Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-05-2014, 12:41 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 12:36 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Thank you very much. Too bad you cannot offer counters my argument that atheists are beholden to a misnomer.

Awww, that's so cute! The chimpanzee thinks throwing it's shit around counts as fine art.


Imagine that... Drinking Beverage

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2014, 12:53 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defini...sh/atheism
This is the Oxford dictionary definition of atheism.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
The wiki definition is pretty good, it explains how broad the term is and that it can but not necessarily be from a social, philosophical or political view. Whilst these are not essential, people who define themselves as atheist hold in common a rejection of the supernatural and the burden of proof.
I agree, however that is humanism - not atheism.

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  My atheism is not a starting point for my political stance.
Your humanism is not the starting point of your political stance. Atheism is the starting point of your political stance, because it describes your opposition to theist doctrine.

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  Just as my not playing basketball or the fact that I don't have green eyes. It is not in direct opposition to only the ontological argument, that is only one theist argument, it is the rejection of all theism.
those are some unfinished arguments - try harder in the future.

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  If I had theism as part of my life then yes, this would be a starting point for my politics but that doesn't mean it follows that no theism is a religious/theistic/politics stance.
Wow - you are willing to recognize that reciprocal of the argument that I am making, but just cannot make the connection, because for the longest time you have known the definition of atheism it has not been associated with politics, because you associate it only with the opposition to the existence of god; which you know is only based on doctrine written by devious white men controlling the masses of stupid people who did not know what top do with their lives.

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  That is like saying because I am European everything I do and think is anti rest of the world. Or because I am not an American, I am automatically anti American. This is essentially your claim, that we are instantly politically opposed to theism by default of the atheist position.
You are not anti-American because you designate yourself, "European," and not, "anti-American." You would not be anti-theism if you were to recognize that humanism is the correction; as it is, you designate yourself to be an atheist; which means you are anti-theist!

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  My definition, which I have provided supporting links for which line up with my understanding show very clearly that I am correct and considerably cleverer than you. (I have stopped being polite now because you didn't even start to be, when I asked you nicely).
Oh you poor thing, you.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2014, 01:03 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 12:36 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 04:07 PM)Impulse Wrote:  All I can say is "Wow..." Blink

And...

1. Arrogant: check
2. Ignores established definitions: check
3. Ignores points raised by others: check
4. Arrogant: check
5. Insists he's right because... well just because: check
6. Arrogant: check
7. Rude: check
8. Arrogant: check
9. Thinks he is God: check
10. I'm outta here: check
Thank you very much. Too bad you cannot offer counters my argument that atheists are beholden to a misnomer.
Sorry, but "I'm right and you're wrong" doesn't qualify as an argument so there is nothing to counter. Drinking Beverage

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Impulse's post
01-05-2014, 01:11 PM (This post was last modified: 01-05-2014 01:15 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  I will continue my intellectually challenged friend ...
You are so cruel!

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  You repeatedly asserting your own definition of atheism as a political stance is dismissed and invalid until you provide credible links, such as I have, the dictionary and Wikipedia are standard surface definitions ...
I am making the same claim to argument that anyone can make - that is what we are here to do - challenge the status quo, because we know it is erroneous, and that we are determined to correct the errors.

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/
So here is a definition from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, it has descriptions of 'family terms' in it too and well worth a read, it is comprised of many articles from top of their field philospers, academics and public intellectuals, I bet even your idol Sam Harris even rates it! Note; there are some big words in it and you may need to check their accepted definitions, your usual approach of simply making up your own meanings and repeating them over and over again will cause you to become unstuck, this will expose your willful ignorance further.
We have only been working on one definition, and you are worn out thinking that that we have discussed all five of the others? Weeping


(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  If your 'lofty intellect' *cough* is struggling, feel free to ask.... I am nearly 40 and have been at this since my mid teens, judging by your profile picture, I have been at this for almost as long as you have been alive, therefore I am years ahead of you, and your superior in intellect, wisdom, class, eloquence, charisma and coherent delivery.
You must have been under the influence while writing this post, because this is really drifting away.

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  Don't stop there though. http://www.amazon.com sell books. Type your chosen search words in to the box provided and you're away! You may need to ask permission from a responsible adult to help you put your bank details in, for a cretin like you, it might be taxing (I have just realised how much I miss Chippy)
I won't do all of your leg work for you.
It is amazing, you probably charge that the theists and Christians are delusional, and you know they control commerce and society; but for some reason you trust their control over the definitions of words.

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  I know you will claim you have done everything and read everything ever but your breath is wasted on me. You will no doubt repeat your claims, not support them and declare we are all stupid. This is the behaviour of a cretinous imbecile or petulant child, you have the debating style of a spoilt toddler deprived of sweets with an inferior grasp of simple coherency. Your proclamations of superior intelligence without even the most simple concept of referencing, citations and supporting evidence demonstrates that you are laughably deluded and your unacceptance of an offer for a civil discussion shows that you can only 'debate' in one style, you are not even a one trick pony, as your 'intellectual trick' is a non starter, you are the turd of a one trick pony.

So, let's sling insults pony turd. It's all you've got.
Insults are all you have to put forth - you drunk punk bitch!

I am pretty sure you are familiar with the objective of atheist discussion forums - to challenge the status quo.

Notice how you, and everyone else, are able to handle challenges to lots of other topics, but for some reason this particular topic was extremely active - why was that?
800 views in less than four hours!!! Wake the fuck up - genius!

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2014, 01:14 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 01:03 PM)Impulse Wrote:  
(01-05-2014 12:36 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Thank you very much. Too bad you cannot offer counters my argument that atheists are beholden to a misnomer.
Sorry, but "I'm right and you're wrong" doesn't qualify as an argument so there is nothing to counter. Drinking Beverage

Atheism is the political doctrine determined to eliminate the legislation of law based on theist doctrines.

Humanism is the proper ontological doctrine "opposite' of theism. It is an error in reason to define an ontology based on the opposition of another ontology. Where as, a political doctrine designated the antithesis of an erroneous ontology is acceptable, because when the political doctrine succeeds in defeating the erroneous ontology the correct ontology, humanism, maintains meaning. Where as, "atheism," makes no sense if no theists exist.

In other words; in a couple of hundred years from now, when theism is eradicated, because of the overwhelming exercise of a scientific political charter, it will be absurd to refer to ourselves as "atheists," however, "humanists," will be acceptable

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2014, 01:17 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 12:53 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defini...sh/atheism
This is the Oxford dictionary definition of atheism.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
The wiki definition is pretty good, it explains how broad the term is and that it can but not necessarily be from a social, philosophical or political view. Whilst these are not essential, people who define themselves as atheist hold in common a rejection of the supernatural and the burden of proof.
I agree, however that is humanism - not atheism.

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  My atheism is not a starting point for my political stance.
Your humanism is not the starting point of your political stance. Atheism is the starting point of your political stance, because it describes your opposition to the theists' doctrine that their is a god who gives the morality and laws for organizing community and society.

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  Just as my not playing basketball or the fact that I don't have green eyes. It is not in direct opposition to only the ontological argument, that is only one theist argument, it is the rejection of all theism.
those are some unfinished arguments - try harder in the future.

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  If I had theism as part of my life then yes, this would be a starting point for my politics but that doesn't mean it follows that no theism is a religious/theistic/politics stance.
Wow - you are willing to recognize that reciprocal of the argument that I am making, but just cannot make the connection, because for the longest time you have known the definition of atheism it has not been associated with politics, because you associate it only with the opposition to the existence of god; which you know is only based on doctrine written by devious white men controlling the masses of stupid people who did not know what top do with their lives.

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  That is like saying because I am European everything I do and think is anti rest of the world. Or because I am not an American, I am automatically anti American. This is essentially your claim, that we are instantly politically opposed to theism by default of the atheist position.
You are not anti-American because you designate yourself, "European," and not, "anti-American." You would not be anti-theism if you were to recognize that humanism is the correction; as it is, you designate yourself to be an atheist; which means you are anti-theist!

(28-04-2014 05:18 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  My definition, which I have provided supporting links for which line up with my understanding show very clearly that I am correct and considerably cleverer than you. (I have stopped being polite now because you didn't even start to be, when I asked you nicely).
Oh you poor thing, you.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2014, 01:26 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 01:14 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Atheism is the political doctrine determined to eliminate the legislation of law based on theist doctrines.

Making up your own definitions of terms to somehow alter reality to your viewpoint?

Why, you must be religious!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Elcarch's post
01-05-2014, 01:43 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 01:26 PM)Elcarch Wrote:  
(01-05-2014 01:14 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Atheism is the political doctrine determined to eliminate the legislation of law based on theist doctrines.
Making up your own definitions of terms to somehow alter reality to your viewpoint?

Why, you must be religious!
Adhering to definitions based on 400-600 year-old technology - you must be religious! The argument I am posing is in response to the sophistication level we should have in understanding what is more correct.

In 1400, or whenever they generated the terms of theism and atheism they did not have the sophistication to recognize the ontological shift to understand that since there is no god and since the belief in god is because of authoritative decree - then atheism is the opposition to the decree.

Humanism is the proper antithesis to theism - atheism is the opposition to the doctrines and the subsequent reference for civil law.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2014, 02:18 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 01:14 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(01-05-2014 01:03 PM)Impulse Wrote:  Sorry, but "I'm right and you're wrong" doesn't qualify as an argument so there is nothing to counter. Drinking Beverage

Atheism is the political doctrine determined to eliminate the legislation of law based on theist doctrines.

Humanism is the proper ontological doctrine "opposite' of theism. It is an error in reason to define an ontology based on the opposition of another ontology. Where as, a political doctrine designated the antithesis of an erroneous ontology is acceptable, because when the political doctrine succeeds in defeating the erroneous ontology the correct ontology, humanism, maintains meaning. Where as, "atheism," makes no sense if no theists exist.

In other words; in a couple of hundred years from now, when theism is eradicated, because of the overwhelming exercise of a scientific political charter, it will be absurd to refer to ourselves as "atheists," however, "humanists," will be acceptable



Atheism is not a doctrine of any kind.
Atheism is simply the absence of belief in a god.


You continue to attach the term atheism to other things to justify your opinions and attitudes. It's pointless. Atheism simply stands for no god-belief. Done.

You keep using the term atheism but I don't think you know what it means Shocking





When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WitchSabrina's post
01-05-2014, 02:38 PM (This post was last modified: 01-05-2014 02:42 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 02:18 PM)WitchSabrina Wrote:  Atheism is not a doctrine of any kind.
What kinds of doctrines are there?Definitions of words are doctrines.

quote='Wikipedia'
Doctrine (from Latin: doctrina or possibly from Sanskrit: dukrn) is a codification of beliefs or a body of teachings or instructions, taught principles or positions, as the body of teachings in a branch of knowledge or belief system. The Greek analogue is the etymology of catechism.
Often doctrine specifically suggests a body of religious principles as it is promulgated by a church, but not necessarily: doctrine is also used to refer to a principle of law, in the common law traditions, established through a history of past decisions, such as the doctrine of self-defense, or the principle of fair use, or the more narrowly applicable first-sale doctrine. In some organizations, doctrine is simply defined as "that which is taught", in other words the basis for institutional teaching of its personnel internal ways of doing business.

(01-05-2014 02:18 PM)WitchSabrina Wrote:  Atheism is simply the absence of belief in a god.
That is a misnomer definition of transference, because in 1400, or whenever they generated the terms theism and atheism, they did not have the sophistication level to understand that atheism is opposition to the decree for theism. If it weren't for theism, you would not understand yourself to be an atheist; and because there is no god - the only thing you can be is opposed to the authority that says you must believe - politics.
Wikipedia Wrote:Transference of a well-known product brand name into a genericized trademark (e.g., Xerox for photocopy, Kleenex for tissue or Jell-o for gelatin dessert).

(01-05-2014 02:18 PM)WitchSabrina Wrote:  You continue to attach the term atheism to other things to justify your opinions and attitudes.
You must be mistaken. I am arguing that atheism is a political doctrine - I am not attaching it to anything else. What are all these other things that you are interpreting?

(01-05-2014 02:18 PM)WitchSabrina Wrote:  It's pointless. Atheism simply stands for no god-belief. Done

You keep using the term atheism but I don't think you know what it means
You, and all the other atheists, don't know what it means.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: