It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Education on the actual meaning of the word 'Atheist'.

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler




1. Atheism: The BELIEF that God does not exist.


Who first proposed that a god DOES exist, to begin with? Who first defined "god" or "gods" for folks to agree or disagree about its or their existences.

Without someone suggesting that there is a god, or gods, there would be no need for atheism to reject it/them.

Your professor is mistaken and led by a belief in god bias. Both of you should watch the video in the OP, the one that we're discussing here.


edit on 28-11-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler



1. Atheism: The BELIEF that God does not exist.


Some atheists qualify their position with similar statements.

Others don't ever think of God which, by extension, means they neither believe nor disbelieve in a God. Perhaps a better way I can phrase it is they don't care either way and the concept is valueless in their world-views - 'belief' becomes a misprojected term.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: schuyler




1. Atheism: The BELIEF that God does not exist.


Who first proposed that a god DOES exist, to begin with? Who first defined "god" or "gods" for folks to agree or disagree about its or their existences.

Without someone suggesting that there is a god, or gods, there would be no need for atheism to reject it/them.

Your professor is mistaken and led by a belief in god bias. Both of you should watch the video in the OP, the one that we're discussing here.


Sorry, but a YouTube video is not the epitome of erudition. It sounds like a first grader trying to explain relativity. I'll take my professor's definition over uneducated random ones on ATS any day. Your suggestion that "we" need to watch it to understand is completely laughable. We're talking formal logical thought here, not someone's bastardization of logic. LITERALLY, "Atheism" means the BELIEF that God does not exist. "Not-God" An atheist is in an active believing relationship here. He's not passive. He's SURE God does not exist. He believes that. That's qualitatively different than an Agnostic, who is basically refusing to take a position and is saying, "I don't know one way or another." It doesn't matter what someone else suggests. You need to educate yourself. I suggest An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis, 4th edition, by John Hospers. The ignorance displayed here is palpable, but then, this is ATS, where denying ignorance is rare.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler




LITERALLY, "Atheism" means the BELIEF that God does not exist.


Really? So asymmetrical LITERALLY means a belief that symmetry doesn't exist? Asexual LITERALLY means a belief that gender attraction, i.e. sexuality, doesn't exist? Atypical means the the concept of typical doesn't exist?



"Not-God" An atheist is in an active believing relationship here. He's not passive. He's SURE God does not exist.


No. "he's" sure that YOUR god, that the definition of YOUR "god", that you've ascribed that people MUST believe in or be labeled atheist, does not exist. Atheism is a rejection of the definition of god that YOU put forth as a requirement for belief in a "god".

Please answer MY question.

Who first proposed the existence of "god", that atheists deny?

Without a proposition that something exists first, there's nothing to deny. Therefore, atheism is the rejection of your proposed definition of god. Maybe its the rejection of other definitions of god too, but those definitions would have to first be put out, for them to be rejected.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Please answer MY question.

Who first proposed the existence of "god", that atheists deny?

That's assuming that his existence was proposed....the more fitting question would be, who declared that he exist and who bares witness to this declaration? The answer is within the question itself only leaving how would you know that, this is the purpose of what's called "objectives".



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 06:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: auto3000
Please answer MY question.
Who first proposed the existence of "god", that atheists deny?
That's assuming that his existence was proposed....the more fitting question would be, who declared that he exist and who bares witness to this declaration? The answer is within the question itself only leaving how would you know that, this is the purpose of what's called "objectives".


You can't prove a negative so you can't prove God does not exist. But that's not what atheists are saying. They are saying there is no existing evidence at this time that would be compelling enough to convince them to have a belief in God. Atheism is the absence of any belief in God because there is no reason for it.

I think many atheists go further and would not accept any so call evidence for the existence of God not matter what it was. I've ask atheist to present the evidence they would find acceptable. Most say nothing. There a lot of people who believe in God by saying all of existence is evidence for the existence of God. But most atheists would argue all of existence is not evidence for the existence of God. Many people who believe in God will claim a sequence of experiences in their own life is evidence for the existence of God. Again, most atheists would say all personal experiences do not qualify as evidence because it's not the type of evidence that can be shared by more than one person.

I once argue what if a bellowing voice came from the sky would that be good enough evidence. Again, the answer was no because the atheist argued by Occam's razor it is more likely the bellowing voice was a sham or some non-supernatural explanation.

So there you have. No evidence is good enough.
edit on 28-11-2016 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Here's the reality of this, this topic is not subject to human reasoning, claims of anything that is absolute will not be known by subjecting it to human reasoning, this is not an insult or saying you don't get it....because you can only come across knowledge and make a decision, you just have no complete control of the outcome...my point is this...reasoning becomes your god my friend and it has convinced you of that. This does not mean you are not intelligent or not a nice person or deserve this bad thing or punishment in some hell, it just means that whatever the outcome is....that's what it is...simple...and as humans we all see where forms of reasoning lands us unless the reasoning proves right and death is the end of your conscience, but then again you'll just have to hope that death has power over you.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join