by EdenOne 284 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Just a brief note: It may have to do with definitions of the website, but in my computer and also on Ipad, this thread has now 23 pages. It appears that, to others, the page count is different. When I gave references to pages, I din't take into account that others might have a different count than mine, I apologize if that's the case.
Eden
Obviously this contribution is hearsay but, I know quite a few atheists;
I think all are comfortable with the label atheist... as am I. Would other self professed atheists agree with this set of statements?
I agree. But that wasn't my point. The use of "absent", as I've demonstrated by using a respected dictionary (and yet Cofty and others dare to claim they know better that Marriam-Webster) can adequately describe a state of non-presence
But you gave a definition for god that DOES presuppose existence when I asked. You also didn't tell me how I would know how to objectively determine whether or not we could tell if he was here.
However, I said that if someone had a better term to positively describe a state of not being present, without presuming existence or non-existence, I was listening.
There is 1) no evidence that deity or deities exist and 2) even if they do, that we have any measurable way to objectively determine the status of their presence in the universe. This position shall be called "makes-sense-ithsm".
Seriously, that took me like, one minute.
But ain't it funny how people demand definitions? Well, that's the place where they can be found. One can't demand definitions from an authority and then refuse said definition from said authority because it doesn't fit your model.
Sure you can, particularly when the definitions given have a ton of nuance not taken into account that don't accurately convey what is being discussed. That's why you often see people say things like "for purposes of this discussion, we are using the specific definition of 'x' to mean 'abc123'"
This is because, as MASH suggested, I use the label atheist to mean I live my life as if no deity exists. I can't know whether or not there is no deity, of course, but since I have no evidence that any exists, certainly not any that anyone has told me about, I live functionally as an atheist and indeed consider myself one. I simply lack the belief.
That is the type of subtle nuance not conveyed by MW dictionary with two short lines.
Viviane: I can't know whether or not there is no deity, of course, but since I have no evidence that any exists, certainly not any that anyone has told me about, I live functionally as an atheist and indeed consider myself one.
This appears to be a sensible reasoning. But let me ask you this: A child of one year old who holds no belief that deities exist. Is that child atheist? Because according to the simplistic definition that "atheism is a disbelief in deities", a child is atheist. And so is a person who has a severe mental handicap from birth. They don't believe in deities, ergo, are they atheists? It's not so simple. There must be something more to atheism than simply disbelief in deities.
My proposition is that there is a fourth stand: That the only thing that can be said about deities is that they are absent, not present, from the known universe, thus leaving the questions of belief or disbelief, existence or non-existence, entirely open. This I coined absentheism but feel free to call it anything else if you come up with a more suitable term.
All of the above are theoretical positions.
However, you introduced another concept: functional atheist. That is, regardless of how your intellectual position towards deities is, your attitude in life is consistent with a belief that deities don't exist. This functional atheism is very much on the same domain of attitude of an apatheist, who "regards the question of the existence or non-existence of a god or gods to be essentially meaningless and irrelevant".
Eden
This appears to be a sensible reasoning. But let me ask you this: A child of one year old who holds no belief that deities exist. Is that child atheist?
Yes, that child lacks a belief in any deity.
Because according to the simplistic definition that "atheism is a disbelief in deities", a child is atheist.
According to one dictionary that's one of many. Another is simply a lack of belief in deities, spirits, etc. They imply and mean different things.
It's not so simple. There must be something more to atheism than simply disbelief in deities.
There is, and you have been told that many times.
- I posit that the overtly rejection of deities on the premise that they don't exist should be called atheism.
- I posit that the disbelief in deities based on lack of objective evidence for their existence is skepticism.
- I posit that the inability to believe or disbelieve in deities based on the premise that they are unknowable isagnosticism.
Well, for starters, all of those things do mean that, but also more than and they all can mean variations on that. You are also missing a lot of similar but subtle variations on belief in deities or the spirit world. That's why, as I said previously, you often see people define the specific thing they are talking about when a word can have various meanings.
My proposition is that there is a fourth stand: That the only thing that can be said about deities is that they are absent, not present, from the known universe, thus leaving the questions of belief or disbelief, existence or non-existence, entirely open. This I coined absentheism but feel free to call it anything else if you come up with a more suitable term.
Define what you mean by absent, please, and how we know they aren't here. If a student is absent from class, that pre-supposes the student exists. If an item is absent from a drawer, say a fork, that supposes the fork exists. Your position isn't clear. Are you saying deities exist but removed from us? That's already a position that is defined. Are you saying they don't exist? Already defined. Are you saying it's unknowable? Already defined.
Your position is very muddy in that it's not at all clear what you are trying to say. How do we know they are absent unless someone defines the specific properties of a deity so we know to look for it? What gap in positions is absenteism filling?
However, you introduced another concept: functional atheist. That is, regardless of how your intellectual position towards deities is, your attitude in life is consistent with a belief that deities don't exist. This functional atheism is very much on the same domain of attitude of an apatheist, who "regards the question of the existence or non-existence of a god or gods to be essentially meaningless and irrelevant".
Apathy implies that I don't care. That's not my position at all.
I consider myself an agnostic, sceptical atheist. As I mentioned previously... I
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". I would say that well known expression is a big deal breaker for your new term.
Viviane,
I think I defined that more than a few times on this thread, but here is again: I take 'absent' in the simplest and most rational of its meanings: not present. It may include "exists, but not there", also "not paying attention/not caring", "existed in the past, now dead", or "non-existent". To say "absent" is to stop short of making any considerations about the existence of God, for the lack of evidence, while at the same time allowing for the possibility of any of them. If one day it would be possible to scan the entire universe in its entirety with all its dimensions and God could not be found, only then, beyond reasonable doubt, one could say "God/deities don't exist".
However, you have posed a question:
How do we know they are absent unless someone defines the specific properties of a deity so we know to look for it?
That's exactly the problem that absentheism attempts to address: Atheism assumes a certain kind of deity - invisible, all-powerful, all-knowing, omnipresent, entirely good and then debunks the notion that a deity like that may exist. But there are two problems with this, to wit:
MASH
That axiom is also problematic for atheism, and is often used by theists.
Eden
