I see no value in atheism

[Ben Dhyan]

Obvious.

I asked you explicitly to provide the link to the definition you are using for 'implicit atheist' and you apparently are refusing to do so...so until you do, I will presume you are making it up and my explanation of what 'implicit atheism' means stands as the gold standard...

 

[paarsurrey]

As you saw from the link I provided, A reason to believe, belief in the supernatural and gods simply evolved because the beliefs gave a survival advantage, not because Poseidon and Zeus actually exists. Here's the evolutionary tree of myth and religion. Here's an Awesome Map of the Evolution of Religions

The sources given in the map are not facts.

The title of the map is "Check out this excellent diagram that maps how world religions have changed and developed, from the beginning of history to now". The religions have existed from the inception, they existed in the pre-historic periods and have continued to date.

Regards

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Does it have the same exact definition as implicit atheism?

Implicit atheism means not explicitly claiming to be an atheist, while nevertheless personally not believing in the concept of God...
Explicit atheism means claiming to be atheist while personally not believing in the concept of God...

 

[Bunyip]

But this is not a sound proposition.....in the middle there are neither...there are those who have never heard of God and non-dualists...

It's like dividing the world between Big Bang believers and disbelievers...in the middle are neither...there are those who have never heard of the big bang, and those who don't have an opinion....

Btw...if the absurd implicit atheist definition is to be considered valid.....then the principle is also valid for those who have never heard of the bib bang and they would automatically be implicit big bang disbelievers...

The mind bogles...the world is full implicit every disbelief existing.... big foot, aliens, moon landing, round earth, elvis is dead.......

No, there is no middle ground - a person is either atheist or theist. If you are not theist, you are atheist.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No, there is no middle ground - a person is either atheist or theist. If you are not theist, you are atheist.

Of course there is....middle ground is populated with non dualists and people who have never been exposed to theistic beliefs...

 

[Bunyip]

Of course there is....middle ground is populated with non dualists and people who have never been exposed to theistic beliefs...

Anyone who has never been exposed to theistic belief would therefore be atheist. Any non dualist who believes in a theistic god would be theist, any who does not would of course be atheist.
There are atheist and theist non-dualists.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Anyone who has never been exposed to theistic belief would therefore be atheist. Any non dualist who believes in a theistic god would be theist, any who does not would of course be atheist.
There are atheist and theist non-dualists.

Someone who has not been exposed to a theistic belief is not an atheist...atheist mean not theist,,,an atheist is someone who had to be exposed to theism and rejects it...simple as that.. If you think otherwise...please explain how they could be an atheist?

Non dualists do not see reality in a dualistic perspective....there is only oneness.....and such apparent dualities as theists and atheists, are seen as only arbitrary framing of a conceptual nature, and are not real in a mind that is liberated from the error of dualism....

 

[Bunyip]

Someone who has not been exposed to a theistic belief is not an atheist

Yes 9f course they are. They are implicit atheists.

...atheist mean not theist,,,an atheist is someone who had to be exposed to theism and reject it...simple as that.. If you think otherwise...please explain how they could be an atheist?

Look up 'Implicit atheism' that is how.

Non dualists do not see reality in a dualistic perspective....there is only oneness.....and such apparent dualities as theists and atheists, are seen as only arbitrary framing of a conceptual nature, and are not real in a mind that is liberated from the error of dualism....

Mate there are both atheist and theist non-dualists. Everyone is either an atheist or a theist, there is no middle ground.
.

 

[outhouse]

an atheist is someone who had to be exposed to theism and rejects it...simple as that

No it is not simple. Its why the wiki page is very large discussing the concept. It is not simple and not vague and incomplete as you posit.

You don't get to define anything, you don't like the academic definition? then address it with the encyclopedia and change it if you think you can build a credible case.

Based on your case you have presented here if one can even call it that, then you have absolutely nothing.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes 9f course they are. They are implicit atheists. Look up 'Implicit atheism' that is how. Mate there are both atheist and theist non-dualists. Everyone is either an atheist or a theist, there is no middle ground.
.

No wonder outhouse didn't want to provide a link...there is no encyclopaedia mention and no credible definition of implicit atheism on the net that I could find...only stuff, including a Wiki page, based on an atheist writer George H. Smith, who failed to get his degree at University....say no more..

The meaning of 'implicit atheism' as anything other than a non explicit non theistic belief is made up stuff...and has zero credibility with the larger community of rational people....

And fine Bunyip, you can believe all you like that the people form one or the other of a complementary opposite pair wrt their conceptual understanding of existence with no middle ground...only theist and atheist...but that's only in your mind... You could do the same with wrt...racist or anti- racist, honest or dishonest, respectful or disrespectful....no middle ground you reckon...fine..

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No it is not simple. Its why the wiki page is very large discussing the concept. It is not simple and not vague and incomplete as you posit.

You don't get to define anything, you don't like the academic definition? then address it with the encyclopedia and change it if you think you can build a credible case.

Based on your case you have presented here if one can even call it that, then you have absolutely nothing.

The Wiki page is only a commentary on the writings of an atheist writer George H. Smith, which as I pointed out im my comment to Bunyip, is not a credible source...atheists writing about atheism.....and a Wiki entry to boot...here is the history page, look at the revisions...how credible are the people who put together this tower of babel....my God, there has been about 500 revisions already,,,anyone can edit it......Implicit and explicit atheism: Revision history - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't care who defines it, so long as the concept of implicit is not abused......Implicit: Implied though not directly expressed..

Therefore an implicit atheist is someone who does not explicitly claim non belief, but they do not believe in God.

 

[outhouse]

I don't care who defines it, so long as the concept of implicit is not abused......

It is not about you though.

Implicit Versus Explicit Atheism -

Labels can be helpful. There are different labels and types of atheism, among them, implicit atheism and explicit atheism. These labels provide a quick and useful shorthand for understanding what a person does, or who she is, or even what he believes is true about the world


A quote from an 1861 speech by the pioneering feminist and atheist Ernestine Rose shows how many atheists think of atheism. Rose said, “It is an interesting and demonstrable fact, that all children are Atheists, and were religion not inculcated into their minds they would remain so.” In other words, people who set religious belief aside are returning to a state that is natural for humans — atheism.

Implicit atheism: An implicit atheist is one who doesn’t believe in any gods but hasn’t consciously rejected such belief.

Explicit atheism: An explicit atheist is one who has consciously chosen to disbelieve — who has, to put it plainly, an actual opinion on the matter

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It is not about you though.

Implicit Versus Explicit Atheism -

Labels can be helpful. There are different labels and types of atheism, among them, implicit atheism and explicit atheism. These labels provide a quick and useful shorthand for understanding what a person does, or who she is, or even what he believes is true about the world


A quote from an 1861 speech by the pioneering feminist and atheist Ernestine Rose shows how many atheists think of atheism. Rose said, “It is an interesting and demonstrable fact, that all children are Atheists, and were religion not inculcated into their minds they would remain so.” In other words, people who set religious belief aside are returning to a state that is natural for humans — atheism.

Implicit atheism: An implicit atheist is one who doesn’t believe in any gods but hasn’t consciously rejected such belief.

Explicit atheism: An explicit atheist is one who has consciously chosen to disbelieve — who has, to put it plainly, an actual opinion on the matter

Implicit atheism: An implicit atheist is one who doesn’t believe in any gods but hasn’t consciously rejected such belief.

I have no problem with that definition, ....it implies that the implicit atheist must be aware of the concept of god prior to not believing in them... Also the fact that the implicit atheist hasn't consciously rejected such belief also implies that said implmust be aware of god belief before consciously not rejecting it..

It's what I've been saying all along, it is consistent with my understanding based on the meaning of the adjective 'implicit' in my dictionary....

 

[outhouse]

it implies that the implicit atheist must be aware of the concept

I see how it is worded It can go both ways. Yet It is impossible to know about the concept without consciously rejecting it.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I see how it is worded It can go both ways. Yet It is impossible to know about the concept without consciously rejecting it.

I think that is because you are an explicit strong atheist and have your conscious reasons for rejecting it with a passion....implicit atheists are no so passionate...

 

[outhouse]

I think that is because you are an explicit strong atheist and have your conscious reasons for rejecting it with a passion....implicit atheists are no so passionate...

It is not about weak or strong atheism.

And wiki makes it very clear exactly what implicit atheism implies.


The above quote is an impossibility if the concept is known about. If you have knowledge of a concept, you have to consciously reject it if you do not follow it or do not believe it.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It is not about weak or strong atheism.

And wiki makes it very clear exactly what implicit atheism implies.


The above quote is an impossibility if the concept is known about. If you have knowledge of a concept, you have to consciously reject it if you do not follow it or do not believe it.

What it would mean is that the implicit atheist, while viewing the concept as not entirely credible, enough to not believe it, but not so entirely incredible that they would consciously reject it absolutely... sort of agnostic...

 

[outhouse]

sort of agnostic...

But sort of agnostic is not the definition of implicit atheism. Even if we both wanted to mean such it does not.

enough to not believe it,

Is a conscious rejection.

 

[outhouse]

George H. Smith writes:Implicit atheism does not require familiarity with the idea of a god. ...

As defined in this chapter, the man who is unacquainted with theism is an atheist because he does not believe in a god. This category would also include the child with the conceptual capacity to grasp the issues involved, but who is still unaware of those issues. The fact that this child does not believe in god qualifies him as an atheist. Since these instances of nonbelief are not the result of conscious rejection, they are best designated as implicit atheism. ...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

But sort of agnostic is not the definition of implicit atheism. Even if we both wanted to mean such it does not.

Is a conscious rejection.

Remember...the implicit atheist concept is an invention by a passionate atheist writer, it automatically swells the statistical ranks on non believers at the expense of agnostics.....just a mind game really...politics of belief...