Is Aleprechaunism a Belief System?

[Cacotopia]

this is just stamp collecting and non stamp-collecting with leprechauns.

 

[SalixIncendium]

...stamp-collecting with leprechauns.

 

[PureX]

Is Aleprechaunism a Belief System?

No. The belief system is the presumption that nothing exists that is not discernible and provable to you.

 

[Cacotopia]

Taken too literally.

 

[Audie]

No. The belief system is the presumption that nothing exists that is not discernible and provable to you.

You'd have to demonstrate it that said belief system exists.
Outside of mental hospitals, that is.

 

[PureX]

You'd have to demonstrate it that said belief system exists.
Outside of mental hospitals, that is.

Every atheist on here says they don't believe God/gods exist because they have no objective proof. Therefor, to these atheist's way of thinking, objective provability is the determinant factor for whether or not something exists. It's how they determine what they believe to exist, and what they don't. That is a "belief system" by any definition.

 

[Audie]

Every atheist on here says they don't believe God/gods exist because they have no objective proof. Therefor, to these atheist's way of thinking, objective provability is the determinant factor for whether or not something exists. It's how they determine what they believe to exist, and what they don't. That is a "belief system" by any definition.

Of course, you said this first..
The belief system is the presumption that nothing exists that is not discernible and provable to you.

And now you is changin' your tune. this below is different.

Every atheist on here says they don't believe God/gods exist because they have no objective proof.

Wrong, I have never said that. I doubt anyone here did.
In fact, I believe you just made that up.

Therefor, to these atheist's way of thinking, objective provability is the determinant factor for whether or not something exists

Your therefor (sic) makes no sense, and you wont
find anyone here who says that but you.

Like you know how an atheist thinks anyway.

That is a "belief system" by any definition

Really.

not by this one-
A belief system is a set of mutually supportivebeliefs. The beliefs of any such system can be classified as religious, philosophical, political, ideological, or a combination of these.

Lets see you find something to back your claim.
Not that it will do any good, as you belief about the
stupidity of atheists is just and only that-your belief.

The belief system is the presumption that nothing exists that is not discernible and provable to you.

Garbage and nonsense.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Every atheist on here says they don't believe God/gods exist because they have no objective proof. Therefor, to these atheist's way of thinking, objective provability is the determinant factor for whether or not something exists.

That is wrong. Objective provability is the determinant factor for believing that something exists, not for determining if something does not exist.

 

[PureX]

That is wrong. Objective provability is the determinant factor for believing that something exists, not for determining if something does not exist.

There is no alternative to existing but not existing. And there is no other response to the proposition, possible, except agnosticism. But being undecided because of a lack of knowledge is not atheism. So you're either an atheist or you're an agnostic, but you can't be both. Because the agnostic asserts that human knowledge is not sufficient to make such a determination possible. Whereas the atheist insists that we make the determination based on the requirement of sufficient knowledge. Thereby agnosticism and atheism are at cross-purposes, and agnostic atheism is an incoherent concept. Unless one is an atheist by faith, or blind pretense, rather than knowledge. And I have never yet heard an atheist admit to either of these motives, even if it's true.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

There is no alternative to existing but not existing.

We are talking about belief. It is entirely possible to not believe in something that does exist. For decades no one believed that there were other galaxies other than the Milky Way, and yet they still existed.

And there is no other response to possible except agnosticism.

Agnosticism deals with what we know. Aleprechaunism deals with what we believe. They answer different questions.

But being undecided because of a lack of knowledge is not atheism. So you're either an atheist or you're an agnostic, but you can't be both.

You can lack a belief in leprechauns while also admitting that we can't know if they exist.

Because the agnostic asserts that human knowledge is not sufficient to make such a determination possible. Whereas the atheist bases his determination on the requirement of such knowledge. Thereby agnostic atheism is an incoherent concept. Unless they are atheist by faith, or blind pretense, rather than knowledge. And I have never yet heard an atheist admit to either of these motives, even if it's true.

Aleprechaunism is simply the lack of belief in leprechauns. Some aleprechaunists may cite the lack of evidence for leprechauns as a reason for their lack of belief, some others may simply not believe in leprechauns for whatever reason.

 

[QuestioningMind]

A belief? Yes.

A belief system? No.



No. Nor does it for scientifically informed Leprechaunists...

...at least the Leprechaunists I know.​

Actually it's a lack of belief, not a belief at all.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Is one of these statements less true than the other?

Sue believes leprechauns do not exist.
Sue lacks belief in the existence of leprechauns.

Is Sue's case, the first statement is not necessarily true. Claiming a lack of belief that something is, is not the same as claiming that something isn't.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Is Sue's case, the first statement is not necessarily true. Claiming a lack of belief that something is, is not the same as claiming that something isn't.

Interesting wordplay.

If one lacks belief in something's existence, one believes that something doesn't exist.

Conversely, if one claims to not believe in something, one claims to lack belief in it.

If Sue doesn't believe in leprechauns, She lacks belief in them. Neither statement claims the definitively do not exist. However, both state that she doesn't believe that they do.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Interesting wordplay.

If one lacks belief in something's existence, one believes that something doesn't exist.

Conversely, if one claims to not believe in something, one claims to lack belief in it.

If Sue doesn't believe in leprechauns, She lacks belief in them. Neither statement claims the definitively do not exist. However, both state that she doesn't believe that they do.

Exactly. So someone saying that they lack a belief that something does exist is not the same as claiming that the something does not exist. It's simply an assertion that they have no reason to believe that it does.

 

[siti]

...is her disbelief in John's claim about leprechauns a belief system in itself?

If it is then not collecting stamps is a hobby, not playing golf is a sport, not washing the dishes is a chore, not working as a cashier at the local five and dime is a job and not singing is a talent (OK that last one is true in my case)...but you get what I mean...not believing in something is obviously not a belief, It is not a belief not a belief. There that's cleared this one up!

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Every atheist on here says they don't believe God/gods exist because they have no objective proof. Therefor, to these atheist's way of thinking, objective provability is the determinant factor for whether or not something exists. It's how they determine what they believe to exist, and what they don't. That is a "belief system" by any definition.

Nah...atheists are prone to both variance and inconsistency.

 

[siti]

Nah...atheists are prone to both variance and inconsistency.

I knew there was something wrong them!

 

[robocop (actually)]

John: Invisible leprechauns run around trees and cause thunderstorms.

Sue: I don't believe you.

Sue is an Aleprechaunist. She dares to not believe in leprechauns. So is her disbelief in John's claim about leprechauns a belief system in itself? Does your own Aleprechanism inform your views on the age of the universe or how thunderstorms form?

We could look with heat-seeking goggles and measure discrepancies tied to thunderstorms to find out. If the Leprechauns are completely unobservable we can detect the reason why thunderstorms occur with 99.9999% accuracy and then exclude the need to believe that Leprechauns cause them. What we can't do is correlate the unobservable with the observable.

 

[Milton Platt]

It depends on what mushrooms one eats while running around the trees !

Wouldn't an Aleprechaunist be someone who believes in Aleprechauns??? LOL

 

[Willamena]

John: Invisible leprechauns run around trees and cause thunderstorms.

Sue: I don't believe you.

Sue is an Aleprechaunist. She dares to not believe in leprechauns. So is her disbelief in John's claim about leprechauns a belief system in itself? Does your own Aleprechanism inform your views on the age of the universe or how thunderstorms form?

Her aleprechaunism does not spring from nothing.

'Nuff said.