A distinction without a difference?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-05-2014, 09:30 PM
RE: A distinction without a difference?
(19-05-2014 04:42 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  I once made the statement in a forum that an atheist was a person that did not believe in God.

I then was told by a member of said forum that I was wrong and that an atheist was a person that lacked belief in gods or God.

My question is:

Is this not a distinction without a difference?

Or, in OTW, was I not right when I said an atheist is a person that does not believe in God?

The answer is YES, you fucking idiot, this is NOT a distinction without a difference.

Your statement presupposes that your fairy tale monster actually exists, whereas the properly corrected statement you were given does not.

You are being disingenuously and intentionally obtuse. You aren't fooling anyone.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Taqiyya Mockingbird's post
19-05-2014, 11:09 PM
RE: A distinction without a difference?
Time to derail this fuckin' thread.
[Image: trainwreck.jpg]

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2014, 11:24 PM
RE: A distinction without a difference?








It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2014, 11:24 PM
A distinction without a difference?
[Image: trainwreck-o.gif]

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2014, 11:54 PM
RE: A distinction without a difference?
(19-05-2014 04:42 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  I once made the statement in a forum that an atheist was a person that did not believe in God.

I then was told by a member of said forum that I was wrong and that an atheist was a person that lacked belief in gods or God.

My question is:

Is this not a distinction without a difference?

Or, in OTW, was I not right when I said an atheist is a person that does not believe in God?

Largely without a difference. It can be argued that the "does not believe in God" version is loaded with A) the claim that there is an existent God in which to believe or not believe, and/or B) the presupposition of some god in particular (presumably either the Abrahamic one or some sort of Platonic abstraction) which is not being believed in. Personally I wouldn't see it that way, but those are the only two distinctions I can imagine someone reaching for. It's parsing words very fine and I'd think it pedantic to worry about that sort of overanalysis. Of the two, I'd say the second one is a bit better, but at the end of the day they both mean about the same thing.


......

Also, that's an impressive...

[Image: pictures-of-deer-warts3.jpeg]

.... deer ailment.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Reltzik's post
20-05-2014, 12:01 AM
A distinction without a difference?
[Image: bttf-train-crash-o.gif]

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like rampant.a.i.'s post
20-05-2014, 12:03 AM
RE: A distinction without a difference?
(20-05-2014 12:01 AM)rampant.a.i. Wrote:  [Image: bttf-train-crash-o.gif]

Oooh, Back to the Future 3! Me likey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2014, 12:20 AM
RE: A distinction without a difference?
I don't believe :

in God = a personal attack on their personal relationship with jebus
in Gods or a god = depersonalised, avoids combative response
in Gods or god = a sucker punch to the nuts
in deities = lets confuse the theist with words they don't understand (don't call my god a deity !!, what's a deity ? )

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2014, 04:31 AM
RE: A distinction without a difference?
(19-05-2014 05:50 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(19-05-2014 05:46 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  How do you know this?

History, sociology, anthropology, and a dash of physchology.

How do History, sociology, anthropology, and a dash of physchology lead you to the conclusion that the God of the Bible is made up by men?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2014, 05:13 AM
RE: A distinction without a difference?
(20-05-2014 04:31 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(19-05-2014 05:50 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  History, sociology, anthropology, and a dash of physchology.

How do History, sociology, anthropology, and a dash of physchology lead you to the conclusion that the God of the Bible is made up by men?

That's only for the insiders. You have to join the club first. Smartass

Τί ἐστιν ἀλήθεια?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes John's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: