Sorcerer Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Atheism 1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God. 2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings. Agnosticism 1. the doctrine or belief of an agnostic. 2. an intellectual doctrine or attitude affirming the uncertainty of all claims to ultimate knowledge. Theism 1. the belief in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation ( distinguished from deism). 2. belief in the existence of a god or gods ( opposed to atheism). Ok, starter topic I'll come back and edit key points later. Right now I'd like to invite people to discuss. iNOW? agnostic theists, agnostic atheists? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Atheism 1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God. 2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings. Agnosticism 1. the doctrine or belief of an agnostic. 2. an intellectual doctrine or attitude affirming the uncertainty of all claims to ultimate knowledge. Theism 1. the belief in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation ( distinguished from deism). 2. belief in the existence of a god or gods ( opposed to atheism). Ok, starter topic I'll come back and edit key points later. Right now I'd like to invite people to discuss. iNOW? agnostic theists, agnostic atheists? I'm in Ignostic Agnostic Weak Atheist. Now, let's break that down a bit. Atheism is an umbrella term that encompasses a gradient of positions. Atheism is just a response to theism. Theists say "One or more deities exist". And atheism is just people saying "I don't believe you." This can take on varying degrees of forcefulness(ranging from Weak Atheism: "I don't believe deities exist" to Strong Atheism:"I believe that no deities exist.") Weak Atheism(the core of atheism) obviously requires no faith and as such is often blatantly ignored by theists. Strong Atheism, on the other hand, requires just as much faith as theism. All that defines an atheist is that they do not answer "yes" when asked "Do you believe in the existence of one or more deities?". "Agnostic" is a term that is misused as nausium. I suspect that it is mostly due to the social stigma(which is thankfully somewhat receding) of the term Atheist. Agnostic is a modifier of the terms Theist and Atheist, and as such cannot stand on it's own. You either believe in the existence of one or more deities, or you don't; there is no middle ground. Atheism and Theism are the only options. Agnosticism is merely one flavour of the choices. "Agnostic" merely means that one believe that one cannot know whether or not deities exist. Thus, one can be an Agnostic Theist(believe one or more deities exist, but it is impossible to know for a fact that this is the truth) or one can be an Agnostic Atheist(lack a belief in deities, but also believe it is impossible to know whether or not deities exist), but one cannot JUST be an Agnostic. There is no middle ground between belief and disbelief; you either believe or you lack belief. Much of the previous, for me at least, hinges on the Ignostic part. Ignosticism basically means that the question of whether or not deities exist is irrelevant until we can come to an agreement on a coherent concept of what a deity is. How can I know if something exists if I don't know what it is supposed to be? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I'm in Ignostic Agnostic Weak Atheist. Now, let's break that down a bit. Atheism is an umbrella term that encompasses a gradient of positions. Atheism is just a response to theism. Theists say "One or more deities exist". And atheism is just people saying "I don't believe you." This can take on varying degrees of forcefulness(ranging from Weak Atheism: "I don't believe deities exist" to Strong Atheism:"I believe that no deities exist.") Weak Atheism(the core of atheism) obviously requires no faith and as such is often blatantly ignored by theists. Strong Atheism, on the other hand, requires just as much faith as theism. All that defines an atheist is that they do not answer "yes" when asked "Do you believe in the existence of one or more deities?". "Agnostic" is a term that is misused as nausium. I suspect that it is mostly due to the social stigma(which is thankfully somewhat receding) of the term Atheist. Agnostic is a modifier of the terms Theist and Atheist, and as such cannot stand on it's own. You either believe in the existence of one or more deities, or you don't; there is no middle ground. Atheism and Theism are the only options. Agnosticism is merely one flavour of the choices. "Agnostic" merely means that one believe that one cannot know whether or not deities exist. Thus, one can be an Agnostic Theist(believe one or more deities exist, but it is impossible to know for a fact that this is the truth) or one can be an Agnostic Atheist(lack a belief in deities, but also believe it is impossible to know whether or not deities exist), but one cannot JUST be an Agnostic. There is no middle ground between belief and disbelief; you either believe or you lack belief. Much of the previous, for me at least, hinges on the Ignostic part. Ignosticism basically means that the question of whether or not deities exist is irrelevant until we can come to an agreement on a coherent concept of what a deity is. How can I know if something exists if I don't know what it is supposed to be? I am a weak atheist. Your last paragraph is most interesting, but I have issues with the second. I think you are being too strict in the binary on/off nature of belief. Many people will struggle to articulate or even internally understand what their own belief systems are and the credence they put in that system; very few human non-concrete concepts exist in simple binary opposition, any individuals position is on a spectrum. People can and do say that they do not know whether they believe in a deity, others will in certain circumstances and not in others (with rapid, frequent, and non-predictable vacillation), many claim to believe and act with scant regard for the tenets of their professed belief system, and so on... On the ignostic bit - academically I think you are probably correct - but Í think it is possible to say that of the definitions I have so far encountered for god, I have been able to easily sort them into two sets; stuff I do not believe in (white gown, beard, sitting on a throne up marble stairs from pearly gates etc), and stuff that I think I have a reasonably tenable physical explanation for (seemingly strange coincidences), and further that I do not envisage and cannot imagine a situation in the future when I will not be able (personally) to make that differentiation. That is to say, the fact that no agreed definition exists (can exist) does not preclude me from not believing in any of those partial definitions proposed so far and assuming that I can and will continue in that state of affairs Stanford Encyclopedia has a pretty wishy-washy page on this matter - but it is a nice read http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/#5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorcerer Posted January 13, 2012 Author Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) I'm in Ignostic Agnostic Weak Atheist. Now, let's break that down a bit. but one cannot JUST be an Agnostic. There is no middle ground between belief and disbelief; you either believe or you lack belief. Much of the previous, for me at least, hinges on the Ignostic part. Ignosticism basically means that the question of whether or not deities exist is irrelevant until we can come to an agreement on a coherent concept of what a deity is. How can I know if something exists if I don't know what it is supposed to be? Well I consider myself an agnostic ignostic then, theism or atheism doesn't play a part. Actually when I look around and see the wonder of things, I could beleive there was a god. But I know wether or not, I'm just guessing. I beleive that the possibility of a god or not is equal, since theres not enough information to determine, or even define a god, then I cannot answer yes or no. Edited January 13, 2012 by Sorcerer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doG Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 I'm in Ignostic Agnostic Weak Atheist. Same here, same reasons. Well I consider myself an agnostic ignostic then, theism or atheism doesn't play a part. Actually when I look around and see the wonder of things, I could beleive there was a god. But I know wether or not, I'm just guessing. I beleive that the possibility of a god or not is equal, since theres not enough information to determine, or even define a god, then I cannot answer yes or no. You're atheist. Either you have an affirmative belief that there is/are one or more gods or you are atheist, period. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Same here, same reasons. You're atheist. Either you have an affirmative belief that there is/are one or more gods or you are atheist, period. So, you accept that an objective and universally agreeable definition of god is not possible - but are willing to assert that an objective and binary decision process exists for determining belief? and even more so the belief in a complex and ethereal being The use of atheism in this thread is also the most inclusive - many definitions would have atheism as a repudiation of the belief in a deity and the taking position set against belief in a deity, which is no where near the same as your implied definition of an almost mechanical determination of belief. Using this widest definition of atheism and an insistence that belief is determinable - then, of course, you are correct; but those two items are far from universally agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doG Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 So, you accept that an objective and universally agreeable definition of god is not possible - but are willing to assert that an objective and binary decision process exists for determining belief? and even more so the belief in a complex and ethereal being The use of atheism in this thread is also the most inclusive - many definitions would have atheism as a repudiation of the belief in a deity and the taking position set against belief in a deity, which is no where near the same as your implied definition of an almost mechanical determination of belief. Using this widest definition of atheism and an insistence that belief is determinable - then, of course, you are correct; but those two items are far from universally agreed. I simply see the term atheist to mean not-theist. Theism is simply defined as one who believes in the existence of a god or gods, by a consensus of definition or not. Any lack of belief therefore makes one not-theist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 I simply see the term atheist to mean not-theist. Theism is simply defined as one who believes in the existence of a god or gods, by a consensus of definition or not. Any lack of belief therefore makes one not-theist. That's probably because that's what the word means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) That's probably because that's what the word means. It is a particular definition that suits your argument Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[2][3] Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.[3][4] Atheism is contrasted with theism,[5][6] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.[6][7]... Wikipedia 'Atheism' means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God.... Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy The term "atheist" describes a person who does not believe that God or a divine being exists. ... 1. What is Atheism? Atheism is the view that there is no God. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy Atheism is that system of thought which is formally opposed to theism. Since its first coming into use the term atheism has been very vaguely employed, generally as an epithet of accusation against any system that called in question the popular gods of the day. Thus while Socrates was accused of atheism (Plato, Apol., 26, c.) and Diagoras called an atheist by Cicero (Nat. Deor., I, 23), Democritus and Epicurus were styled in the same sense impious (without respect for the gods) on account of their trend of their new atomistic philosophy. In this sense too, the early Christians were known to the pagans as atheists, because they denied the heathen gods; while, from time to time, various religious and philisophical systems have, for similar reasons, been deemed atheistic. Catholic Encylcopedia Atheism is the absence of belief in the existence of any gods. Indeed, the word stems from the Greek a- meaning "without", and theos meaning "god". Theos includes the Abrahamic YHWH(s), Zeus, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and every other deity from A to Z[2] (and 0-9, !, ", £, $ or any other character, obviously). For the definition of atheism, the terms "God" and "a god" are used interchangeably as there is no difference between a monotheistic deity and a pantheon of polytheistic deities when it comes to complete disbelief in them. This also has the deliberate intent of ignoring the privileged position Yahweh has held in English grammar. Most atheists also do not believe in anything supernatural or paranormal. Rational Wiki I do not see an agreement upon the simple and conclusive definition you and doG are insisting upon - whilst the belief in a god certainly precludes one from being an atheist it is by no means clear what the requirements are for being an atheist Edited January 13, 2012 by imatfaal 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doG Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) It is a particular definition that suits your argument Wikipedia Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy Catholic Encylcopedia Rational Wiki I do not see an agreement upon the simple and conclusive definition you and doG are insisting upon - whilst the belief in a god certainly precludes one from being an atheist it is by no means clear what the requirements are for being an atheist atheist is to theist as asynchronous is to synchronous. The 'a' is simply a 'not' modifier. Edited January 13, 2012 by doG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 atheist is to theist as asynchronous is to synchronous. The 'a' is simply a 'not' modifier. It would be very useful if we could claim a strict definition of a word from the derivation - however hundreds of years of usage and abusage means that this cannot be presumed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekan Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 These abstract nouns are so confusing! Do they mean something like this: 1. Atheism : I definitely don't believe in a God. 2. Agnosticism: I'm not sure whether there's a God, we'll never know. 3. Theism: I feel there ought to be a God. Does that sum it up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Do they mean something like this: 1. Atheism : I definitely don't believe in a God. 2. Agnosticism: I'm not sure whether there's a God, we'll never know. 3. Theism: I feel there ought to be a God. Does that sum it up? No, as already noted repeatedly above, and many times elsewhere, that is not accurate. Theism - Belief in one or more deities. Atheism - Does not believe in one or more deities. Agnosticism - Does not feel the truth is knowable, BUT still falls on one side of the equation and either believes in one or more deities or does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekan Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 No, as already noted repeatedly above, and many times elsewhere, that is not accurate. Theism - Belief in one or more deities. Atheism - Does not believe in one or more deities. Agnosticism - Does not feel the truth is knowable, BUT still falls on one side of the equation and either believes in one or more deities or does not. Thanks - I'm still a bit confused though! To go back to the original Greek abstract nouns: Atheism means - No-Godness. That seems a firm stance. Agnostic means - No-Knowledge, ie an undecided "Don't Know". (I don't quite follow your point about the equation). Theism means - I'm not sure what - sort of "Godism"? That's to say, an idea there must be some God/Gods? Doesn't this whole argument get confused by one thing. The meaning of those slippery abstract nouns. Suppose we replaced them by concrete statements like "I believe in God", "I don't believe in God", "I don't know whether to believe in God or not". Then we'd all be thinking clearly. Abstract nouns are the theologians' delight. Such nouns can obfuscate, and hide shallowness of thought. Which probably helps Religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) I think where you're confused is here. You seem to think that atheism is the active belief that there are no gods. That's actually rather rare. Most atheists don't "actively believe" that there "is NO god!" Most simply don't find any good reason to accept that a god or gods exist... so choose not to believe in it. I don't "actively believe" that the tooth fairy DOES NOT EXIST! I merely don't find any good reason to think she actually does. I don't "actively believe" that the easter bunny DOES NOT EXIST! I merely don't find any good reason to think it actually does. Likewise... I don't "actively believe" that "god(s) DOES NOT EXIST!" I merely don't find any good reason to think it does. You seem to think all atheists "actively believe" that "THERE IS NO GOD!!!!1!!1!!!2!!!one!!fudge!!1!" ...and I think that may be part of the confusion. Edited January 13, 2012 by iNow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doG Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 It would be very useful if we could claim a strict definition of a word from the derivation - however hundreds of years of usage and abusage means that this cannot be presumed. Abuse of a term doesn't change what it means. Like at how much the term 'agnostic' has been abused by fence sitting atheists that simply don't want to admit they're atheist. Atheist literally means not-theist, nothing more, nothing less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorcerer Posted January 14, 2012 Author Share Posted January 14, 2012 (edited) Hmm could somebody please put the argument, where all those who are not theists are atheists down in standard form for me please. I believe you will find some interesting results if you interchange atheist and theist, and change beleif for disbelief. E.g. you will find all those who aren't atheists are theists. Since both arguments are both valid, and I don't believe or disbelieve in a god, one agument says I'm theist, the other says I'm atheist. To me it seems some people want a dichotomous definition and aren't happy with the straight forward ones given below: Atheism - 1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God. <------- not me Theism - 2. belief in the existence of a god or gods ( opposed to atheism). <------ not me Agnosticism - 1. the doctrine or belief of an agnostic*. <---- Me *A person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/agnostic) Abuse of a term doesn't change what it means. Like at how much the term 'agnostic' has been abused by fence sitting atheists that simply don't want to admit they're atheist. Atheist literally means not-theist, nothing more, nothing less. You should tell dictionary.com And I think you'll find fence sitting isn't a bad thing. If your trying to prove a hypothesis and you're not fence sitting, then you are biasing your results. I think where you're confused is here. You seem to think that atheism is the active belief that there are no gods. That's actually rather rare. Most atheists don't "actively believe" that there "is NO god!" Most simply don't find any good reason to accept that a god or gods exist... so choose not to believe in it. I don't "actively believe" that the tooth fairy DOES NOT EXIST! I merely don't find any good reason to think she actually does. I don't "actively believe" that the easter bunny DOES NOT EXIST! I merely don't find any good reason to think it actually does. Likewise... I don't "actively believe" that "god(s) DOES NOT EXIST!" I merely don't find any good reason to think it does. You seem to think all atheists "actively believe" that "THERE IS NO GOD!!!!1!!1!!!2!!!one!!fudge!!1!" ...and I think that may be part of the confusion. Yes iNow that is my definition of atheism. I can say, and you can quote me on this, "I do not believe that the tooth fairy exists." To me it sounds like you're saying that you are agnostic ignostic about the tooth fairy. But I mean what is your definition of a tooth fairy? I mean as soon as a definition or, part of one is formed. -The tooth fairy removes teeth from under pillows - you can test it. And you'll find out the tooth fairy is just your parents. Edited January 14, 2012 by Sorcerer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 I don't believe or disbelieve in a god And since you don't believe in god, you are not theist... or, atheist. I can say, and you can quote me on this, "I do not believe that the tooth fairy exists." Which is not equivalent to saying, "I believe that the tooth fairy does not exist." The tooth fairy example was merely an attempt to dumb this down enough so people stop missing such an easy point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doG Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Atheism - 1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God. <------- not me... You should tell dictionary.com... From dictionary.com: a·the·ist [ey-thee-ist] Show IPA noun a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings. Only a disbelief in deities is required to be atheist, not an affirmative belief that deities do not exist. If you lack the belief that they do and still concede the possibility that they may you are atheist by definition. You are either theist or not-theist, i.e. atheist. Fence sitters are atheist even if they don't want to admit it. BTW, I'll leave it to you to question dictionary.com, your own reference, since they contradict YOUR definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorcerer Posted January 16, 2012 Author Share Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) Ok I think I have this sorted, the problem here is the question. Do you believe in god? It is a problem because of the word "believe", my belief is intimately tied with my knowledge, and as an agnostic, I do not have that knowledge. And thus I cannot even begin to answer the question. Also I call any belief which is not based on knowledge, fantasy. ____________________ A more appropriate question would be, "Does god exist?" In this case I would (as agnostic) answer "I don't know". An atheist would answer "no", and a theist would answer "yes". ____________________ So yes, I see your points, it all comes down to belief in god, since I don't have a belief in god (because I can't answer the question, "yes", or in anyway at all) I am an atheist. I think though it is important to remember that belief is independant of truth, and whether someone believes in something or not doesn't change its reality of existence. "If we all (dis)believe it hard enough, it doesn't mean it's true." Edited January 16, 2012 by Sorcerer 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 A more appropriate question would be, "Does god exist?" I think case I would (as agnostic) answer "I don't know". An atheist would answer "no", and a theist would answer "yes". ____________________ So yes, I see your points Sorry, but no. You're still not getting it. I'm an atheist, and I don't know if god exists. I don't answer, "No." I have no way of knowing that. I just don't think there's any good reason to think one does. That doesn't mean I assert that one DOES NOT exist. Why are you so confused about this? I think it's a relatively simply point, and it's one that has been explained to you numerous times by numerous people in numerous different ways now. Atheism is an umbrella term that encompasses a gradient of positions. Atheism is just a response to theism. Theists say "One or more deities exist". And atheism is just people saying "I don't believe you." Either you have an affirmative belief that there is/are one or more gods or you are atheist, period. I simply see the term atheist to mean not-theist. Theism is simply defined as one who believes in the existence of a god or gods, by a consensus of definition or not. Any lack of belief therefore makes one not-theist. Theism - Belief in one or more deities. Atheism - Does not believe in one or more deities. Agnosticism - Does not feel the truth is knowable, BUT still falls on one side of the equation and either believes in one or more deities or does not. I think where you're confused is here. You seem to think that atheism is the active belief that there are no gods. That's actually rather rare. Most atheists don't "actively believe" that there "is NO god!" Most simply don't find any good reason to accept that a god or gods exist... so choose not to believe in it. Only a disbelief in deities is required to be atheist, not an affirmative belief that deities do not exist. If you lack the belief that they do and still concede the possibility that they may you are atheist by definition. You are either theist or not-theist, i.e. atheist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorcerer Posted January 16, 2012 Author Share Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) Did you just decide to ignore this: "So yes, I see your points, it all comes down to belief in god, since I don't have a belief in god (because I can't answer the question, "yes", or in anyway at all) I am an atheist." So you could argue with me some more? "It is a problem because of the word "believe", my belief is intimately tied with my knowledge, and as an agnostic, I do not have that knowledge. And thus I cannot even begin to answer the question. Also I call any belief which is not based on knowledge, fantasy." Tell me iNow, would you consider me a theist if I fantasized that god existed? Edited January 16, 2012 by Sorcerer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekan Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Physicists have no definite knowledge that the Higgs particle exists. They only think it should exist. Because if it does, it can explain a lot of things about the Universe. And, working along similar lines, theologians think that God should exist. For the same reason. Aren't both professions engaging in constructive fantasy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
immortal Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Physicists have no definite knowledge that the Higgs particle exists. They only think it should exist. Because if it does, it can explain a lot of things about the Universe. And, working along similar lines, theologians think that God should exist. For the same reason. Aren't both professions engaging in constructive fantasy? Well there is a difference, scientists have a method and experiments are currently conducted to test whether such a particle exists or not and scientists are very much prepared that if they find unexpected results out of those experiments to either wipe out the entire standard model or change it with some refinements where as theologians don't have a method and their argument is a rational one and unless they don't come up with a method they are living on a constructive fantasy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vent Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 In my opinion, to argue with a theist on the voracity of their belief in a God is to already highlight your belief in the negative. How can you argue against something when you haven't formulated a belief on it? [note the word against]. I'm a anti-theist for this reason because the idea of a God, in the first instance, comes from theism, so i can legitimately argue against the existence of God because i reject the founding. I think Atheism is a relatively incoherent stance to take on the issue, unless you decide not to have an opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now