Are atheists inevitably pessimists?

David Mo said:
If the concept of atheism is so clear, why are there endless discussions in this forum about it?
If the concept of god is vague, how can the concept of godless be clear?
Click to expand...
I didn’t say it didn’t bear endless discussion. I said it’s plenty clear enough in context of the question in the title of the thread.

In any discussion it is necessary to specify the concepts when there are reasonable doubts that they are not used in the same way. This is normal. Another thing is that there are people who do not know how to do it.
Click to expand...

No, not any discussion. For example, it’s possible to produce pages of debate trying to nail down exactly what can count as a sandwich - there are doubts as reasonable as the ones about what atheism can be - but if you do that when someone says “hey do you want to get sandwiches for lunch?” People will stop asking your opinion and just bring you turkey and Swiss on wheat.
 
Lithrael said:
I didn’t say it didn’t bear endless discussion. I said it’s plenty clear enough in context of the question in the title of the thread.



No, not any discussion. For example, it’s possible to produce pages of debate trying to nail down exactly what can count as a sandwich - there are doubts as reasonable as the ones about what atheism can be - but if you do that when someone says “hey do you want to get sandwiches for lunch?” People will stop asking your opinion and just bring you turkey and Swiss on wheat.
Click to expand...

This is because the people who participate in the debate insist that the meaning they give to a word is the authentic one.

In the impossibility of reaching an agreement on the word, the verbal discussion would end if the discussion focused on the concept. If someone wants God to be an omnipotent being and another wants God to be a pure feeling, instead of arguing about "God" let's argue about omnipotent beings and feelings.

But before we get there we need to know the meanings each one gives to the word. Otherwise we will continue with a verbal discussion until eternity and a day.
 
Last edited:
If we want to get really meta we can debate team “define it all down to the last hair” vs team “I think we all got a handle on this for now.” The only interesting and useful clarification that’s happened in this thread was the bit where there was an assumption that atheists in general experience atheism as missing something that had been important. And many people said they didn’t experience it that way, often because religion was never a felt as a strong force in their lives personally in the first place. Nothing else has been clarified at all, as far as I can see. Did I miss any other points of clarity?
 
David Mo said:
I imagine that this refers to the explanations, descriptions or definitions you know.
Click to expand...

Well, God’s are all about imagination, after all.

You do have an odd habit of trying to tell people what they think. Have you learned nothing from being so frequently wrong?
 
David Mo said:
I'll expand my answer:

Imagine that you enter into a debate and define yourself as an atheist.
Imagine someone asking you what you mean by atheist.
Imagine that you answer: "atheists do not believe in any god(s)"
Imagine your opponent asking you if that includes the god of Spirit-Wrestlers.
What do you do now?
Click to expand...

You say “yes”.
 
David Mo said:
I'll expand my answer:

Imagine that you enter into a debate and define yourself as an atheist.
Imagine someone asking you what you mean by atheist.
Imagine that you answer: "atheists do not believe in any god(s)"
Imagine your opponent asking you if that includes the god of Spirit-Wrestlers.
What do you do now?
Click to expand...

I'd say "whatever.."
Take a sip of my coffee and
continue watching my movie.
 
David Mo said:
Drinking is the opposite of not drinking (ask someone who is thirsty).

Believing is the opposite of not believing.

In court, you will be asked, "Did you steal President's wallet? Yes or no?"

The absence of something is the opposite of its presence. Absence of belief is the opposite of presence of belief. This opposition is presented in terms of "yes" or "no". What is the difference between "no" and "absence"? Please specify.
Click to expand...

"Absence" is not synonymous with "opposite." Stop playing with words.
 
winter salt said:
I'd say "whatever.."
Take a sip of my coffee and
continue watching my movie.
Click to expand...


:thumbsup:

I am baffled why David is so hung up on this. :confused:

Talk of uncommon concepts of god amuses me also. As if every believer has an image identical to that of others in the same religious group? A fantastic notion I find difficulty with.
 
David Mo said:
Drinking is the opposite of not drinking (ask someone who is thirsty).

Believing is the opposite of not believing.

In court, you will be asked, "Did you steal President's wallet? Yes or no?"

The absence of something is the opposite of its presence. Absence of belief is the opposite of presence of belief. This opposition is presented in terms of "yes" or "no". What is the difference between "no" and "absence"? Please specify.
Click to expand...


He's no man who can't say no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom