PLZ READ OP FIRST! The Atheist Delusion

Whatever one has as a belief is only that.

It is a thought from the brain.

A belief is only a thought that you think over and over, thus making the neural transmitters of the brain work in a particular way.

The man in India believes one way. You believe another. Who is right.

It all has to do with the "Mental Codes" you were brought up with. You are nothing less than a computer programmed by the environment you were raised in.

Hugh Hefner and the Males in the middle east see women in a very different light. Could that possibly have to do with upbringing?

It is not complicated. Live by 3 rules and you will never violate the universe.

1. Do NOT violate the rights of your fellow man/woman.
2. Never impose YOUR will upon someone else.
3. If YOU have a belief in a god, keep it to yourself.

If you need an explanation to any of these universal laws, then you will never understand them.

peas

Originally posted by Mike_A
Although Atheism can describe people who have this belief it isn’t the meaning of the word.

No problem Mike, let's go back to the OED definition - a person who does not believe in the existence of God or gods.

Note that does NOT refer to a lack of belief. If you do not believe that something exists you by default believe that it does not.

I really don’t know how else to say it, atheism is the lack of belief not the belief that god does not exist.

Plenty have said this in this thread, we are atheists, we know what we do and do not believe.

No atheism is the lack of 'a belief' - something completely different as I have tried to point out.

It is not my problem if those who profess to be atheists do not actually understand that they are really referring to the peculiar state of agnosticism.

If we are going by dictionary definitions then your statement cannot be that of an atheist.

I’m really not trying to be rude but it has been stated numerous times on each and every page. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god or gods, it is not the belief that there are no gods.

Unfortunately not so by the OED definition. It is not taken as rude by the way. It is an interesting discussion.

Perhaps read again? I don't think that is the case at least by those who profess to be atheists.

I have to say I am somewhat disappointed that the OP has not seen fit to re-join us and defend his original assertion.

You DO realize that this entire OP is an argument based on semantics, hopefully by now? In other words, just a hair above meaningless and pointless debate. Despite your insistence, "atheism" can mean either because of the flexible nature of interpreting language.

Belief

–noun
1.
something believed; an opinion or conviction: a belief that the earth is flat.
2.
confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof: a statement unworthy of belief.
3.
confidence; faith; trust: a child's belief in his parents.
4.
a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith: the Christian belief.

In your OP you cite 4 different definitions of the word "belief". Only the first one fits into your argument. If I were to use one of the other three definitions, then "atheism" would mean lacking belief, not having it.

Because there is such a wide variation in how each of us perceives the world, something like the nature or existence of God is never going to perfectly fit into one definition even among like-minded people.

[edit on 30-7-2010 by Son of Will]

Originally posted by ChickenPie

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by ChickenPie
What are your reasons for your lack of belief in God?

No objective evidence confirming the existence of a deity.

...

Which leads you to conclude...?

That is my conclusion.

...

reply to post by Son of Will


Guess you just shot yourself in the foot there because the argument is between not believing and lack of belief and that is not semantics. Your post only proved not lack of belief since all elements of the post pointed to belief and not a lack of it.

Please continue this discussion without allusions to the personal character of those involved.

Thank you.

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
But what do you really KNOW about God? What can be objectively verified beyond your subjective experiences and what you were told to believe about God?

Absolutely nothing. As I've stated many times before, my faith in God is completely subjective, and I would be a bit disappointed if it were otherwise.

However, you'll generally not find me making a statement of fact ("God exists!") so much as a statement of belief ("I have faith that God exists.") Things that I do or say are predicated on that non-absolute, though I'm likely guilty of treating it as an absolute at times. My decision to have faith was not an easy one to come to, but it's not made in a vacuum, neither is it made in the face of objective proof.

Call me an idiot, but I don't want God to prove himself to me. I really don't.

reply to post by PuterMan

No problem Mike, let's go back to the OED definition - a person who does not believe in the existence of God or gods.

Note that does NOT refer to a lack of belief. If you do not believe that something exists you by default believe that it does not.

That’s not correct, I don’t believe that you are wearing a pink paisley shirt but I don’t believe that you are not. There is a point between saying something exists and saying it doesn’t, you can just say “I don’t know” or “maybe it does and maybe it doesn’t”.

To say I do not believe X is exactly the same as saying I lack a belief in X.

No atheism is the lack of 'a belief'

That’s what I said.

It is not my problem if those who profess to be atheists do not actually understand that they are really referring to the peculiar state of agnosticism.

I discussed this earlier.

“Agnostic (as it relates to deities) describes someone who believes that they cannot know whether or not there is a god.

Atheistic describes someone who lacks a belief in a god or gods.

The two are not oxymoronic but related. A person who believes that they cannot know if there is a god is agnostic but if they cannot know then they lack a positive believe and are thus an atheist; or agnostic atheist.

However the two are not synonyms because someone who believes that there are no gods is just as much an atheist as the first person but is certainly not agnostic.”

Unfortunately not so by the OED definition.

I really don’t see the distinction between the OED’s “a person who does not believe in the existence of God or gods” and Princeton’s (any my) “a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods”.

Where is the difference, it’s just two ways of saying the same thing; neither suggest a positive belief in anything.





[edit on 30-7-2010 by Mike_A]

reply to post by IamBoon


great thread!
i knew you were an atheist, or at least i thought you were, from your posts, and that made it all the better in reading.

thank you for your honesty and openness.

ultimately, that is of far more value than personal beliefs, whatever they may be.

being honest and candid is the answer to getting along, regardless of differences of opinion and faith that cannot be proven.

honesty proves itself.
it is called "integrity."

Originally posted by Mike_A
reply to post by ChickenPie

 

What I'm asking now is for your reasons. Or are you telling me you have none? If you're too stupid to answer the question, then just say so.

You asked me the same question and I gave you the answer on page nine posted on 30-7-2010 @ 02:26 PM but you didn’t reply.

Now here’s a question for you, why are you such an arsehole?

Talking to some of you kids is like trying to squeeze water out of a rock.

I wanted to know his reason because his reason is what would lead up to his assertion. There is no empirical evidence for God; therefore, I believe God doesn't exist, or therefore, I believe God probably doesn't exist. And if there's an assertion then it's no longer just a "disbelief" or a "lack of belief." Lack of belief or disbelief would accurately describe a week old babies ideas concerning God, but not a guy who asserts God probably doesn't exist or does not exist because there is no empirical evidence to suggest otherwise. Now, since he does not possess certain knowledge that God doesn't exist, then his assertion is partly faith based.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

Sadly, too many people cannot think outside of their own box. They believe atheism a "belief"

Atheism is a belief...like it or not.

You have information...you have processed that information...you have come to a conclusion you personally BELIEVE in.

Atheism CAN be a "non-belief"...if there is a person that has never heard of the concept of "god". That person is an atheists by definition...and also holds no belief on the subject.

Once you have information or knowledge of the concept...you make your decision on your opinion/stance on it...whether you don't think the concept exist or not doesn't matter...the end resulting conclusion is your BELIEF on the subject.


You simply can not have a "non-belief" in a subject that you have knowledge about.

[edit on 30-7-2010 by OutKast Searcher]

Originally posted by ChickenPie
[Now, since he does not possess certain knowledge that God doesn't exist, then his assertion is partly faith based.

Oh of course it's faith, and it's a belief and also a belief system. Why not just go all the way and claim that it's a religion also? Don't just stand up to your waist in the pool of misconception: dive right in.

Originally posted by Mike_A
That’s not correct, I don’t believe that you are wearing a pink paisley shirt but I don’t believe that you are not. There is a point between saying something exists and saying it doesn’t, you can just say “I don’t know” or “maybe it does and maybe it doesn’t”.

See the socks analogy. I don't see this in the same class. Not knowing comes under agnosticism in my book.

To say I do not believe X is exactly the same as saying I lack a belief in X.

No atheism is the lack of 'a belief'

That’s what I said.

No, the 'a' makes a difference to the statement.

I guess we will just have to differ on the definition of atheism depending on which dictionary we 'believe'

I don't have a problem with that. Peace.

reply to post by ChickenPie

then his assertion is partly faith based.

Is the assertion that Unicorns probably don't exist also faith based? What about fairies? It doesn't take faith to lack belief in something for which there is no evidence.

Faith itself in this context refers to a belief for which there is no evidence.

While I agree that the assertion "There is no God" requires faith I do not think the statement "I do not believe in God" or "To my knowledge there is no objectively verified evidence of God and therefore I lack faith or belief in him" requires faith.

[edit on 30-7-2010 by Titen-Sxull]

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

Atheism is a belief...like it or not.

You have information...you have processed that information...you have come to a conclusion you personally BELIEVE in.

Not correct. Information does not always cause beliefs. Any demonstrable tautology is based on information but acceptance of its stated fact is not a belief. Like it or not, disbelief is not belief, antonyms are not synonyms, not collecting stamps is not a hobby.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher


Atheism is a belief...like it or not.

Star that!

Holy Cow! We agree on something else!!!

reply to post by IamBoon

He that formed the eye, can he not see? He that formed the ear, is he deaf?

Apparently, if you want it. Must have been a lot of work to get there.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

Not correct. Information does not always cause beliefs. Any demonstrable tautology is based on information but acceptance of its stated fact is not a belief. Like it or not, disbelief is not belief, antonyms are not synonyms, not collecting stamps is not a hobby.

You can say it all you want...but you sound silly.

"I don't BELIEVE in god"....sounds like a belief to me.

Now go ahead and attempt to mess with the semantics of the above statement to remove the word "believe"...careful to not make it a statement of fact because then I am going to ask you to prove it.

If you have an opinion on something...you have a "belief"...it's not a bad thing.

Why do you look at the word "belief" like it is a negative thing?

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
You can say it all you want...but you sound silly.

"I don't BELIEVE in god"....sounds like a belief to me.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

"not believe" does not equal "believe"

"disbelief" does not equal "belief"

"not A" does not equal "A"

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
While I agree that the assertion "There is no God" requires faith I do not think the statement "I do not believe in God" or "There is no evidence of God and therefore I lack faith or belief in him" requires faith.

"There is no God". "I do not believe in God". Neither require 'faith' but they are both statements of belief (not A belief)

"There is no evidence of God and therefore I lack faith or belief in him". A nonsensical statement as it is unlikely that someone would say 'therefore I lack belief in him'. "There is no evidence of God therefore I do not believe in him". This is the same to my way of thinking as "There is no evidence of God therefore I believe he does not exist."

Unicorns and fairies, now that is a different matter.