Yuki is a powerful communicator, fearless in confrontations, and an intense logician.
Tsk, I thought all the atheists you knew resort to deceptive tactics, emotive intimidation, and out and out lies. Why butter me up at this stage in the game?
What’s worse for religiously minded people is I don’t think she ever has doubts about her faith in the nonexistence of God.
Except that faith is belief in the absence of evidence and there is ample evidence that I am lacking in belief in gods. Nice try though!
Based on the evidence I see, I can deny that there are doughnuts in the box, or a hat on your head, or a god at work in my life.
If you can see my head through this computer screen, you either need medical attention because you are hallucinating or you’ve got something illegal on my machine, in which case you have problems of another nature entirely.
There is no need to deny a hat on a hatless person, nor a need to deny that there are donuts in an empty box. An absence is an absence, you do not need to deny a presence in order to have an absence.
You can believe that there is a god at work in your life but that would apply only to you, not universally.
But, in Logic, these are known as propositions: positive assertions that the world is a certain way.
They’re models, Jim. I’m an atheist, not a preacher.
Somebody ate the last doughnut!
The box which had previously contained donuts is now empty. There is evidence.
Your head is hat-less.
There is no evidence of a hat upon my head.
The universe is godless.
There is insufficient evidence for me to accept any of the god concepts currently known to me. That is a compulsion beyond the realm of choice.
I would not, and I do not at the present time, claim that that it is possible to know whether any type of gods are possible at any place in the entire known universe, past, present or future, because I do not have the whole data set. That would be intellectually dishonest.
Can you get me the whole data set? I don’t think you can.
To insist that “Atheism is not the positive assertion that no gods exist” is an evasion tactic, and contrary even to the definitions found in various dictionaries of Philosophy.
Evasion of what, the theist’s attempt to shirk the burden of proof, perhaps?
The ancient Romans accused Christians of being atheists for not worshiping the pagan deities. Now theism is understood as encompassing belief in any divinity and Christians no longer are called atheists. “Various books” as a source doesn’t really cut it here, to be honest.
Atheism my be the denial of theism, but that means it is also the view that no God exists, that there is no such Person or Being as God.
That remains false equivalence. Shall I demonstrate with a model? I’ve got one for this argument.
Why quibble on this ground?
Because I am an atheist and atheism is not a religion. I have to wonder why you’re focusing on a single aspect of this man’s post, to be honest.
Because if Atheism says nothing, then Atheists have nothing to defend.
Since when is “atheism” able to say anything? It’s an absence of belief, Jim, not a belief system.
All they have to do is declare that all the arguments brought to the table by Theists are unconvincing.
Does that bother you, Fresh? That positively reeks of butthurt.
Not all of Atheism, but a portion of it. Some Atheists approach their belief system the same way religions do. One of the methods is aggressive advertising via the way of “tracts” (in their case, pamphlets), Billboards, and even TV and Radio PSAs.
This is identical to religion. Get the word out. This takes it beyond being a personal belief, and makes it more of a religion. That is to say, it’s not enough for these people to simply say, “I don’t believe in God.” Now they are adding to it, “And I must let others know that belief in God is delusional.” This thinking shows a desire to join others to your cause, again, just as religion.
Not all Atheists do this.
And so they do, but they conspicuously do no more, because there is no good evidence that Atheism is true.
That would be because atheism is not a belief system, nor is it a positive assertion, of course! Thank you for proving my point so succinctly. It’s always helpful to have another religious person explain things to religious folks who are being unreasonable.
Now, if you are simply hate-following me for the purpose of stalking my posts so that you can entertain yourself by trying to refute them, please accept my cordial invitation to the unfollow button at your earliest convenience. It’s one thing when it is a mutual follow, and it is another thing entirely when it is not.
Damn, Yuki, where do you find these people?
It’s part of my charm, I suppose, the price of my popularity. Heard from your latest hate-follower lately by any chance, my friend, or did he give up? ^^
No, he unfollowed me after I asked him nicely. I was a little surprised.