Isms and Ists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-04-2016, 11:18 AM
RE: Isms and Ists
Biochemical mechanism
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2016, 11:18 AM
RE: Isms and Ists
organism

Your faith is not evidence, your opinion is not fact, and your bias is not wisdom
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2016, 11:34 AM
Isms and Ists
(15-04-2016 10:09 AM)Gordon Blue Wrote:  I suppose as a follow up to that, the useless term of Atheism runs a similar risk with a different outcome.
Atheism isnt, or at least, shouldnt be considered a belief system. It would be more accurate to call it a lack-of-belief system.
Atheism, as typically defined, is not a positive position or statement. It has no claims to believe in, and has no tenets to follow. Its is most certainly not a religion like how it is often claimed by its opponents.
Being as such, unless Atheism is being used to denote the concept it does actually discribe, it betrays the credulity of the user like the other two terms in that if it is being used to describe anything beyond the LACK of belief in gods, it only stands to confuse or obfuscate the subject at hand.


Atheism isn't an ism really... The ism is theism. Atheist means simply "not a theist".

[img]

via GIPHY

[/img]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2016, 11:50 AM
RE: Isms and Ists
(15-04-2016 11:34 AM)Sam Wrote:  Atheism isn't an ism really... The ism is theism. Atheist means simply "not a theist".

You would be correct. Atheism isnt the ism.
Say that 5 times fast.
Athesim shouldnt even be the response or counter to theism. Theism is the counter to atheism, the neutral position, which is why it is a useless term IMHO.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2016, 12:00 PM
Isms and Ists
(15-04-2016 11:50 AM)Gordon Blue Wrote:  
(15-04-2016 11:34 AM)Sam Wrote:  Atheism isn't an ism really... The ism is theism. Atheist means simply "not a theist".

You would be correct. Atheism isnt the ism.
Say that 5 times fast.
Athesim shouldnt even be the response or counter to theism. Theism is the counter to atheism, the neutral position, which is why it is a useless term IMHO.


It is, and should be seen as the neutral position. But, compared to the rest of the population, it's still a minority viewpoint. Plus, a large proportion of atheists are former theists.

So, in reference to the fact that non theists are the exception rather than the norm, I think atheist is still a valid label to use. But it shouldn't be seen as a belief system, or even a world view, it's simply stating that you do not share the majority belief.

Or some shit.

[img]

via GIPHY

[/img]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2016, 12:06 PM
RE: Isms and Ists
baptism
vandalism
tourism
magnetism
Angel

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2016, 12:09 PM
RE: Isms and Ists
I do find myself having to clarify what I believe or don't believe to theists. I always have to make sure I don't say I "believe" in evolution but that I "accept" it as a fact and sometimes I forget and they get to say "Well I don't believe in that like you do." and then it's like "Well, you don't have to believe it's true, it's still true and factual no matter what you believe but I do accept it as a reality."

I don't mind ists and isms so much, if someone wants to define me or label me as long as it's true to what I do believe it's fine. I'm ok with being called a humanist and a Darwinist and of course an atheist if that makes people feel like they can understand my point of view better but what really matters is how they define those terms. Chances are they don't even understand what they mean and often they seem to think atheism is some kind of religion so I have to spend time refuting that.

We hear so often about what "conservative" means or "liberal" but how often do you hear "humanist"? It's so rare even I didn't know what it meant until my early 20's so telling a theist who claims I have no morals that I'm a humanist won't change their mind until I go out of my way to fully illustrate what that means.

[Image: sagansig_zps6vhbql6m.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2016, 12:16 PM
RE: Isms and Ists
(15-04-2016 12:00 PM)Sam Wrote:  Plus, a large proportion of atheists are former theists.

Right, but ALL theists are former atheists, and i feel safe making that generalization. Even still, all theists are atheists in regards to the countless deities that they dont believe in.
In that sense, atheism is the rule and theism is the exception. It is the exception of making a special case for believing in one (or one group) of many deities that have been cooked up over the ages.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2016, 12:25 PM
RE: Isms and Ists
I am a journalist and I believe in journalism. Praise be to Cronkite.

Check out my now-defunct atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2016, 12:29 PM
RE: Isms and Ists
(15-04-2016 12:09 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  I don't mind ists and isms so much, if someone wants to define me or label me as long as it's true to what I do believe it's fine. I'm ok with being called a humanist and a Darwinist and of course an atheist if that makes people feel like they can understand my point of view better but what really matters is how they define those terms. Chances are they don't even understand what they mean and often they seem to think atheism is some kind of religion so I have to spend time refuting that.
This, i think, is the core issue. The ism puts you in a box in their mind and takes away from the discussion about the facts to correct them, especially when the ism comes packaged with whatever falsehoods, like the false associations "darwinism" and "social darwinism".
It does become troublesome when you want to outline your position quickly without having to throw it all out up front, but an ism to one may not be the same to another.
That, i wish, we had a better way to go about it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: