Quantcast
"Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important."

Forums - General Discussion - "Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important."

Nem said:
VGPolyglot said:

Yes, atheism is the lack of belief in a god, which is why the terms atheist and agnostic are not mutually exclusive. I myself would be considered an agnostic atheist, though when asked I generally tend to refer myself to the latter as there are also theistic agnostics. But calling someone who does not know of the concept of a god an atheist doesn't make sense as they could begin to believe in one as soon as they become aware of the idea, and thus in terms of debates and discussion it shifts away from the central argument.

Atheism is about wether you believe the proposition or not, agnosticism is about wether you know the proposition to be true or not.

The agnostic says that he doesn't know enough to accept the proposition, the Atheist says he doesn't believe the proposition. They are the same thing. You are just saying you don't know and don't believe the proposition rather than just saying you don't believe the proposition. It's the same thing. It doesn't change the conclusion.

A theistic agnostic is a bundle of contradictory nonsense. You can't believe it and know it not to be true. Those are most commonly known as the closet Atheists.

I don't know if you catched my previous post but this page i linked before explains all you need to know.

Hmm, would it make more sense to you if i said the baby is an atheist but he doesn't know it? I am not sure why my previous example didn't click though. If i say not believing the space cow means you are a "atheist-moo" but i didn't tell you, would that mean you are not a "atheist-moo"? It is not dependant on you recognising the term yourself, it's about your belief of the proposition.

 

 

I'd say that yes, it does mean I'm not an atheist-moo, since I wouldn't even know of the concept.



Around the Network
VGPolyglot said:
Nem said:

Atheism is about wether you believe the proposition or not, agnosticism is about wether you know the proposition to be true or not.

The agnostic says that he doesn't know enough to accept the proposition, the Atheist says he doesn't believe the proposition. They are the same thing. You are just saying you don't know and don't believe the proposition rather than just saying you don't believe the proposition. It's the same thing. It doesn't change the conclusion.

A theistic agnostic is a bundle of contradictory nonsense. You can't believe it and know it not to be true. Those are most commonly known as the closet Atheists.

I don't know if you catched my previous post but this page i linked before explains all you need to know.

Hmm, would it make more sense to you if i said the baby is an atheist but he doesn't know it? I am not sure why my previous example didn't click though. If i say not believing the space cow means you are a "atheist-moo" but i didn't tell you, would that mean you are not a "atheist-moo"? It is not dependant on you recognising the term yourself, it's about your belief of the proposition.

 

 

I'd say that yes, it does mean I'm not an atheist-moo, since I wouldn't even know of the concept.

That would mean you didn't know you were one, not that you weren't. I see that the problem is you can't recognise the default state as the rejection. 

So, do you think anything can be real until it is presented to you?



Nem said:
VGPolyglot said:

I'd say that yes, it does mean I'm not an atheist-moo, since I wouldn't even know of the concept.

That would mean you didn't know you were one, not that you weren't. I see that the problem is you can't recognise the default state as the rejection. 

So, do you think anything can be real until it is presented to you?

I addressed this before, some people begin to believe in a deity as soon as they are made aware of it, so it can can also mean that someone didn't know that they weren't one, so again that's why knowledge of the concept is important.



Nem said:
Azuren said:

Quit trying to redefine a word that is self-defining.

Is that all you have to say? I don't make up words nor definitions. I use the existing ones. You have me confused with religious leaders.

There's not much else to say. You're arguing against the very meaning of the word.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

VGPolyglot said:
Nem said:

That would mean you didn't know you were one, not that you weren't. I see that the problem is you can't recognise the default state as the rejection. 

So, do you think anything can be real until it is presented to you?

I addressed this before, some people begin to believe in a deity as soon as they are made aware of it, so it can can also mean that someone didn't know that they weren't one, so again that's why knowledge of the concept is important.

The rejection state is the default. The becoming a theist later in a different point in time that can come with knowledge, yes, but it doesn't change the fact that before the knowledge of it came, the default state was reining. You asked me about a baby who is essentially a tabula rasa. A tabula rasa will only believe what is in front of them and they naturally reject everything else that isn't until the knowledge of it changes. This event is not retroactive. It only takes place from the point in time where they decide to become theists (if they do).

Azuren said:
Nem said:

Is that all you have to say? I don't make up words nor definitions. I use the existing ones. You have me confused with religious leaders.

There's not much else to say. You're arguing against the very meaning of the word.

You really are boring. The definition of the word Atheism is the lack of belief in a god. It is everywhere and is the definition of the word officially recognised. Many people have linked it already on this thread. 

Don't like it? Want to make up your own definition based on the lies fed to you by your religious leaders? Go ahead. Not my problem. But it's total BS and only you and your religious buddies will eat it. Don't expect the rest of the world to. And after that you go and play the victims and want special treatment. Yes, i've seen this sad carrousel before.

Last edited by Nem - on 13 January 2018

Around the Network
Nem said:
VGPolyglot said:

I addressed this before, some people begin to believe in a deity as soon as they are made aware of it, so it can can also mean that someone didn't know that they weren't one, so again that's why knowledge of the concept is important.

The rejection state is the default. The becoming a theist later in a different point in time that can come with knowledge, yes, but it doesn't change the fact that before the knowledge of it came, the default state was reining. You asked me about a baby who is essentially a tabula rasa. A tabula rasa will only believe what is in front of them and they naturally reject everything else that isn't until the knowledge of it changes. This event is not retroactive. It only takes place from the point in time where they decide to become theists (if they do).

How do you reject something that you're not aware of? If someone doesn't know that the Detroit Red Wings won the Stanley Cup in 1950, that doesn't mean that they're rejecting that they won it that year.



VGPolyglot said:
Nem said:

The rejection state is the default. The becoming a theist later in a different point in time that can come with knowledge, yes, but it doesn't change the fact that before the knowledge of it came, the default state was reining. You asked me about a baby who is essentially a tabula rasa. A tabula rasa will only believe what is in front of them and they naturally reject everything else that isn't until the knowledge of it changes. This event is not retroactive. It only takes place from the point in time where they decide to become theists (if they do).

How do you reject something that you're not aware of? If someone doesn't know that the Detroit Red Wings won the Stanley Cup in 1950, that doesn't mean that they're rejecting that they won it that year.

You seem to believe that there are three states of mind.

1. I believe.
2. I don't know.
3. I don't believe.

And that makes sense to you?



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

RolStoppable said:
VGPolyglot said:

How do you reject something that you're not aware of? If someone doesn't know that the Detroit Red Wings won the Stanley Cup in 1950, that doesn't mean that they're rejecting that they won it that year.

You seem to believe that there are three states of mind.

1. I believe.
2. I don't know.
3. I don't believe.

And that makes sense to you?

Yes, though I don't know could be replaced with not being aware, though whether or not it is a state of mind is dubious because can something that you're not aware be a state of mind when it does not even exist in your mind? But yes, if you're completely unsure of something you can say that you don't know, as your knowledge isn't great enough for you to lean to belief or disbelief.



RolStoppable said:
VGPolyglot said:

How do you reject something that you're not aware of? If someone doesn't know that the Detroit Red Wings won the Stanley Cup in 1950, that doesn't mean that they're rejecting that they won it that year.

You seem to believe that there are three states of mind.

1. I believe.
2. I don't know.
3. I don't believe.

And that makes sense to you?

Holy crap! Rol is seeing eye to eye with me.

It's a miracle! ^^



The Choice is yours believe or not it's up to you

In a name of Allah

Alif, Lam, Meem.
This is the Book about which there is no doubt, a guidance for those conscious of Allah -
Who believe in the unseen, establish prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them,
And who believe in what has been revealed to you, [O Muhammad], and what was revealed before you, and of the Hereafter they are certain [in faith].
Those are upon [right] guidance from their Lord, and it is those who are the successful.
Indeed, those who disbelieve - it is all the same for them whether you warn them or do not warn them - they will not believe.
Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing, and over their vision is a veil. And for them is a great punishment.