Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I would say there is no in between if we are talking about belief. You either believe something or you don't. Agnosticism is besides what you believe or don't. It answers a different question than "What do you believe?"Then what would be in between?I see your point, but i don't agree entirely.
I would say there is no in between if we are talking about belief. You either believe something or you don't. Agnosticism is besides what you believe or don't. It answers a different question than "What do you believe?"
I would say there is no in between if we are talking about belief. You either believe something or you don't. Agnosticism is besides what you believe or don't. It answers a different question than "What do you believe?"
Ok, I admit that the title is a bit of a "click bate" for both ends, but here it goes.
Browsing through some popular threads here, it seems like there's a general confusion as to what Atheism really is, and how that label tends to take on a "form" that shouldn't be ascribed to Atheism.
First of all, it should be noted that labels like Christian, Atheist, Republican, Democrat tend to be more pragmatic than carry some full scope of ontology of reality that these labels supposed to describe. These are very different from a more precise labels like "human", etc.
Thus, it's very easy to get lost in arguments against your own perception of the label as to what that label means to a person who takes it on as a description. In such, I'm not sure whether such labels are useful as shortcuts, or these create problematic perception.
We generally use them, because we are either "lazy" to repeat a list of what we believe, or because we find solace in some form of "righteous identity".
But, in short time I've spent on this forum, I've already had to clarify several times that "Atheism" is not a charge that God doesn't exist, at least it's not necessarily the case. In scope of our human experience, it tends to be a default position of not knowing and not believing.
From there we can progress into:
1) Staying in the default - not knowing and not believing that a God exists
2) Not knowing and believing that God exists
3) Claiming to know and by extension believing that God exists
4) Claiming to know and by extension not believing that God exists
So, there are a variety of positions. Some refuse to believe without evidence. Some believe without evidence.
But generally, #1 is labeled as "Agnosticism" and not Atheism, and here where confusion lies. Agnosticism is merely a claim of lack of knowledge through some form of experience or evidence. Both Atheists and theists have an overlap of not knowing.
IMO, the more general form of Atheism is anyone's default position of #1 - not knowing and not believing by extension. There are people who attempt to convince people both successfully and unsuccessfully to shift to a position of believe, but if they do shift to theism based on claims alone... that would make them Agnostic Theists.
The reason why I'm writing this is primarily because a lot of Christians associate Atheism as being closed to possibility of God, and view atheists on this board as trolls. That can be the case, but generally not IMO. There are cynics on either side of the spectrum and it's not inherent to either Christians or theists. I think people like myself are interested following up with whatever innovative evidence there may be for existence of supernatural and God, and such evidence and line of reasoning can come from individuals.
I hope that all of us would be interested to know if we indeed mistaking. I hope that would be true for either side of this issue. But, I don't think it's helpful to assume what a person believes or doesn't solely based on a one word label.
There are also naturalists, who believe the universe is all there is, all there has been (albeit concentrated in a point in nothingness to start with)
Is atheism a truth claim?
If no, then there is no truth to be found in atheism.
Correct, but that doesn't mean that there isn't truth to be found in atheistic worldviews.
Main question to consider:
Is atheism a truth claim?
If no, then there is no truth to be found in atheism.
If yes, then why is atheism true?
No, atheism isn't a claim. It's a default position. Default positions can be true or false, but we don't merely jump to conclusions. We generally ask for some evidence for extraordinary claims prior to making a decisions as to whether we believe these or not.
Neither theism or atheism are truth claims in themselves, they're just differing positions on belief in a god or gods. Declarations or statements of theism or atheism are truth statements about belief in a god or gods. They are true or false to the extent that the individual does or does not believe as they claim.Sure, but the truth one finds in an atheistic worldview did not come from atheism because there is no truth in atheism, since it's not a truth claim.
The only way to avoid this conclusion is to say atheism is a truth claim, but we know it's not.
Neither theism or atheism are truth claims in themselves, they're just differing positions on belief in a god or gods. Declarations or statements of theism or atheism are truth statements about belief in a god or gods.
They are true or false to the extent that the individual does or does not believe as they claim.
Theism is the belief that God and or gods exist. It's a truth claim. We're claiming that it's true that God exists and that He is the greatest being in every way. Atheism is against that truth claim, meaning atheists either believe God does not exist or they actually don't know.
Noooooo...
"I believe a god exists." or "I do not believe a god exists." are not truth claims about a god's existence. They are only true or false in the sense that the person speaking could be lying about their beliefs.
"A god exists." or "A god does not exist." are truth claims about a god's existence.
In order for atheism to be default, you'd first have to know about theism. IOW, you can't be atheist if you don't know what theism is. Knowledge of theism must come before atheism, therefore atheism is not default.
No. It's default in respect of our perception of reality. For example a-Zeusims is a default position in respect to belief about Zeus. I don't need to be aware of that particular religion in order to have a default lack of belief in it.
You have to understand the difference between non-belief and unbelief. A in Atheist stands for "non". Anti would signify opposite, and that's not what atheism is. Atheism is not opposite of theism.
I'll give you an example. We walk and find a gumball machine. You say "I believe that there are more red gumballs than green ones". I'd say, I don't really believe that, because I don't see any evidence for that claim, and I don't see how you can know that without taking the machine apart and counting.
Then you say "So, you believe there are more green ones then?". Again, NO. It's not a claim I'm going to make conclusively without some evidence pointing in either direction. Thus, I lack belief that you are correct, because you haven't demonstrated it. But it doesn't mean that I automatically believe the opposite of your claim.
Lol, nice try.
No. And I'm not getting on this particular merry-go-round again.Theism is the belief that God and or gods exist. It's a truth claim. We're claiming that it's true that God exists and that He is the greatest being in every way. Atheism is against that truth claim, meaning atheists either believe God does not exist or they actually don't know.
Huh? that's 'hard' agnosticism; what on Earth has that to do with me saying that statements of belief are true or false according to the actual belief of the individual??So your belief is that there is no truth that can be known regarding the existence of God?
I do understand the difference and I understand atheism is not a truth claim, which means there is no truth in atheism.
Sure, I could believe there are more red gumballs than green ones and tell you that's what I believe, but if we come to find out there are actually more green than red, then I'd better admit I was wrong and accept the truth.
However, it's not wise to believe something without reason. In this example, I would have reason to claim to believe there are more red than green because it appears that there actually is more red than green, otherwise I'd claim to not know for sure until I count them myself.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?