Agnosticism, Theism, Atheism - What does it mean?

a reply to: Ghost147

when an "ism is added to a word it carries with it addtonal meaning to what it is attached

ism
ˈizəm/
nouninformalderogatory
noun: ism; plural noun: isms

a distinctive practice, system, or philosophy, typically a political ideology or an artistic movement.

the source is here www.google.com...

I was just trying to keep it simple.

But Number six is one of the meanings to religion and is applicable to those who hold no formal religious organizational affiliations.

We learned to "KISS" long ago which means "keep it simple stupid" No personal attack intended

originally posted by: Willingly
a reply to: Ghost147
Ghost147, for someone who is that much into "logic" you behave a lot like some snake that trys to escape being captured.

You're free to explain how my responses aren't logical.

originally posted by: Willingly
a reply to: Ghost147
Didn't the existence of "God" depend a lot on how one defines such "God"? How can anybody claim that "God" does not exist, IF for example this "God" is defined as: The totality of existence as such.

When did I state that 'god does not exist'?

originally posted by: Willingly
a reply to: Ghost147
Sometimes you seem as if you argue just because that is what you can do best. As if it doesn't matter what ones says, you are against it, because that's what you do, arguing against it for the sake of doing so. Could that be a possibility, Ghost? And that would indeed explain a lot. Being unable and/or unwilling to agree to disagree is just this: The stance, "I'm right and others are wrong, no matter how right they are, because I'm right only!!"

I comment on posts only when they are presenting invalid, inaccurate, or misrepresented information, and that's about it.

Once again, if you can show me that my any of my claims are false, I will gladly and instantly change my stance.

I would assume that someone so interested in my 'career in debate' on ATS would have picked up on the fact that I have many times been shown to have made a false assumption, or had posted invalid information, and I immediately withdrew those statements as facts and then accepted the more valid ones that the opposition presented.

originally posted by: Willingly
a reply to: Ghost147
And by the way, what is logic anyway? Are we talking about formal logic? Psycho-logic? Personal logic? Trans-personal-logic? You tell me, Ghost, what kind of logic you are trying to prove so feverishly.

I haven't even used the word "logic" in the entire 6 pages of this topic (minus this very post). You brought it into discussion, so what do you mean by it?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Ghost147

when an "ism is added to a word it carries with it addtonal meaning to what it is attached

That is absolutely correct. That is indeed what an 'ism' is.

However, you're also forgetting the "A" when placed in front of a word to represent the lack of that word, or in some cases the anti position, a singular position, or a representation of the opposite of whatever the following word is. These different traits aren't always bundled up into one description, but often singular in their own right.

For instance 'Heterosexual' vs 'Asexual'. In the context sexual attraction, Heterosexual would obviously be the attraction to the opposite sex, where as Asexual is a total lack of sexual attraction what so ever. In this case, like atheism, it doesn't necessarily mean "against sex" or "against theism", but simply a lacking of "sex" or "theism".

The same concept goes for atheism and why theism is in the word, as well as the 'Ism" part too

a reply to: Ghost147

I would assume that someone so interested in my 'career in debate' on ATS would have picked up on the fact that I have many times been shown to have made a false assumption, or had posted invalid information, and I immediately withdrew those statements as facts and then accepted the more valid ones that the opposition presented.

What opposition? I'm discussing but you seem to debate. That's how it looks like to me.

I haven't even used the word "logic" in the entire 6 pages of this topic (minus this very post). You brought it into discussion, so what do you mean by it?

Really, Ghost, a simple note, like, "I understand what you are driving at", would have let you look like someone who can understand a statement, made to clean the air from too much ....you name it.

From now on I consider you as being my opponent. I did not before. But thanks for reminding me that you debate only.

originally posted by: Willingly
a reply to: Ghost147
What opposition? I'm discussing but you seem to debate. That's how it looks like to me.

I do go into discussion, even within this very topic the OP and I have conversed through curiosity and discussion alone (I can get those quotes for you if you'd like).

However, When a person is stating something as a 'matter of fact' or simply has posted inaccurate information that I'm aware of, I will respond with what the actual information states.

It is then up to them if they reject the reality that their initial information was false, or if they agree that they were mistaken.

originally posted by: Murgatroid
Really, Ghost, a simple note, like, "I understand what you are driving at", would have let you look like someone who can understand a statement, made to clean the air from too much ....you name it.

So, ignoring all the rest of my post which has completely disproved your concepts. Got it.

originally posted by: Murgatroid
From now on I consider you as being my opponent. I did not before. But thanks for reminding me that you debate only.

There's nothing like saying "I'm a humble person and you're not" by declaring a person a permanent opponent no matter what they say.

Way to represent going into a topic with an open mind

a reply to: Ghost147

So, ignoring all the rest of my post which has completely disproved your concepts. Got it.

You can't properly discern a concept from a statement, that was meant to critise your style of arguing . I haven'd presented a concept in my statement! I critizised your style of arguing, Ghost.

There's nothing like saying "I'm a humble person and you're not" by declaring a person a permanent opponent no matter what they say.

Like I said before: I'm not humble. I'm not great enough to be humble. But I clearly see that you want me to be humble, so I assume I'm great. Thanks for that!

Way to represent going into a topic with an open mind

With an open mind like you have?

originally posted by: Willingly
a reply to: Ghost147
You can't properly discern a concept from a statement, that was meant to critise your style of arguing . I haven'd presented a concept in my statement! I critizised your style of arguing, Ghost.

I realize what you were stating, but that doesn't exclude the fact that you didn't respond to the information within that comment. Or is that just 'your style of arguing?'

originally posted by: Willingly
a reply to: Ghost147
Like I said before: I'm not humble. I'm not great enough to be humble. But I clearly see that you want me to be humble, so I assume I'm great. Thanks for that!

Then I mistook your criticism on however you believe I respond like as a statement that your approach is far more superior and less aggressive.

originally posted by: Willingly
a reply to: Ghost147
With an open mind like you have?

Well, I can actually admit when I'm wrong if the opposition can show that I was. I also don't go into a topic with an OP that I regularly disagree with and immediately assume this new position of theirs must automatically relate to their previously held ones.

I would consider than an open mind.

a reply to: Ghost147

One thing...

I also don't go into a topic with an OP that I regularly disagree with and immediately assume this new position of theirs must automatically relate to their previously held ones.

Not to say that you do this regularly, but it seems you do it on occasion...as for instance you automatically assumed my definitions in this thread would be incorrect, based on a previous discussion...

Ah, excellent! I'm here to learn what I believe and what I don't believe and what traits represent me from a person whom has no conclusive understanding of the term.

...I presume that some of my "accurate descriptions" took you by surprise....despite there still having been an "incorrect" representation...I do hope I've shown that I understand the term and the implications to a much greater degree than many others...

A2D

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: Ghost147
Not to say that you do this regularly, but it seems you do it on occasion...as for instance you automatically assumed my definitions in this thread would be incorrect, based on a previous discussion...

Very true, this would be an exception. Of course we were right in the middle of this very conversation in another topic and you felt it deserved a topic of it's own (which it did, indeed)

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: Ghost147
...I presume that some of my "accurate descriptions" took you by surprise....

No. You had already admitted that you understood Atheism meant a lack of belief as well, also posted in the thread we were previously having this conversation within.

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: Ghost147
despite there still having been an "incorrect" representation...I do hope I've shown that I understand the term and the implications to a much greater degree than many others...

You have

a reply to: Ghost147

No I did not forget the A for the A-theisit and the A-gnositc are practising a system of beliefs one of A in Greek means NO and add the following either theist or gnostic.

An Atheist practices a systematic belief that there is NO GOD. So under meaning number 6 of Religion it fits them perfectly and shows that is something they practice, that is the belief there is not a God on a regular basis.

An Agnostic is a particular problem in that the NO knowledge they profess to practice is "of God" but is is still a regular practice of this belief that makes it a religion.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

How does one "practice" a non belief?

IF someone believes brushing their teeth every day will prevent cavities, does that also make it a religion?

Its amusing how some people consider Atheism or even Agnosticism a religion...

its not...

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Ghost147
An Atheist practices a systematic belief that there is NO GOD.

Except that many (perhaps even most) atheists don't make a direct statement that 'there is no god'. Many simply lack the belief in one without making any claims at all.

Also, how is there a 'system' behind a single belief even if atheism was a belief that there is no god?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Ghost147
So under meaning number 6 of Religion it fits them perfectly and shows that is something they practice, that is the belief there is not a God on a regular basis.

Except it's not a belief.... it's a lack of belief. There are certainly some atheists who make a statement that there is no god, they would be making a statement out of belief, because there is no evidence there isn't a god. However, Atheism at a whole is merely a lack of belief.

Atheism is as much a belief as non-stamp-collecting is a hobby and 'off' is a channel on your TV.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Ghost147
An Agnostic is a particular problem in that the NO knowledge they profess to practice is "of God" but is is still a regular practice of this belief that makes it a religion.

What practice?! how can you 'practice' no knowledge? how can you 'practice' unknowable?

You seem to think it is impossible to do just about anything without it being some kind of belief system. Perhaps you simply cannot understand how people can live a life that doesn't have a belief system like yours?

a reply to: Akragon

O come now, the systematic practice of not holding belief in God is argued every day and you ask such a silly question.

Yes, brushing one teeth could be considered a religious activity. That is the most basic meaning of the word religious. Because brushing ones teeth is done at certain times of the day on a regular basis it can be concidered religious. People say things like i.e. "I religiously brush my teeth", "Grandpa smoke religiously", "Rap music is his religion", "he is a religious drinker", "she exercises religiously". Just about anything done or practices on a regular basis and time can be said to be a religious practice.

Now you are catching on to what the basis of religion is a daily practice. This meaning of the word religious has been lost in modern times but should never be forgot. Many have placed the word religious as to mean church or spiritual, but it had a much more common meaning when it first was used way back in the 1500's to a regular practice of just about anything.

So when people say Atheism or Agnosticism is a religion to some people it is because it is a system practised by them on a regular basis. they do this so they wont be converted to another view of that which they oppose.

a reply to: Ghost147
Ask any atheist if they believe there is a god.

What is their answer?
No.

What does that logically imply?

That implies they don't believe there is a god.

Not believing that there is a god is a system of belief. It is the BELIEF there is no god. A Daily defence of this belief of there being no god is a religious practice and constitutes a religion.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Akragon

O come now, the systematic practice of not holding belief in God is argued every day and you ask such a silly question.

not holding belief in God = belief

and you see no paradox here?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Akragon
Yes, brushing one teeth could be considered a religious activity.

WOW... really??? you're being serious?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Akragon
That is the most basic meaning of the word religious.

There is no single defining trait of religion. Religion requires several traits in order for it to be religion.

That's like saying "the practice of expanding your lungs is the religion of breathing". That analogy actually has a big impact, but I think it may escape you because you believe brushing your teeth is a form of religion.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Akragon
Because brushing ones teeth is done at certain times of the day on a regular basis it can be concidered religious.

No...

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Akragon
People say things like i.e. "I religiously brush my teeth", "Grandpa smoke religiously", "Rap music is his religion", "he is a religious drinker", "she exercises religiously".

Do you honestly believe that you think 'religiously' as in, synonymous with excessively, is equal to religion as in christianity?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Akragon
Just about anything done or practices on a regular basis and time can be said to be a religious practice.

Are you intentionally trying to be misleading? or do you really think that brushing your teeth is a religion?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Akragon
Now you are catching on to what the basis of religion is a daily practice. This meaning of the word religious has been lost in modern times but should never be forgot. Many have placed the word religious as to mean church or spiritual, but it had a much more common meaning when it first was used way back in the 1500's to a regular practice of just about anything.

So when people say Atheism or Agnosticism is a religion to some people it is because it is a system practised by them on a regular basis. they do this so they wont be converted to another view of that which they oppose.

All hope in humanity is lost...

a reply to: ChesterJohn

That is a seriously twisted way of looking at this...

So basically you're saying if i take a dump at the same time every day, its religious? LMAO!!

Have you ever looked up the definition of religion?

I really think you need to...

Atheism isn't a religion... its a non belief...

Atheists don't go around preaching that there is no God, but when some encounter people that do believe... they will protest... Its not something that can be even considered religious... IF said person never encounters believers that preach or talk about their religion, its not even a topic of discussion... especially on a regular basis

I think a lot of you Christians only use this ridiculous premise to annoy people that don't believe...

You know its nothing but nonsense, why even bother pushing something thats completely illogical?

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: ChesterJohn

That is a seriously twisted way of looking at this...

So basically you're saying if i take a dump at the same time every day, its religious? LMAO!!

Have you ever looked up the definition of religion?

I really think you need to...

Atheism isn't a religion... its a non belief...

Atheists don't go around preaching that there is no God, but when some encounter people that do believe... they will protest... Its not something that can be even considered religious... IF said person never encounters believers that preach or talk about their religion, its not even a topic of discussion... especially on a regular basis

I think a lot of you Christians only use this ridiculous premise to annoy people that don't believe...

You know its nothing but nonsense, why even bother pushing something thats completely illogical?

Does that mean you don't believe him?

You know that means that you believe that you don't believe him? (or some twisted version of the word belief)

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Not believing that there is a god is a system of belief

No its not...

The Atheist's claim isn't a belief... they know there is no God

And they will tell you they know this because there is no evidence of it...

Knowing and believing are two different things...

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Ghost147
Ask any atheist if they believe there is a god.

I have, and the vast majority of responses is that they lack a belief because there has yet to be evidence to suggest otherwise.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Akragon
What is their answer?
No.

What does that logically imply?

It implies nothing. You're reaching to appease your preconceived notion that "all atheists are making a direct statement that god does not exist"

Tell me... is your hobby "non-stamp-collecting"?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Akragon
That implies they don't believe there is a god.

The only thing that states is a lack of belief, not a claim that there isn't one.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Akragon
Not believing that there is a god is a system of belief.

HOW?! You keep saying it over and over again as if saying it more makes it more valid. tell me how, even if it is one single belief, that it thus equates some sort of system?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Akragon
A Daily defence of this belief of there being no god is a religious practice and constitutes a religion.

Wow, You are on a whole other level of delusion...

What daily defense? Believe it or not but not all atheists just go about there day trying to dismiss the existence of a god. I don't know of any that actively attempt to reject god every day.

Well, guess what, you're talking to an atheist right now. So how about instead of telling me what I do, you simply just ask me?

No, I do not go about every day of my life trying to make sure I don't believe in god.

No, I don't make a daily effort in trying to prove god doesn't exist.

No, I don't go to atheist church and read the sacred text of atheism and follow atheist traditions while praying to my atheist priests.

I wish I could see the world through your eyes for just one day. It would be like walking into a land designed by Dr Seuss

a reply to: TerryDon79

Does that mean you don't believe him?

You know that means that you believe that you don't believe him? (or some twisted version of the word belief)

I wasn't talking about myself...

My knowledge of God is not a belief...