Olivia Cassandrae
- Comment - Share
Dave Pearson - Not that I think this approach makes sense, but I think the function you want to define, if you must, would be called isAtheistInRespectOf
Yesterday 1:22 AM
Heather Wiech - "Number of gods = 100" is false. There are thousands of different deities in mythology. India alone has more than that. This is a foolhardy endeavor.
Yesterday 1:25 AM
Dave Pearson - I think you'll find that the 100 figure is the deity count version of ahttp://en.wikipedia.
Yesterday 1:30 AM
Miles Kurland - I have to respectfully disagree (and I know it's a joke) because atheism is the lack of believe in any god or supernatural phenomena or agencies.
99% atheist is a little bit like 99% pregnant: it's a binary condition. The atheism bit is either flipped on or off.
99% atheist is a little bit like 99% pregnant: it's a binary condition. The atheism bit is either flipped on or off.
Yesterday 1:32 AM
Adam Hirschfeld - Very few humans truly believe in any god anyway. Do you wonder why they spend so much time perpetuating the same garbage? that is why. Only the severely mental ill have what is called true faith.
Yesterday 1:33 AM
Dave Pearson - It'd be generally understood, and would be binary, if one said "I am atheist in respect of the Flying Spaghetti Monster".
It's true, of course, that you can't really be 99% atheist, but... yeah, it borks the joke. ;-)
It's true, of course, that you can't really be 99% atheist, but... yeah, it borks the joke. ;-)
Yesterday 1:34 AM
Marshall Gillson - First of all, I don't think you can be an atheist "with respect to" a specific god. I consider atheism an absolute state. If you do not believe in any gods then you're an atheist. Otherwise you're not.
Second, as some blogger pointed out to me once (maybe PZ Meyers?), this line of reasoning is counterproductive. Theists don't decide on their god by looking at a list and systematically eliminating ones they disbelieve. They are by-and-large taught a god and stick with it. The other gods are just out by default.
Second, as some blogger pointed out to me once (maybe PZ Meyers?), this line of reasoning is counterproductive. Theists don't decide on their god by looking at a list and systematically eliminating ones they disbelieve. They are by-and-large taught a god and stick with it. The other gods are just out by default.
Yesterday 1:35 AM
Dave Pearson - +Marshall Gillson It's not uncommon parlance, and would be understood within context, to describe someone as atheist in respect to a deity.
But, of course, it shouldn't be confused with being atheist, period.
But, of course, it shouldn't be confused with being atheist, period.
Yesterday 1:37 AM
Olivia Cassandrae - +Heather Wiech I wrote there to suppose: Let's suppose. It is used in Maths, when trying to prove a hypothesis.
Yesterday 1:39 AM - Edit
Marshall Gillson - Just because it's understood doesn't make it correct. I know what she means, I just don't think it makes much sense to call people who are clearly theists "atheists".
Yesterday 1:40 AM
Olivia Cassandrae - There may be hundreds or thousands of Gods but here in my thesis I said let's suppose, Number Of Gods = 100;
Therefore it's not wrong.
Therefore it's not wrong.
Yesterday 1:40 AM - Edit
Heather Wiech - +Olivia Cassandrae And in philosophy, which gave birth to math, all premises must be true for the conclusion to be true.
Yesterday 1:40 AM
Marshall Gillson - +Heather Wiech: Then we can't ever ask any questions about fictional universes? PS... triple points for being another Rhode Islander.
Yesterday 1:42 AM
Dave Pearson - I'd say it's correct in context, but the context is being lost a little (mostly because it seems it's a joke that's being dissected). Moreover, the other bit of context that it has been stripped of is this is a way of explaining, to a theist, how one can even be an atheist in the first place and that, and this is the vital bit, it isn't about the god they believe in, their god is not special.
Yesterday 1:42 AM
Yesterday 2:01 AM
Miles Kurland - Jim, I think many atheists would say that it's not a matter of belief: they'd assert that atheism is a logical conclusion that there is no conclusive evidence to support the existence of god, gods, or supernatural phenomena.
Yesterday 2:12 AM
Miles Kurland - Dave: that joke has elsewhere been posed as "You know how you don't believe in any of those other gods beside you God? The only difference between you and me is that I disbelieve in just one more god than you do."
Yesterday 2:18 AM
Jim Lloyd - +Miles Kurland - Yes, many would say that. But I think they've let the faith-heads hijack the world believe to imply belief without evidence.
Yesterday 2:23 AM (edited Yesterday 2:24 AM)
Olivia Cassandrae - +Badger (stealth) I am taking it as a compliment, therefore thank you gentleman.
Yesterday 2:24 AM - Edit
Dave Pearson - Yeah, although it's an old sentiment, it's one that was, arguably made popular by Dawkins (in tGD, wasn't it?).
Yesterday 2:25 AM
Olivia Cassandrae - +Badger (stealth) I was just wondering who is 'he' in your attribute, I am glad he . . .?
Yesterday 2:27 AM - Edit
Chris Gomersall - Crazy thread. Much misunderstanding. Olivia's thesis is what it is, unaddressed for what it is. The clear exchange of ideas through text is still SO lame...
Yesterday 4:13 AM
Yesterday 4:17 AM
Dave Spencer - Theists and atheists both based on belief. I don't believe a purple bunny with green eyes that speaks and understands klingon exists. While unlikely, can not rule it out, although one might consider it a fools errond to spend a life searching for said bunny. Goes to the earlier truth thread, belief is subjective and even when it is widely held we cannot afford to make the mistake of calling it truth. There is no shame in saying "The evidence suggests, but we cannot prove or disprove the existance of the klingon bunny".
Yesterday 5:38 AM
Adam Hirschfeld - You are making the rainbow mistake again. I see no example of how Atheists have faith in anything.
Yesterday 5:39 AM
Olivia Cassandrae - +Adam Hirschfeld are you suggesting that Atheists don't have faith at all?
+Dave Spencer thank you.
+Dave Spencer thank you.
Yesterday 9:42 AM - Edit
Jim Lloyd - +Olivia Cassandrae Consider the various connotations of these three words:belief, faith, trust. They aren't all purely synonymous, yet they are often used interchangeably, even by atheists. But a pedantic atheist (well, this one anyway) is likely to say that while we have trust in our friends, we don't have faith in them. Faith is belief without evidence, or even despite contrary evidence. A claim for which there is no evidence for or against the claim is provisionally false, even if millions of people have faith the claim is true. Especially if the claim is tied to one culture.
Yesterday 10:48 AM
Edward McGuire - The argument hinges on a definition of "atheist" which is artificially narrow. The word "atheist" was made up by the religious. For 2,000 years it was a term of contempt. It meant a blasphemer or heretic, and did not mean actual disbelief. If you offend the gods, they will abandon you and you will then be godless (atheist). So atheism began as a social construct, not a self-identification. The word "atheist" has been adopted by atheists themselves for about 500 years, but also still has its original meaning when spoken by a believer. So it is not necessarily true that a person who believes in Yahweh but not in 99 other gods is 99% atheist. Despite his belief in Yahweh, if the Yahwist community considers him a blasphemer, he is an atheist according to them also, and therefore 100% atheist.
Yesterday 10:51 AM
Olivia Cassandrae - +Jim Lloyd wonderful explanation of faith. So crystal clear.
+Edward McGuire Why does a Yahwist considers him a blasphemer when he believes in Yahweh. He should be considered as theist. Right? I do not understand this logic.
+Edward McGuire Why does a Yahwist considers him a blasphemer when he believes in Yahweh. He should be considered as theist. Right? I do not understand this logic.
Yesterday 11:37 AM - Edit
Edward McGuire - For example, he might believe the "wrong" thing about Yahweh, the thing that makes the community consider him a heretic. Or, he might believe in Yahweh but be angry with him, and speak about him with disrespect, so that the community considers him a blasphemer. In either case the community can think of him as having lost his god. It is still true today that such people are called atheists even when the people themselves deny they are atheists.
Yesterday 11:48 AM
Olivia Cassandrae - +Edward McGuire very well explained about atheists and how they are emerged.
Ha! Now I totally got you. Thank you.
Ha! Now I totally got you. Thank you.
Yesterday 11:53 AM - Edit
Add a comment...
No comments:
Post a Comment