Correct, them being nonsense added to muddy the waters makes them less valid.
Agnosticism concerns not believing the is a god (like an atheist) but not believing the is no god either (unlike an atheist) and being open to either possibility.
Religion question?
- Thread starter squarehead94
- Start date
Correct, them being nonsense added to muddy the waters makes them less valid.
Agnosticism concerns not believing the is a god (like an atheist) but not believing the is no god either (unlike an atheist) and being open to either possibility.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a God. It is NOT the positive belief that God doesn't exist.
Dawkins admits he cannot absolute rule of the possibility of a God so does that mean you would describe him as an Agnostic?
Yet pretty much everyone calls him an 'atheist'. But by your definition and Dawkins he is an agnostic. And if he's an agnostic then no one is an atheist.
Atheism [aith-ee-iz-zum] - n - belief that the is no God.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/atheism
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/agnostic
I like to sum them up as "Atheism - the religious belief that there is no God." and "Agnostic - Meh, whatever"
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
It is not ONLY the belief there is no God, it also covers a lack of a belief as well...
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/atheism?q=atheism
Atheism [aith-ee-iz-zum] - n - belief that the is no God.
Dude your arguing with a definition form the Oxford English dictonary as well as others people have posted it is belief that the is no god, seriously how many people have to tell you this and how many sources have to be provided
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Maybe you should look up 'religion' as well because it seems you from above you don't know what it is.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Dude your arguing with a definition form the Oxford English dictonary as well as others people have posted it is belief that the is no god, seriously how many people have to tell you this and how many sources have to be provided
I've got a copy of the OED and what you printed is not how it is stated in there.
Sorry dude Atheism is technically a religion, this has long been established now:
--- EDIT ---
I copied it word for word, would you prefer a scan instead? because I can do that.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
And whose opinion is that?
The desire of religious apologists to call atheism a 'religion' is nothing but a lame tactic so they can say "we're both religious so we are just as bad as each other".
It's lame argument and won't wash with me.
If you think atheism is a religion, then by extension you must be calling theism a religion of it's own too. So you are saying that a Muslim, for example, belongs to two religions, Islam and Theism.
A religion is system of rules, beliefs and rituals. There are no rules or rituals to being an atheist and only one belief, that God probably doesn't exist.
Seeing as we're using the OED so much in here....
So tell me, what 'vows' does one take when they stop believing in God?
No need, just go to their website...
http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/12449?redirectedFrom=Atheism#eid
Last edited:
At a stretch it can be defined as a faith based position but it is in no way a religion.
They are just as bad as each other.
Links dead, but if it does say that its changed since my copy was printed (which isn't even that long ago).
Really....?....
If you think atheism is a religion then you are deluded.
Why are people selectively picking one singular definitions to a term which has multiple meanings.
Estebanrey is 100% correct on this, atheism can mean BOTH - it can be the express position a god doesn't exist or simply the lack of belief in a god/gods.
Which is why (as I've said 40,000,000 times) multiple sub-categories exist - because simply stating "I'm an atheist" says little about the rational behind the stance.
Why are you trying to pretend that the term only has one meaning (with you cherry picking one which is easier for you to argue against, ie - positive atheism).
Regarding the previous comments on agnosticism - you clearly have no idea what agnosticism really is (which is a view held by some theists or none-theists).
"a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God."
With theists believing in faith alone & atheists believing it's irrational to hold a view for either side of the argument (as no evidence exists).
Technically I'm also ignostic -
"The view that a coherent definition of God must be presented before the question of the existence of God can be meaningfully discussed. Furthermore, if that definition is unfalsifiable, the ignostic takes the theological noncognitivist position that the question of the existence of God (per that definition) is meaningless. In this case, the concept of God is not considered meaningless; the term "God" is considered meaningless." - do you want to pretend this doesn't exist either (as it doesn't suit your argument?).
Indeed, a tenuous stretch when applied to a singular sub-category of atheism (which in reality very few atheists fit into), which isn't applicable to "agnostic-atheism" - but it mostly isn't a religion in any way.
Last edited:
It requires a log in, Athens ID will do:
OED said:
So as you consider the OED authoritative are you now happy to concede that atheism can have a broader meaning?
A religion is just a faith based position and a set of values by which you lead your life, and atheism conforms perfectly to that, but w/e.
For the last time, atheism is believing the is no god, believing that the may or may not be god is agnosticism.
I don't even care at this point if the OED has been edited to account for all the atheists trying to absorb agnosticism to make their faith appear bigger/correcter. The fact that atheists have to fall back on semantics to try and bolster their position should in itself say something.
For the last time, atheism is believing the is no god
So as you consider the OED authoritative are you now happy to concede that atheism can have a broader meaning?
I don't even care at this point if the OED has been edited to account for all the atheists trying to absorb agnosticism to make their faith appear bigger/correcter. The fact that atheists have to fall back on semantics to try and bolster their position should in itself say something.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
So as you consider the OED authoritative are you now happy to concede that atheism can have a broader meaning?
I'm the one arguing it has a broader meaning. It is ultrasonic that is trying to narrow it down to being something specific.
In my opinion, anyone that doesn't actively believe in a god or gods is an atheist. Whether that be through consideration of the evidence and a rejection of God or through a lack of knowledge of the concept in the first place.
Please explain what 'set of values' atheists must adhere to?
Other than "Not believing in god" what exactly are the "set of values by which to lead your life" that atheism confers?
This is what I love about the internet. A source is only ever authoritative as long as it agrees with you!
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Which is why I was replying to, and quoting, ubersonic.
My bad.
You quoted the OED which I posted so techincally you were quoting me
Anyway, I think Sam Harris nails this argument pretty well...
None, just like the are no values that Christians must adhere to, only the ones they choose to. If you Google atheist values you can most likely get a lot of answers.