Support NeoGAF

[Cipherr]

Eh, when one of those groups holds all the power, obviously.

umm.. wat

 

[speculawyer]

Even the roots depict "no god".

No. No belief in god.

Theism in the broadest sense is the belief in at least one deity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theism

I know it's wikipedia, but I'm lazy and they have proper citations.

You quote the wiki but then don't bother to quote the first sentences they give?!? WTF?

Atheism is the philosophical position that deities do not exist,[1] or that rejects theism.[2] In the broadest sense, it is the absence of belief in the existence of deities.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

If you say atheism is the belief that there is no god, you excluding the broader definition thus, it is not correct.

Even the section you highlighted "one who denies or disbelieves" Disbelieving is not the same as believing the opposite. It means no belief. It may seem trivial but it is HUGE difference that completely blows away the 'atheism is a religion' canard this started with.

Agnosticism is believing that you cannot know if a god exists . . . hence one can be both an atheist and an agnostic at the same time.

 

[FunkyMunkey]

Atheism is the philosophical position that deities do not exist,[1] or that rejects theism.[2] In the broadest sense, it is the absence of belief in the existence of deities.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

If you say atheism is the belief that there is no god, you excluding the broader definition thus, it is not correct.

FFS. BROADEST SENSE. BROADEST.

How "broad" do you need to misconstrue you're arguments to be right? The more narrowed down and exact a definition, the more correct.

If you have to keep widening and widening what you mean to be right, you're wrong.

And FYI, to "disbelieve" is to "reject belief", not "lack of belief" [in reference to the Greek info].

 

[speculawyer]

FFS. BROADEST SENSE. BROADEST.

How "broad" do you need to misconstrue you're arguments to be right? The more narrowed down and exact a definition, the more correct.

If you have to keep widening and widening what you mean to be right, you're wrong.

No, this is simply using the words properly.

A Honda prelude is a car. But to define a car as a Honda Prelude is not "more correct" since it is narrowed down. It is actually less correct.

 

[FunkyMunkey]

No, this is simply using the words properly.

A Honda prelude is a car. But to define a car as a Honda Prelude is not "more correct" since it is narrowed down. It is actually less correct.

So, being more specific when describing something makes it less correct?? :lol RIGHT.

edit: I mean, if the car is a honda prelude, it wouldn't be "less correct".

 

[KHarvey16]

FFS. BROADEST SENSE. BROADEST.

How "broad" do you need to misconstrue you're arguments to be right? The more narrowed down and exact a definition, the more correct.

If you have to keep widening and widening what you mean to be right, you're wrong.

And FYI, to "disbelieve" is to "reject belief", not "lack of belief" [in reference to the Greek info].

It says "absence of belief." That is what atheism is. Again, 'a' means without and 'theism' means belief in god. A person is not either agnostic or atheist or theist. That's like saying a car is blue or it's a ford or it's a chevy. One of those things describes something else.

Agnosticism speaks to knowledge and atheism speaks to belief.

 

[speculawyer]

So, being more specific when describing something makes it less correct?? :lol RIGHT.

If you are eliminating items that properly fit within the class, then yes, it is less correct.

Are you seriously going to defend the definition of car as a Honda Prelude?

edit: I mean, if the car is a honda prelude, it wouldn't be "less correct".

Honda prelude is more specific for a specific vehicle that is a Honda prelude.

Actually Atheism is a religion

Did you say that people who believe in the nonexistence of god have a religion? No.

The problem is that you assuming a narrow subset of people. Even Richard Dawkins doesn't have a 'faith' that no god exists. He's pretty sure that no god exists but he doesn't know.

 

[FunkyMunkey]

Apparently I'm just being too specific in going by definitions...?

Are you seriously going to defend the definition of car as a Honda Prelude?

If the car you're pointing at is a Honda Prelude, and you call it a Honda Prelude, you are more specific then someone who just says "oh look a car".

I am very confused as to why you're saying that it's akin to me calling all cars a honda prelude? If it drives like a prelude, says prelude on the outside, matches the prelude interior entirely, and was bought off the Honda lot with "prelude" in the contract, it's a prelude.

 

[KHarvey16]

Apparently I'm just being too specific in going by definitions...?

Ok, let's do it this way. So by your thinking an atheist believes there is no god. Ok, fine. Then what is someone who simply lives their life without a belief in god, but doesn't necessarily make the claim that god definitely doesn't exist? If I have this right you'd call this person an agnostic. However, that isn't what agnosticism means. At all. Agnosticism doesn't describe belief in any way, shape or form. It simply describes how a person feels about the possibility of knowing whether or not god exists for certain. You can believe god exists and also believe we cannot prove for sure that he does. I think they call that faith.

 

[speculawyer]

I am very confused as to why you're saying that it's akin to me calling all cars a honda prelude? If it drives like a prelude, says prelude on the outside, matches the prelude interior entirely, and was bought off the Honda lot with "prelude" in the contract, it's a prelude.

Because you referred to a 'car' (atheist/atheism) with your first statement, not a Honda Prelude (A person/people that denies the existence of god.)

 

[phillipgessert]

Heaven would be pretty boring. Nothing ever goes wrong, right? So what do you do to pass the time? If you wanted to learn a musical intrument or something, wouldn't you just instantly master it?