Hmmm...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-09-2014, 05:14 PM
RE: Hmmm...
(18-09-2014 06:28 AM)CiderThinker Wrote:  See - to me atheism is the default position so they automatically fall into that category...

I suppose that is one way of looking at it. But, I believe we might be looking at it in the wrong way. Using Semantics to argue meanings of words and how we think.

Let's replace the word religion with the word...I dunno, Idea!

So, lets say that there is an idea out there that I have never heard of before, but many others have. I am not an atheist of that idea Per Se, It just means I have no heard of it before. I have no argument to give, no opinions I could possibly have for that idea.

What we have here is an Unknown unknown. Something that I don't know, that I didn't have any idea I didn't not know about it. So to me, that idea would be an unknown unknown and you cannot possibly comment on an unknown unknown. No mind, no matter how great or all knowing it is can escape the unknown unknown.

So, if we accept that is what atheists are. We are accepting that WE are "Ignorant". Because we simply do not know about anything. That we cannot possibly know and then we get into the whole, brain in a jar Sye ten bull crap stuff again.

So, I believe that Atheism is the default position when presented with an idea that has yet to provide evidence to satisfy your standard of proof. That way, we are fully knowledgeable about what we have been presented with, seen what the other side has determined as evidence and have made the clear, concise and logical evaluation to it that is needed to keep our position on whether or not the idea is true or accurate or not.

That is what I think anyway.


My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-09-2014, 05:32 PM
RE: Hmmm...
(18-09-2014 05:03 PM)Sam Wrote:  Whichever way you look at it, atheism is an opinion... A newborn baby has no opinion of anything at all.

I think agnostic would be a better term, although that isn't entirely satisfactory either, since it implies questioning.

To me its the same as calling a baby a vegetarian, because they don't eat meat...

Well, atheist is without belief and agnostic is without knowledge. I'd say babies qualify.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
18-09-2014, 06:07 PM
RE: Hmmm...
I categorize atheist as the default position also... they're atheist. All agnostic atheist is, is lacking a belief in a God, they qualify that criteria.

They also are a-smokers/nonsmokers, aphilatelists, and anything else you want to categorize them as for their inaction. We just live in a sad human world were atheist happens to be a position that currently matters.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-09-2014, 06:30 PM
RE: Hmmm...
(18-09-2014 02:20 PM)CiderThinker Wrote:  
(18-09-2014 12:43 PM)Li_Holodomer Wrote:  To have the ability to have spiritual lives.

And what does that mean?

Sorry. I don't know all of the lingo of logical fallacies or anything like that unlike some, so I'll just blunder on.

The ability to make decisions about the meaning of life and the pursuit of happiness. Let's put it like that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2014, 07:41 AM
RE: Hmmm...
(18-09-2014 04:25 AM)pablo Wrote:  I have to say I agree with him for the most part. I think a baby would be more accurately described as a non-believer rather than an atheist. Atheism implies knowledge of theism. Non-belief (or lack of belief) could imply ignorance of theism, at least in this context.
Maybe a better term would be uninformed non-theist?

a baby doesn't have the cognitive capability to understand these concepts in a critical way or in meaningful way and remain as such for a few more years by which time the believers would've indoctrinated him/her by then
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2014, 07:42 AM
RE: Hmmm...
(18-09-2014 06:30 PM)Li_Holodomer Wrote:  
(18-09-2014 02:20 PM)CiderThinker Wrote:  And what does that mean?

Sorry. I don't know all of the lingo of logical fallacies or anything like that unlike some, so I'll just blunder on.

The ability to make decisions about the meaning of life and the pursuit of happiness. Let's put it like that.

isn't that just philosophy ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2014, 10:17 AM
RE: Hmmm...
(19-09-2014 07:41 AM)Ace Wrote:  
(18-09-2014 04:25 AM)pablo Wrote:  I have to say I agree with him for the most part. I think a baby would be more accurately described as a non-believer rather than an atheist. Atheism implies knowledge of theism. Non-belief (or lack of belief) could imply ignorance of theism, at least in this context.
Maybe a better term would be uninformed non-theist?

a baby doesn't have the cognitive capability to understand these concepts in a critical way or in meaningful way and remain as such for a few more years by which time the believers would've indoctrinated him/her by then

I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: