Atheism does not exist

[LuisDantas]

Well actually cause Atheist's do not believe in "God's" or a "afterlife" So I guess what I am saying is that there is alway's that chance "god's" do exist and well there could be a punishment for atheist's in the afterlife.

Eh. Do you think I would bother to fear such a despicable God?

Seek some of the threads abou Pascal's Wager sometime.

Atheist's are bold cause they still do not care. I of course am pretty much a Apatheist so it's all pretty much of little concern to me.

Why should anyone care?

 

[LuisDantas]

You are ill informed. Buddhists believe in reincarnation and Nirvana.

Not in reincarnation, no we do not.

And truth be told, there are many conceptions of what an afterlife would be. Many are virtually symbolic.

 

[ArtieE]

And yet you give another definition of both/either "rejecting a 'god'" and "believing in the non-existence of gods." So unless you are promoting only one definition, it really is more, no less.

I am beginning to believe you are a troll. For the last time: The definition of "atheism" is "absence of belief in deities." The definition of "hard/strong atheism" is "belief in the non-existence of deities". They are not two definitions of atheism. The first is the definition of "atheism", the second is the definition of "hard/strong atheism". It is a bit more complicated than this, but I am trying to simplify as much as possible.

Not all Buddhists are atheists.

True.

 

[McBell]

Well actually cause Atheist's do not believe in "God's" or a "afterlife" So I guess what I am saying is that there is alway's that chance "god's" do exist and well there could be a punishment for atheist's in the afterlife. Atheist's are bold cause they still do not care. I of course am pretty much a Apatheist so it's all pretty much of little concern to me.

No bolder than {insert religion name here} that claims their deity is the one and only deity.
Wonder what happens if they are wrong?

 

[ArtieE]

Not in reincarnation, no we do not.

Pardon me. The correct word is rebirth. Just used to writing reincarnation.

And truth be told, there are many conceptions of what an afterlife would be. Many are virtually symbolic.

I understand. My point was that atheists have concepts of an afterlife.

 

[Sha'irullah]

I am beginning to believe you are a troll.

I regret creating this thread not many atheists know what atheism is and sadly it has become a grounds for atheists to mock theists as to lie and troll for their amusement. Lying must be a typical trait of an atheist without sincerity probably.
Most of these so called atheists are anti-theists by the way . It seems confusing the harsh opposition towards religion using any dirty and illogical tactic necessary is a key point of anti-theism and not atheism. Anti-theists do not share the same view of atheists as one requires so much confidence in its claim it borders theists and their's.

Welcome to the forum by the way as I have not seen you around

 

[Willamena]

I am beginning to believe you are a troll. For the last time: The definition of "atheism" is "absence of belief in deities." The definition of "hard/strong atheism" is "belief in the non-existence of deities". They are not two definitions of atheism. The first is the definition of "atheism", the second is the definition of "hard/strong atheism". It is a bit more complicated than this, but I am trying to simplify as much as possible.

If disagreeing with you makes me a "troll," then so be it.

You seem to be saying that atheists and hard/strong atheists are two different beasts, and that only one of the two are really atheists. I disagree.

 

[ArtieE]

Welcome to the forum by the way as I have not seen you around

Thank you but I do have 450 posts...

 

[Sha'irullah]

Thank you but I do have 450 posts...

This is my issue, I have not seen a single one

 

[ArtieE]

If disagreeing with you makes me a "troll," then so be it.

You seem to be saying that atheists and hard/strong atheists are two different beasts, and that only one of the two are really atheists. I disagree.

One is an "atheist", one is a "hard/strong atheist". One lacks belief in deities, the other lacks belief in deities but also actively believes deities don't exist. I doubt I can find any more different ways of expressing the same facts.

 

[Willamena]

One is an "atheist", one is a "hard/strong atheist". One lacks belief in deities, the other lacks belief in deities but also actively believes deities don't exist. I doubt I can find any more different ways of expressing the same facts.

You have made the term "atheist" inclusive of "hard/strong atheist."

That's the same as making the pendum at rest inclusive of the pendulum swinging one way, but not swinging the other way.

Does that make sense?

 

[ArtieE]

You have made the term "atheist" inclusive of "hard/strong atheist."

Yepp. Starts with "atheism" and then you add "hard/strong".

That's the same as making the pendum at rest inclusive of the pendulum swinging one way, but not swinging the other way.

Does that make sense?

The pendulum is at rest on "atheism". Then energy is added to the pendulum and "strong/hard" is added on top of "atheism" and the pendulum swings. I think you have gotten the point a long time ago so I'll stop waisting my time.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You have made the term "atheist" inclusive of "hard/strong atheist."

That's the same as making the pendum at rest inclusive of the pendulum swinging one way, but not swinging the other way.

Does that make sense?

That depends. If you've decided to divide the pendulum's arc into the sections "left" and "not left", then the pendulum at rest would be in "not left" because it's not in "left".

 

[Willamena]

Yepp. Starts with "atheism" and then you add "hard/strong".

The pendulum is at rest on "atheism". Then energy is added to the pendulum and "strong/hard" is added on top of "atheism" and the pendulum swings. I think you have gotten the point a long time ago so I'll stop waisting my time.

Fine by me, but...

1. Atheism is the pendum at rest.
2. Atheism is the pendum at rest or swinging to the hard atheism side.

That's two distinct definitions. If you claim it's #1, you leave out all the people who are swingers. If you claim to include them, and yet it's still #1, you are contradicting yourself.

Carry on.

 

[Willamena]

That depends. If you've decided to divide the pendulum's arc into the sections "left" and "not left", then the pendulum at rest would be in "not left" because it's not in "left".

"Not left" and "the pendulum at rest" are still two distinct definitions.

 

[jmn]

That is a bit too restrictive, though. Who can tell that anyone (theist or otherwise) understood the idea of God?

Agree
The fact at one point, the mind wasn't capable of understanding ideas, or such concepts. No comprehension

 

[ArtieE]

That depends. If you've decided to divide the pendulum's arc into the sections "left" and "not left", then the pendulum at rest would be in "not left" because it's not in "left".

The pendulum's arc is divided into three sections.

1. Pendulum one side theism actively believing in existence of gods.
2. Atheism pendulum at rest straight down neither believing nor disbelieving in existence of gods, lacking both belief and disbelief in existence of gods, absence of both belief and disbelief in existence of gods.
3. Pendulum other side hard/strong atheism actively disbelieving in existence of gods.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

"Not left" and "the pendulum at rest" are still two distinct definitions.

But a pendulum "at rest" is still "not left".

2. Atheism pendulum at rest straight down neither believing nor disbelieving in existence of gods, lacking both belief and disbelief in existence of gods, absence of both belief and disbelief in existence of gods.

But that makes no sense. That's like saying "I neither collect stamps nor do I not collect stamps". You believe something or you do not believe it - there is no possible middle ground. You cannot neither believe nor disbelieve a proposition.

 

[ArtieE]

But that makes no sense. That's like saying "I neither collect stamps nor do I not collect stamps". You believe something or you do not believe it - there is no possible middle ground. You cannot neither believe nor disbelieve a proposition.

Nobody is disputing the existence of stamps. Better use Bigfoot. Some people believe in the existence of Bigfoot, some people are sure he doesn't exist. Personally I have no opinion either way. I have no belief in his existence, but I don't believe he doesn't exist either. He might, or he might not. Somebody asks me if he exists I won't say "I believe he exists" and I won't say "I don't believe he exists". I'm undecided. I have an absence of belief in his existence, and an absence of belief in his non-existence.

 

[LuisDantas]

Does the fact that I have no idea of what a Tolomenapiterix is make it any less true that I don't believe in their existence?