Humans! Simply human beings living THEIR life as they see fit.
Do we have to label everything?
Upvote
0
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 was reading the below article recently..
Infants and Uninformed Children are Atheists: Atheism is the Default Position; Theism Must Be Indoctrinated
The reason for reading this was because I realised 2 things recently: (1) the vast majority of people I know are not Christians, and (2) the vast majority of people that I know who are not Christians are also not atheists
What are they then?
I agree.
We're not discussing religion or religious behaviour.It's simply illustrative of the fact that atheists consider religion to be a human construct. We're not born religious, we're taught it.
You appear to have tangled yourself up in a double negative.
It would be nice to get some sort of consensus of what a God is, however there seems to be none. A way of testing whether it exists would be even better, but again there appears to be nothing that stands up to any kind of scrutiny. Even worse is that you are told not to test whether a God exists, but to just believe it.
So apparently the default position is atheism because they lack belief in God, but since they also lack belief in no god the default position is also theism.
No, because lacking a belief in no god isn't theism... is it. Theism is belief in a God. It requires a positive belief.
Not that all that has anything to do with the current discussion, but what kind of test would you be expecting? What kind of evidence would you be expecting to see?
No it isn't, lack of belief in no god, is a neutral position, just like lack of belief in God as you claim. If you lack belief in no God then you lack belief that there is no God. Default position and pretty self explanatory.
Would you describe a baby as an a-parentist, because it doesn't believe in parents?Paradoxum said:Atheism definitely is the default position. Fetus'/ Babies don't believe in anything at first.
You can apply a label to whatever you want, but they aren't really like things.tonybeer said:There is a difference between someone who has never heard a claim, and those that have heard a claim and felt it hasn't me the burden of proof. However, in both cases the person doesn't believe the claim, so is labelled as such.
An atheists is a person with a non-theist view.An Atheist is anyone who is not a Theist.
Would you describe a baby as an a-parentist, because it doesn't believe in parents?
A, there is a difference between age appropriate awareness and relationship, and being able to hold and articulate an abstract idea.
B, there is a difference between having thought about the question and saying "I don't believe...", and never having considered the question.
Atheists like to pretend all sorts of things are the default position by definition - when in fact they are manipulating the definitions to achieve it.
Because it's an artifact of applying a definition beyond its reasonable domain. It's a category error. Like saying cupboards don't like the taste of chocolate, or love isn't orange. Those are grammatically correct, but meaningless.Paradoxum said:I don't know what babies think about parents, but fetus' could be called a-parentist. They also don't believe in chairs, Santa, or Brahma. It doesn't matter if a question has been considered or not. If there isn't a belief in God, then that being is an atheist. They are not-theist, a-theist. Atheism is definitely the default position. Why do you disagree? Do you think fetus' or babies believe in China? They don't believe in God or China because they can't. That makes them atheists, because they don't believe in God.
Because it's an artifact of applying a definition beyond its reasonable domain. It's a category error. Like saying cupboards don't like the taste of chocolate, or love isn't orange. Those are grammatically correct, but meaningless.
FWIW, I think a newborn has a corresponding awareness of God equivalent to their awareness of mum. I wouldn't call either of those states belief or disbelief since they lack the characteristics necessary to meaningfully put them on that scale.
They don't do the abstraction I would hear implied in belief/not beliefBabies don't completely lack thought though.
I do, so why wouldn't a newborn.I don't have an awareness of God, so why would a newborn?
Intelligence doesn't reflect light, but I wouldn't call it black; that would be a category error.If babies lack a belief in God, then that makes them atheists.
They don't do the abstraction I would hear implied in belief/not belief
I do, so why wouldn't a newborn.
Intelligence doesn't reflect light, but I wouldn't call it black; that would be a category error.
It seems clear to me when the word is looked at closely it doesn't.Paradoxum said:I'm not sure they have to, for the word to apply.
That does not follow.Because that would seem to claim that an awareness of God is the natural state. That should mean that I feel it too.
We are just as capable of culturally training ourselves out of things as training ourselves into things.I don't feel it, so why think humans naturally have an awareness of God?
Belief is a level of abstraction. Newborn babies dont abstract.We understand what it would mean for a baby to have beliefs about God though. It's not an incomprehensible idea, like black intelligence. Maybe you're right... it just makes sense to me to talk about a conscious thinking being lacking a particular belief.
It seems clear to me when the word is looked at closely it doesn't.
That does not follow.
We are just as capable of culturally training ourselves out of things as training ourselves into things.
If the Christian God exists its reasonable to assume that a newborn has as much awareness of their creator as they do of their mother.
If God doesn't exist then obviously she wouldn't.
Belief is a level of abstraction. Newborn babies dont abstract.
That's a separate question.Paradoxum said:Okay. Well why don't I feel it? Can you ask God to make his awareness known to me?
Seeing colour is only obvious if you haven't been blinded.But are things we can so easily, and accidently, fall out of awareness of, real? Why isn't an awareness of God as obvious as seeing colour...
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?