Hello everyone

183 posts / 0 new
Last post
Anonymous's picture
Hello everyone

I'm new to this forum, and have questions about your perspective, I'm a little apprehensive on the response i'll get.
Asking a question is never the problem is dealing with the answer. right?

I'm not here to judge, to change or shame anyone and will expect the same courtesy, also please excuse my ignorance in certain subjects that may arise ( please educate me).

Excuse any spelling, grammar, and\or incomplete sentences, my thought seem to run faster then I can type.

Now to the first question.

why in your sign up page you only have the option of athiest or non yet no option for neutral\neither?

my other question will be on just doing my best to learn from you and how you see the world.

Thank You in advance for your tolerance.
Curious

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

Aposteriori unum's picture
It is a binary issue. Either

It is a binary issue. Either you believe that a god exists or you don't. The second option is atheist, the first is everything else.

It's the law of the excluded middle. A or not A.

Hope that explains the lack of options there.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
But such a law refers to the

But such a law refers to the truth of a proposition and not our beliefs about it, right? Either God exists or He doesn't; but beliefs themselves are not binary, there are as many variations as there are thinking heads to produce them:

I can believe God exists or believe He doesn't. I can believe something else entirely or, as the OP suggests, hold no beliefs at all.

Sheldon's picture
"I can believe God exists or

"I can believe God exists or believe He doesn't."

You have again erroneously described the lack of a belief as itself belief, not believing something is not a belief, by definition. I assume there are things you don't believe in, even deities like Zeus and Apollo, now are each of these a belief you hold? So unicorns not being real is a belief you hold, also mermaids, leprechauns, etc etc..

mykcob4's picture
It's the same old shit. The

It's the same old shit. The black and white trick. You either believe in god or you "believe" there is no god. Theist just can't grasp in NOT BELIEVING! They like to twist things to meet a predetermined narrative. Fucking stupid. Hey, all you theist!!!! I don't believe in a god! That is not the same thing as "believing that there is no god."
The reason theists always try to say that atheists believe that there is no god instead of saying that atheists don't believe in a god is so they can say that atheists have a false belief.
The fact is that there is no god until someone actually proves that there is a god. That is just a fact! What SHOULD be normal is no one believes in a god. That is natural. Everyone is born an atheist. You have to be indoctrinated or trained/brainwashed/coerced to believe in a god! It isn't a natural thing.

Sheldon's picture
It's definitely in vogue to

It's definitely in vogue to try and reverse the burden of proof, not a new idea, but idiots like William Lane Craig are leading the charge. It amounts to no more than a fallacious argument from ignorance. Quite risible stuff it really is, yet theists lap it up.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
Its evident neither of you

Its evident neither of you understood the comment.

Sheldon's picture
No it isn't, though it now

No it isn't, though it now seems obvious you don't.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Breezy

@ Breezy

The standard response.."its obvious everyone understands the comment but I will say you don't as I have no answer..."

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
Me: "I can believe God exists

Me: "I can believe God exists or believe He doesn't. I can believe something else entirely or, as the OP suggests, hold no beliefs at all."

Sheldon: "You have again erroneously described the lack of a belief as itself belief..."

Sheldon's picture
"I can believe God exists or

"I can believe God exists or **believe He doesn't.**"

There are two possibilities, either you are unable to understand that your second choice is erroneous precisely because not believing something is not a belief by definition, or you're disingenuously misrepresenting atheism as a belief.

Atheism is the absence of a belief. This is one of two possible positions, either to believe a claim or not. The spectrum refers to knowledge and not belief.

As far as knowledge is concerned there is a virtually limitless spectrum, and in that spectrum one can admit to not knowing.. However this position is not a 50/50 position on belief, as it is absurd to claim to believe something exists when you don't know.

This then is why dishonest apologists try to pretend that atheism is a belief with the same burden of proof as theism. The lie is easily exposed by noting they don't apply this universally. As I said earlier do you hold separate beliefs for everything you don't believe is real?

There is no such thing as holding a "belief that you don't believe something", as you are trying to dishonestly claim.

As I said you don't understand the point at all. Or you're lying of course?

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
When you say my second choice

When you say my second choice, are you aware that I presented four?

Sheldon's picture
Yes, you're wrong because

Yes, you're wrong because you're mixing belief and knowledge together. That's why I was careful to quote only the two that applied to belief.

The spectrum refers to knowledge. As has been pointed out by others belief is a binary position, it can be nothing else.

Theists use special pleading because they attach a significance to their belief that they don't to other beliefs. This skews their reason.

Sheldon's picture
Wheezy "I can believe God

Wheezy "I can believe God exists or believe He doesn't. I can believe something else entirely or, as the OP suggests, hold no beliefs at all."

1) one can believe God exists (theism)
2) One can not believe God exists (atheism)
3) Holding no brliefs about the existence if god is also atheism.

There are no other belief positions one can hold about whether a deity exists. All the other positions are about knowledge, this includes agnosticism.

mykcob4's picture
No, we understand Breezy. We

No, we understand Breezy. We definitely understand. You thought you'd slip it by.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
Atheist Paranoia

Atheist Paranoia

mykcob4's picture
That is your latest game and

That is your latest game and it's getting old Breezy!

Sheldon's picture
Theistic special pleading.

Theistic special pleading.

LogicFTW's picture
I am going to try, (and

I am going to try, (and probably fail,) to explain atheist to people that do not seem to understand.

Commonly accepted definition of believe in this use:
accept (something) as true; feel sure of the truth of.

If we can agree that theist means someone that believes in god. Then atheist is: someone who does not believe in god.

That is it. You can not add anything to this super easy and short definition, it is the opposite of theism. The a in front of the word denotes opposite of. (Latin roots I believe.)

An example: typical and atypical. The difference between the two definitions is a simple "not." Atypical is not a variation of typical, it is the opposite of typical.

You would have to add additional meaning and definition to the word: "atypical" if you wanted the word "atypical" to mean something that is slightly different from typical but shares the same characteristics of the word typical. Making it no longer a word denoting the opposite of.

Do not make the mistake of such a simple "not" definition much more than it is. Keep it simple, as it was intended to be used that way.

---Lightly edited for clarity---

Aposteriori unum's picture
"I can believe God exists or

"I can believe God exists or believe He doesn't. I can believe something else entirely or, as the OP suggests, hold no beliefs at all."

The first sentence here is correct. The second, not so much.

Here's a good explanation for you, Breezy:
It's black or not black. Whether not black means purple or green or White is irrelevant... It's not black. So you believe in god (black) or you do not (not black). That's what the law of the excluded middle is refering to.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
I agree that something is

I agree that something is ultimately either 'black' or 'not black;' and also that 'not black' includes every possible category that isn't 'black.' That's clearly binary, since something can't be both 'black' and 'not black' or be neither simultaneously.

However, beliefs don't work the same way. I can believe something is black; you can believe the same thing is not black; and another person may be completely neutral on the issue, and it would be inappropriate to place such a person in the 'believes its not black" category.

Aposteriori unum's picture
No, you are totally wrong.

No, you are totally wrong. Either you believe or you don't. There is no third option. This is logic 101. A thing is or it is not. You say with one sentence that you understand and then with the next you demonstrate that you do not.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
Again, I agree a thing is or

Again, I agree a thing 'is' or 'is not;' but a persons beliefs on whether a thing 'is' or 'is not', do not fall into such a binary system.

Beliefs about any subject can fall into a middle, neutral, category. You're treating beliefs as if they were actual 'things' rather than as an opinion about actual 'things.'

Nyarlathotep's picture
But the same method can be

The same method can be repeated to produce a binary distribution:

A = someone has the belief X
B = ¬A; someone does not have the belief X.

Notice that all of the following are subsets of B:

  • not believing X
  • not being sure about belief X
  • potato!
ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
Right, which is what happens

Right, which is what happens when a belief is treated as a thing rather than as an opinion about a thing.

For example, if X = God 'does not exist;' then someone who isn't sure about belief X, logically falls into subset B and not A. If instead X = God 'does' exist, the same unsure person still falls into subset B not A.

That's an uninformative way to split things up, since being unsure/neutral means you don't identify with any of the possible options.

Far more expedient are the following options: Does God Exist?

1. Yes, I believe God does.
2. No, I believe God does not.
3. Unsure.

Nyarlathotep's picture
The primary purpose of that

The primary purpose of that question on the forums is to determine access to the Atheist Hub sub-forum. User access to the sub-forum is binary, so the question is as well. I've already demonstrated that the question does in fact perform a binary sort (despite the claims to the contrary). The fact that a couple users don't like the sort is not likely to change anything.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
That's fine. In fact, that's

That's fine. In fact, that's a better answer to the OP's question about why there's only two options, than saying its because there are only two possible beliefs on the topic of God.

As long as people recognize that options A, B, C, and D exist, emphasizing that B, C, D are not A, or that A, D, B are not C seems obvious and redundant. Clearly, that doesn't change the fact that there are still four options.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Breezy - ...that doesn't

Breezy - ...that doesn't change the fact that there are still four options.

There are an infinite number of options. But all of them are covered by A and not A.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
Right, its like asking what

Right, its like asking what your political views are, but only giving you the option of Republican and Not Republican.

Nyarlathotep's picture
yes, that is exactly it

Yes, that is exactly it; will you have access to the Atheist Hub, or will you not.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
I just changed my profile's

I just changed my profile's view to atheism, where do I find this Atheist Hub?

P.S., I'm down for changing Cyber's gender from female to non-male. Hopefully she doesn't mind, since that would just be illogical of her.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.