"Atheism is a world view"

[Alien]

...

But provided you stick to what "atheism" actually means - "without gods" - ...

That's part of the problem. Some define "atheism" the way you have above, but some philosophy departments, for example, don't define it that way.

[Outrider]

On our "side", we have problems too. In the strict sense all Christians are "creationists" yet people happily use that term to refer solely to "Young Earth Creationists."

Indeed, which makes it difficult to keep context when you try to point out that nothing in evolutionary theory is irreconcilable with creationism to try to build bridges.

The longer I go, the harder it is to avoid any philosophical discussion devolving into an argument about the specific meaning of words, which is a shame, because I find it the dullest area of philosophy there is.

O.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Alien,

That's part of the problem. Some define "atheism" the way you have above, but some philosophy departments, for example, don't define it that way.

Your "side" has a bigger problem than that I think. For the most part theists seem to be "level 7" equivalents - they assert that there definitely is a god/are gods - rather than confine themselves to possibilities, which is when the burden of proof issue smacks then in the chops.

[Andy]

That's part of the problem. Some define "atheism" the way you have above, but some philosophy departments, for example, don't define it that way.

How does the OED define it? You normally like to stick with that.

[Alien]

That's part of the problem. Some define "atheism" the way you have above, but some philosophy departments, for example, don't define it that way.

How does the OED define it? You normally like to stick with that.

It defines it the way you do. I'm not fussed how it is defined, only that the term is used consistently and it isn't.

[Andy]

That's part of the problem. Some define "atheism" the way you have above, but some philosophy departments, for example, don't define it that way.

How does the OED define it? You normally like to stick with that.

It defines it the way you do. I'm not fussed how it is defined, only that the term is used consistently and it isn't.

Well the best we can do here between ourselves is say what we mean by it. I think that's been covered ad nauseam.

[splashscuba]

Alien,

A strong aleprechaunist, for sure. What about you? Are you a weak or strong aspaghetti-monsterist?

I've never understood how you think you can be a strong or a weak a-anyhting. The a-prefix just means "without" - a-theist just means "without gods". You can't be strongly or weakly without gods (or leprechauns) - would a strong one really, really be without gods but a weak one would be without gods except on Wednesday afternoons or something?

What?

BHS and Shaker,
See http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=10870.msg555281#msg555281

A-theism or athe-ism? It depend(s/ed) on what the "a" was doing. Is it "without theism" or "without god"-ism? Best to signify which is meant, perhaps.

I use the word to simply mean that I don't believe in gods. Not bothered what other people use the word for.

So you have your own private language?

Nope

It might be better to use English words the way other people use them.

Did you read my last sentence ?

[Alien]

Alien,

A strong aleprechaunist, for sure. What about you? Are you a weak or strong aspaghetti-monsterist?

I've never understood how you think you can be a strong or a weak a-anyhting. The a-prefix just means "without" - a-theist just means "without gods". You can't be strongly or weakly without gods (or leprechauns) - would a strong one really, really be without gods but a weak one would be without gods except on Wednesday afternoons or something?

What?

BHS and Shaker,
See http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=10870.msg555281#msg555281

A-theism or athe-ism? It depend(s/ed) on what the "a" was doing. Is it "without theism" or "without god"-ism? Best to signify which is meant, perhaps.

I use the word to simply mean that I don't believe in gods. Not bothered what other people use the word for.

So you have your own private language?

Nope

But you have just written that you are not bothered what other people use a particular word for. That means you are assigning your own meaning to a word, which is not how language works. For language to work, there needs to be at least a rough correspondence in meaning.

It might be better to use English words the way other people use them.

Did you read my last sentence ?

Yes, but it didn't sink in. I thought you were referring to me, rather than yourself. Please would you clarify what you are saying.

[splashscuba]

Alien,

A strong aleprechaunist, for sure. What about you? Are you a weak or strong aspaghetti-monsterist?

I've never understood how you think you can be a strong or a weak a-anyhting. The a-prefix just means "without" - a-theist just means "without gods". You can't be strongly or weakly without gods (or leprechauns) - would a strong one really, really be without gods but a weak one would be without gods except on Wednesday afternoons or something?

What?

BHS and Shaker,
See http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=10870.msg555281#msg555281

A-theism or athe-ism? It depend(s/ed) on what the "a" was doing. Is it "without theism" or "without god"-ism? Best to signify which is meant, perhaps.

I use the word to simply mean that I don't believe in gods. Not bothered what other people use the word for.

So you have your own private language?

Nope

But you have just written that you are not bothered what other people use a particular word for. That means you are assigning your own meaning to a word,

Nope, I'm using a common meaning of the word

which is not how language works. For language to work, there needs to be at least a rough correspondence in meaning.

It might be better to use English words the way other people use them.

Did you read my last sentence ?

Yes, but it didn't sink in. I thought you were referring to me, rather than yourself. Please would you clarify what you are saying.

Means exactly what it says. Many people use atheism to mean not believing in gods. Some don't. I've been clear enough on how I use the word.

[Alien]

Alien,

A strong aleprechaunist, for sure. What about you? Are you a weak or strong aspaghetti-monsterist?

I've never understood how you think you can be a strong or a weak a-anyhting. The a-prefix just means "without" - a-theist just means "without gods". You can't be strongly or weakly without gods (or leprechauns) - would a strong one really, really be without gods but a weak one would be without gods except on Wednesday afternoons or something?

What?

BHS and Shaker,
See http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=10870.msg555281#msg555281

A-theism or athe-ism? It depend(s/ed) on what the "a" was doing. Is it "without theism" or "without god"-ism? Best to signify which is meant, perhaps.

I use the word to simply mean that I don't believe in gods. Not bothered what other people use the word for.

So you have your own private language?

Nope

But you have just written that you are not bothered what other people use a particular word for. That means you are assigning your own meaning to a word,

Nope, I'm using a common meaning of the word

"Common" does not equate with "correct", though I do accept that if enough people use a word in a certain manner that becomes the new, correct way.

which is not how language works. For language to work, there needs to be at least a rough correspondence in meaning.

It might be better to use English words the way other people use them.

Did you read my last sentence ?

Yes, but it didn't sink in. I thought you were referring to me, rather than yourself. Please would you clarify what you are saying.

Means exactly what it says. Many people use atheism to mean not believing in gods. Some don't. I've been clear enough on how I use the word.

Fair enough. I hope it won't lead to confusion since some people use it in a significantly different way to the way you do.

[Andy]

Means exactly what it says. Many people use atheism to mean not believing in gods. Some don't. I've been clear enough on how I use the word.

Fair enough. I hope it won't lead to confusion since some people use it in a significantly different way to the way you do.

Who here, that label themselves atheist, are using it in a different way?

[Alien]

Means exactly what it says. Many people use atheism to mean not believing in gods. Some don't. I've been clear enough on how I use the word.

Fair enough. I hope it won't lead to confusion since some people use it in a significantly different way to the way you do.

Who here, that label themselves atheist, are using it in a different way?

An interesting question. I hope that any who do will see your post and reply.

A question for you though. Who is to decide how the word "atheist" is used? The "weak/agnostic atheists" on this board?

[ippy]

I live in something like a normal way, I read, look and listen to the various forms of the media, having done this for some time I have heard about people that believe in goddy things it's unavoidable, other than I find it strange how seriously people take these unsupported ideas as a part of reality, religion, other than here on the forum, has no part in my life whatsoever and I can't think of any good reason why it should.

How can anyone disbelieve in something that' s not there in the first place to either believe in or not?

ippy

[Andy]

Means exactly what it says. Many people use atheism to mean not believing in gods. Some don't. I've been clear enough on how I use the word.

Fair enough. I hope it won't lead to confusion since some people use it in a significantly different way to the way you do.

Who here, that label themselves atheist, are using it in a different way?

An interesting question. I hope that any who do will see your post and reply.

A question for you though. Who is to decide how the word "atheist" is used? The "weak/agnostic atheists" on this board?

I would say that all the atheists here are using it in the way splashscuba is. Threads such as this one seem to have made that clear.

As I said and agreed with you earlier, if we're clear on what we mean by a term, then that's all that matters. I don't see the significance of who gets to decide how terms "should" be used if we agree what we mean by it.

But I really don't see an issue here. It's made clear here and it's made clear by the OED, which you refer back to often. I'm only seeing confusion on your part.

[Leonard James]

I live in something like a normal way, I read, look and listen to the various forms of the media, having done this for some time I have heard about people that believe in goddy things it's unavoidable, other than I find it strange how seriously people take these unsupported ideas as a part of reality, religion, other than here on the forum, has no part in my life whatsoever and
I can't think of any good reason why it should.

How can anyone disbelieve in something that' s not there in the first place to either believe in or not?

ippy

It seems to me, Ippy, that some people just need to have a belief of some sort to make their lives feel complete.

Like you, I am baffled to understand it, but just accept it as fact.

[BeRational]

Means exactly what it says. Many people use atheism to mean not believing in gods. Some don't. I've been clear enough on how I use the word.

Fair enough. I hope it won't lead to confusion since some people use it in a significantly different way to the way you do.

Who here, that label themselves atheist, are using it in a different way?

An interesting question. I hope that any who do will see your post and reply.

A question for you though. Who is to decide how the word "atheist" is used? The "weak/agnostic atheists" on this board?

I would say that all the atheists here are using it in the way splashscuba is. Threads such as this one seem to have made that clear.

As I said and agreed with you earlier, if we're clear on what we mean by a term, then that's all that matters. I don't see the significance of who gets to decide how terms "should" be used if we agree what we mean by it.

But I really don't see an issue here. It's made clear here and it's made clear by the OED, which you refer back to often. I'm only seeing confusion on your part.

There is no confusion, it's just a tactic to divert from real discussion about his delusional beliefs.

[Alien]

Means exactly what it says. Many people use atheism to mean not believing in gods. Some don't. I've been clear enough on how I use the word.

Fair enough. I hope it won't lead to confusion since some people use it in a significantly different way to the way you do.

Who here, that label themselves atheist, are using it in a different way?

An interesting question. I hope that any who do will see your post and reply.

A question for you though. Who is to decide how the word "atheist" is used? The "weak/agnostic atheists" on this board?

I would say that all the atheists here are using it in the way splashscuba is.

That may well be the case.

Threads such as this one seem to have made that clear.

As I said and agreed with you earlier, if we're clear on what we mean by a term, then that's all that matters. I don't see the significance of who gets to decide how terms "should" be used if we agree what we mean by it.

OK, I take it then that there will be no more stuff about definitions of Christians along the lines of "anyone who calls themself a Christian is a Christian" or "Hitler was a Christian".

But I really don't see an issue here. It's made clear here and it's made clear by the OED, which you refer back to often. I'm only seeing confusion on your part.

That may say more about you than me though.

[Alien]

Means exactly what it says. Many people use atheism to mean not believing in gods. Some don't. I've been clear enough on how I use the word.

Fair enough. I hope it won't lead to confusion since some people use it in a significantly different way to the way you do.

Who here, that label themselves atheist, are using it in a different way?

An interesting question. I hope that any who do will see your post and reply.

A question for you though. Who is to decide how the word "atheist" is used? The "weak/agnostic atheists" on this board?

I would say that all the atheists here are using it in the way splashscuba is. Threads such as this one seem to have made that clear.

As I said and agreed with you earlier, if we're clear on what we mean by a term, then that's all that matters. I don't see the significance of who gets to decide how terms "should" be used if we agree what we mean by it.

But I really don't see an issue here. It's made clear here and it's made clear by the OED, which you refer back to often. I'm only seeing confusion on your part.

There is no confusion, it's just a tactic to divert from real discussion about his delusional beliefs.

Really. If so it is about the worst one I could pick, don't you think. Would you please back up your claim with some evidence. Ta.

[BeRational]

Means exactly what it says. Many people use atheism to mean not believing in gods. Some don't. I've been clear enough on how I use the word.

Fair enough. I hope it won't lead to confusion since some people use it in a significantly different way to the way you do.

Who here, that label themselves atheist, are using it in a different way?

An interesting question. I hope that any who do will see your post and reply.

A question for you though. Who is to decide how the word "atheist" is used? The "weak/agnostic atheists" on this board?

I would say that all the atheists here are using it in the way splashscuba is. Threads such as this one seem to have made that clear.

As I said and agreed with you earlier, if we're clear on what we mean by a term, then that's all that matters. I don't see the significance of who gets to decide how terms "should" be used if we agree what we mean by it.

But I really don't see an issue here. It's made clear here and it's made clear by the OED, which you refer back to often. I'm only seeing confusion on your part.

There is no confusion, it's just a tactic to divert from real discussion about his delusional beliefs.

Really. If so it is about the worst one I could pick, don't you think. Would you please back up your claim with some evidence. Ta.

Easy.

Atheism means not believing in any gods.

Stop obfuscating and accept it.

If you don't, you make my point for me.

[Andy]

I would say that all the atheists here are using it in the way splashscuba is.

That may well be the case.

I've currently seen nothing to the contrary.

Threads such as this one seem to have made that clear.
As I said and agreed with you earlier, if we're clear on what we mean by a term, then that's all that matters. I don't see the significance of who gets to decide how terms "should" be used if we agree what we mean by it.

OK, I take it then that there will be no more stuff about definitions of Christians along the lines of "anyone who calls themself a Christian is a Christian" or "Hitler was a Christian".

That's not my concern - not really something I get bogged down in caring about either way tbh.

But I really don't see an issue here. It's made clear here and it's made clear by the OED, which you refer back to often. I'm only seeing confusion on your part.

That may say more about you than me though.

You'll have to enlighten me...

[Alien]

..

There is no confusion, it's just a tactic to divert from real discussion about his delusional beliefs.

Really. If so it is about the worst one I could pick, don't you think. Would you please back up your claim with some evidence. Ta.

Easy.

Atheism means not believing in any gods.

Stop obfuscating and accept it.

If you don't, you make my point for me.

Blimey, you're grumpy today.

If you had read back earlier in the thread you would have noticed that I posted a link to http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/, i.e. Stanford University's Dictionary of Philosophy which includes, "‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God."

[Shaker]

Which still means not believing in any gods.

Fuck me, how much simpler can we make it?

[Leonard James]

Stanford University's Dictionary of Philosophy which includes, "‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God."

No atheist can deny the possibility of a god existing, but in the absence of any evidence to support one, we find it more sensible not to believe in any of the gods man has invented.

[ProfessorDavey]

..

There is no confusion, it's just a tactic to divert from real discussion about his delusional beliefs.

Really. If so it is about the worst one I could pick, don't you think. Would you please back up your claim with some evidence. Ta.

Easy.

Atheism means not believing in any gods.

Stop obfuscating and accept it.

If you don't, you make my point for me.

Blimey, you're grumpy today.

If you had read back earlier in the thread you would have noticed that I posted a link to http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/, i.e. Stanford University's Dictionary of Philosophy which includes, "‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God."

Denial is a pejorative term and is unnecessary within a definition of atheism (unless you want to make a 'political point').

Atheism requires no denial whatsoever - it is simply a lack of belief in the existence of god or gods.

[Andy]

Which still means not believing in any gods.

Fuck me, how much simpler can we make it?

Exactly. You can't deny the existence of god/believe god doesn't exist without not believing god exists. This was even agreed back at post #24.