Atheism's Burden of Proof

Nihilist Virus · Dec 21, 2017

Red Economist said:
As a Christian pretending to be an Atheist?

Yep.

Shadow · Dec 21, 2017

Nihilist Virus said:
Yep.

I'm a Communist, (aka. Dialectical Materialist/Marxist-Leninist). But I guess you think that's the same as being a Christian regardless?

Nihilist Virus · Dec 21, 2017

Red Economist said:
I'm a Communist, (aka. Dialectical Materialist/Marxist-Leninist). But I guess you think that's the same as being a Christian regardless?

And I'm a lesbian male who self-identifies as a mop.

Shadow · Dec 21, 2017

Nihilist Virus said:
And I'm a lesbian male who self-identifies as a mop.

Ask a Communist?

Nihilist Virus · Dec 21, 2017

Red Economist said:
Ask a Communist?

Can't tell if you intend that as an invitation or as evidence. Not interested either way. I gave you the analogy of moral/immoral/amoral to show you why "lack of belief" atheists truly are atheists, and you chose to get defensive. You're wrong, and it's not up for debate - that's how definitions work. If you're truly here to learn and grow, then your response would have shown that.

Shadow · Dec 21, 2017

Nihilist Virus said:
You're wrong, and it's not up for debate

When you accuse someone of being "a Christian pretending to be an atheist and posting absurd things online for kicks" it gives me a very big incentive NOT to debate you because it means you have already decided anything I say cannot be trusted.

Radagast · Dec 21, 2017

Nihilist Virus said:
I asked him whether R is countable and he had no clue what I was even talking about.

Well, there are people who only believe in the constructive subset of R, which is indeed countable. However, my example of a logical tautology, (P => R & Q => R) => (P \/ Q => R), was carefully chosen so that even constructivists would agree on its truth.

Nihilist Virus said:
I ask because you're stating falsehoods.

Well, no, I'm not, actually. Which of the three statements did you think was false?

2 + 2 = 4
(P => R & Q => R) => (P \/ Q => R)
The truths of logic didn't suddenly become true when people appeared on the planet (in Penrose's words, “The natural numbers were there before there were human beings, or indeed any other creature here on earth, and they will remain after all life has perished. It has always been true that each natural number is the sum of four squares, and it did not have to wait for Lagrange to conjure this fact into existence.”)

Almost there · Dec 21, 2017

Nihilist Virus said:
What a despicable thing to say. Ignorant of basic definitions also.

I base it on the definitions. I've been arguing against both agnostics and atheists for almost 50 years, and the last 19 on the internet. I studied the actual dictionary definitions of the words as well as their common usage before really getting into it.

i.e. you are projecting.

Eight Foot Manchild · Dec 21, 2017

Almost there said:
I base it on the definitions. I've been arguing against both agnostics and atheists for almost 50 years

Then what's your excuse?

Almost there · Dec 21, 2017

Eight Foot Manchild said:
Then what's your excuse?

For what?

Eight Foot Manchild · Dec 21, 2017

Almost there said:
For what?

Spewing asinine garbage like this,

Almost there said:
There are very few real atheists in the world. You know them by their actions. Stalin, for one.

Almost there · Dec 21, 2017

Eight Foot Manchild said:
Spewing asinine garbage like this,

Opinions vary. Thanks so much for sharing yours!

Shadow · Dec 21, 2017

Almost there said:
I base it on the definitions. I've been arguing against both agnostics and atheists for almost 50 years, and the last 19 on the internet. I studied the actual dictionary definitions of the words as well as their common usage before really getting into it.

i.e. you are projecting.

Until Anthony Flew 1976 work "The Presumption of Atheism", lack of belief was not the definition of Atheism. It has only become more widely used in the 21st century (through the New Atheists). The rest of the history of atheism has operated under the definition of Atheism as the Denial of the existence of God (but there is a suggestion that by the late 19th century there was also a definition of atheism as "practical indifference to and disregard of God, godlessness." which is slightly broader.)

Antony Flew - Wikipedia
http://commonsenseatheism.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Flew-The-Presumption-of-Atheism.pdf
atheism | Origin and meaning of atheism by Online Etymology Dictionary
atheist | Origin and meaning of atheist by Online Etymology Dictionary
The Etymology of Atheism

Almost there · Dec 21, 2017

Red Economist said:
Until Anthony Flew 1976 work "The Presumption of Atheism", lack of belief was not the definition of Atheism. It has only become more widely used in the 21st century (through the New Atheists). The rest of the history of atheism has operated under the definition of Atheism as the Denial of the existence of God (but there is a suggestion that by the late 19th century there was also a definition of atheism as "practical indifference to and disregard of God, godlessness." which is slightly broader.)

Antony Flew - Wikipedia
http://commonsenseatheism.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Flew-The-Presumption-of-Atheism.pdf
atheism | Origin and meaning of atheism by Online Etymology Dictionary
atheist | Origin and meaning of atheist by Online Etymology Dictionary
The Etymology of Atheism

Exactly.
In a nut shell, atheists believe there is no God. Agnostics just aren't sure. I used to be an "intellectual agnostic". I wasn't sure, but I thought only dumb, lemming type people believed in a specific, ancient and mythical god.

Then I studied the subject.

Almost there · Dec 21, 2017

Red Economist said:
Until Anthony Flew 1976 work "The Presumption of Atheism", lack of belief was not the definition of Atheism. It has only become more widely used in the 21st century (through the New Atheists). The rest of the history of atheism has operated under the definition of Atheism as the Denial of the existence of God (but there is a suggestion that by the late 19th century there was also a definition of atheism as "practical indifference to and disregard of God, godlessness." which is slightly broader.)

Antony Flew - Wikipedia
http://commonsenseatheism.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Flew-The-Presumption-of-Atheism.pdf
atheism | Origin and meaning of atheism by Online Etymology Dictionary
atheist | Origin and meaning of atheist by Online Etymology Dictionary
The Etymology of Atheism

On a side note, I have been accused of being an idiot by a lot of young people on the internet regarding the definition of the word, Fascism. This, again, is something I've studied for a long time. Actually, since the late 60's. And then I saw a youtube video about the word being redefined on the internet. Sure enough, when you look up fascism on a lot of modern internet dictionaries, they've not just changed the definition, but included words like "right wing" in the definition, utterly destroying their credibility. The reason is that "right wing" is a VERY subjective term and varies from country to country.

Oh, and then he shows the definition from a "pre-internet" dictionary. It matches the one I use all the time. And, truth be told, there are a lot of facets to the meaning of the word.

A lot of kids today have acquired an odd form of what I call "arrogant ignorance."

ToddNotTodd · Dec 21, 2017

Almost there said:
Exactly.
In a nut shell, atheists believe there is no God. Agnostics just aren't sure.

In a nutshell, you're incorrect. That's not how the terms are always used today.

I'm an atheist because I haven't believed any god propositions put forth to me. It doesn't mean that I would say "No gods exist."

I'm an agnostic because I don't know for sure if any gods exist.

I do believe that gnostic atheists have a burden of proof however...

Almost there · Dec 21, 2017

ToddNotTodd said:
In a nutshell, you're incorrect. That's not how the terms are always used today.

I'm an atheist because I haven't believed any god propositions put forth to me. It doesn't mean that I would say "No gods exist."

I'm an agnostic because I don't know for sure if any gods exist.

I do believe that gnostic atheists have a burden of proof however...

You are an agnostic. You can't be an atheist AND an agnostic - at least regarding a single subject. They are mutually exclusive.

Then again, maybe Orwell was right...

Here are a couple of useful definitions, and they are even from the internet:

Definition of agnostic
1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (such as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

Definition of atheist
: a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods : one who subscribes to or advocates atheism

ToddNotTodd · Dec 21, 2017

Almost there said:
You are an agnostic. You can't be an atheist AND an agnostic - at least regarding a single subject. They are mutually exclusive.

Then again, maybe Orwell was right...

Here are a couple of useful definitions, and they are even from the internet:

Definition of agnostic
1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (such as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

Definition of atheist
: a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods : one who subscribes to or advocates atheism

Your examples prove my point, not yours. Knowledge is a subset of belief, not two sides of a coin.

Almost there · Dec 21, 2017

ToddNotTodd said:
Your examples prove my point, not yours. Knowledge is a subset of belief, not two sides of a coin.

I think they prove my point. That is why I posted them. I think we're probably just having a communication challenge here.

BTW, knowledge is not belief. Knowledge is like a foundation, and belief is like the house sitting on the foundation.

Shadow · Dec 21, 2017

Almost there said:
A lot of kids today have acquired an odd form of what I call "arrogant ignorance."

Yeah. I was a little bit like that but thankfully I've slowly grown out of it. I still walk around with some absolutist ideas that "I know X" but I want to go beyond that. "arrogant ignorance" is the ability to have absolute conviction in your own intellectual capacity whilst having little or no knowledge about a subject. Its at least anti-social because people simply feel "entitled" to ready-made answers as if many questions were easy to answer. To be at the other end of it feels like you are being abused because it can get so aggressive. It also usually wrong because it typically has little ability to process nuance or subtitles, so it ends up in black-and-white thinking.

Almost there said:
Then I studied the subject.

Lol. That's how it is isn't it? Even when we aren't completely wrong, everything we think we know can be improved upon.

Atheism's Burden of Proof

Infectious idea

Well-Known Member

Infectious idea

Well-Known Member

Infectious idea

Well-Known Member

comes and goes

Well-Known Member

His Supreme Holy Correctfulness

Well-Known Member

His Supreme Holy Correctfulness

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Iconoclast

Well-Known Member

Iconoclast

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency