Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-05-2014, 07:47 AM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(02-05-2014 07:35 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  ...
Smarten-up.

Thanks for the candid advice. Dodgy

Problem here is... I ain't a Humanist. So, no club membership for me.

Weeping

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 07:56 AM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
Quote:Smarten-up.
Drinking Beverage



I'll just play the 'can I help you' lick!!!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Monster_Riffs's post
02-05-2014, 08:40 AM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(01-05-2014 06:44 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  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???
It's all beginning to make perfect sense now. If this is what you really believe, then clearly you have been allowing too much FICTION to change your mind. Drinking Beverage

I am not accountable to any God. I am accountable to myself - and not because I think I am God as some theists would try to assert - but because, no matter what actions I take, thoughts I think, or words I utter, I have to be able to live with myself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Impulse's post
02-05-2014, 08:47 AM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
I knew I was going to have problems with that claim, but I couldn't figure out how to narrow it. It should read: Every fucking book in the social sciences section of the fucking bookstore of your fucking sorry-ass town is written to change people's fucking minds, otherwise nobody would fucking 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
02-05-2014, 08:50 AM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(02-05-2014 08:47 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  I knew I was going to have problems with that claim, but I couldn't figure out how to narrow it. It should read: Every fucking book in the social sciences section of the fucking bookstore of your fucking sorry-ass town is written to change people's fucking minds, otherwise nobody would fucking read them.

No, I sometimes read books that just support ideas I already support that are in the social sciences section.
Also, I can't tell if your signature is an infraction on count of forum rule 4.
4) No Threats
We do not tolerate any physical threats aimed at any of our members. This behavior can result in your account being banned and depending on the nature of the threats your details being passed to law enforcement. It is also a bannable offence to interfere with, or threaten to interfere with, someone's life beyond the forum; either online (such as threatening to spam someone's Facebook page), or in real life (such as threatening to track down someone's phone number). The exception to this rule are threats that involve legal issues. If a matter revolves around the threat of a legal issue then it is up to the relevant courts and/or authorities to rule on such matters. The staff at TTA forums do not have the knowledge or right to make judgments, or intervene, in legal matters.
Also, that's waayyyyy too many cuss words to actually be necessary.
5) Maliciously Disrupting the Forum is Prohibited
Anyone who comes here with the sole intent of causing chaos and conflict is not welcome. Being intentionally overly disruptive is also not acceptable. In the event that it is felt by the forum Administration that a person is causing excessive issues then they will be officially warned. Failure to heed the warning may lead to temporary bans leading up to a permanent ban if the offending behaviour is not ceased. This is considered a last resort and only for the most serious situations. Anyone who is felt to be trying to manipulate this rule to get another member banned by causing controversy about them risks falling foul of this rule themselves.

[Image: v0jpzpT.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 08:59 AM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(02-05-2014 08:47 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  I knew I was going to have problems with that claim, but I couldn't figure out how to narrow it. It should read: Every fucking book in the social sciences section of the fucking bookstore of your fucking sorry-ass town is written to change people's fucking minds, otherwise nobody would fucking read them.

This says otherwise Drinking Beverage

I'll just play the 'can I help you' lick!!!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 11:42 AM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
All you guys have to offer is that the dictionary defines atheism as . . . non-belief in gods.
Quote:atheism is the opposite of theism


That is not reasoning. You get close to reasoning when you say:
Quote:Theism is the belief in gods therefore the grammatical construction of the prefix "a" in atheism means the opposition to belief in gods

But the problem is that is in contention with the non-belief definition, because why would people designate themselves in respect to something that the do not know exists???

Atheism only makes sense when it is used to combat theism, and when theism is defeated, "atheism," will be discarded; and the factions will define themselves. But I say lets start defining our factions now, and get ahead of the game.

You guys like talk your stupid shit about how atheism is not a political doctrine, because every atheist is different. Well, why the fuck can't you grant me the privilege of being different - why do I have to see things your way? Why the fuck do you believe it is impossible to define the factions of atheism - why do you think it is infinite? It is because you are stupid and you want the Christians to do it for you.

If you had the ability to reason, you wouldn't be arguing with me with the dictionary definitions as your weapons - you would be asking me, " what is the next step in my grand pooh-pa plan if this contingent of the atheist community were to recognize that my definitions were the better descriptors?" But you cannot get there, because you have a dogma that guides your agenda to predominately fight the arguments about gods. Your dogma only allows you to see the solution to the world's problems is only possible by the eradication of theism by arguing them to submission - you do not have the ability to see the proactive path.

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
02-05-2014, 11:57 AM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(02-05-2014 11:42 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  All you guys have to offer is that the dictionary defines atheism as . . . non-belief in gods.
Quote:atheism is the opposite of theism


That is not reasoning. You get close to reasoning when you say:
Quote:Theism is the belief in gods therefore the grammatical construction of the prefix "a" in atheism means the opposition to belief in gods

But the problem is that is in contention with the non-belief definition, because why would people designate themselves in respect to something that the do not know exists???

Atheism only makes sense when it is used to combat theism, and when theism is defeated, "atheism," will be discarded; and the factions will define themselves. But I say lets start defining our factions now, and get ahead of the game.

You guys like talk your stupid shit about how atheism is not a political doctrine, because every atheist is different. Well, why the fuck can't you grant me the privilege of being different - why do I have to see things your way? Why the fuck do you believe it is impossible to define the factions of atheism - why do you think it is infinite? It is because you are stupid and you want the Christians to do it for you.

If you had the ability to reason, you wouldn't be arguing with me with the dictionary definitions as your weapons - you would be asking me, " what is the next step in my grand pooh-pa plan if this contingent of the atheist community were to recognize that my definitions were the better descriptors?" But you cannot get there, because you have a dogma that guides your agenda to predominately fight the arguments about gods. Your dogma only allows you to see the solution to the world's problems is only possible by the eradication of theism by arguing them to submission - you do not have the ability to see the proactive path.

Help me to better understand your position. What do you hope to get out of a semantic argument? If we agree there are different factions of atheism, then what?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 12:25 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
(02-05-2014 11:42 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  All you guys have to offer is that the dictionary defines atheism as . . . non-belief in gods.
Quote:atheism is the opposite of theism


That is not reasoning. You get close to reasoning when you say:
Quote:Theism is the belief in gods therefore the grammatical construction of the prefix "a" in atheism means the opposition to belief in gods

But the problem is that is in contention with the non-belief definition, because why would people designate themselves in respect to something that the do not know exists???

Atheism only makes sense when it is used to combat theism, and when theism is defeated, "atheism," will be discarded; and the factions will define themselves. But I say lets start defining our factions now, and get ahead of the game.

You guys like talk your stupid shit about how atheism is not a political doctrine, because every atheist is different. Well, why the fuck can't you grant me the privilege of being different - why do I have to see things your way? Why the fuck do you believe it is impossible to define the factions of atheism - why do you think it is infinite? It is because you are stupid and you want the Christians to do it for you.

If you had the ability to reason, you wouldn't be arguing with me with the dictionary definitions as your weapons - you would be asking me, " what is the next step in my grand pooh-pa plan if this contingent of the atheist community were to recognize that my definitions were the better descriptors?" But you cannot get there, because you have a dogma that guides your agenda to predominately fight the arguments about gods. Your dogma only allows you to see the solution to the world's problems is only possible by the eradication of theism by arguing them to submission - you do not have the ability to see the proactive path.

Want some cheese with that whine?

We have enough youth. How about looking for the Fountain of Smart?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 12:33 PM
RE: Let's define atheism, and other misnomers
Atheism has a definition and we have provided that to you, even gone to lengths to explain it to you, but that's not what you want.

You want to create some kind of strawman definition that fits what you believe about atheists or atheism. You aren't looking for truth. You are looking to redefine terms so they match your beliefs.

You're doing it wrong.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: