Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-09-2016, 09:02 AM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
Now we're going to see an attempt to redefine atheism into theism. Drinking Beverage

Because without the almighty god everything must inevitably descend into solipsism and madness.

Or something like that.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
27-09-2016, 09:10 AM (This post was last modified: 27-09-2016 09:15 AM by SYZ.)
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(27-09-2016 07:33 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  If you lack a belief in a God defined by your personal preference, yet believe in a God according to someone's else personal preference, would you be an atheist or a theist?

This is a non sequitur. You ether believe in the existence of "gods", like you do, or you don't—like me.

There is NO question about any alleged "degrees" of atheism.


And this is one of the silliest "questions" I've seen you post...

Quote:So they're theist according to what someone else personally defines as God, not what they define as God?

You seem to be increasingly posting this sort of drivel purely in order to get a bite out of people—as an excuse for furthering your own nonsensical theories. Please give it up.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like SYZ's post
27-09-2016, 09:16 AM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(27-09-2016 09:02 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(27-09-2016 08:49 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  According to your personal definition as to what constitutes and doesn't constitute as a God.

According to other peoples personal definition of God he would be a theist, whether or not he believes in a personal, or impersonal life force.

Only if you redefine theism. You are redefining it into meaninglessness.

Quote:As well as atheist? God is also is a self-defined concept?

No, theists are those who believe in gods. An impersonal life force is not a god.
See above.

You yourself indicated that the definition of God is a personal preference.

Therefore when you claim that God is not an impersonal life force, you're just stating a personal preference, i.e what you personally define as God or not God.

If someone else defines God as an impersonal life force, while they may disagree with your personal definition, they wouldn't be wrong. And the person who believes in an impersonal life force, would be a theist, in this view. And he wouldn't be wrong in his assessment, because as your suggested it's a matter of personal preference.


I'm also curious about your personal definition of God, that excludes an impersonal life force, from being a God. Can you provide that personal definition?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2016, 09:32 AM (This post was last modified: 27-09-2016 09:36 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(27-09-2016 09:10 AM)SYZ Wrote:  This is a non sequitur. You ether believe in the existence of "gods", like you do, or you don't—like me.

There is NO question about any alleged "degrees" of atheism.

Actually there's a variety of people who in some sense are nothing like us, who seem to be a product of a trend, where people eschew traditional labels. Like christians who prefer not to see themselves as having a religion, but a relationship. Or folks like Neil Tyson who lack a belief in God, but will not define themselves as atheist. What you also get are those who don't like the label God, used in a variety of traditions, but prefer terms like life force, energy, higher power, divine consciousness, etc.. and whatever else name is in vogue among such people.

These are not alleged degrees of atheism, but are different degrees of theism, whether such individuals have an issue with that label or not. They are as much theists, as Neil Tyson is an atheist, regardless if they like that label or not.

For me an atheists is one who lack a belief in a God/s, that would fall under the umbrella of a wide variety of forms of theism, even if it's a vague panentheism, or pantheism of some sorts. Whether or not the person in question calls their beliefs a God belief or not.

Quote:You seem to be increasingly posting this sort of drivel purely in order to get a bite out of people—as an excuse for furthering your own nonsensical theories. Please give it up.

Not really the case at all, the question is one that pops up quite frequently. Which should pose some problems when defining atheism or theism as merely a lack of belief in God, primarily because the thing they supposedly believe or lack a belief in is quite ambiguous in scope, with no real agreed upon definition. Hence why some folks here would suggest an impersonal life force, wouldn't be a God, while it would be a God or akin to a God in a variety of theistic traditions.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2016, 10:19 AM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(27-09-2016 09:16 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(27-09-2016 09:02 AM)Chas Wrote:  Only if you redefine theism. You are redefining it into meaninglessness.


No, theists are those who believe in gods. An impersonal life force is not a god.
See above.

You yourself indicated that the definition of God is a personal preference.

The definition of theism is not.

Quote:Therefore when you claim that God is not an impersonal life force, you're just stating a personal preference, i.e what you personally define as God or not God.

I am not redefining theism.

Quote:If someone else defines God as an impersonal life force, while they may disagree with your personal definition, they wouldn't be wrong. And the person who believes in an impersonal life force, would be a theist, in this view.

No, he would not be. See the definition of theism.

Quote:And he wouldn't be wrong in his assessment, because as your suggested it's a matter of personal preference.

His concept of god might be, but it wouldn't be theism.

Quote:I'm also curious about your personal definition of God, that excludes an impersonal life force, from being a God. Can you provide that personal definition?

I don't need to. Look at the definition of theism. Drinking Beverage

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
27-09-2016, 10:22 AM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(27-09-2016 09:32 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(27-09-2016 09:10 AM)SYZ Wrote:  This is a non sequitur. You ether believe in the existence of "gods", like you do, or you don't—like me.

There is NO question about any alleged "degrees" of atheism.

Actually there's a variety of people who in some sense are nothing like us, who seem to be a product of a trend, where people eschew traditional labels. Like christians who prefer not to see themselves as having a religion, but a relationship. Or folks like Neil Tyson who lack a belief in God, but will not define themselves as atheist. What you also get are those who don't like the label God, used in a variety of traditions, but prefer terms like life force, energy, higher power, divine consciousness, etc.. and whatever else name is in vogue among such people.

These are not alleged degrees of atheism, but are different degrees of theism, whether such individuals have an issue with that label or not. They are as much theists, as Neil Tyson is an atheist, regardless if they like that label or not.

For me an atheists is one who lack a belief in a God/s, that would fall under the umbrella of a wide variety of forms of theism, even if it's a vague panentheism, or pantheism of some sorts. Whether or not the person in question calls their beliefs a God belief or not.

Quote:You seem to be increasingly posting this sort of drivel purely in order to get a bite out of people—as an excuse for furthering your own nonsensical theories. Please give it up.

Not really the case at all, the question is one that pops up quite frequently. Which should pose some problems when defining atheism or theism as merely a lack of belief in God, primarily because the thing they supposedly believe or lack a belief in is quite ambiguous in scope, with no real agreed upon definition. Hence why some folks here would suggest an impersonal life force, wouldn't be a God, while it would be a God or akin to a God in a variety of theistic traditions.

Calling a belief in an impersonal life force theism does not make it theism.

"How many legs does a dog have if you call his tail a leg?
Four. Saying that a tail is a leg doesn't make it a leg."
-Abraham Lincoln

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
[+] 5 users Like Chas's post
27-09-2016, 12:27 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(26-09-2016 06:33 PM)Matrim Cauthon Wrote:  
(30-08-2015 10:44 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  [SNIP]...I agree. But for me is mainly about not trying to force others to live according to your rules rather than being theist/atheist...[snip]

This strikes at points/question just above (^). Just don't know if a 'medium' is possible in the 'religion' dynamic.


For me it's kinda easy - separation of church and state cause delusions shouldn't interfere with governance. No religion in public schools as they're places of education, not indoctrination. Lastly no laws based on religion.

I don't think that "medium" is possible. Moderate catholic is against right to abortion but pro right to euthanasy? He condemns only gays but not lesbians. For me it look like this - you care about your primitive dogma so you try to spread this shit and force it onto others, or you care not and just say you're cultural christian or some such and don't bother others.

Quote: Purity of form, is certainly (at least) a goal of any religion - even if tempered by some (selling what they can?), for modern reality. In pure form - any religion inherently commands all humanity. Given 'balance' - we'll have all degrees on both sides, and certain we'll need those who 'actively stand' (to trickle down from)


I just need to be left alone. I don't care about bullshit theists believe if they do not force it onto me.

Quote: *Isn't Atheism inherently more or less a 'defensive' position anyway? I'm sure there are those otherwise, but I'm unaware of where 'Atheism' and 'Forcing Others' (for anything but to stop being forced themselves) could ever intersect, correctly.

Exactly.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2016, 12:58 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(27-09-2016 10:22 AM)Chas Wrote:  Calling a belief in an impersonal life force theism does not make it theism.


You already stated that the definition of God is a matter of personal preference.

Calling an impersonal life force a God, makes it a God, according to that particular person's personal preference.

And you also have yet to support why your own personal preference for the meaning of God, excludes an impersonal life force here. What exactly about a impersonal life force, makes it not a god of some sort, in your personal view?

Quote:The definition of theism is not.

The definition of theism with what you and others here have stated. Is a belief in God/s, that is defined by one's own personal preferences.

The very definition of thing/s one has to believe to be a theist, is a matter of personal preference, which you earlier suggested, and now seem to want to back peddle.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2016, 01:45 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(27-09-2016 12:58 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(27-09-2016 10:22 AM)Chas Wrote:  Calling a belief in an impersonal life force theism does not make it theism.


You already stated that the definition of God is a matter of personal preference.

Calling an impersonal life force a God, makes it a God, according to that particular person's personal preference.

Reread what I wrote. Belief in that kind of 'god' does not constitute theism; it's not even deism.

Quote:And you also have yet to support why your own personal preference for the meaning of God, excludes an impersonal life force here. What exactly about a impersonal life force, makes it not a god of some sort, in your personal view?

Since I have not stated a meaning, I have nothing to support.
The definition of theism precludes that definition of god as appropriate.

Quote:
Quote:The definition of theism is not.

The definition of theism with what you and others here have stated. Is a belief in God/s, that is defined by one's own personal preferences.

No, theism has a narrower definition than you are trying to fob off on us.
Look it up.

Quote:The very definition of thing/s one has to believe to be a theist, is a matter of personal preference, which you earlier suggested, and now seem to want to back peddle.

No, please stop lying. Your reading comprehension appears to be getting worse. Drinking Beverage

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
27-09-2016, 02:16 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(27-09-2016 01:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  Reread what I wrote. Belief in that kind of 'god' does not constitute theism; it's not even deism.

You do realize that deism is a form of theism, just like pantheism, panentheism, polytheism, etc.. are forms of theism? Belief in any kind of "god/s" would constitute as theism.

Quote:Since I have not stated a meaning, I have nothing to support.
The definition of theism precludes that definition of god as appropriate.

It seems you don't understand theism. Theism doesn't preclude any definition of god, or label any particular definition as inappropriate. If you believe in a god of any sort, you'd be a theist of one type or the other.

What is interesting is that you seem to suggest that theism precludes a belief in certain types of god/s. But atheism doesn't? Would those who believe in such inappropriate gods be atheist? Is atheism a lack of belief in appropriate god/s? Or both inappropriate and appropriate god/s?

Quote:No, theism has a narrower definition than you are trying to fob off on us.
Look it up.

Theism is just as broad as the very definition of the thing the theist is to believe in.

Is the definition of god according to theism narrow?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: