Ok, I can agree with that. Now we’re back at the point where we have no evidence as to the existence or non-existence bit.
Hey dakravel, you know if you look in the dictionary under redundant, it says, “see redundant”?
That’s three definitions of atheism. Just in case Godzilla wanted to accuse me of only looking at one definition.
Never said that you had to believe in him. I also never said he was deliberately trying to hide himself. But if there were an intangible being out there, I don’t think we could detect him unless he explicitly wanted to be detected. In other words, he might not even be thinking about whether or not he wants to reveal himself.
Three definitions just in case Godzilla wanted to dispute the dictionary definition of the word.
Never said that you had to believe in him. I also never said he was deliberately trying to hide himself. But if there were an intangible being out there, I don’t think we could detect him unless he explicitly wanted to be detected. In other words, he might not even be thinking about whether or not he wants to reveal himself.
Three definitions just in case Godzilla wanted to dispute the dictionary definition of the word.
The irony of that is sickening.
…
I was on a slow machine and I couldn’t tell if the submits had taken, :smack:.
Wow, an uncited list of definitions! I’m definately convinced.
You do understand that dictionaries are records, not textbooks, right? They are (hopefully) informed opinions of common usage, not scientific facts. That’s why dictionaries offen differ (which is one reason an uncited dictionary is no help). And why their particular choices of definitions are not ever fully complete or authoritative. Any good dictionary will start with an introduction explaining this.
I have to cite dictionaries? I didn’t figure I’d have to resort to that, considering I just looked it up on dictionary.com, and I would have assumed people would have realized that.
So what Godzilla was referring to was what is commonly termed “weak atheists”. A “strong atheist” is one who denies the existence of God. The definition of “weak atheist” coincides with my idea of agnosticism, i.e. someone who really has no opinion on God, believes nothing can be known about God, or doesn’t think the discussion of God is productive. In fact, Wikipedia says “Within this scheme, agnosticism represents a rationale for weak atheism”.
So, for the purposes of this discussion I’m going to throw the “weak atheists” into the agnostic category. Furthermore, anytime above when I said, “atheist”, I was referring to “strong atheism”, and anytime I refer to atheism after this, I will also be referring to “strong atheism”.
I’m still thinking about this explanation of my atheism, so don’t take it too seriously yet.
How many people truly believe in O.J. Simpson’s innocence? There’s no absolute proof he’s guilty, and yet most people I’ve asked about it have no question in their minds. That’s where I stand on God/gods/other. I have no way to give absolute proof that no deity exists, and yet I have no doubt in my own mind. I no longer consider the possibility of supernatural forces of any kind. I could accept an alien being (or race of advanced beings) that passed through and influenced our evolution. But that kind of theory does not presuppose omniscience, omnipotence, or infinite anything. I have serious doubts that the infinite exists outside of mathematics.
The debate as to whether the definition of ‘faith’ applies to belief in the lack of God, is just semantics. (Which is a perfectly legitmate subject for debate, but not what the OP intended.) I hope my O.J. comparison is clear. Assuming it is: let me add that I have had several epiphanies where various seemingly unrelated experiences in my life all flashed through my mind like pages of a mystery novel, so that I suddenly “knew” the conclusion (i.e. no God esists). This seems as valid to me as the “religious” experiences I’ve heard.
Well VileOrb, you’re a strong atheist. You deny the existence of God. You have no strong logical reasoning, but simply a gut feeling and intuition. And, that’s just about what I would expect from any strong atheist. Same with most theists, it’s simply a gut feeling, or an intuition. That’s the most anyone can do in terms of coming to an affirmative conclusion about the existence or non-existence of a god or gods. Only agnosticism is based entirely in provable logic. There haven’t been any solid proofs proving or disproving God’s existence quite yet.
Jeesh! dakravel, will you listen to yourself – “Only agnosticism is based entirely in provable logic” – how do you propose to prove this? What meta-logic do you use to prove that your logic is consistent? And what meta-meta-logic do you use to show that your meta-logic is consistent? ad infinitum.
There is only empiricism – the reason why we can call the syllogism (for instance) consistent is because no-one has ever provided a counter-example.
I thought I’d gone out of my way to demonstrate that the “hard-line” you take logically leads us to a position of absolute doubt about everything (even logic itself). This is such a rarified and constraining posistion to be in, we (that is you too) implicitly reject it a gazillion times every single day without batting an eyelid – these are not a gazillion acts of faith by any meaningful definition of the word, faith.
Going back a little:
Do you understand that a world in which such an intangible “God” existed is necessarily non-different to a similar world where the blessed intangible simply does not exist?
I’ve said this before (and will say it again, belike) – many of us consider the very deinition of “God” to be logically self-contradictory – like a square triangle or the proverbial “invisible pink unicorn.” Given that as a basis, disbelief does follow from the rules of logic and evidence.
(The place, thus, for my brand of atheist to begin his explanation is on why he feels “God” to be a self-contradicting concept – something perhaps beyond the scope of this thread.)
Trinopus
Well, please feel free to drop by this thread and cast your vote for “Most Convincing Argument for the Non-existence of God.”
Barry