ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
"I don't believe in God" is not a statement of negative belief, it is a statement of a lack of belief. A strong atheist would say "I believe there is no God", which is a negative belief.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I see no value in atheism
- Thread starter The Transcended Omniverse
- Start date
It means the same thing to me. When I say that I don't believe in Bigfoot, I mean to assert that there is no Bigfoot as far as I'm concerned.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
God is not "imagined" to the atheist necessarily. That is exactly my point. Many who merely lack a belief in God do not consider God to be "imagined". The ones that do ARE actively claiming that God does not exist.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
That might be what YOU mean. But, that is not what the phrase indicates, necessarily.
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
To you.
We are trying to explain how it means to some others.
DOH! Why do you think she as an atheist felt murder was disgusting and unjust? Because evolution and natural selection evolved a survival instinct of course so we don't want to be murdered. Obviously atheists feel murder is wrong because who wants to be murdered?
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
It may do to you, but not in linguistics, and not in formal logic. If I assert that the number of beans in a jar is even, but do not show how I reached that conclusion and have given no reason to believe it, does that mean that your only choice in responding to my claim is either to accept it - and assume the number of beans in the jar is even despite the fact you have no good reason to, or do you not believe what I have said and - by your reasoning - thereby have to assert that the number of jelly beans is odd?
I think God is imagined for every atheist. Even the mere mention of the word and some offering up of what it means would inspire some sort of idea.
Yes. I'm fine with others thinking differently.
I'm just offering up what it means to me. Nothing more.
...to you.
I agree with that. It's not necessary to believe that the number of jelly beans is either even or odd.
It is, however, necessary to believe that there are no not-jelly beans. There are no non-existent things.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
What does that have to do with what I said? The point is that not believing something is not the same as believing its opposite. In basic logic, there are two possibilities: God does or does not exist, just as there are only two possibilities with the number of jelly beans: they are either an even quantity or an odd quantity. But not believing one (i.e: not believing there is a God or not believing the number of jelly beans is even) does not entail a belief in the oppositng proposition (i.e: believing God does not exist, or that the number of jelly beans is odd). It makes no difference whether the claim is about a quantity of something or about the existence of something, a position of disbelief is not the same as claiming an opposing belief.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Nope. Strong Atheists say, actively, that they believe that God does not exist. This is a very strong position to take, as it is pretty much impossible to prove that God cannot exist.
Weak athesists, on the other hand, merely say "I do not believe that God exists", usually because they have not been provided with enough evidence as of yet. They, however, have not been provided enough evidence to believe that the opposite is true ("God cannot exist").
No, that's what weak atheists say. Strong atheists say "I believe there is no God."
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Right, but it is possible that there is insufficient evidence either way for some to choose which way to believe. Think about Agnostics who believe that the existence of God is unknowable. They certainly don't believe in God, and they certainly do not believe that God does not exist. They just feel that the entire thing is fruitless either way ... it's not worth worrying about because we will never know.
I may be aware of many different concepts of God but I've no belief in any of them.
I suppose one can also say I have no belief in the concept of no God?
Sorta makes one an agnostic though I'd think. So a weak atheist say the first part but fails to address the second?
I suppose one can also say I have no belief in the concept of no God?
Sorta makes one an agnostic though I'd think. So a weak atheist say the first part but fails to address the second?
It has to do with what I said. It has to do with what the post was about.
I agree with that.
However, when I say, "I don't believe in Bigfoot," I am asserting that, as far as I'm concerned, I believe there are none. That's just English as I learned it.
It is simply to say that my beliefs lie elsewhere than with the stated belief that there are Bigfoot. My beliefs, which compose the world I know, lie with a world that does not include Bigfoot in it.
Actually, basic logic includes three possibilities: "Figuratively, a proposition A divides the agent's knowledge or belief base into three mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive parts: a part that speaks in favor of A, a part that speaks against A (i.e., in favor of W \ A), and a part that neither speaks in favor of nor against A." (Formal Representations of Belief (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
"I don't believe in Bigfoot" doesn't say much to us. You might continue to say "But I don't believe he doesn't exist either. I keep the possibility open". Only if you say "I believe Bigfoot doesn't exist" we know exactly where you stand.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
According to your cited explanation, a lack of belief in God would be "the part that neither speaks in favor of nor against A". These would be weak atheists, which are included in the parent category "atheism" in general. That is my argument. Thus, "atheist", which must include both weak and strong atheists, must be general enough to include those that neither speaks in favor nor against the existence of God. Right?
It should, at very least, say that I don't believe in Bigfoot.
Anything more is extraneous.