Let's settle this for once and for all...... is atheism a belief, a non-belief or an anti-belief? (page 13)

Essan

It's not a faith that he doesn't exist...it's the obvservation, or lack thereof actually, of the non-evidence of his existence.

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". You're using a logical fallacy. Argument from Ignorance.

It is faith to conclude that God does not exist, which is why Agnostics refrain from making that judgement.

Theists do have basis for their belief, it just isn't conclusive. They bridge the gap with faith.

Atheists do have basis for their belief, it just is not conclusive. They bridge the gap with faith.

Agnostics accept that the basis for both beliefs is inconclusive. So they withhold judgement.

A negative claim must also meet the burden of proof. Atheists cannot prove that God does not exist any more than Theists can prove he does. Therefore for the claim to be accepted it requires............ faith.

ziddina

"Zid, don't assume people are Theists just because they recognize that Atheism is also a belief. ..."

Essan, you are painting all Atheists with the same broad brush-stroke. You are looking at everything as though it were "black-and-white"...

As to your comment that,

"many of the Scientists who helped to prove "dead wrong" the beliefs you mentioned were Theists. ..."

Many were, back in the times when it would have proven deadly to state that one did NOT believe in the bible 'god'... You know, the one that's only 3,500 years old or so...

What their innermost beliefs were, or would have been, without the shadow of the Church hanging over them, one must leave to conjecture at this time... I would not consider their personal notes as a completely accurate picture of their innermost thought processes, as even notes and diaries could have been used in heretical 'trials', so a cautious person would be careful to avoid totally heretical comments, in general...

However, most of those scientists that you refer to as "theists", accumulated a body of scientific evidence that eventually disproved nearly all of the quasi-"scientific" aspects of the theological dogma of the established system of "FAITH"... Like the "Noaic Flood", the "creation" mythology, the "garden of Eden", "woman created from man's rib", and so on...

On the definition of "atheist" or "atheism", my Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, copyright 1973, states: "atheist - one who denies the existence of God". Under "atheism", it states: " [MF athéisme, fr athée atheist, Gk atheos godless, fr a- + theos god] 1 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity... b: the doctrine that there is no deity...

So, what part of "a person who... dis-believes the existence of a supreme being or beings... " do you NOT get??? "DIS - belief..." NOT belief...

As has been stated ad infinitum by other posters, to assume AND CONTINUE TO ASSERT that an atheist has a "belief" system is to flatly discount the actual meaning of the word... If you cannot even accept the definitions of atheist as presented by several dictionaries, what point is there in continuing this discussion with you??

Zid

JWoods

It is faith to conclude that God does not exist, which is why Agnostics refrain from making that judgement.

Theists do have basis for their belief, it just isn't conclusive. They bridge the gap with faith.

Atheists do have basis for their belief, it just is not conclusive. They bridge the gap with faith.

A negative claim must also meet the burden of proof. Atheists cannot prove that God does not exist any more than Theists can prove he does. Therefore for the claim to be accepted it requires............ faith.

This is exactly my view on the subject, Essan. It is fascinating to me how many self-proclaimed atheists want to define themselves (and the word atheist) otherwise.

undercover

I used to claim being agnostic...but that's just being non-committal...

I don't need faith to say I don't believe in God...or that there is no God. But I'm not completely closed-minded. If God were to peek through the clouds and announce himself, then I'd change my mind and say, Hey I do believe there is a God. Observation of evidence...

The problem with theists is that they try to lump all atheists into one camp...or religion. Problem is, there isn't one camp or religion of atheists. Atheisism isn't a religion or a faith, it's just tag given to people who chose to not accept the notion of a God because there is no evidence for it. It's people of faith that have to bring them down to their level and label them in order to try to understand them.

Essan

CyberJesus it's not arrogance it's just a fact.

There are only two elements to the word, a negation and God. No God. People have to insert "belief" to make atheist mean "No belief in God".

A- the-ism - the philosophy of God negation. No-God-ism.

This was it's original meaning and is still it's primary meaning. I know some people want to use it differently and get upset that I consider such redefinition illegitimate but.... so what? LOL

bohm

ARGH!

As a bayesian, this thread make me want to tear out my hair in frustration!

For the love of God, read a basic book on the subject of inferrense, anything will do, before getting the fundamentals wrong.

cyberjesus

BrotherDan : maybe I do. Although is not bitternes what I am presenting. Think about it. What If I tell you that I am not bitter and then in your next post you tell me I am? how does that sound......

I have nothing against nobody. but if we are to make a statement we need to defend it. otherwise we would be babling and creating a new religion.

How many times have we explained what we not believe and how many different ways..... and its like we didnt say anything. you are christian because you belive in Jesus. well what if I tell you you dont believe in Jesus you believe in Isis...and you go on and on telling me you believe in Jesus and I just keep repeating you believe in Isis.

ziddina

" I find it interesting that you also characterize atheists as not only taking "a stance against the concept of god", but "against those who believe in god" as well.You seem very keen on defining atheism as not only a belief but perhaps as a behavior as well. Maybe I have misread you, but that statement sounds fairly defensive in nature. ..."

What Zoiks said, Essan...

It almost sounds as if you are very frightened of people who DON'T believe; as if their dis-belief [and that means NO belief, by the way... ] threatens YOUR belief system, within your own psyche...

You have belabored the point far, far too much, and have - in general - shown a particularly obstinate resistance to the idea that atheism IS a total lack of belief...

Why does that bother you so???

Zid

Essan

Zid said: "Essan, you are painting all Atheists with the same broad brush-stroke. You are looking at everything as though it were "black-and-white"

No, I'm not. I just tried to explain that but perhaps I wasn't clear.

"Atheism" is a word. Words have definitions. They were created for very specific purposes. The definition of Atheism was and is "black and white". Therefore if everyone who chose the label atheist did so because they actually fit the established definition then atheists would indeed be "painted with the same brush stroke". It's only because people have adopted the label illegitimately that it's not "black and white".

I'm addressing the definition, not the countless people who have wrongly called themselves atheists and the countless misinterpretations of the label.

The definition is "black and white". People aren't. I'm interested in the facts regarding the true definition.

ziddina

"Atheisism isn't a religion or a faith, it's just tag given to people who chose to not accept the notion of a God because there is no evidence for it. It's people of faith that have to bring them down to their level and label them in order to try to understand them. ..."

Oooo, Undercover comes thru, as usual!!!

Excellent points, Undercover!! You hit the nail on the head!!

Zid

Let's settle this for once and for all...... is atheism a belief, a non-belief or an anti-belief?

Share this