Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-05-2014, 06:02 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 05:59 PM)Simon Moon Wrote:  
(01-05-2014 05:54 PM)Psuedo Yeshua Wrote:  "An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence" - Carl Sagan

I personally believe the definition: athiesm= belief that there is not a god. Instead of the definition: atheism = lack of belief in god.


So, what word or set of words do you think define someone that lacks belief in a god?


As far as I can tell, theism is the belief in at least one god. Anything else if atheism (without theism).
Then would you consider agnosticism atheism?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2014, 06:06 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 06:02 PM)Psuedo Yeshua Wrote:  
(01-05-2014 05:59 PM)Simon Moon Wrote:  So, what word or set of words do you think define someone that lacks belief in a god?


As far as I can tell, theism is the belief in at least one god. Anything else if atheism (without theism).
Then would you consider agnosticism atheism?

Exactly.

So, still an atheist then?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2014, 06:09 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 06:01 PM)John Wrote:  
(01-05-2014 04:22 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  I do not want you to guess - I want you to tell me what the universal accepted definition are

There are none. There -- are -- NONE. Which is already evident from the fact that you wish to subscribe to different definitions than the rest of us. The most useful definitions are, yet once again, those found in dictionaries; the reasons for this should be clear by now, if not, I'm happy to explain. And as you'll see, they have several definitions for most of those words, because they are employed differently by different people in different contexts.

I'm not going to do 5 minutes worth of copy-pasting for your convenience, you can type the words for yourself here, among other places.

(01-05-2014 04:22 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  and I will explain to you why they are wrong.

If by 'wrong' you mean 'inappropriate', go for it.

No, by "Wrong," what he means is "A person who does not routinely abuse inhalants" as opposed to "Right: A person who routinely concentrates and abuses inhalants." By continuing to use confabulated personal definitions for words, he agrees that any personal definition for any given word is equally accurate, regardless of the dictionary definition.

Therefore, TrainWreck is merely asserting that he routinely abuses inhalants before posting personal definitions of words like "atheism" on TTA.

“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
[+] 1 user Likes rampant.a.i.'s post
01-05-2014, 06:10 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 06:06 PM)Simon Moon Wrote:  
(01-05-2014 06:02 PM)Psuedo Yeshua Wrote:  Then would you consider agnosticism atheism?

Exactly.

So, still an atheist then?

I considered myself an agnostic who favored atheism so by that definition I would have been atheist the entire time.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-05-2014, 06:12 PM (This post was last modified: 01-05-2014 06:23 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 05:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  This is not a discussion - you are having a rant.
This is not a rant at all, pal. I am presenting an excellent argument and all of you cannot handle the reasoning, because it offends the belief systems that you have constructed.

Way back in the 1400's, or when ever they generated the terms theism and atheism, they did not have the sophistication, nor need, to understand that if the person does not know of the existence of a supernatural then the only thing he can oppose is the authoritative doctrine that directs him to believe in such.

(01-05-2014 05:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. Are you perhaps thinking of antitheism?
Yo kid, didn't you notice that that European peon presented that argument way back in this thread??

(01-05-2014 05:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  Clearly, atheism will have political ramifications, but it is not itself political.
For instance, an atheist would likely support secular government and oppose theocracy. But an atheist might also support fascism or socialism or violent repression of religion or peaceful coexistence. Or many other things.

So, no, you are incorrect.
No. I am correct and you are wrong. Humanism is closer to the "lack of belief" theory. Atheism requires the existence of theism to have any meaning; and so, atheism is the opposition to the doctrines prescribing theism - politics.

Oh look at your sorry ass signature - you're fucking playing the semantics organization plan that I am doing. Bitch, I'm years ahead of you - take a fucking walk of the pier.
Quote:Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Why the fuck are you doing that if people are not getting it incorrect???
Get lost you lame piece of shit.

You think you're the only one who can figure out what is fucked up - go fuck yourself.

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, 06:19 PM (This post was last modified: 01-05-2014 06:32 PM by rampant.a.i..)
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 06:12 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(01-05-2014 05:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  This is not a discussion - you are having a rant.
This is not a rant at all, pal. I am presenting an excellent argument and all of you cannot handle the reasoning, because it offends the belief systems that you have constructed.

Way back in the 1400's, or when ever they generated the terms theism and atheism, they did not have the sophistication, nor need, to understand that if the person does not know of the existence of a supernatural then the only thing he can oppose is the authoritative doctrine that directs him to believe in such.

(01-05-2014 05:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. Are you perhaps thinking of antitheism?
Yo kid, didn't you notice that that European peon presented that argument way back in this thread??

(01-05-2014 05:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  Clearly, atheism will have political ramifications, but it is not itself political.
For instance, an atheist would likely support secular government and oppose theocracy. But an atheist might also support fascism or socialism or violent repression of religion or peaceful coexistence. Or many other things.

So, no, you are incorrect.
No. I am correct and you are wrong. Humanism is closer to the "lack of belief" theory. Atheism requires the existence of theism to have any meaning; and so, atheism is the opposition to the doctrines prescribing theism - politics.

It does not alter the dictionary definition of atheism as a lack of belief, to a doctrine with a specific set of beliefs. It is apparent that you lack the sophistication to understand that one can reject a indoctrinated beliefs without forming a new doctrine of beliefs.

You can equivocate terms all you like, but that does not change their dictionary definition, nor does it change the popular or common definition.

All it means is that you demand your ridiculous personal definition be taken as seriously as the real definition, like someone with aphasia screaming that we answer the toaster oven and tell them to stop calling, because it's been ringing all morning.

Again, according to your concept of word definition, your signature states you are "walking on sunshine":



“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
01-05-2014, 06:39 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.

[Image: colin-farrell.gif]


Look, fucktard, you don't get to make up your own definitions of words and foist them on the rest of the world.

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
[+] 3 users Like Taqiyya Mockingbird's post
01-05-2014, 06:44 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 06:39 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  Look, fucktard, you don't get to make up your own definitions of words and foist them on the rest of the world.
Don't tell me what I can and cannot do. Every fucking book at the entrance of the fucking bookstore in your sorry-ass town, is dedicated to changing peoples minds about what they believe; otherwise they wouldn't fucking bother to write them, because why the fuck would anybody read them???

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
[+] 1 user Likes TrainWreck's post
01-05-2014, 06:47 PM (This post was last modified: 01-05-2014 06:50 PM by rampant.a.i..)
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 06:39 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird 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.

[Image: colin-farrell.gif]


Look, fucktard, you don't get to make up your own definitions of words and foist them on the rest of the world.

Sure he does. But if that's the case, so does everyone else:

(01-05-2014 01:14 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Atheism is the political doctrine determined to eliminate the legislation of law based on theist doctrines.

Atheism is the reasonable belief Trainwreck is determined to eliminate the inhalants by illegally concentrating and inhaling propellants.

See? The alternate definition to each of those words is equally as valid to his definition of atheism.

Words can mean whatever you like, regardless of what it says in the dictionary.

Anyway, I've gotta go baseball my refrigerator before Tom Selleck the ice maker silly hat tango the fruit basket.

Shark-be-gone!

“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
01-05-2014, 09:21 PM (This post was last modified: 01-05-2014 09:35 PM by Chas.)
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 06:12 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(01-05-2014 05:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  This is not a discussion - you are having a rant.
This is not a rant at all, pal. I am presenting an excellent argument and all of you cannot handle the reasoning, because it offends the belief systems that you have constructed.

Way back in the 1400's, or when ever they generated the terms theism and atheism, they did not have the sophistication, nor need, to understand that if the person does not know of the existence of a supernatural then the only thing he can oppose is the authoritative doctrine that directs him to believe in such.

(01-05-2014 05:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. Are you perhaps thinking of antitheism?
Yo kid, didn't you notice that that European peon presented that argument way back in this thread??

(01-05-2014 05:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  Clearly, atheism will have political ramifications, but it is not itself political.
For instance, an atheist would likely support secular government and oppose theocracy. But an atheist might also support fascism or socialism or violent repression of religion or peaceful coexistence. Or many other things.

So, no, you are incorrect.
No. I am correct and you are wrong. Humanism is closer to the "lack of belief" theory. Atheism requires the existence of theism to have any meaning; and so, atheism is the opposition to the doctrines prescribing theism - politics.

Nope, you're still wrong. Your mistake is making a leap from not believing in gods to opposing doctrines. Non sequitur.

Quote:Oh look at your sorry ass signature - you're fucking playing the semantics organization plan that I am doing. Bitch, I'm years ahead of you - take a fucking walk of the pier.

Quote:Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Why the fuck are you doing that if people are not getting it incorrect???
Get lost you lame piece of shit.

You think you're the only one who can figure out what is fucked up - go fuck yourself.

How little you understand.
Go fuck yourself, you ignorant, delusional twat. Crawl back under that bridge, you troll.

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
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: