the term “atheism” is polysemous—i.e., it has more than one related meaning—even within philosophy".
So it's an argument you can never win with someone that wants to take a different stance.
At the end if the day as I said earlier in the thread, it's not worth arguing over. We all know what atheism means.
There have been more threads on what the definition of atheism is than I've had hot dinners. Trust me, I've even argued for dozens of pages with fellow atheists about what an atheist is, and it is never completely resolved, which is why I can no longer be bothered to argue about it.
My preference is to go with the literal definition, but it's not a hill I'm going to die on.
Also I disagree that the American Atheists society folks are trying to put a 'happy face' on anything. Personally, I'm left with the opposite impression. They strike me as a miserable bunch.
I think a problem throughout this part of the forum is a reliance on definitions. Definitions don't really give us very much information. Let's take for example the formal definition of 'teacher' by Merriam-Webster: "a person or thing that teaches something". Well, duh. So let's see, that could include a radio, a television, a filmstrip projector from the 1960s, a movie, Jesus and Buddha, Mrs. Lillyquist (my 7th grade English teacher), Einstein, or the label on a can of condensed soup.
Sure, a definition gives us a very, very, very basic meaning of one word. Without context, that definition of 'teacher' means very little. And so too, the definition of 'atheist' or 'atheism'. Okay, it's someone who doesn't believe in god(s). Is it like my grandfather who just seems uninterested in the topic of god(s) and ignored it? Is it a crusader for the concept of 'no god'? Is it someone who has studied religion(s) in depth and could easily intelligently debate the topic? Is it a mildly mentally retarded person who has no real concept of god(s)? Is it a Buddhist -- a religion that doesn't believe in a creator god? The mere definition of almost anything tells us very, very little about the topic.
If I want to know what atheism is, is all I need is that "disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods" -- 12 words. Then why is there's a book on atheism you can buy on Amazon called "Atheism: The Basics", which goes on for 190 pages. In fact, there are 50 pages of books that you can buy on Amazon that deal with atheism.
I'm not saying that definitions are unimportant. But definitions are like a grain of sand on a beach to understanding what are, often, very complex topics.
Seems like everyone chooses a definition of atheism depending on what best suits their own argument.
At least the version(s) you put forward in the link says as much:
"It is important to recognize that the term “atheism” is polysemous—i.e., it has more than one related meaning—even within philosophy".
So it's an argument you can never win with someone that wants to take a different stance.
At the end if the day as I said earlier in the thread, it's not worth arguing over. We all know what atheism means.
There have been more threads on what the definition of atheism is than I've had hot dinners. Trust me, I've even argued for dozens of pages with fellow atheists about what an atheist is, and it is never completely resolved, which is why I can no longer be bothered to argue about it.
My preference is to go with the literal definition, but it's not a hill I'm going to die on.
Also I disagree that the American Atheists society folks are trying to put a 'happy face' on anything. Personally, I'm left with the opposite impression. They strike me as a miserable bunch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
what the post above clearly and accurately points out
is that atheists argue and disagree about atheism, and do not even agree about what is atheism. atheists hold different beliefs about atheism.
atheists do not agree on what atheism is. atheists do not agree on what an atheist is.
=a collection of different beliefs about atheism (what is an atheist? atheists are not in agreement; what is atheism? atheists are not in agreement).
a collection of different beliefs about atheism = a belief system about atheism.
these different beliefs atheists hold (about what is an atheist, about what is atheism)
and the ensuing discussion, arguments, disagreements atheists have amongst themselves and with other other atheists,
are no different than the discussions, arguments, disagreements people have about what does this or that path of religion and spirituality include.
No that's not what I said at all.
I didn't say atheists hold different beliefs about atheism.
I said atheists argue over definitions of atheism.
'Belief' and 'definition' are not synonymous at all.
'Atheists argue and disagree about atheism' - yes. That is an accurate statement.
'a collection of different beliefs about atheism = a belief system about atheism. ' NO completely wrong.
My goodness how many times?
ATHEISM - a lack of belief in god or gods.
ATHEISTS - people who do not believe in a god or gods. They have beliefs about other things. They may not agree on what the DEFINITION of what an atheist is but they ALL have a lack of belief that a god or gods exist.
I will expand of what I mean by arguing over the definition:
For EXAMPLE;
(and this is ONE argument, NOT every atheists argument.)
I personally would say that unless you 100% reject the idea of a god, you can't refer to yourself as an atheist.
Other atheists will reject this statement and say there is no way you can be 100% certain of anything at all and that 99.9% for example is good enough. Richard Dawkins takes this stance but I disagree with him. Are we going to say Dawkins is not an atheist?
My argument is how do you settle on a percentage and where do you draw the line?
Once again there is NO BELIEF SYSTEM in atheism. A system requires MORE THAN ONE THING WORKING TOGETHER. Atheism is a lack of belief in a god or gods. That's it.
If we can't even agree on a definition of what atheism is IT'S NOT A SYSTEM.
I'll tell you another thing that I can't believe:
That I have allowed myself to be dragged into this argument again.
I'm turning my computer off.
Have a great day.
Of course, atheism is a belief system, chiefly because there is no empirical proof either for or against the existence of a metaphysical being or beings. Yes, there are accounts testifying for the existence of such and systems of logic and philosophy that argue against such, but neither are proof. At best, they are guesses.
The more honest expression of disbelief is agnosticism, which is that of doubt.
Of course, atheism is a belief system, chiefly because there is no empirical proof either for or against the existence of a metaphysical being or beings. Yes, there are accounts testifying for the existence of such and systems of logic and philosophy that argue against such, but neither are proof. At best, they are guesses.
The more honest expression of disbelief is agnosticism, which is that of doubt.
By that logic, not believing in Santa is a belief system. Not believing in Cthulhu is a belief system. Not believing in Horus is a belief system. Not believing in Quetzalcoatl is a belief system. Not believing ... etc.
You see how silly that sounds? Humans made up Santa, Cthulhu, Horus & Quetzalcoatl. They are all fictional. Same with the Christian god. Fake. Made up. Not real.
Not believing in something fictional is not a "belief system".
Of course, atheism is a belief system, chiefly because there is no empirical proof either for or against the existence of a metaphysical being or beings. Yes, there are accounts testifying for the existence of such and systems of logic and philosophy that argue against such, but neither are proof. At best, they are guesses.
The more honest expression of disbelief is agnosticism, which is that of doubt.
What are the components that make up this belief system you speak of?
Of course, atheism is a belief system, chiefly because there is no empirical proof either for or against the existence of a metaphysical being or beings. Yes, there are accounts testifying for the existence of such and systems of logic and philosophy that argue against such, but neither are proof. At best, they are guesses.
The more honest expression of disbelief is agnosticism, which is that of doubt.
What are the components that make up this belief system you speak of?
Its components are everything you take for granted about our Reality. Your priests are the scientists who are investigating it and providing the latest truths about it.
Its components are everything you take for granted about our Reality. Your priests are the scientists who are investigating it and providing the latest truths about it.
Nonsense. He said atheism is belief system. I asked for the components of that system.
Its components are everything you take for granted about our Reality. Your priests are the scientists who are investigating it and providing the latest truths about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy
Nonsense. He said atheism is a belief system. I asked for the components of that system.
How do you not see that what you believe about Reality without a God is entirely the product of your belief in what you have been taught about it largely from what science has discovered and explained? That is the system of belief that underlies your lack of belief. Your lack of belief in God (or gods) is the result of your belief that only what you have been taught to be true about Reality exists.
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.
