Atheism is a faith.

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
I'm not changing anything. Nor will you.

Yes you did. You picked three of eight definitions and you change the one you use within the same discussion.

I didn't "pick" three of eight, and interchange them in the course of discussion. I pointed out that three of eight definitions fit the concept I am basing my position on:

Faith, belief, or doctrine is necessary for an atheist to make a decision, because the atheist cannot know any more than the theist. Faith, belief, doctrine, etc is necessary for both if either are to place themselves in one or the other camp.

The dictionary/definition derail is an ongoing maneuvering game played by both sides, like my example of grand jury proceedings illustrate.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Again, they don't change. They include. Christian theology is a faith. So is "confidence or trust in a person or thing", "belief that is not based on proof", and "belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc."

They also contradict each other. You can believe a thing exists, yet not have confidence or trust in it. I believe Republicans exist (there's lots of evidence for them), but I don't have confidenced or trust in them. So I have faith in them, but I don't have faith in them. This is what happens when you start mixing definitions.

And using that analogy brings forth another position of mine regarding atheists: some hate God (or the concept of God), thus giving some measure of existence to God.

 

[Huntster]

...Is this like when you have a toothache and you can't help but poke at it to see if it still hurts?

So, how did it feel?

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
Correct, and it is still a belief, because it is incomplete knowledge, thus a measure of faith or belief is required to arrive at that decision.

If arriving at a decision based on incomplete knowledge requires a measure of faith, then every decision requires a measure of faith, and the concept of faith becomes a useless appendage.

Oh, wait. It already was.

Quite the contrary. Faith becomes absolutely necessary, in some measure (from very little to very much) in all decisions.

This fact becomes significant when one considers the measure of focus Christ tried to convey as so much of his teachings were regarding faith.

 

[Roboramma]

Yes. Let us begin. I will start (unless you prefer to start):

"Hey, Roborama. I've heard that you have a bucket. I've got a few, too."

Your turn.

Okay, I'll bite. Yep, I've got a bucket. It's cool. I put water in it and use it for bathing in the mornings.

edit: by the way, I'm off to bed now. May be able to respond tomorrow night.

 

[I less than three logic]

Keep wondering.

I expected as much. I don't believe I've seen you answer a question yet.

Is it?

Of course it is. You have a concept of each a toilet and an outhouse, regardless of whether they "really" exist or not. Which concept do you find preferable?

I do wonder at the silliness of your questions.

The silliness was completely intended, to show that not all opinions are faith.

 

[Anacoluthon64]

... brings forth another position of mine regarding atheists: some hate God (or the concept of God), thus giving some measure of existence to God.

Bizarre. The corollary, of course, is that if god doesn't exist "in some measure" (whatever that means), it isn't hated by atheists. Your prior statement is therefore self-contradictory.

'Luthon64

 

[joobz]

I seriously thought that this would be done by now.

I was trying to challenge the thought that atheism was not corruptable. The mistake I made was to think that if someone could turn their atheism into a faith or religion, then that must mean that it IS a faith or religion. Yet, that would only mean that those people have a faith and religion and that doesn't change what atheism truly is.

Now, part of my line of thought was that no person could be truly without faith. However, since you can't really gather enough evidence to show that everyone has some faith, it will remain my faith.

Pressure is zero when the particles in a volume have no influence on each other, and in deep space that applies. Particle density outside gas-clouds is one or two per cubic metre, far too diffuse for them to interact. Just an observation.

Off topic, but for sake of precision, deep space isn't zero pressure. Since there are still particles floating arround there, there must be a pressure. These particles can collide with a surface and therefore a pressure is felt. It's been thought to be on the order of atto to picoPascal, but there is a pressure.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
I'm impressed.

Snide remark noted.

That is incorrect. I correctly cited my source, and you correctly cited yours. Yours has more interpretations. Thus, we can debate based on your (finally!) supported position.

Shall we begin?

"Finally supported"? Huntster, I don't have to provide citations and evidence for the way I'm using a word!

Oh. You're one of those "scientists" who like to vociferously demand "evidence!", yet are somehow exempt from the requirement themselves.

How does one become elevated to that plane? Is that self-appointed?

It's up to me as to how to use it! Usage of words is not like scientific theories, requiring evidence to back it up!

Tom blue several ; ran come Fluß indignant forced, why ? incredible casa . somewhat fleur mow gguzaakk rather nahutl-eeyh /

I stand by that assertion, attest it to be true and accurate, there is no way you can validly contest it, I present it as a universal truth that nobody in the Heavens or Earth can prove wrong, and it shall be the univeral truth from now unto eternity.

Please try to prove me wrong.

I have always stated exactly what I mean by "atheism". No "support" is required other then my explanation of what I mean!

And I do likewise with my authoritative statement above.

Quote:
In all of the above cases, since the person cannot know, they are rendered to apply some measure of faith, uncertainty, belief, opinion, doctrine, etc in order to arrive at their decision to reject or remain indifferent, unless they have no knowledge of the subject whatsoever. Then, they are ignorant.

Completely false. Look, Huntster, stop ignoring the bloody question and answer how "X=~Y" is the same as "~(X=Y)"!

As a mathematical equation, it is true.

What you are arguing is that I need to have faith in my view that I do not think a god exists. No faith is required. It is the default position.

Because it is the default position doesn't mean that no faith is required to accept it.

Just as the default position is that "XCOIER" does not exist (especially since you hadn't heard of it until now).

"XCOIER" does exist. I've seen it. I just typed it. It has meaning. That cannot be denied.

How can you be so consistently incorrect without seeing your error?

Listen carefully.

Okay........................I hear my daughter's aquarium pump producing bubbles which are popping as they reach the surface of the water.....................I hear "Kindergarten Cop" on the TV my son is watching......................I hear the wind blowing through the trees outside.......................I hear the keys on my keyboard as I depress them.........................

I do not have any belief at all. That is the point! Not having a belief does not equal having a negative belief. "X=~Y" does not equal "~(X=Y)"!

More accurately, you don't believe you have any beliefs at all...............but you do.

 

[RandFan]

More accurately, you don't believe you have any beliefs at all...............but you do.

That's not what he is saying.

 

[I less than three logic]

"XCOIER" does exist. I've seen it. I just typed it. It has meaning. That cannot be denied.

Heck, if I would have known that by attesting that god exists you only meant it is nothing more than three letters in a certain order, then I would have agreed to that long ago. "God" exists. I just typed it. Can't you see it?

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
Yes. Let us begin. I will start (unless you prefer to start):

"Hey, Roborama. I've heard that you have a bucket. I've got a few, too."

Your turn.

Okay, I'll bite. Yep, I've got a bucket. It's cool. I put water in it and use it for bathing in the mornings.

"Wow. My bucket is warm, and it isn't big enough for me to bathe in, unless I sponge bathe.

Now, the bucket on the excavator that I used to use at work is plenty big enough to bathe in, but it isn't cool right now, it's damned cold, because it's sitting in the yard, and the temperature outside is nearing zero degrees F.

Is your bucket plastic, metal, or made from another material?"

In the above exchange, Roborama and I are comparing buckets. In this way we might be able to get a better understanding of what kind of buckets we are referring to, it's properties, it's size, it's shape, etc.

So far, there is no conflict of understanding, even though there are many, many types of buckets, as well as usage of the word "bucket" (noun, verb, etc).

I suspect that may change soon, because one of us (because of the reason of our discussion) will try to trip the other up.

We'll see how it goes.................

 

[hammegk]

The silliness was completely intended, to show that not all opinions are faith.

As your compatabalistic choice gives you faith.

My faith in the shared reality we perceive is the same as yours.

 

[Huntster]

....The silliness was completely intended, to show that not all opinions are faith.

All opinions aren't a matter of faith, and nobody is saying such:

Hillary Clinton is my favorite candidate.

That is an opinion. It is based on fact.

Hillary Clinton is the best candidate for president.

That is an opinion. It is based on belief.

You are an idiot for believing that Hillary Clinton is the best candidate for president.

That is an opinion. It is based on belief.

Now, I can argue until doomsday that it is fact, but that does not make it so, and my very argument that it is fact is an opinion.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
... brings forth another position of mine regarding atheists: some hate God (or the concept of God), thus giving some measure of existence to God.

Bizarre. The corollary, of course, is that if god doesn't exist "in some measure" (whatever that means), it isn't hated by atheists. Your prior statement is therefore self-contradictory.

Sorry, I wrote that poorly.

God may or may not exist, but the fact that some atheists hate the concept of God makes that concept a concrete thing that is hated.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[I less than three logic]

All opinions aren't a matter of faith, and nobody is saying such:

So did you not read all the posts, or are you being dishonest? Hammegk specifically pointed out that "all opinions" except for one are faith.

No, the thread is about atheism being a faith, not a belief. They do not necessarily mean the same thing. Apparently you only know how to read the dictionary literally, but the difference between connotation and denotation continues to escape you. You seem to think that all beliefs are faith, yet belief also means just to hold an opinion. So therefore, all opinions must be a faith as well.

Other than Thought Exists, which does not require faith, that's 100% correct.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
"XCOIER" does exist. I've seen it. I just typed it. It has meaning. That cannot be denied.

Heck, if I would have known that by attesting that god exists you only meant it is nothing more than three letters in a certain order, then I would have agreed to that long ago. "God" exists. I just typed it. Can't you see it?

Yup. The word "God" exists.

However, I also attest that I believe that the spiritual entity defined by the RCC, which is known as "God" also exists.

And the concept of God as I and others believe exists (as well as other concepts which differ) is a concept that most atheists use as a basis of their doctrine.

 

[RandFan]

And the concept of God as I and others believe exists (as well as other concepts which differ) is a concept that most atheists use as a basis of their doctrine.

What doctrine?

Unicorns don't exist.
There isn't a flying spaghetti monster.
There is no tea cup orbiting the sun.
Gravity works.
The sun rises in the east.
There is no such thing as Casper the friendly Ghost and no other ghosts either.
Sylvia Browne can't talk to dead people because dead people are dead.
Uri Geller can't bend spoons with his mind.

Atheist doctrine: Bring us evidence and we WILL change our mind.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
All opinions aren't a matter of faith, and nobody is saying such:

So did you not read all the posts, or are you being dishonest?

No, I have not read all the above posts in depth, nor did I claim to. I've been addressing those which are replies to mine.

Was that an honest answer? Do you call people's honesty into question on a regular basis before learning the facts?

Have I called your honesty into question? How many times have you done so to me, or outright called me dishonest?

Please answer that question, so I don't have to run the search "for evidence".

(Okay; in all "honesty", I'm going to run the search anyway, because I think you might now try to be "dishonest", but here's your chance to "honestly" confront my questions. So what are you going to do?......................)

Hammegk specifically pointed out that "all opinions" except for one are faith.

Originally Posted by hammegk
Originally Posted by me
No, the thread is about atheism being a faith, not a belief. They do not necessarily mean the same thing. Apparently you only know how to read the dictionary literally, but the difference between connotation and denotation continues to escape you. You seem to think that all beliefs are faith, yet belief also means just to hold an opinion. So therefore, all opinions must be a faith as well.

Other than Thought Exists, which does not require faith, that's 100% correct.

I agree with hammegk, with the addendum that faith is measured; the amount of faith needed to reach a decision is balanced by the amount of evidence available which lessens the amount of faith required.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
And the concept of God as I and others believe exists (as well as other concepts which differ) is a concept that most atheists use as a basis of their doctrine.

What doctrine?

The doctrine of atheism:

–noun
1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Unicorns don't exist.
There isn't a flying spaghetti monster.
There is no tea cup orbiting the sun.
Gravity works.
The sun rises in the east.
There is no such thing as Casper the friendly Ghost and no other ghosts either.
Sylvia Browne can't talk to dead people because dead people are dead.
Uri Geller can't bend spoons with his mind.

Atheist doctrine: Bring us evidence and we WILL change our mind.

There is nothing that dictates that doctrine can't change or evolve with the advent of evidence.

In fact, that is exactly what I've been writing ad nauseum:

The amount of faith required to adhere to a belief/faith/doctrine/etc is directly opposed to the amount of evidence available.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Unicorns don't exist.

Atheism says nothing about the existence of unicorns.

There isn't a flying spaghetti monster.

Atheism says nothing about the existence of a flying spaghetti monster.

There is no tea cup orbiting the sun.

Atheism says nothing about tea, cups, orbits, or suns.

Gravity works.

Guess what?

The sun rises in the east.

Again!

There is no such thing as Casper the friendly Ghost and no other ghosts either.

Sylvia Browne can't talk to dead people because dead people are dead.

[yawn]

Uri Geller can't bend spoons with his mind.

How many irrelevant things can you post?

Atheist doctrine: Bring us evidence and we WILL change our mind.

One more, it seems. Atheism says nothing about a willingness to change one's mind in light (or in lieu) of evidence.