I see no value in atheism

[Curious George]

Nope. You are either happpy or you are not happy. Same with pretty much everything else. Either you are green or you aren't. Either you are sad or you aren't. For example, one could ask you, "are you sad". And you could respond, "no, I am not sad, but I am angry". Either way you are not happy.

what if you don't know if you are happy or unhappy?

 

[leibowde84]

you are trying to fit separate terms into a binary definition. This is the same as trying to fit emotions into a binary definition. Language is prone to semantics. I already explained that I do not mind all of the semantic distinctions however, they are still arbitrary.

And, my argument is that they are not arbitrary. Remember, "unhappy" does not mean "sad" or "angry" or "let-down", it merely means the absense of happiness, or "not happy". It is an extremely general term.

 

[leibowde84]

what if you don't know if you are happy or unhappy?

Then you don't know the answer. But, you have to be one or the other.

 

[Willamena]

I get all that. I'm asking why you think that a person who is undecided is not practicing atheism, as they certainly lack a belief in god.

Because they're undecided.

 

[JoStories]

So, you are saying that we all just get to make up our own definitions of terms? That is just straight chaos, which underminds communication in general. There has to be accepted definitions of terms, right?

Agreed. However, I think that even with dictionaries, definitions are influenced by multiple factors. Life experience, culture, etc. for example, you know the word teepee I imagine. And I could post a defintion from several dictionary sources. But if you ask the average person versus NA,s you will get different answers. Even from tribe to tribe the defintion will change. A Hopi might think a flat roofed square house whereas someone from SD might have the classic defintion while my tribe might define it as a log home that is communally used.

 

[leibowde84]

Because they're undecided.

Don''t they "lack a belief in God" if they do not believe either way? Lack means to not hold or be without. If you are undecided then you don't actively believe either way. Thus, you fit into the definition.

Why do you think that being undecided and lack belief are mutually exclusive?

 

[Willamena]

Don''t they "lack a belief in God" if they do not believe either way? Lack means to not hold or be without. If you are undecided then you don't actively believe either way. Thus, you fit into the definition.

Why do you think that being undecided and lack belief are mutually exclusive?

Why can't a person be undecided about lacking belief in God?

 

[leibowde84]

Why can't a person be undecided about lacking belief in God?

Because the term "lack" implies that someone either holds a belief that God exists or they do not hold a belief that God exists. This goes for any belief. Being undecided means that you don't hold a belief in God and you don't hold the belief that God does not exist, but, nevertheless, you still lack a belief in God.

If you do not lack a belief in God, then you hold a belief in God, and, thus, you are a "theist". If you do not hold a belief in God, then you "lack a belief in God", and you are an atheist. Those undecided still do not hold a belief in God, and, thus, by definition, they "lack a belief in God", which is all that is necessary.

 

[leibowde84]

Agreed. However, I think that even with dictionaries, definitions are influenced by multiple factors. Life experience, culture, etc. for example, you know the word teepee I imagine. And I could post a defintion from several dictionary sources. But if you ask the average person versus NA,s you will get different answers. Even from tribe to tribe the defintion will change. A Hopi might think a flat roofed square house whereas someone from SD might have the classic defintion while my tribe might define it as a log home that is communally used.

But, if we don't provide definitions of terms, how can we discuss what they actually mean? It would all just be up to everyone's own preference.

 

[Willamena]

Because the term "lack" implies that someone either holds a belief that God exists or they do not hold a belief that God exists. This goes for any belief. Being undecided means that you don't hold a belief in God and you don't hold the belief that God does not exist, but, nevertheless, you still lack a belief in God.

If you do not lack a belief in God, then you hold a belief in God, and, thus, you are a "theist". If you do not hold a belief in God, then you "lack a belief in God", and you are an atheist. Those undecided still do not hold a belief in God, and, thus, by definition, they "lack a belief in God", which is all that is necessary.

I think you're stretching to make language fit convictions (that may not even be your own), but I'm not going to butt heads anymore.

 

[leibowde84]

I think you're stretching to make language fit convictions (that may not even be your own), but I'm not going to butt heads anymore.

And it seems like you are denying the fact that a lack of belief does not indicate a positive belief in the opposite.

 

[Curious George]

Then you don't know the answer. But, you have to be one or the other.

but which are they? under the current logic we are using undecided = not the term from which we are defining other terms. In this case we are using the term happy. Thus, the person is unhappy. Consequently we have said a person who does not know if they are unhappy is unhappy. But this can't be right, can it?

 

[Willamena]

And it seems like you are denying the fact that a lack of belief does not indicate a positive belief in the opposite.

That's more double-negatives than my brain can deal with.

 

[leibowde84]

but which are they? under the current logic we are using undecided = not the term from which we are defining other terms. In this case we are using the term happy. Thus, the person is unhappy. Consequently we have said a person who does not know if they are unhappy is unhappy. But this can't be right, can it?

You are confusing the question putting subjectivity into it. Either someone is happy or unhappy, whether they know it or not. Whether a person knows that they are happy or unhappy is not going to change this.

 

[ArtieE]

Because they're undecided.

And as long as they are undecided they are "not theists" (atheists). When they decide they become either theists or strong atheists.

 

[leibowde84]

That's more double-negatives than my brain can deal with.

What "double-negatives" are you referring to?

 

[Curious George]

But, if we don't provide definitions of terms, how can we discuss what they actually mean? It would all just be up to everyone's own preference.

I absolutely agree. This would make a cluster... well you get the picture. For this reason, I am happy to use whatever parameters the people discussing the terms are unless a relevant distinction needs to be made. In the case of atheist there are so many sub-categories that I can grab at a whim and make whatever distinction I need- as long as everyone agrees on that definition. However, I can also use the myriad words in the English language to attempt to describe whatever concept or distinction I need at the time.

That said, whenever this topic comes up people adamantly argue either way. That we have chosen to define atheist as not theist is not a proper use of classical logic and is arbitrary but that is okay too: some people get way to hung up on logical proofs and negations. I am here to learn and discuss and debate. If a semantic game comes along and I am feeling particularly feisty then I will usually engage; unless I am trying to make another point, then I will often abstain, because semantics can confound everyone involved.

 

[Curious George]

You are confusing the question putting subjectivity into it. Either someone is happy or unhappy, whether they know it or not. Whether a person knows that they are happy or unhappy is not going to change this.

And a person believes god exists or does not exist whether they know it or not. Belief is subjective too you know.

 

[Willamena]

And it seems like you are denying the fact that a lack of belief does not indicate a positive belief in the opposite.

I had to read it five times, but I think I got it.

I agree that lack of belief does not indicate "a positive belief in the opposite," but simply its negation, and I could quibble about what the opposite of "belief in god" is (namely, "knowing god"), but I won't.

 

[leibowde84]

And a person believes god exists or does not exist whether they know it or not. Belief is subjective too you know.

That is not true. There are many atheists who do not actively believe that God does not exist. They merely have not been prevented with sufficient evdence to convince them to believe God does exist. Also, agnostics do not believe that God exists, but they also do not believe that God does not exist. They are undecided, but they still lack belief in God

I had to read it five times, but I think I got it.

I agree that lack of belief does not indicate "a positive belief in the opposite," but simply its negation, and I could quibble about what the opposite of "belief in god" is (namely, "knowing god"), but I won't.

The terms are centered around "the belief in the EXISTENCE of God", not "knowing God". One either holds a belief or they do not. Then, further, they are may or may not believe the opposite.