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.
Ah, OK - I see. Have to say I consider myself a humanist too...It isn't .. but when I signed up to this website it was the closest approximation I could come up with which would lead to sign-up.
That the label isn't editable by the poster, is completely bizarre .. (and highly suspicious).
I understand. I think you need to find a better way of explaining your "problem" since most -ists are not belief based. I don't see how we can reasonably include artists, violinists, dentists, florists etc in any belief based grouping.What I was attempting to express (maybe not so well) is that the process of classification of people which assumes them as being motivated by any default, fixed beliefs (or disbeliefs), in modern times, is not reflective of the demonstrable human ability of altering motivations on a basis other than fixed beliefs. In fact, classifying people that way and denoting those 'classes' by using the '-ist' suffix, sets up the path towards nothing more than discrimination.
The purpose of discrimination on the basis of fixed beliefs is certainly not the purpose behind science's classification system, and so any attempts to imply equivalence between the two, should encounter serious objectively based evidence counter argument. (I think we might agree on this?)
I find acceptance of the term of 'atheist' tantamount to the acceptance of humans being nothing more than what they believe, with 'atheism' simply being denial of some other assumed, preferred belief (ie: 'theism'). I understand and accept some atheists try to distinguish atheism from that, by saying it represents an absence of belief, however, this still indulgences a conversation which centers around belief systems.
Any notion which sanctions or certifies any belief system, is where I choose to take my stand.
.. and the patience, honesty and care in handling other humans you exhibit could easily be interpreted as Christian virtues (as opposed to some rabid atheist) .. all of which is just a total load of nonsense and serves no purpose other than divisiveness (IMO).Ah, OK - I see. Have to say I consider myself a humanist too...
Point taken ... perhaps my generalisation can be taken as meaning things beyond what I'm actually trying to express then.I understand. I think you need to find a better way of explaining your "problem" since most -ists are not belief based. I don't see how we can reasonably include artists, violinists, dentists, florists etc in any belief based grouping.
I think that works. I cannot think of an -ism that isn't belief based.Point taken ... perhaps my generalisation can be taken as meaning things beyond what I'm actually trying to express then.
Interestingly, if one replaces the '-ist' with an '-ism', I think it may become clearer(?) and more akin to what I'm really on about, maybe(?)
(Hmm .. I'm content to quietly ponder the matter further ..)
I once had a CFs moderator offer to change my denomination tag when I tried explaining that Humanists didn't have to be taken as being atheists (which at the time, appeared to strip some preconception gears which were clearly in train). I declined, because there was no better means for me to disclose, publically, my position opposing all undistinguished beliefs.Well, they don't want people who previously declared themselves a non-believer relabeling a believer to get access to the Christians Only sections.
Since I left Christianity, I haven't tried to change my label. I thought that, when I was a believer, one could swap various Christian denominations at will. Therefore, I'm a little surprised that within the non-CO labels that we can't swap from, say, atheist to skeptic.
Ah, well.
I think that works. I cannot think of an -ism that isn't belief based.
I have thought of some non-belief -isms, but nowhere near as many as -ists. Examples would be embolism, magnetism, polyglottism. They're mostly scientific terms. Just goes to show (and this lines up nicely with @SelfSim point) how our words can carry a lot of unnecessary innuendo and semantic baggage.This is why I don't think there is any such thing as "atheism" as being atheist doesn't imply or require a philosophy or belief.
Atheist and Theist (and if you like to separate it Deist) are just broad catagories on the "do you believe in a god?" question.
I'm in two other "ist" groups that don't have an "ism": Scientist and Physicist. These categories don't require one to follow any kind of "Scientism" or "Physicism" (both of which the spell checker correctly mark as non-words). [There is a dumb notion labeled scientism, which isn't the philosophy behind science, and is mostly an accusation thrown at people.]
I have thought of some non-belief -isms, but nowhere near as many as -ists. Examples would be embolism, magnetism, polyglottism. They're mostly scientific terms. Just goes to show (and this lines up nicely with @SelfSim point) how our words can carry a lot of unnecessary innuendo and semantic baggage.
Yes; I may be frumious, but I'm certainly not rabid.. and the patience, honesty and care in handling other humans you exhibit could easily be interpreted as Christian virtues (as opposed to some rabid atheist) .. all of which is just a total load of nonsense and serves no purpose other than divisiveness (IMO).
Be aware - discussing forum moderation sometimes gets a slap-on-the-wrist response from the moderators - I think it's against the rules.I once had a CFs moderator offer to change my denomination tag when I tried explaining that Humanists didn't have to be taken as being atheists (which at the time, appeared to strip some preconception gears which were clearly in train). I declined, because there was no better means for me to disclose, publically, my position opposing all undistinguished beliefs.
Interestingly, (and perhaps unrelated), no moderator has subsequently ever responded to any posts I've made to them .. not a single one! I often wonder whether other CF atheists have ever perceived the same/similar treatment(?)
(There is certainly clear, and recent, hard evidence of one atheist poster being mistreated ..)
Then there's a missing 'feedback' forum on moderation!Be aware - discussing forum moderation sometimes gets a slap-on-the-wrist response from the moderators - I think it's against the rules.
You can suggest a new forum... good luck with that!Then there's a missing 'feedback' forum on moderation!
How can one provide feedback/suggestions on improvements, when there is evidence (and a growing perception) of being on a moderator 'ignore' list? Its a catch-22!
Deleted.This is why I don't think there is any such thing as "atheism" as being atheist doesn't imply or require a philosophy or belief.
Atheist and Theist (and if you like to separate it Deist) are just broad catagories on the "do you believe in a god?" question.
I'm in two other "ist" groups that don't have an "ism": Scientist and Physicist. These categories don't require one to follow any kind of "Scientism" or "Physicism" (both of which the spell checker correctly mark as non-words). [There is a dumb notion labeled scientism, which isn't the philosophy behind science, and is mostly an accusation thrown at people.]
Deleted.
If god appeared to me I would be an evolution accepting christian.Its not internal feelings or convictions, you wouldn't understand, like i said if God appeared to you would you be an evolution origin believing atheist? of course not, God has made himself known to me, and this is more important for me than anything else.
If god appeared to me I would be an evolution accepting christian.
It depends on your theology. Accepting that the process of evolution as scientists describe it is "enough" and fully compatible with God's authorship of our being is entirely satisfactory to most Christians. That applies to a fully naturalistic abiogenesis as well. To put it another way, no, you are not going to find God's greasy fingerprints on the works. He is above such things.There is a reason why theistic evolution exists, its because God making all things even through evolution is not compatible with 'standard' evolution. If it were scientists would discover that the process of evolution is not enough and there may be something else at play here.
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?