Deicide:
You can be an atheist and still believe in the supernatural yeah i know its wierd but atheist who do believe in supernatural do exist

I guess they are theistic atheists

johnydon22:



Thus broadly..

comprehende?

Agnostics believe believe the concept of God cannot be understood. They are partly atheistic and theistic

Deicide:
No it doesnt which is where agnotism comes into play. In atheism we say there is no proof to sujest that a God exist this does not mean that a God does not exist it only means that there isnt enough proof to sujest that one does exist.

Wow! So an atheist beliefs there's a possibility of the existence of God? Can there be a married bachelor?

Atheism is simply the lack of belief in god. The only effects it has is the potential for people to question, rethink or refine religious dogma.


Islam, however...

Sapiosexuality:
But it is because you know something about that you reject it? You are in a neutral position like a new born baby. You decided to reject it because you studied it and know it is full of shit. So you know. And if you don't or think there proof is not good enough, why not stay neutral like an agnostic until you know a lot? Why should a man who knows there's no God be the same man who knows God is unknowable?

Nope not necessarily, many things can inform disbelief.

Example:

You; I have a diamond pig

me: I don't believe you.


I do not necessarily need to know whether you do or not, i just do not see evidence that suggests you do therefore i express doubt over your claim.

So disbelief doesn't equate knowability just an expression of doubt

Sapiosexuality:
Not enough proof is not atheism. Even science, an entirely different field, could say so. Atheism is simply the belief in the absence of gods. Agnosticism says we don't know if there is god or not. Atheism says we know he doesn't exist. Then we make a man who knows and doesn't know. How do you reconcile that?

Like hopefulland said the defination of atheism is very board. Science doesnt concern itself with if a God exist or not. The defination of atheism most atheist agree on is "Lack of belief in a deity" which means it has noting to do with a belief system. most atheist would not agree with that defination you gave because that also puts them in the same basket as a theist which is why i use that lack of proof so that you would understand the point of Atheism.

Sapiosexuality:
That's my problem. Can one claim to belief there's no God and still say he's not sure if there's a God? Or you mean to say that Atheists, by been atheists, have no logical basis for their position since what they have is just a belief?

An atheist may defend his/her position logically but that is not a requirement for atheism.
Atheism is just a lack of belief in god/gods.
There are no pre-conditions to be an atheist, other than the one stated above.

I don't believe in a ghost even though I do not know if one exists, is my position
illogical?
"Know" in this instance means real knowledge and not some feel-good mantra.

Imagine I make this claim:
There is an invisible being made up of quantum energy in blackhole Xecat whose
gaze control the setting and rising of the sun.

If you believe me is your position logical?
If you don't believe me, are you illogical?

Geofavor:

Agnostics believe believe the concept of God cannot be understood. They are partly atheistic and theistic

Thus the concept of Agnostic atheism or agnostic theism

johnydon22:


A unicorn is a natural concept but we don't believe it exist none the less. So one can believe in supernatural while maintaining disbelief for the concept of God.

That you say that a bag exists doesn't mean you believe a diamond ball is inside the bag

I hope you understand it now

Lolol. When I say "supernatural," I talk about unseen forces which constantly influence the physical world, and not some myths like unicorns.

Sapiosexuality:
Okay. Nice. But there are etymologies and things cannot be completely semantically uprooted from their etymologies.

this is a bit off topic but yes they can, Etymological Fallacy is a genetic fallacy that holds that the present-day meaning of a word or phrase should necessarily be similar to its historical meaning

there are various examples of words today that meant something slightly different originally and some that actually contradicts its original meaning

The word hound originally simply meant "dog" in general. This usage is now archaic or poetic only, and hound now almost exclusively refers to dogs bred for hunting in particular.

The meaning of a word may change to connote higher status, as when knight , originally "servant" like German Knecht , came to mean "military knight" and subsequently "someone of high rank".

Conversely, the word knave originally meant "boy" (as the equivalent German Knabe ) and only gradually acquired its meaning of "person of low, despicable character".

The word "Awful" originally meant "Awe-inspring" and "Full of awe" but now means something bad

The word "Moody" originally meant "Courageous" but now means something totally different

The word "Bully" actually originated from Dutch word "Boele" which actually means "Lover"

The word lady derives from Old English hlæf-dige ("loaf-digger; kneader of bread" ), and lord from hlafweard ("loaf-ward; ensurer, provider of bread" ). No connection with bread is retained in the current meaning of either word.

Would it be wrong to use it here? Is there even any definition of atheism that is etymologically different?

not really etymologically different but slight differences in the definitions actually makes a lot of difference if one pays attention to it

Geofavor:
Lolol. When I say "supernatural," I talk about unseen forces which constantly influence the physical , and not some myths like unicorns.

I used the unicorn to paint a relatable analogy. A unicorn is a natural concept not a supernatural one.

I use that example to show a simple thing. Nature exists but that doesn't mean a unicorn (which is a natural being) does.

Same way someone can say, supernatural plain exists but that doesn't mean God (supernatural being) does..

Do not be in a haste to reply, first try to understand the argument

Sapiosexuality:
Wow! So an atheist beliefs there's a possibility of the existence of God?

Yes, but there is no evidence to prove this thats why i said at this point agnotism comes into play but again there are some atheist that dont God simple doesnt exist and they stand with that idea 100%

Can there be a married bachelor?

It seems you aint understanding my explanations

Let's see the end of stupid arguments like 'Atheist developed the world' 'Isaac Newton was an Atheist' 'Science opposes religion'

God is a human psychological concept. A part of some of our species' need to put a name and a face behind major events in history, sometimes to focus our emotions or directives onto, despite there no such face or name to begin with.

After a destructive earthquake in the bronze age, a village murders the local hermit woman because "someone must've done it".

After a long, thunderous, life-threatening storm in the Mediterranean, Greek sailors lay the blame of offending the Gods upon a crewmate because "someone must've done it".

People go to the mosque and head-bop the carpets in front of them, acknowledging "Allah" as the creator of everything, because "someone must've done it."

Atheism all begins when man begins to ponder thus: "maybe it didn't have to be someone who did it..."

johnydon22:


Nope not necessarily, many things can inform disbelief.

Example:

You; I have a diamond pig

me: I don't believe you.


I do not necessarily need to know whether you do or not, i just do not see evidence that suggests you do therefore i express doubt over your claim.

So disbelief doesn't equate knowability just an expression of doubt

The analogy is more like

Me: I have a diamond
You: Show me
I go in and show you something that looks like a Squirrel not even a pig talk more diamond.
You: You don't have a diamond pig and there is no Diamond pig.

Now, this is the fact of Atheism. He's not disputing the theistic beliefs like the right and left wing American politicians do(without what he thinks is facts). He is disputing it because the fact presented is not good enough to him.

If Atheism is the lack of belief in God(It surely means it is not a belief) and thus something. What is it? For me, I think it is the knowledge of the absence of God. How is this not so?

danvon:
Let's see the end of stupid arguments like 'Atheist developed the world' 'Isaac Newton was an Atheist' 'Science opposes religion'

Appeal to authority.

Newton wasn't an atheist though

Deicide:
Like hopefulland said the defination of atheism is very board. Science doesnt concern itself with if a God exist or not. The defination of atheism most atheist agree on is "Lack of belief in a deity" which means it has noting to do with a belief system. most atheist would not agree with that defination you gave because that also puts them in the same basket as a theist which is why i use that lack of proof so that you would understand the point of Atheism.

Very good. So if atheism is not a belief what is it? Is it a fact? An opinion and is it a logical one? Is it an emotion?

johnydon22:


Thus the concept of Agnostic atheism or agnostic theism

Well, they aren't theist, neither are they atheist. They are simply agnostic s. Theists are certain God exists. Atheists are certain God doesn't exist. But agnostics say neither of them can say for sure.

Geofavor:
I guess they are theistic atheists

No

johnydon22:


There are atheistic religions, or even the practice of conventional religions without the belief in God. Example Christian atheism



An example of belief in a God without religion

What is Christian atheism?

ivolt:


An atheist may defend his/her position logically but that is not a requirement for atheism.
Atheism is just a lack of belief in god/gods.
There are no pre-conditions to be an atheist, other than the one stated above.

I don't believe in a ghost even though I do not know if one exists, is my position
illogical?
"Know" in this instance means real knowledge and not some feel-good mantra.

Imagine I make this claim:
There is an invisible being made up of quantum energy in blackhole Xecat whose
gaze control the setting and rising of the sun.

If you believe me is your position logical?
If you don't believe me, are you illogical?

I'm not against the logic or illogicality of atheism. I am against using the words 'agnostic atheism'. It makes no logical sense.

Sapiosexuality:
Very good. So if atheism is not a belief what is it? Is it a fact? An opinion and is it a logical one? Is it an emotion?

It is a position xame as Theism

I would personal say it is logical and my reason would still be base on that "Proof" xame as testing something to see if it works b4 you buy it isnt that logical?

Geofavor:
Well, they aren't theist, neither are they atheist. They are simply agnostic s. Theists are certain God exists. Atheists are certain God doesn't exist. But agnostics say neither of them can say for sure.

After all this discussion, this where we land again?

Ok

hopefulLandlord:


this is a bit off topic but yes they can, Etymological Fallacy is a genetic fallacy that holds that the present-day meaning of a word or phrase should necessarily be similar to its historical meaning

there are various examples of words today that meant something slightly different originally and some that actually contradicts its original meaning

The word hound originally simply meant "dog" in general. This usage is now archaic or poetic only, and hound now almost exclusively refers to dogs bred for hunting in particular.

The meaning of a word may change to connote higher status, as when knight , originally "servant" like German Knecht , came to mean "military knight" and subsequently "someone of high rank".

Conversely, the word knave originally meant "boy" (as the equivalent German Knabe ) and only gradually acquired its meaning of "person of low, despicable character".

The word "Awful" originally meant "Awe-inspring" and "Full of awe" but now means something bad

The word "Moody" originally meant "Courageous" but now means something totally different

The word "Bully" actually originated from Dutch word "Boele" which actually means "Lover"

The word lady derives from Old English hlæf-dige ("loaf-digger; kneader of bread" ), and lord from hlafweard ("loaf-ward; ensurer, provider of bread" ). No connection with bread is retained in the current meaning of either word.

not really etymologically different but slight differences in the definitions actually makes a lot of difference if one pays attention to it

Then let's leave the stories and proceed. Is Atheism a belief?

Sapiosexuality:
Then let's leave the stories and proceed. Is Atheism a belief?

atheism is lack of it, I'm using the broad definition

johnydon22:


I used the unicorn to paint a relatable analogy. A unicorn is a natural concept not a supernatural one.

I use that example to show a simple thing. Nature exists but that doesn't mean a unicorn (which is a natural being) does.

Same way someone can say, supernatural plain exists but that doesn't mean God (supernatural being) does..

Do not be in a haste to reply, first try to understand the argument

If there are atheists who believe in the supernatural do they also deny the existence of a supernatural plain?

I still would want you to list out those supernatural things an atheist can believe in while disbelieving the existence of God who is also of the supernatural.

johnydon22:


"God" is not peculiar to religion as a subject. More so, an atheist can be religious too as stated on my post.

Again, both God and religions are matters of public concerns as we feel the effects of these two subjects none withstanding our position or opinion on them

its like you don't understand my position here... religious people are having a discussion as regards their religion and/or God and you think atheists should have a say... maybe why your brothers keep spamming threads with trash always.

johnydon22:


I used the unicorn to paint a relatable analogy. A unicorn is a natural concept not a supernatural one.

I use that example to show a simple thing. Nature exists but that doesn't mean a unicorn (which is a natural being) does.

Same way someone can say, supernatural plain exists but that doesn't mean God (supernatural being) does..

Do not be in a haste to reply, first try to understand the argument

Okay, let's break it down.

Do atheists believe in spirits ( a supernatural being)?

Deicide:

Yes, but there is no evidence to prove this thats why i said at this point agnotism comes into play but again there are some atheist that dont God simple doesnt exist and they stand with that idea 100%

It seems you aint understanding my explanations

Frankly speaking, it makes no sense. I mean, once atheism holds the possibility of a deity's existence it ceases to be atheism. You cannot know there's no God and still believe in any possibility.

Deicide:
It is a position xame as Theism

Theism is a BELIEF in God or God's. A Belief. What is Atheism? A BELIEF too?

hopefulLandlord:


atheism is lack of it, I'm using the broad definition

Lack of it? Is a Statement of fact then, a Logical Position, an emotional position, a scientific position? What exactly is atheism? I don't mean the definition here and I believe you understand me.

Sapiosexuality:
The analogy is more like

Me: I have a diamond
You: Show me
I go in and show you something that looks like a Squirrel not even a pig talk more diamond.
You: You don't have a diamond pig and there is no Diamond pig.

Now, this is the fact of Atheism. He's not disputing the theistic beliefs like the right and left wing American politicians do(without what he thinks is facts). He is disputing it because the fact presented is not good enough to him.

If Atheism is the lack of belief in God(It surely means it is not a belief) and thus something. What is it? For me, I think it is the knowledge of the absence of God. How is this not so?

I couldn't have said it any better myself. I also believe that if an atheist claims GOD DOES NOT EXIST this statement must have been made from a position of knowledge or better yet COUNTER KNOWLEDGE to the existence of God. So an atheist who claims that God does not exist should be able to defend this position by providing this acquired counter knowledge as proof that God does not exist.

I have yet to see a single person of an ascribed faith give a reasonable argument for why they believe the things they do. Muslims especially. Christians and Muslims love to hang on to "Infalsifiable" claims to protect their tattered pieces of faith, yet the actual reasons THEY give for why THEY believe are always weak and fallacious.

"The inhabitants of the earth are of two sorts: those with brains, but no religion, and those with religion, but no brains." - Abul Ala Al-Ma'arri.