Why I raise my children without ? .
Options
Comments
-
There is no such thing as a weak atheist.
Positive atheism (also called strong atheism and hard atheism) is the form of atheism that asserts that no deities exist. Negative atheism (also called weak atheism and soft atheism) is any other type of atheism, wherein a person does not believe in the existence of any deities, but does not explicitly assert there to be none
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_atheism
logically There is no such thing as a weak atheist and wikipedia is often wrong. -
logically There is no such thing as a weak atheist.
You have yet to prove this.wikipedia is often wrong.
Not in this instance. -
There is no such thing as a weak atheist. From the perspective of the one doing the denial , a statement of Denial of anything nitigates it's possible existence. Because by denying what he is saying it that. Whatever it is does not exist. Period end of story
It does does not matter if said thing actually exist or not. It is being denied usually based off of logic. There is no such thing as a weak atheist. Atheism is a denial of gods existence.
-
It is being denied based on logic and evidence to an atheist ? cannot logically exist. His possible existence is ilogical so therefore gods existence is denied.
-
It does does not matter if said thing actually exist or not. It is being denied usually based off of logic. There is no such thing as a weak atheist. Atheism is a denial of gods existence.
Atheism is also defined as absence of belief. An atheist can lack belief in ? but not assert gods non existence. It is (a) of the webster definition.It is being denied based on logic and evidence to an atheist ? cannot logically exist. His possible existence is ilogical so therefore gods existence is denied.
Certain descriptions of ? are illogical. For instance, the abrahamic ? is illogical. It is equivalent to a square circle. It can't possibly exist.
I'm a strong atheist with regards to the Abrahamic version of ? but I'm also a strong atheist in any version of a supreme being because I believe a supreme being is illogical and can't possibly exist.
However, "? " is a label that can be attached to anything and descriptions of whatever ? may be can be loose as to where it's more difficult to disprove its existence. A ? does not have to be supreme or the first cause. If ? were to be defined as a being that somehow created or "set off" the universe but exists in some other universe where other beings exist, and is not the creator of the beings that live with him or the universe he lives in, then I'm a weak atheist in that regard; I don't believe in it but I'm not asserting that it doesn't exist.
Assert
1: to state or declare positively and often forcefully or aggressively
2a : to demonstrate the existence of <assert his manhood — James Joyce>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assert -
-
-
FuriousOne wrote: »alissowack wrote: »I think it is a bit sad that someone thinks the real world taken as it is would not spark curiosity and imagination. In my opinion diverting a child's curiosity from the real world to superstitions and fairy tales inflicts actual harm.
I don't particularly know where @bigjames is going with what he said, but I agree with one point. Kids need to be allowed to be kids. They need to be able enjoy what it's like to dream and imagine. Taking away someone's childhood can inflict harm as well. They will grow up still trying to be kids or live like they are in their teens.
What does that have to do with religion? Religion isn't a necessary part of any child's childhood. There are plenty of fantasies for them to partake in with the knowledge that it is for play play. I knew Santa Clause was fake when i was a kid. It's as easy as explaining to your child that there are end of the year traditions where gifts are exchanged with no mention of religion. Isn't it enough that we have to live under the Gregorian calendar and celebrate the end of the year of our lord?
...and I wasn't saying that it needs to be. This was something off the subject that I wanted to address because there was the impression that the only harm posed to kids is being "indoctrinated"...when it's not. -
It does does not matter if said thing actually exist or not. It is being denied usually based off of logic. There is no such thing as a weak atheist. Atheism is a denial of gods existence.
Atheism is also defined as absence of belief. An atheist can lack belief in ? but not assert gods non existence. It is (a) of the webster definition.It is being denied based on logic and evidence to an atheist ? cannot logically exist. His possible existence is ilogical so therefore gods existence is denied.
Certain descriptions of ? are illogical. For instance, the abrahamic ? is illogical. It is equivalent to a square circle. It can't possibly exist.
I'm a strong atheist with regards to the Abrahamic version of ? but I'm also a strong atheist in any version of a supreme being because I believe a supreme being is illogical and can't possibly exist.
However, "? " is a label that can be attached to anything and descriptions of whatever ? may be can be loose as to where it's more difficult to disprove its existence. A ? does not have to be supreme or the first cause. If ? were to be defined as a being that somehow created or "set off" the universe but exists in some other universe where other beings exist, and is not the creator of the beings that live with him or the universe he lives in, then I'm a weak atheist in that regard; I don't believe in it but I'm not asserting that it doesn't exist.
Assert
1: to state or declare positively and often forcefully or aggressively
2a : to demonstrate the existence of <assert his manhood — James Joyce>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assert
Like I told you earlier the dictionary holds the popular meaning of words but not always the logical meanings of words. So in other words webster is wrong. You have exposed yourself as an anti christian bigot.
Your Belief in so called weak atheism is nothing more than a hate for christians and a rejection of their ? . You are not an atheist, an atheist would reject the concept of ? period, not pick and choose which ? could be real or not.
Denial is a noun, an action word, atheism is a thought action. Atheism requires you to mentaly reject ? . People who simply lack belief are not atheist.
Atheism cannot be logically defined as both a denial of ? and an absence of belief. Because one requires action and the other does not.
There is no such things as a weak atheist. -
So in other words webster is wrong.
Prove it.You have exposed yourself as an anti christian bigot. Your Belief in so called weak atheism is nothing more than a hate for christians and a rejection of their ? . You are not an atheist, an atheist would reject the concept of ? period, not pick and choose which ? could be real or not.
All concepts of ? are not the same. I reject the possibility of a supreme being whether Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, etc. etc. I'm a strong atheist when considering the ? of classical theism which does not boil down to hate for Christians no matter how much you would like it to.People who simply lack belief are not atheist.
Yes they are.Atheism cannot be logically defined as both a denial of ? and an absence of belief. Because one requires action and the other does not.
Atheism
a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
b : the doctrine that there is no deity
The prefix "a-" means "without", "not" or "the absence of".
"Theo" is Greek, which means "? " or "deity".
"-ism" means "doctrine" or "theory"
So literally, "atheism" means the absence of the ? theory.
-
So in other words webster is wrong.
Prove it.You have exposed yourself as an anti christian bigot. Your Belief in so called weak atheism is nothing more than a hate for christians and a rejection of their ? . You are not an atheist, an atheist would reject the concept of ? period, not pick and choose which ? could be real or not.
All concepts of ? are not the same. I reject the possibility of a supreme being whether Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, etc. etc. I'm a strong atheist when considering the ? of classical theism which does not boil down to hate for Christians no matter how much you would like it to.People who simply lack belief are not atheist.
Yes they are.Atheism cannot be logically defined as both a denial of ? and an absence of belief. Because one requires action and the other does not.
Atheism
a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
b : the doctrine that there is no deity
The prefix "a-" means "without", "not" or "the absence of".
"Theo" is Greek, which means "? " or "deity".
"-ism" means "doctrine" or "theory"
So literally, "atheism" means the absence of the ? theory.
I already told you the original use of the word atheist and broke it down. We went over all of this many posts ago. A disbelief is a denial both are actions they requires doing. Atheism is the denial of ? denial is an action. that's the "ism" in atheism. So just lacking belief is not enough To make you an atheist. To a real atheist all gods are equal in there non existence. You are not an atheist. You chose to bring up the ? of the bible because it is the ? you don,t like.
Look until someone comments on our debate it shall just go in circles because you refuse to see logic. -
Atheism is the denial of ? denial is an action.
Atheism is a noun, not a verb.You chose to bring up the ? of the bible because it is the ? you don,t like.
I chose to bring up the ? of the Bible because it is the most widely accepted version of a ? .
I don't believe in the gods of polytheistic religions and monotheistic religions other than the Abrahamic religions either. I'll bring them up from now so you can stop crying. Deal?
-
Atheism is the denial of ? denial is an action.
Atheism is a noun, not a verb.You chose to bring up the ? of the bible because it is the ? you don,t like.
I chose to bring up the ? of the Bible because it is the most widely accepted version of a ? .
I don't believe in the gods of polytheistic religions and monotheistic religions other than the Abrahamic religions either. I'll bring them up from now so you can stop crying. Deal?
Noun verb whatever. an Atheist is a person and atheism is what he does from a mental stadpoint. I don't want you to bring them up you festering ? . They are not important to our debate. -
whatever
Nah, it's not "whatever". A noun and a verb are two different things and it derails your entire argument. Just admit you're wrong. -
It makes no difference to my argument and derails nothing atheism is a denial and requires the knowing rejection of the possiblity of ? . An atheist is the name giving to a person who denys ? . -
there is no such thing as a weak atheist.
-
In reality there is no such thing as strong or weak atheism, In the dictionary yes, in reality NO .
Those terms are concepts with no reality they are made up invented ? . Atheist translated from the greek means without ? , it is an intellectual position on reality. Agnostic literally means "A" without "gnosis" knowledge, you have no knowledge of ? 's existence or non-existence, that statement alone does not erase his possible existence. You don't seem to be thinking you are just spewing forth the popular but false atheist garbage of the current secular age we live in.
A) The real meaning of Atheism = Belief that ? definitely does not exist. = A disbelief that ? exists. = A denial of the existence of ? .
The false and incomplete meaning of Atheism = Absence of any belief in ? .
One side believes that the term Atheism originally refers to the belief in the complete absence of the existence of ? . (A). The other side believes that the terms Atheism originally refers to the absence of belief in the existence of ? . (B) A AND B ARE CLOSE BUT THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.
B considers agnostics, and many other types of beliefs/nonbeliefs that do not acknowledge the existence of ? to be atheist. To it's followers Agnosticism is a type of ATHEISM. Therefore ? terms like agnostic atheist. Strong Atheism, Weak Atheism are taken seriously to define various forms of atheism. B creates a cornucopia of atheism and defines A as strong atheism
A does not accept such terms as atheist agnostic, weak atheism, strong atheism, as valid as they play no part in it's definition. An agnostic as defined by A is in no way an atheist. A also does not define people that have not been exposed to the proposition of ? as atheists.
B is wrong for the following reasons you stupid ? .
1. The word Atheist was originally created to describe those that deny the existence of ? . The atheist were criminals in ancient grecce because they denied the gods existence. B was not the original meaning, but more of a CORRUPTION of the words meaning that came later on.
2. Standpoint B CREATES a roof for other positions and non-positions to hide under atheism. It paints the label “atheism” onto other viewpoints.
you may consider yourself an agnostic independent of any label of atheism as defined by A. But B automatically places you under atheism. B forces babies, toddlers animals and all that have never taken an active position in the matter to be labeled as atheists. A however, does not label anybody atheist unless they actively take the position in the debate.
3. It is illogical to consider a disbelief/denial too equal to " a lack of belief ". By definition, a denial is an outright claim that the proposition is false. Same with a disbelief. It is an active position, and an outright rejection of the statement. A would not consider babies to be theists, any more than they are Marxists, capitalists, or atheists. "a lack of belief " means not having belief,not having something and denying something are two different standpoints and cannot be the same.
So you can take your ? ? licking terminology and stick it up dawkins ass. Now you can consider B and it's ? terminology as your perspective. however it is not not real atheism. Use your ? brain and not just the dictionary, it only holds the popular meanings of things but often not their real meanings.
There is no such thing as a weak atheist. -
I already argued against that. You're just trollin now
-
-
There is no such thing as weak atheism. Until someone else comments on our debate this shall continue because you refuse to see logic.
-
You say that but haven't proven it. Most of what you have said is wrong. You don't even understand how atheism is a noun and not a verb.
-
You say that but haven't proven it. Most of what you have said is wrong. You don't even understand how atheism is a noun and not a verb.
There is no such thing as a weak atheist. The mistake of calling a noun a verb or a verb a noun does not change the fact that atheism is a denial of gods existence and nothing more. a denial is an action. You cannot deny something exist and then say it could exist that would contradict the denial because a denial is a rejection. You refuse to see logic until someone else comments me and you will keep going in circles. -
Yeah the former is an atheist, the latter is a theist; theism and atheism deal with belief. Gnosticism and agnosticism deal with knowledge. Knowledge and belief are not the same, which is why it is possible to be classified as something like an agnostic theist. I'm not making these terms up.
It does not matter who made the terms up they are not real.
LACK OF belief IS NOT THE MEANING OF THE WORD ATHEIST. Atheism is the complete denial of the existence of ? and nothing else all the terms you have described are not atheism Just because someone made something that does not make it true. you cannot be an agnostic and an atheist at the same time because an agnostic says he has no knowledge of ? and an atheist claims he has knowledge that ? does not exist nor can he exist because the concept of a ? is illogical.
There is no such thing as a weak atheist -
SINCE YOU LIKE THE DICTIONARY SO MUCH HERE YOU GOA disbelief is not a denial. A baby has no belief in ? but has not yet denied its existence.
de·ny (d-n)
tr.v. de·nied, de·ny·ing, de·nies
1. To declare untrue; contradict.
2. To refuse to believe; reject.
3. To refuse to recognize or acknowledge; disavow.
de·ni·al [dih-nahy-uhl]
noun
1.
an assertion that something said, believed, alleged, etc., is false: Despite his denials, we knew he had taken the purse. The politician issued a denial of his opponent's charges.
2.
refusal to believe a doctrine, theory, or the like.
3.
disbelief in the existence or reality of a thing.
4.
the refusal to satisfy a claim, request, desire, etc., or the refusal of a person making it.
5.
refusal to recognize or acknowledge; a disowning or disavowal: the traitor's denial of his country; Peter's denial of Christ.
There is no such thing as a weak atheist. -
Denial is a noun. Deny is the verb.
Atheism is a noun. Atheism is the absence of belief in the ? theory. The word absence is also a noun. Atheism is also the doctrine that no ? exists. Doctrine is a noun.
This discussion has been closed.