flamingjimmy Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 It's just you could have phrased your first double negative a little more eloquentlyI actually rather like the phrasing I used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Well that's just not true at all. Atheism is not about what you say, it's just a lack of belief. Regardless of the semantics about what atheism means, it certainly doesn't matter what you say. You could go round screaming "Jesus is coming!" all day long and still be an atheist as long as you didn't believe it. Given that we've seen any number of definitions of the word "atheist" in this thread alone and given how hard it would be to satisfy those criteria simultaneously in one individual, it's safe to say no-one is an atheist (unless they identify themselves as such). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Given that we've seen any number of definitions of the word "atheist" in this thread aloneBy my count we've seen two. 1. lack of belief in god/s 2. belief that there is no god and given how hard it would be to satisfy those criteria simultaneously in one individualNot hard at all, in fact anyone who number 2 applies to also fits number 1. That's why number 1 is the better definition, because it describes everyone who self identifies as an atheist, whereas number 2 only describes very few people (I've only ever come across a handful, even on the internet). It may also describe a few people who don't like being described as atheists but that's tough really. You can't just redefine a word because you don't like it being applied to you. it's safe to say no-one is an atheist (unless they identify themselves as such).Nope, that's not safe to say, in fact it's definitely incorrect. It doesn't matter what you say, only whether you believe or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 I'm not an atheist unless I identify myself as one. No one else can call me an atheist because they don't actually have a clue what I believe. So until I say "I am an atheist"*, I'm not. *for illustrative purposes only. It doesn't matter what you believe. It's what you DON'T believe. If you tell me you don't have a belief that God exists, I'm calling you an atheist. That doesn't mean that you are JUST an atheist, there can be a lot more to it, but simply by NOT having a belief in God's existence, you are an atheist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 By my count we've seen two. 1. lack of belief in god/s 2. belief that there is no god Also No.1 is the Oxford English Dictionary's current definition, Wikipedia's "most inclusive" definition and finally, the LITERAL translation of the word. Not hard at all, in fact anyone who number 2 applies to also fits number 1. Jimmy is correct. Phanerothyme, what makes you think that somone must identify themselves as an atheist to actually be one? Do I have to IDENTIFY myself as white and male to actually BE one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Reposting from another thread to try and help out on this one.... I think the best way to understand the difference between denial of God and being without belief in God is if we use an example paid for and supported by many atheists as a unified slogan. There were or are famous/infamous slogans on buses in London, designed and paid for by atheists, which read: "There's probably no God now stop worrying and enjoy your life" The word "PROBABLY" is NOT a denial. These are the agreed words of atheists themselves, they have spent money on it. Now, if it was antitheists who came up with this, the slogan would likely read: "There's DEFINITELY no God" See? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 I concur with pleknahov, flamingjimmy, and RootsBooster. Furthermore, if you can pick up an old dictionary (>100 years) you are likely to find a single line definition, "one who lacks of belief in God" or "one who disbelieves in God". Simples. At a time when almost everybody would say they believed there was a God, this definition was all that was required. It's only in the 1900's that the second line was added, "belief that there is no God". On my last trip to the USA I found a "modern" dictionary with a third line, that simply said "evil". As the word a'theist has evolved to define somebody who is more definite in their disbelief, the word a'gnostic has evolved to mean undecided. I suspect that this has been driven by what theists want the word to mean. I prefer the original definition because it more closely reflects my own position, and every person I know that identifies themselves as an atheist for that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 I can’t have a belief in that which as no definition, if it as no definition then I can't believe it exists, therefore I am an atheist; we do have a biblical definition of God which is impossible therefor I am still an atheist. To be a theist you must believe in God and one must know what God is to believe it exists, without knowing what it is you can’t believe it exists. I have yet to meet a theist that can define God therefore they are all atheist. Thats an interesting theory! By your definition i am a theist who is an atheist,because i can't define God. There's a first time for everything....as they say! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 It doesn't matter what you say, only whether you believe or not. Amen to that brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Phanerothyme, what makes you think that somone must identify themselves as an atheist to actually be one? Do I have to IDENTIFY myself as white and male to actually BE one? No because those are physical characteristics. That's what you are. That much is obvious even to you surely. But you do have to identify yourself as a socialist, a marxist, a keynsian, a conservative or an anarchist, truther or ufologist either with your words or your actions. Other people may identify you as such from external appearances, but more fool them eh? Now, how many atheists use religious curses on a daily basis, including "jeez" , "blimey", "crikey" etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.