Is atheism just a "true for me" thing.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Not exactly: an agnostic is someone who holds the view that the claim 'God' is not amenable to knowledge: hence an agnostic atheist is someone who has no beliefs in 'God(s)' but doesn't claim that there are no 'God(s)', since to do so would be a claim of having knowledge confirming that there are no 'God(s)'.

I'd have thought you'd have understood this by now.

Not being amenable to knowledge is separate to not being amenable to belief so when BR suggests it has f all to do with atheism I can agree.
So an agnostic atheist
Doesnt know whether there is a god or not unless he is in conflict with himself but behaves or believes as if god doesnt exist.

[Gordon]

Unfortunately lack of belief in gods can cover a belief that there are no gods as well as a host pf things. It is not as they say irreducible conceptually.

I've just set you straight on that: what you describe would be a gnostic atheist, and I've yet to encounter one of those posting here.

Methinks you don't know what you are talking about: although, to be fair, I came to that conclusion yonks ago.

P.S. given your last sentence, I think your random word generator is working again (unless you intended a very bad pun).

[BeRational]

Belief isn't knowledge.

How do you know what new born babies believe in?

Yes it is.
It is just something you are really really convinced about.

The speed of light in a vacuum is about 186000 miles per second.
I believe that to a degree and it is knowledge.
We really really believe it to be true and so we call it knowledge,  but it is a subset of belief.

[Maeght]

Not being amenable to knowledge is separate to not being amenable to belief so when BR suggests it has f all to do with atheism I can agree.
So an agnostic atheist
Doesnt know whether there is a god or not unless he is in conflict with himself but behaves or believes as if god doesnt exist.

Nobody knows if there is a god or not.

[BeRational]

Nobody knows if there is a god or not.

I believe that is true.

I cannot claim certainty of course,  perhaps someone has brilliant evidence for a god.  I just know that I have never seen it.

[Maeght]

Yes it is.
It is just something you are really really convinced about.

The speed of light in a vacuum is about 186000 miles per second.
I believe that to a degree and it is knowledge.
We really really believe it to be true and so we call it knowledge,  but it is a subset of belief.

That's not a belief. It is what we accept based on the current evidence.

[Gordon]

Not being amenable to knowledge is separate to not being amenable to belief so when BR suggests it has f all to do with atheism I can agree.
So an agnostic atheist
Doesnt know whether there is a god or not unless he is in conflict with himself but behaves or believes as if god doesnt exist.

You do realise the post of mine you quoted was my response to your mistaken description of agnosticism.

If you like you could describe me as an agnostic atheist and I'm not in any conflict and nor do I behave as if 'God' doesn't exist: remember I think the claim is fallacious and/or incoherent, so it isn't a serious prospect that causes me any more concern than the risk of encountering a dragon in my garage tomorrow.

[BeRational]

That's not a belief. It is what we accept based on the current evidence.

Yes I know!
The current evidence is so overwhelming we call it knowledge. That just means you are really really convinced by the evidence.
It might have been knowledge at one point that the world was flat due to the available evidence.
Knowledge is a subset of belief.

[Maeght]

I believe that is true.

I cannot claim certainty of course,  perhaps someone has brilliant evidence for a god.  I just know that I have never seen it.

No, can't claim certainty,that's true. Same as when claiming atheism is the default position really.

[BeRational]

Not being amenable to knowledge is separate to not being amenable to belief so when BR suggests it has f all to do with atheism I can agree.
So an agnostic atheist
Doesnt know whether there is a god or not unless he is in conflict with himself but behaves or believes as if god doesnt exist.

I do not believe a god  does not exist

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Great rapping with you guys but cocoa calls have a good rest of the evening.

Bon nuit.

[Gordon]

Great rapping with you guys but cocoa calls have a good rest of the evening.

Bon nuit.

Good night, Vlad.

[BeRational]

Great rapping with you guys but cocoa calls have a good rest of the evening.

Bon nuit.

As long as you take it on board  and do not repeat the mistake  about what an atheist is,  then progress has been made.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

As long as you take it on board  and do not repeat the mistake  about what an atheist is,  then progress has been made.

It seems though that their is more than one kind of atheist and so atheism is not just a matter of a lack of belief in Gods.

This thread though is about whether atheism is a true for you thing though but on the way I still maintain thay Gordon has expressed beliefs about Gods, your position on the distinction between knowledge and belief has become more confused and the issue of agnostic atheism has cropped up.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You do realise the post of mine you quoted was my response to your mistaken description of agnosticism.

If you like you could describe me as an agnostic atheist and I'm not in any conflict and nor do I behave as if 'God' doesn't exist: remember I think the claim is fallacious and/or incoherent, so it isn't a serious prospect that causes me any more concern than the risk of encountering a dragon in my garage tomorrow.

Well you need to explain where the atheism in agnostic atheism comes in then since you have gone hell for leather here to explain it away.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

If you are agnostic then you dont know whether God exists.
He might not or might. You imply that the idea of Gods though cannot be serious. That has no warrant in what you know or dont know in your agnosticism. What then, if not the extent of your knowledge, is it that makes you an atheist ....and if that is not knowledge is it not then belief?

[Maeght]

Well you need to explain where the atheism in agnostic atheism comes in then since you have gone hell for leather here to explain it away.

The atheism is a statement of the individuals position on whether they currently believe in God or gods or not. Someone doesn't hold a belief in God or gods so is an atheist. Seems quite simple really to me.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The atheism is a statement of the individuals position on whether they currently believe in God or gods or not. Someone doesn't hold a belief in God or gods so is an atheist. Seems quite simple really to me.

I think we get that bit.
Belief in Gods is different from beliefs ABOUT god.....and Gordon is denying he has any and therefore is implying that he has not expressed views ABOUT god either implicitely or explicitly.

[Gordon]

Well you need to explain where the atheism in agnostic atheism comes in then since you have gone hell for leather here to explain it away.

Nope: I explained this very clearly last night, and given the amount of time you've been posting here I'd have thought you'd have long since understood these terms.

[Gordon]

I think we get that bit.
Belief in Gods is different from beliefs ABOUT god.....and Gordon is denying he has any and therefore is implying that he has not expressed views ABOUT god either implicitely or explicitly.

Have you ever tried thinking about what others write rather than just ranting: so, to make it easy for you;

1. I hold no beliefs about 'God(s).

because

2. I reject the arguments made in favour of God(s) are being fallacious and/or incoherent.

therefore

3. For me the term 'God(s) is no more that meaningless white noise, about which I can say nothing else.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Nope: I explained this very clearly last night, and given the amount of time you've been posting here I'd have thought you'd have long since understood these terms.

It may be that a lack of clarity and or skill in discourse might have obscured where your point and rendered it rather as a study in evasion to my viewing.

Could you please cite the replies where you think you  have established your agnostic atheism, particularly the atheism part.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Have you ever tried thinking about what others write rather than just ranting: so, to make it easy for you;

1. I hold no beliefs about 'God(s).

because

2. I reject the arguments made in favour of God(s) are being fallacious and/or incoherent.

That might say more about you though than the arguments.

If you say you know the arguments to be wrong then that is not agnosticism.

[BeRational]

It may be that a lack of clarity and or skill in discourse might have obscured where your point and rendered it rather as a study in evasion to my viewing.

Could you please cite the replies where you think you  have established your agnostic atheism, particularly the atheism part.

Perhaps you can just acknowledge that you now know that atheists just do not believe in a god.
Nothing more, nothing less.
It seems silly to not understand this simple term after all this time, so it would be good to put it to bed and move on.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The arguments for God are wrong.....and therefore........?

[Gordon]

It may be that a lack of clarity and or skill in discourse might have obscured where your point and rendered it rather as a study in evasion to my viewing.

Could you please cite the replies where you think you  have established your agnostic atheism, particularly the atheism part.

Vlad

What bit of 'I have no beliefs about God(s)', which I've clearly stated, and you having trouble understanding?

I'd have thought my position was crystal clear on this: so, once again 'I have no beliefs about God(s) and set this out very clearly in #169 a few moments ago, and may I also refer the honourable gentleman to my #'s 129, 127 and 113 in this thread.

Perhaps you should try reading and thinking about what others say to you instead of just reacting to your own misreading of posts.