|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,000
Loc: Terra Firma
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: sudly]
#28602818 - 12/30/23 12:14 AM (29 days, 13 hours ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said: There's a lot to question about whether matter and anti-matter are two aspects of the same thing
They are composed of the same two quarks in sets of three. They are merely two polar aspects of the same single thing; hadronic matter.
Quote:
sudly said: but I'm not sure why you're bringing up enantiomers.. I don't believe there's a great deal of unverified information surrounding them, unless you had something specific in mind by bringing them up?
Because, just like with antimatter and matter, despite appearing to be polar opposites in contrast they are actually just inverse versions of the same thing.
In this manner, to me, anti-theists are a type of theist.
Atheism is, from my perspective, a type of religion, it even has congregations, people considered leaders or role models and a developed culture. It is functionally indistinguishable from a type of cult, but in the sense that all religious communities are cults. This is from anthropological, historical and behavioral perspectives.
I tend to prefer the company and conversation of atheists to theists but I prefer to avoid those who are fanatical, regardless of what they believe.
This is just my perspective and opinion. I subscribe to Dialetheism so am viewing atheistm and theism as both true and both false without contradiction in my comparison.
Nevertheless I view the theistic perspective of Einstein to be more reasonable than other theist and anti-theistic perspectives. I'm sure that relates to my own ontology and psychology.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,797
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Nillion]
#28602824 - 12/30/23 12:27 AM (29 days, 13 hours ago) |
|
|
So because a neutron is like a proton, but they're not the same, anti-theists are a type of theist?
When you get to universal origins and someone claims anything, maybe then you could call them in a sense a theist of sorts, but outside of creation, I don't think the analogy applies. Am I a theist for liking that the Sun sustains life?
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
Freedom
Pigment of your imagination



Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 5,850
Last seen: 4 minutes, 15 seconds
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Nillion]
#28602829 - 12/30/23 12:41 AM (29 days, 13 hours ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said:
Because, just like with antimatter and matter, despite appearing to be polar opposites in contrast they are actually just inverse versions of the same thing.
In this manner, to me, anti-theists are a type of theist.
Atheism is, from my perspective, a type of religion, it even has congregations, people considered leaders or role models and a developed culture. It is functionally indistinguishable from a type of cult, but in the sense that all religious communities are cults. This is from anthropological, historical and behavioral perspectives.
I think this is true of some aetheists but not all.
for example it took me till the age of 30 or 35 till I realized that people might actually believe in a god that would torture people for eternity. I simply couldn't understand how anyone could possibly really believe that, as it was incomprehensible to me.
Further, when I was 5 I had an experience where I realized thought and observation are always limited, and so found I couldn't believe in anything. For example, am I really a guy nammed bob dreaming that he's this Freedom dude? I don't know.
All my life people have said that my inability to believe is a belief, yet it is not the same phenomena. Belief is holding onto an idea. Non belief is just open. There are different levels and scales of belief.
The wiki page for aethism breaks down 3 levels starting with absence of belief:
Quote:
Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.
and a cool ven diagram from reddit:
|
Freedom
Pigment of your imagination



Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 5,850
Last seen: 4 minutes, 15 seconds
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Freedom]
#28602831 - 12/30/23 12:42 AM (29 days, 13 hours ago) |
|
|
I think I'm sort in the infant category, gods seem to be beyond me
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,000
Loc: Terra Firma
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: sudly]
#28602839 - 12/30/23 12:54 AM (29 days, 12 hours ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said: So because a neutron is like a proton, but they're not the same, anti-theists are a type of theist?
I don't think you understand what I was expressing. It is about polar inverses being equivalents.
Atheism is a claim without evidence about a claim without evidence. It suffers from the same flaw it identifies.
|
Freedom
Pigment of your imagination



Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 5,850
Last seen: 4 minutes, 15 seconds
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Nillion]
#28602842 - 12/30/23 01:03 AM (29 days, 12 hours ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said:
Quote:
sudly said: So because a neutron is like a proton, but they're not the same, anti-theists are a type of theist?
I don't think you understand what I was expressing. It is about polar inverses being equivalents.
Atheism is a claim without evidence about a claim without evidence. It suffers from the same flaw it identifies.
atheism doesn't require any claim
|
budmanman
OTD Masterbater



Registered: 02/07/07
Posts: 17,974
Loc: PNW
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Nillion] 1
#28602843 - 12/30/23 01:03 AM (29 days, 12 hours ago) |
|
|
Do you collect stamps?
-------------------- Everything I have ever said is total bogus bs I am full of crud therefore everything I say should never be taken literal. And I am mentally unstable.
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,000
Loc: Terra Firma
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: clam_dude]
#28602847 - 12/30/23 01:10 AM (29 days, 12 hours ago) |
|
|
To me defining atheism as a lack of belief is an exercise in religious apologetics.
Consider the word aletheia, it literally means to uncover, lethia is the act of covering. the A- part reverses the part that follows. Because uncovering is revealing, aletheia is the word for truth. Ironically, for the topic of this conversation, it also became anthropomorphized as a Goddess of truth named Aletheia.
Theism classically is a claim that God exists and Atheism is classically a claim that there is no God. This is why I call it anti-theism.
Agnostic is gnostic with the same prefix, one can believe in God and be agnostic, it merely means that one is unable to know about God. Gnostic means knowable. Agnostic means un-knowable. One can also be agnostic as a position that Gods existence cannot be known and thus may or may not exist.
In my opinion, that is.
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,000
Loc: Terra Firma
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Freedom]
#28602851 - 12/30/23 01:16 AM (29 days, 12 hours ago) |
|
|
Quote:
budmanman said: atheism doesn't require any claim
Classically it is a claim. In that sense Theism is a claim that God exists and Atheism is a claim that God lacks existence or is unexisting.
From a dialethic perspective one can consider that it is true that God does exist and it is true that God does not exist, without conflict or mutual exclusivity. Catuá¹£koá¹i also relates.
Edited by Nillion (12/30/23 01:20 AM)
|
Freedom
Pigment of your imagination



Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 5,850
Last seen: 4 minutes, 15 seconds
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Nillion]
#28602858 - 12/30/23 01:38 AM (29 days, 12 hours ago) |
|
|
what would you call the position that claims neither belief in or against god?
|
Freedom
Pigment of your imagination



Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 5,850
Last seen: 4 minutes, 15 seconds
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Freedom] 1
#28602866 - 12/30/23 01:45 AM (29 days, 12 hours ago) |
|
|
here's a quote from the Aetheist subreddit, which has 2.8 million members. Its an example of how the word is used there. I don't say this to argue about the definition of the wordas I don't see words as having strict definitions, just that this being in the FAQ of such a large group shows that it is used this way:
Quote:
Anyone who does not hold a belief in one or more gods is an atheist. Someone who holds an active belief in the nonexistence of particular gods is specifically known as a "strong" or "explicit" atheist, as opposed to "weak" or "implicit" atheists who make no claims either way.
|
DisoRDeR
motional



Registered: 08/29/02
Posts: 1,158
Loc: nonsensistan
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Freedom] 1
#28602870 - 12/30/23 01:47 AM (29 days, 11 hours ago) |
|
|
I might call it curiosity, or just chillin', depending on the thinker's recent interest in all that.
Named things can be pointed at. How does one point in all directions at once?
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Freedom]
#28602958 - 12/30/23 05:32 AM (29 days, 8 hours ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Freedom said: I think I'm sort in the infant category, gods seem to be beyond me
me too 72 yr old infant!
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
budmanman
OTD Masterbater



Registered: 02/07/07
Posts: 17,974
Loc: PNW
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: redgreenvines]
#28602977 - 12/30/23 05:57 AM (29 days, 7 hours ago) |
|
|
You will belivz in ze lord, you will eat ze bugs, you will own zuthing and you zwill like it.
-------------------- Everything I have ever said is total bogus bs I am full of crud therefore everything I say should never be taken literal. And I am mentally unstable.
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,000
Loc: Terra Firma
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Freedom]
#28603204 - 12/30/23 10:42 AM (29 days, 3 hours ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Freedom said: what would you call the position that claims neither belief in or against god?
A scientific ontology does just that.
It basically entails the view that any question that cannot be answered is irrelevant. In this if you can't measure a claim and test it in a reproducible manner than it isn't worthy of attention or consideration. Thus science cannot make a claim for or against God and from a scientific perspective both claims are equally untenable without evidence.
If one adds that their definition of God is such that it is unknowable then that is agnosticism. God is a word that is widely applied to numerous conceptually distinct things, some of them much less plausible than others.
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,000
Loc: Terra Firma
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Freedom]
#28603207 - 12/30/23 10:49 AM (29 days, 2 hours ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Freedom said: here's a quote from the Aetheist subreddit, which has 2.8 million members. Its an example of how the word is used there. I don't say this to argue about the definition of the wordas I don't see words as having strict definitions, just that this being in the FAQ of such a large group shows that it is used this way:
Quote:
Anyone who does not hold a belief in one or more gods is an atheist. Someone who holds an active belief in the nonexistence of particular gods is specifically known as a "strong" or "explicit" atheist, as opposed to "weak" or "implicit" atheists who make no claims either way.
I tend to use older word definitions in a rather precise manner. I also ignore what people on reddit think about in regard to pretty much everything. No offense is intended to reddit or those who care about what reddit users think. In general I don't base any of my opinions, that I am aware of, on the consensus of others.
Edited to add: I also have no issue with people on reddit having a different opinion than I about this. There is nothing wrong with their beliefs, nor with mine, they are just different perspectives.
Edited by Nillion (12/30/23 11:11 AM)
|
Freedom
Pigment of your imagination



Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 5,850
Last seen: 4 minutes, 15 seconds
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: DisoRDeR]
#28603300 - 12/30/23 12:52 PM (29 days, 53 minutes ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DisoRDeR said: I might call it curiosity, or just chillin', depending on the thinker's recent interest in all that.
Named things can be pointed at. How does one point in all directions at once?
i like curiosity
all directions at once? the limitless limit. all pointing is an attempt, who knows where it lands?
|
Freedom
Pigment of your imagination



Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 5,850
Last seen: 4 minutes, 15 seconds
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Freedom]
#28603315 - 12/30/23 01:06 PM (29 days, 40 minutes ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said:
I tend to use older word definitions in a rather precise manner. I also ignore what people on reddit think about in regard to pretty much everything. No offense is intended to reddit or those who care about what reddit users think. In general I don't base any of my opinions, that I am aware of, on the consensus of others.
Edited to add: I also have no issue with people on reddit having a different opinion than I about this. There is nothing wrong with their beliefs, nor with mine, they are just different perspectives.
Language is co-created and co-evolves. The definitions of words are so fluid we might not notice. For example:
You may use a word a certain way, however the way other people use the word is not an opinion, it can be observed. If we look to the post you were responding to, the way the word is being used is spelled out pretty clearly (IMO):
Quote:
I find god "not guilty" of existing. That is, there is not enough evidence to verify the claim that "god" exists. I am not addressing the claim that "god doesn't exist".I am addressing those who claim that god does exist. The burden of proof is on them to show god's existence.
...
It seems that the word "atheist" is generally misunderstood. Over the course of this thread, I have heard that "atheists claim to know that there is no god" countless times. There might be a very small minority of self proclaimed atheists that claim this. But believe me, the most prominent atheists in the world are agnostic as well (if only as a technicality). It is those who have not taken the time to understand the atheist position who see it as dogmatic.
Edited by Freedom (12/30/23 01:07 PM)
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,000
Loc: Terra Firma
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Freedom]
#28603328 - 12/30/23 01:20 PM (29 days, 25 minutes ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Freedom said: You may use a word a certain way, however the way other people use the word is not an opinion
I disagree.
If opinions cannot be observed then how do we even know they exist? Definitions are opinions, a form of belief. This is why I use standardized definitions in a precise manner and don't care about connotative definitions.
In relation to this the word God is relative to several distinct and in some cases mutually exclusive definitions. A generic statement about God without specificity is pretty vacuous to me. I don't believe in the Abrahamic God, in fact it is my belief that it doesn't exist, so when it comes to that specific definition of God I can be described as an atheist, but I am not an atheist in any absolute sense.
And I have no problem saying that in my opinion a lot of people use many words incorrectly and the employment of both God and Atheist frequently entails this. English is often criticized for lacking precision, but I believe that it can be used in a very precise way, just as much so as German. To do this, however, requires focusing on standardized definitions, otherwise the language loses coherent value.
|
Freedom
Pigment of your imagination



Registered: 05/26/05
Posts: 5,850
Last seen: 4 minutes, 15 seconds
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Nillion]
#28603341 - 12/30/23 01:30 PM (29 days, 16 minutes ago) |
|
|
so how do you determine the True definition of a word when the dictionary has multiple meanings for most words?
For example this study using the oxford learners dictionary found 64% of words have multiple definitions, and 95% of the 3000 most frequently used words had multiple definitions.
I've encountered what i think of as language absolutests and I wonder if it has to do with different ways of thinking
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1207245#:~:text=The%20results%20indicated%20that%2064,in%20the%20mid%2Dfrequency%20vocabulary.
Edited by Freedom (12/30/23 01:30 PM)
|
|