Carrot Flower King
Janitor of Lunacy
Yeahbut, we could (maybe, possibly, who knows?) be talking about the P-god (see threads passim), which was never particularly defined, so could encompass those things...
Split Thread Atheism and lack of belief in the afterlife
- Thread starter psionl0
- Start date
Yeahbut, we could (maybe, possibly, who knows?) be talking about the P-god (see threads passim), which was never particularly defined, so could encompass those things...
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
I think that some statements are not the same, but this does not mean they are incompatible. If I lack belief in Cthulhu it might be that belief is not something i do at all, or that I never heard of Cthulhu or heard a good argument for him, but in any case, Cthulhu is out. If I do not believe in Cthulhu, there is an implication that belief has at least been on the table, and Cthulhu is not entirely a stranger, but Cthulhu is out, and that statement includes the first. If I believe there is no Cthulhu, I have entered into the idea that believing is a thing one can do, considered Cthulhu, and he's out. This statement includes the first two. There are some slight, if overlapping, differences in those three things, where I am concerned, both as to how I have thought about things and how permanent my position is, but the status of Cthuhu is essentially the same for all. I do not regard Cthulhu as existing.
Delvo
Дэлво Δε&#
Why expect a message for atheists from the starter of a thread that was clearly intended as a message for theists? Those are the only people who could possibly "procrastinate" a theistic activity.
Presumably because theists like to ask gotcha questions.
I know that there is no afterlife as much as I know that there is no Cthulhu. But solipsism teaches us that I can't truly know anything, so I guess I only believe that there is no Cthulhu.
And that's where the Cthulhu cultists get you. Two beliefs, which makes them both equal, which means the cultists aren't delusional idiots after all. Commence the sacrifices!
Much better to cut trough the Gordian Knot of bad faith arguments and wash your hands of the whole nonsense. Ergo, a lack of belief. All conceptions of the afterlife are nothing but fiction, and believing in fiction has never even crossed my mind. Why would it?
And that is really the true core of atheism: I know that all gods are fiction. That possibility of an afterlife you've just imagined? Fiction. The small glimmer of hope you carry in your heart to assuage your existensialism? More fiction.
But that's still just a long-winded way of saying that I don't believe in god. Or that I lack belief in god. Or that I believe god doesn't exist. And I'm pretty sure all three apply to me unless I try to dissect each statement to an impractical degree.
Roger Ramjets
Philosopher
Yes, but not because I believe it. The afterlife is defined as 'life after death'. But death is defined as 'the end of life'. Therefore the afterlife is syntactically impossible. An afterlife with supernatural elements is even more impossible, since the supernatural does not exist by definition.
The definition of belief is:-
acceptance of, or confidence in, an alleged fact or body of facts as true or right without positive knowledge or proof.
I have proof that the afterlife doesn't exist, because it is defined as not existing. Therefore my statement that 'there is no afterlife' is simply stating this fact. That is no different from stating that (in the natural number system) 2 + 2 <> 5.
Anybody who says they are the same is wrong, Disbelief is defined as:-
inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real.
However I don't know what you mean by 'many posters here'. In this thread the only person who has used the word 'disbelief' is you.
There is a subtle difference between them that is often not distinguished. Simple unbelief is due to lack of credibility, positive unbelief is a result of knowledge. But many people will say they 'don't believe' something when what they really mean is that they know it isn't true. Similarly they may say that they 'believe' something when they actually have knowledge or proof of it.
Outside of the dictionary, words are defined by popular usage. It's not unusual for words to be used interchangeably when by strict definition they shouldn't. Furthermore dictionaries often provide several different meanings that have to be determined by context.
We all know what you are trying to do. By parsing words narrowly you are attempting to equate 'unbelief' or 'disbelief' with 'belief'. It won't work though. When someone has knowledge or proof that something isn't true, it's not a matter of belief (same as when they know it is true).
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
And to think that I am being accused of solipsism.
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist
The reason is that the position that there are no gods can be spun as a belief, and therefore as a religion, as a tu quoque argument by dishonest actors. For this reason a lot of atheists get really touchy about it, since atheism by any definition is absolutely not a religion.
But I'm pretty sure you already know this.
Tassman
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2012
- Messages
- 1,248
"Belief in no gods" has positive connotations in that it leaves open the unwarranted possibility of gods existing whereas, to "lack belief" in gods' more accurately reflects the atheist position.
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
If that is the reason then the atheist is just as dishonest because they are trying to conceal their position to avoid a dishonest counter argument.
But the real reason seems to be to enlarge the set of atheists. Many here will claim that babies are born atheist by default because they are not born with a belief in any god. Never mind that this argument could equally apply to a block of wood.
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
Is that what you are so afraid of? Somebody who doesn't understand English?
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist
No, because what the atheist is saying is actually true. Though it is a common generalisation to say that atheists believe that there are no gods, that's not technically what the word means. It is not therefore dishonest to maintain this position and I can't believe that I'm having this conversation again.
Indeed. Again, though, since a block of wood is not conscious and is incapable of developing beliefs of any kind, the analogy is once again faulty.
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
That is exactly what it means. Outside of this forum, you won't find anybody saying that atheism is a "lack of belief".
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
That is conversationally what people might say, not exactly what it means.
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist
Neither statement is true.
Norman Alexander
Penultimate Amazing
That is exactly what it does NOT mean.
Theism = belief in god/gods
A-theism = NOT( belief in god/gods )
Couldn't be any clearer.
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist
Again afterlife is not a synonym for God.
Now we're not disrupting another thread about a different topic.
Psion - why should arguments and claims made about god apply to arguments and claims about an afterlife? Afterlife does not mean god.
Psion - why should arguments and claims made about god apply to arguments and claims about an afterlife? Afterlife does not mean god.
Indeed. Just as an example, Buddhists (at least some flavours) believe in an afterlife, via reincarnation, but not any gods.