dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
In my experience a lot of Americans have no idea what the word Socialism means.If Obama was British he would be a Conservative.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
In my experience a lot of Americans have no idea what the word Socialism means.If Obama was British he would be a Conservative.
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
1/3 of English terms and usages are actually French?
Tricky
Briefly immortal
He's actually pretty darn conservative even by American standards. Of course, few conservatives want to admit this. It interferes with their screeds.
JonathanQuick
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 228
Good one.
Obama proposes the socialization of the entire health industry, one seventh of the American economy, takes over General Motors, spends far more than George Bush ever spent, and he's suddenly a conservative.
One wonders why Republicans and Democrats alike oppose Obama's socialistic practices.
His failed extremist tactics will result in a dramatic change in congress on November 2.
Screed that, "Tricky."
Mister Agenda
Illuminator
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2007
- Messages
- 3,139
I know this was nine pages ago, but it was just lying there.
Miriam
disbelieve
:to hold not worthy of belief:not believe
:to withold or reject belief
Just by way of saying that as far as dictionary definitions go, one of the meanings of disbelieve is simply to not believe.
An atheist is someone who would not answer 'yes' if someone asked them if they believe in any God or gods. There isn't a word that I know of for someone who would not answer 'yes' if someone asked them if they believe in Morkanwup, which I mention by way of illustration that it doesn't make sense to say 'yes' if you don't know what 'Morkanwup' is. You can't believe in something you haven't heard of.
Christian, the point of using this definition of 'atheist' is that it is inclusive (unlikely to 'disqualify' anyone who thinks of themselves as an atheist). Agnostic atheists, gnostic atheists, weak atheists, strong atheists; it includes us all.
If 'skeptic' is too vague for your purposes, what about 'strong atheists'? Because, really, 'atheist' is too vague for your purposes as well, I think.
Using sheer logic and argumentation has not worked so far. So it occured to me that I might not be the only one who has expressed an interest in exploring the idea of an atheist perspective. I have found such books that touch upon this topic.
Atheists: A Groundbreaking Study of America's Nonbelievers [Paperback]
Bruce E. Hunsberger (Author), Bob Altemeyer (Author)
From the reviews:
These books indicate that atheists as a group can be studied, and they actually are.
Atheists: A Groundbreaking Study of America's Nonbelievers [Paperback]
Bruce E. Hunsberger (Author), Bob Altemeyer (Author)
From the reviews:
These books indicate that atheists as a group can be studied, and they actually are.
SezMe
post-pre-born
Sledge, I just found out about this. Congratulations! "Bloody good show, mate." or however it goes over there. Honesty compels me to admit I'm jealous...but I'll get over it by seeing my adviser. *snort*
Mister Agenda
Illuminator
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2007
- Messages
- 3,139
Sure, if you have a good operational definition. My guess is the one used for the study was 'someone who self-identifies as an atheist'. That would be a good one for you to use as well, I think.
elipse
Master Poster
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 2,470
That would be a very good definition, so long as he didn't let himself slip back into defining "atheist" as "one who rejects the idea of a god or gods" at any point in the survey, or at any point in the analysis of the data.
I think that was the whole problem, though. Christian is hypothesizing (correct me if I'm wrong, Christian) that people who have rejected the idea of god have a different brain...something. He is calling these people atheists, and is trying to survey them using the word "atheist", but, as several people have pointed out, not all atheists consider themselves to fit in that category.
So if what he wants to study is the hypothesis
"People who have rejected the idea of a god or gods have differences in their brains from people who do not reject the idea of a god or gods"
then he needs to use that exact phrase in his survey, and also add a box that indicates "other" or "have not rejected but do not believe in a god or gods" so that he can make sure that the group he is studying is the right group. He then needs to compare ONLY those who check the "I have rejected the idea of a god or gods" box. He may not use the word "atheist" at all, because it is counterproductive to do so, just as it is counterproductive to use the word "gay" in a survey on sex.
Christian, can you agree to this? If you just re-phrase your survey to replace "atheist" with "one who has rejected the idea of a god or gods", we can move on to talking about the next item of interest: your proposed IQ study.
Last edited:
elipse
Master Poster
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 2,470
For the record, I think I would qualify as one of those who "rejected" the idea of a god or gods, since I was a theist until I was 19.
And even I am slightly uncomfortable with the word "rejected" because it carries connotations of anger or shunning or something.
Maybe it should read "one who has rejected the idea of a god or gods", since I no longer do any active rejecting.
Yeah, I think that's better. I'm gonna edit my last post to that.
And even I am slightly uncomfortable with the word "rejected" because it carries connotations of anger or shunning or something.
Maybe it should read "one who has rejected the idea of a god or gods", since I no longer do any active rejecting.
Yeah, I think that's better. I'm gonna edit my last post to that.