NationStates Jolt Archive

Thank you!

And it's he, for the record.

Welcome to the downside of NationStates forums: You aren't Mark, you're Canada.

Except that there is no god.

Being an atheist isnt a belief in the non existence of god

It is the absence of belief that there is a god.

From my own point of view, simply because there is no reason at all
for anyone to come to a conclusion that a god exists, anymore than
fairies, leprechauns or ghosts.

If Estaga is still daring to show his/her/its face, let me ask this.
Didn't Egypt have actual physical living gods? We know the pharoahs actually existed, and they said they were gods. They have at least as much proof of divinity as the Chistian god.

And you take that seriously? A virus or bacterium which is a vector for a recent political ideology? I'm serious, if this was last year, you'd have a week-long forum ban now. You are derailing what was a perfectly reasonable discussion for 24 pages. :mad:

When it comes to religion or politics, cake and goodwill to you if you can keep a civil discussion for more than thirty minutes.

I can think of at least three people on here who provide sooooo much support for my belief that people should have to pass an IQ test and score over 100 to be able to post on forums or enter chat rooms >.> you might call it predjudice, but I call it removing irritations

and I won't name names, I'm no flamer :P

Welcome to the downside of NationStates forums: You aren't Mark, you're Canada.
*let out a tear* Thank You!

It's the greatest compliment someone ever did to me. I love being a nation. How can I ever repay you? :p

All joking asides, how did you know I was named Mark? :confused:

Give it up . There hasn't been atheism until people were infected with LIDS(Liberal Intelligance Deficiancy Syndrome, quoted from Michael Savage).
I refuse to take that from someone who fails their save against misspelling "intelligence."

Being an atheist isnt a belief in the non existence of god

It is the absence of belief that there is a god.

From my own point of view, simply because there is no reason at all
for anyone to come to a conclusion that a god exists, anymore than
fairies, leprechauns or ghosts.

Wrong, that's agnosticism. Atheism is the belief there is no god. These are very specific classifications and you don't decide how the classification works even if you would like to. You can't say I'm Christian but I don't believe God existed.

*let out a tear* Thank You!

It's the greatest compliment someone ever did to me. I love being a nation. How can I ever repay you? :p

All joking asides, how did you know I was named Mark? :confused:

Just typed the first male name that came into my head. But if you're willing to write me a nice reference letter to the Singapore Psychic University, I'd be more than happy to take it.

Bah! Humbug! People of faith are taken as seriously as people who lack it.

Not by me.

Originally Posted by Estaga
Give it up . There hasn't been atheism until people were infected with LIDS(Liberal Intelligance Deficiancy Syndrome, quoted from Michael Savage).

I refuse to take that from someone who fails their save against misspelling "intelligence."


Making fun?

It may simply be some form of deficiency

Wrong, that's agnosticism. Atheism is the belief there is no god. These are very specific classifications and you don't decide how the classification works even if you would like to. You can't say I'm Christian but I don't believe God existed.


No
agnosticism is uncertainty

it allows for the possibility that there may be a god

so if you were to consider belief in god an infection
then agnosticism is a milder form of it

Making fun?

It may simply be some form of deficiency
Come on now. Be nice. ;)

Everybody :fluffle: and carry on without accusing each other of bestiality or being disease-carriers.

Atheism - believing there is no god
Agnosticism - believing it is impossible to tell if there is a god, or refusing to make a decision either way

Why are people still arguing over definitions which are fairly clear from a simple glance at a dictionary? It's beginning to grind on my nerves...

Did Estaga chicken out?
This was just getting interesting.

Give it up . There hasn't been atheism until people were infected with LIDS(Liberal Intelligance Deficiancy Syndrome, quoted from Michael Savage).

Well... Sense atheism is as old as humanity, I guess you're LIDS must be too. (Need proof? Socrates was an atheist.)

Modern atheism is certainly a product of the enlightenment, which was for the paradigm of its time quite liberal, but is hardly a purely liberal trait (There have been atheistic conservatives too, the religious right doesn't hold the trademark on authoritarianism or free-market policy.)

Did Estaga chicken out?
This was just getting interesting.

Indeed, that little argument was entertaining.

Atheism - believing there is no god
Agnosticism - believing it is impossible to tell if there is a god, or refusing to make a decision either way

Why are people still arguing over definitions which are fairly clear from a simple glance at a dictionary? It's beginning to grind on my nerves...


Definitions are fairly obviously the most important part of any argument
otherwise there would be no arguments.

For example

Statement
All brainwashing of young people by cults should be banned

Christian thinks: I raise my children with a proper belief in the one true god
My church isnt a cult and I sure don't want my kids when they get old
enough to go off to college being gotten at by these insane cultists
So I'm in favour of that statement

Atheist thinks: Finally christians will no longer be allowed to indoctrinate their children with their ludicrous beliefs.
I'm in favour of that statement

Atheism - believing there is no god
Agnosticism - believing it is impossible to tell if there is a god, or refusing to make a decision either way

Why are people still arguing over definitions which are fairly clear from a simple glance at a dictionary? It's beginning to grind on my nerves...


Other than that,

the definitions of words in dictionaries do tend to vary depending on the dictionary


When I state that I am an atheist
to be absolutely clear about this
I mean I do not have a belief in any god and that is based on their being
absolutely no reason ever presented that is sufficient to suggest
that any god might exist


A helpful site for some definitions and explanation could be
http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismquestions/a/whatisatheism.htm

You'll find that there they would describe my atheism as
gnostic atheism

Definitions are fairly obviously the most important part of any argument
otherwise there would be no arguments.

For example

Statement
All brainwashing of young people by cults should be banned

Christian thinks: I raise my children with a proper belief in the one true god
My church isnt a cult and I sure don't want my kids when they get old
enough to go off to college being gotten at by these insane cultists
So I'm in favour of that statement

Atheist thinks: Finally christians will no longer be allowed to indoctrinate their children with their ludicrous beliefs.
I'm in favour of that statement

That's an interesting point. When my kids go to youth clubs and get preached at by "visitors" from the local church I am very offended. I don't want my kids indoctrinated into anyones religion but if an athiest were to carefully explain their beliefs (lack of beliefs?) to my kids that would seem rational and reasonable.
Am I biased against organised religion? I don't know.

Oh, I'm a druid and don't ask my kids to stand in dark, wet woods (which is lucky cos they think I'm a loony)

Actually, Atheism is the worship of yourself.

You in effect make yourself God.

Therefore, it is a religion.

Actually, Atheism is the worship of yourself.

No, that's Satanism.

Atheism is the lack of belief in any God.

That's an interesting point. When my kids go to youth clubs and get preached at by "visitors" from the local church I am very offended. I don't want my kids indoctrinated into anyones religion but if an athiest were to carefully explain their beliefs (lack of beliefs?) to my kids that would seem rational and reasonable.
Am I biased against organised religion? I don't know.

Oh, I'm a druid and don't ask my kids to stand in dark, wet woods (which is lucky cos they think I'm a loony)

I don't like organized religion. It's gone from people with similar beliefs joining together to religion zombies that only repeat "join us and you will be forgiven by (insert name of appropriate god here)..." to anyone confused in that aspect.

Basically, I believe what I think is most plausible. If I had to put a definition on it, I'm somewhat of a Christian, but I believe what I wish and not what other people tell me.

As a man who resembles Jesus, and a man without a religion or title, I give Atheism the thumbs up!

http://www.pix8.net/pro/pic.php?u=168560TI44&i=503368

Hah! That's me, by the way.

Actually, Atheism is the worship of yourself.

You in effect make yourself God.

Therefore, it is a religion.


Thats very much a traditional type of argument from christians especially.
If you don't worship our imaginary friend then you must be worshipping yourself.

It is not what atheists do in terms of being atheists though I am sure
there must be some self absorbed atheists out there.
I am equally sure there are self absorbed christians out there.

Your point is however incorrect in every conceivable way which
puts it on a par with whatever religion you follow.

Chek your little liberal encyclopedia you atheist asshole
Chek your little liberal encyclopedia you atheist asshole. Duck f***er
Round these parts this is known as FLAMING and is not looked upon kindly. In fact, it's against the rules.

Give it up . There hasn't been atheism until people were infected with LIDS(Liberal Intelligance Deficiancy Syndrome, quoted from Michael Savage).
Yeah, like those Enlightenment idiots Voltaire, Rousseau, Franklin, Locke and Jefferson, right? :rolleyes:

Except that there is no god.
That's antitheism you're thinking of. Atheism neither denies nor accepts God. It's the belief for the apathetic.

That's antitheism you're thinking of. Atheism neither denies nor accepts God. It's the belief for the apathetic.

Prefix, A, implying without
theism, the belief in god(s)

ie. without belief in god(s)

"The idea of god implies the abdication human reason and justice." -Mikhail Bakunin ;)

That's antitheism you're thinking of. Atheism neither denies nor accepts God. It's the belief for the apathetic.

anti-theism would mean you were against theists. Anti-theism isn't really a word or a class of religious belief. Atheism is in the dictionary and it refers to those who believe there is no God as defined by sociology. You are referring to agnostic.

Agnostic -
a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

www.m-w.com

atheist -
one who believes that there is no deity

The foundation of atheist is not theist it's atheos (no god). Nice try though.

No
agnosticism is uncertainty

it allows for the possibility that there may be a god

so if you were to consider belief in god an infection
then agnosticism is a milder form of it

You're right. And you agree with me though you started your point iwht no. Agnosticism is no real belief that god does or does not exist. Atheism is the belief that no god exists.

Sorry, Swimmingpool, as I understand it Jocabia and the others have the correct definition.

I belive its once again time for me to cast my 2cents into this vortex of destruction.

It has been stated by numerous people that athiesm is infact a group of people
that DO NOT belive in god or religion in general. Now some iron fist christians might disagree with this but it is the outright truth.

Another point skimmed but someone else was their children going to social clubs ect ect and getting pumped with religion. You might be strongly against religion and your children might be aswell but shouldnt you give them the chance to decide for themselves? *Side note-IIs not saying you do not have the right censor what your children are viewing/hearing, nor am I'm endorsing anything still the proverbial fence sitter :D*

Now, earlier there was a case of flaming and I must say how pathetic you are if you need to flame another to get your view across, it would appear that your relativly intelligent people with good judgement.

Now onto organized religion,

I dont need a dictonary.com definition but my one will suffice.

A organized religion can be any number of things, a group or covern of people of whom have similar beliefs or ideolgy. Think of it as a baseball or football team and their god/s the players of said game. Are they not entitled to worship their team/relgion with their own players/god/s?

If you really wanted to you could create your own religion and by all means your entitled to, but when the totaltarism religious nuts come in *their religous book* waving, condeming and yelling evil we know that its time to *enlighten* their narrowminds and open their f*cking eyes.

Other than that,

the definitions of words in dictionaries do tend to vary depending on the dictionary


When I state that I am an atheist
to be absolutely clear about this
I mean I do not have a belief in any god and that is based on their being
absolutely no reason ever presented that is sufficient to suggest
that any god might exist


A helpful site for some definitions and explanation could be
http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismquestions/a/whatisatheism.htm

You'll find that there they would describe my atheism as
gnostic atheism

You have stated clearly that you believe that god does not exist. That is clearly atheism. As you pointed out if you allow for a god to exist or not exist then you are agnostic. You try to claim you have no belief about God, but you do, that no God exists.

Sorry, Swimmingpool, as I understand it Jocabia and the others have the correct definition.

Thank you. Why do I always have to have this argument with people? Dictionaries and encyclopedias are readily available.

Yeah, like those Enlightenment idiots Voltaire, Rousseau, Franklin, Locke and Jefferson, right? :rolleyes:
.

Um... I don't mean to nitpick, but all five of them were deists.

Chek your little liberal encyclopedia you atheist asshole. Duck f***er
Check our little rules thread, you flamer.

As has been pointed out multiple times, such behavior is against NationStates rules. I strongly recommend that you take the time to click the link in my signature and read the whole thing, concentrating on the sections pertaining to flaming, trolling, and flamebaiting.

Should you continue to post in the same manner, I assure you I will be less polite and understanding next time.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Forum Moderator
The One-Stop Rules Shop

You're right. And you agree with me though you started your point iwht no. Agnosticism is no real belief that god does or does not exist. Atheism is the belief that no god exists.

Ehh... no.

Agnosticism is the belief that certainty about God's existence is impossible, that no mortal man can know God or even whether he exists. It's a bit more than just not knowing.

Atheism is the lack of belief in god. There are two forms of atheism, one as you describe believes there is no god, the other simply doesn't possess the belief in a god.

Are you either agnostic or atheistic by any chance?

[snip]
Atheism is the lack of belief in god. There are two forms of atheism, one as you describe believes there is no god, the other simply doesn't possess the belief in a god.


The first kind is called strong atheism, the second is called weak atheism. Myself, I am in between the two, wavering on a daily basis.

Having doubts about some element of your faith? Not sharing your family's enthusiasm for church, or perhaps disillusioned with the idea of religion itself?

Give in today! :)

Become an atheist like me, or at least an agnostic.

Don't worry, you can keep your morals just the way they are now!

Benefits include:
- Priceless time freed by not attending religious services
- Fewer feelings of non-specific guilt
- Being taken seriously by more people
- Fewer restrictions on hedonistic behaviour :fluffle:
- And best of all, the secure knowledge that your errors will be consigned to oblivion!

No sign-up required. Reject spirituality, and Live!



Sounds intriguing....


..... but do I HAVE to keep my morals just the way they are? Those fuckers keep getting in the way....

Ehh... no.

Agnosticism is the belief that certainty about God's existence is impossible, that no mortal man can know God or even whether he exists. It's a bit more than just not knowing.

Atheism is the lack of belief in god. There are two forms of atheism, one as you describe believes there is no god, the other simply doesn't possess the belief in a god.

Are you either agnostic or atheistic by any chance?

Lacking a belief in a god does not make you Atheist. You have to believe there is no a god. It's very clear. Atheos is the root of the word. It means no god. It's quite simple. Atheist is a term that has existed since before you or I were born so what I am or you are says nothing about what it is.

Having no belief regarding a deity and believing that a deity does not exist are as different as having no belief regarding a deity and believe that a deity does exist. You might as well call them weak theists.

The first kind is called strong atheism, the second is called weak atheism. Myself, I am in between the two, wavering on a daily basis.

I say it's weak theism. What you call weak atheism is as close to atheism as it is to theism.

I say it's weak theism. What you call weak atheism is as close to atheism as it is to theism.

The definition of atheism changes on where you read it. But i've never seen weak atheism defined as anything but the lack of beleif in god and strong atheism as the beleif that there is no god.

The definition of atheism changes on where you read it. But i've never seen weak atheism defined as anything but the lack of beleif in god and strong atheism as the beleif that there is no god.

Bastardization of a term does not make it correct. Would any of these non-believers like to answer whether they think proof that God doesn't exist is possible? Because if you think it's not then you're agnostic.

And why don't you tell us how some "all-powerful being" came into "being" before anything else?


Where did all the mass that created the universe come from?

Which came first; The chicken or the egg?

Pointless argument. :D

You're right. And you agree with me though you started your point iwht no. Agnosticism is no real belief that god does or does not exist. Atheism is the belief that no god exists.


Once again but definitely for the last time

NO

Do you believe in my cousin Jane.

Maybe you do and and maybe you don't.


Some people might believe in the existence of my cousin Jane, I have
offered no proof though I could certainly spin a story about her daily life
fears anxieties and highpoints I have not even offered that much on this occasion. Even if I had however none of it would be proof.
So belief in her existence would be without proof and would be simply
based on faith.That stance in relation to god(S) would be theism.

Some people might say well as I have offered no proof
she may exist or she may not but it is unknowable from what has been
presented here.


On this occasion that response when about existence of god(S)
would be agnosticism, would be a perfectly reasonable stance
as we all know that people called Jane exist and it is not beyond the realms
of possibility that I could be related to one.

A third possibility is that without proof you are not willing to accept the
possibility that I might have a cousin called Jane.
For the reasons above this would be rather foolish stance, although it is in fact correct , I have no cousin called Jane.
That is the point of view of atheists regarding the existence of god(s),
although it is more sensible a view than the others when it is about god(S)
as there is no evidence to indicate that there are or ever have been any
and no reason whatsoever to believe any story spun.


christians in particular prefer to ascribe as you can see in this thread
a 4th stance

That of actively believing in the nonexistence of my cousin Jane.
They are so infected with their religion that they actually think
that the religion itself is the starting point for reason therefore to disbelieve
in god has taken a leap of faith rather than simply being the result of their
being no reason whatsoever to have any belief in god(S).

As for the root of the word atheism.
I offer the definition of the word poppycock
a very mild and generally considered relatively polite
swear word which would attract much opprobrium
if its true meaning were understood by people who hear it.
Borrowed from the dutch its literal meaning is soft sh*t.

The roots of words are vastly less important than the use of words.

Atheist has been defined for you by pretty much everyone claiming to be
one as a nonexistence of belief in god(s)
and not the very different meaning of belief in the nonexistence of god(S)
the leap of faith you seem to think it is.

Now I can understand you may be confused and were not sure which
definition we were using, but as we have now advised you of it
over and over and over again, its time for confusion to retire.

After all I don't go around defining christianity as being a belief in the
inferiority of women, although a case could be made for it.
I think it, like every other religion is crass idiocy and people who argue for it
as little better than fools but I don't claim that when they say they worship
a god who created all things that they actually mean they believe
women are inferior to men.

I throw the words fools and idiots and the like around.
I do have a belief that very intelligent people in some areas can be downright
idiots in others. It is only in this area that I believe they are foolish , cretinous etc. I have no knowledge of other parts of their lives and knowledge
and for all I know some of the idiots may well be medical geniuses, mathematical whizz kids, software design gurus or excel in every single other
facet of their thoughts and lives.

Nor do I say they are not good people, as I know that many religious people
are examples to everyone in how they treat others friends,families and strangers
just as I know that many religious people deserve locking up for the horrible things they do to friends, family and strangers

Also the same types exist amongst atheists.

It is purely the irrational belief in their imaginary friend that needs to be challenged.

What a mature topic. pffttt.

No Kidding. Whats sadder is people think this stuff is original.

Where did all the mass that created the universe come from?

Which came first; The chicken or the egg?

Pointless argument. :D


OH! I know this one. The egg came first. Before birds, there were lizards. Since Evolution is correct, we know that. The very last lizard before the chicken laid an egg, and out popped a chicken! There we go. Perfectly rational. :D

Do any of you atheists believe that a man named Jesus ever existed at all?

Do any of you atheists believe that a man named Jesus ever existed at all?I believe he probably did exist. Whether or not he honestly believed the delusion that he was the offspring of a diety or whether he was a manipulative charlatan, I don't know.

Do you believe that He was a good person?

Do any of you atheists believe that a man named Jesus ever existed at all?


For sure

there are men called jesus, many of them around today

and there were many in the past

and there is evidence of one who lived in nazareth
and he had some good social ideas.

Much like the ideas of the essenes who were also hebrews and whose
cult existed for at least one hundred years before the man
that you are referring to was born.

There is however no evidence that he was anything other than
a man with some radical ideas.

Do you believe that He was a good person?I'm not sure. If the things he reportedly said were what he really believed, I think he was a revelutionary thinker far ahead of his time.

Do you believe that He was a good person?
Who cares? Maybe he was just a character in some stories which have gained currency. Or maybe he was an ordinary man who started a cult and that cult became the foundation of a two thousand year old culture. How many people are there out there right now, claiming to be God's messenger on Earth? Wouldn't it be funny if one of our obscure contemporaries ends up being worshipped thousands of years from now? For all I know, the legend will say that he was killed by the EU, the Romans of the future. And who is to say that their beliefs will be invalid?

This is the problem, too much is possible, and none of it, not even the most absurd ideas, can be invalidated. Which is why the whole notion of religion seems fanciful to me.

How could He have been a good person if He was a liar and/or a lunatic?

How could He have been a good person if He was a liar and/or a lunatic?If he was a liar, then I don't think he was a good person. But lunatics can be good people. After all, I consider myself a good person.

You consider yourself a good person. It remains to be seen whether you are or not.

I say it's weak theism. What you call weak atheism is as close to atheism as it is to theism.

Is the glass half empty or half full :D

Once again but definitely for the last time

NO

Do you believe in my cousin Jane.

Maybe you do and and maybe you don't.


Some people might believe in the existence of my cousin Jane, I have
offered no proof though I could certainly spin a story about her daily life
fears anxieties and highpoints I have not even offered that much on this occasion. Even if I had however none of it would be proof.
So belief in her existence would be without proof and would be simply
based on faith.That stance in relation to god(S) would be theism.

Some people might say well as I have offered no proof
she may exist or she may not but it is unknowable from what has been
presented here.


On this occasion that response when about existence of god(S)
would be agnosticism, would be a perfectly reasonable stance
as we all know that people called Jane exist and it is not beyond the realms
of possibility that I could be related to one.

A third possibility is that without proof you are not willing to accept the
possibility that I might have a cousin called Jane.
For the reasons above this would be rather foolish stance, although it is in fact correct , I have no cousin called Jane.
That is the point of view of atheists regarding the existence of god(s),
although it is more sensible a view than the others when it is about god(S)
as there is no evidence to indicate that there are or ever have been any
and no reason whatsoever to believe any story spun.


christians in particular prefer to ascribe as you can see in this thread
a 4th stance

That of actively believing in the nonexistence of my cousin Jane.
They are so infected with their religion that they actually think
that the religion itself is the starting point for reason therefore to disbelieve
in god has taken a leap of faith rather than simply being the result of their
being no reason whatsoever to have any belief in god(S).

As for the root of the word atheism.
I offer the definition of the word poppycock
a very mild and generally considered relatively polite
swear word which would attract much opprobrium
if its true meaning were understood by people who hear it.
Borrowed from the dutch its literal meaning is soft sh*t.

The roots of words are vastly less important than the use of words.

Atheist has been defined for you by pretty much everyone claiming to be
one as a nonexistence of belief in god(s)
and not the very different meaning of belief in the nonexistence of god(S)
the leap of faith you seem to think it is.

Now I can understand you may be confused and were not sure which
definition we were using, but as we have now advised you of it
over and over and over again, its time for confusion to retire.

After all I don't go around defining christianity as being a belief in the
inferiority of women, although a case could be made for it.
I think it, like every other religion is crass idiocy and people who argue for it
as little better than fools but I don't claim that when they say they worship
a god who created all things that they actually mean they believe
women are inferior to men.

I throw the words fools and idiots and the like around.
I do have a belief that very intelligent people in some areas can be downright
idiots in others. It is only in this area that I believe they are foolish , cretinous etc. I have no knowledge of other parts of their lives and knowledge
and for all I know some of the idiots may well be medical geniuses, mathematical whizz kids, software design gurus or excel in every single other
facet of their thoughts and lives.

Nor do I say they are not good people, as I know that many religious people
are examples to everyone in how they treat others friends,families and strangers
just as I know that many religious people deserve locking up for the horrible things they do to friends, family and strangers

Also the same types exist amongst atheists.

It is purely the irrational belief in their imaginary friend that needs to be challenged.
K, we'll try again since there is no dictionary in your home.

www.m-w.com That's webster's dictionary.

Agnostic-
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god


Are we done now?

I am agnostic as to the existence of your cousin Jane. If I thought she didn't exist I would be an aJaneist.

Is the glass half empty or half full :D


No, it's not. There's already a term for it so we don't have to have that argument.

Agnostic:
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

You consider yourself a good person. It remains to be seen whether you are or not.

Your rapier like debating skills are noted
and we all tremble with anticipation for your next intellectual offering

Know it's not. There's already a term for it so we don't have to have that argument.

Agnostic:
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god


True, agnostic and weak atheist are one and the same. However, weak theist makes no sense to me in its comparison to weak atheist, as being a theist of any kind, weak or not, means that you have some belief in some sort of god.

You consider yourself a good person. It remains to be seen whether you are or not.The fact that my friends, my family and I all consider me a good person is all that matters to me. People who I'm not interested in having some sort of relationship with, well, their opinions don't matter to me. Especially if I consider them to be imaginary.

True, agnostic and weak atheist are one and the same. However, weak theist makes no sense to me in its comparison to weak atheist, as being a theist of any kind, weak or not, means that you have some belief in some sort of god.

And atheist by definition means no god not just no belief regarding God. Atheos means no god. Atheist means belief in no god.

Know it's not. There's already a term for it so we don't have to have that argument.

Agnostic:
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god



Santa Claus

If you never had the story and never had the pretence played out
you would neither believe nor hold the view that it was unknowable.
Once you had reached the age of reason without having heard the story
your reason would not allow for there to be any chance of him existing
without clear evidence.

Are you equally agnostic about magicians and conjurers, if unable to check
their equipment and look up their sleeves.
Without the ability to check it is strictly speaking unknowable
but reason tells you no magic is involved and that some trick or other is being pulled even if you don't know the mechanism.

Or would not believing that they really use magic be too much of a leap of faith for you

Santa Claus

If you never had the story and never had the pretence played out
you would neither believe nor hold the view that it was unknowable.
Once you had reached the age of reason without having heard the story
your reason would not allow for there to be any chance of him existing
without clear evidence.

Are you equally agnostic about magicians and conjurers, if unable to check
their equipment and look up their sleeves.
Without the ability to check it is strictly speaking unknowable
but reason tells you no magic is involved and that some trick or other is being pulled even if you don't know the mechanism.

Or would not believing that they really use magic be too much of a leap of faith for you

Look it's simple. Do you believe there is no God. If yes, you're an atheist. If you don't, you're agnostic. Atheist is not no belief. Agnostic is. I am aSantaClaus. I am not agnostic to Santa Claus. I don't believe he exists, anymore (based on a real guy like King Arthur and Robin Hood). Magic is sleight of hand and physics and I fully believe that exists and rests on the idea that you haven't figured it out yet. I am agnostic to Conjurers but I suspect they don't exist and would be suspicious of a particular conjurer. If you believe there is no God you are Atheist. If you don't allow for the possibility of a God. If you don't know (have no belief) but suspect that God doesn't exist, then you are agnostic. I am also agnostic to the existence of purple cows though I suspect they don't exist and agnostic to the existence of aliens though I suspect that there is sentient life on other planets.

Look it's simple. Do you believe there is no God. If yes, you're an atheist. If you don't, you're agnostic. Atheist is not no belief. Agnostic is. I am aSantaClaus. I am not agnostic to Santa Claus. I don't believe he exists, anymore (based on a real guy like King Arthur and Robin Hood). Magic is sleight of hand and physics and I fully believe that exists and rests on the idea that you haven't figured it out yet. I am agnostic to Conjurers but I suspect they don't exist and would be suspicious of a particular conjurer. If you believe there is no God you are Atheist. If you don't allow for the possibility of a God. If you don't know (have no belief) but suspect that God doesn't exist, then you are agnostic. I am also agnostic to the existence of purple cows though I suspect they don't exist and agnostic to the existence of aliens though I suspect that there is sentient life on other planets.


I am an atheist, I have no belief in the existence of any god(s)
It is not the same as a belief there is no god as that would require evidence
proving no god exists whereas the situation is there is no evidence or reason to think any god would could or does exist.

If it came to a suggestion that there is on this planet a talking dog,
who btw can also type if the keys are big enough for him to not hit more than
one at a time with his paw.
I do not have to believe that the dog does not exist I simply do not believe that he does.
People don't need to go around disproving talking dog stories as logic
tells us that it aint going to happen.
God does not need to be disproven as there is no reason at all to believe there could be one or many.

If it came to aliens I am open to the possibility that life exists on other planets but there is currently no proof and that would be agnostic

I do believe in electricity because although I do not have a full understanding of how it works, I do know it works because I make use of it all the time,
but it would be pretty hard to believe if I had never come across it and someone was describing it to me, to believe it I would either have to
see it in action or have it proven in other ways that allowed logical
thought to accept it.

I do believe most positively that hitler was responsible for great evil.
as in
I dont believe he was a good man - theist
Im not open to the possibility that he may have been a good man - agnostic
It is not that I have no belief about him being a good man - atheist

Belief in gods and agnosticism are the same illness
you just have a milder form of it.

I am an atheist, I have no belief in the existence of any god(s)
It is not the same as a belief there is no god as that would require evidence
proving no god exists whereas the situation is there is no evidence or reason to think any god would could or does exist.

If it came to a suggestion that there is on this planet a talking dog,
who btw can also type if the keys are big enough for him to not hit more than
one at a time with his paw.
I do not have to believe that the dog does not exist I simply do not believe that he does.
People don't need to go around disproving talking dog stories as logic
tells us that it aint going to happen.
God does not need to be disproven as there is no reason at all to believe there could be one or many.

If it came to aliens I am open to the possibility that life exists on other planets but there is currently no proof and that would be agnostic

I do believe in electricity because although I do not have a full understanding of how it works, I do know it works because I make use of it all the time,
but it would be pretty hard to believe if I had never come across it and someone was describing it to me, to believe it I would either have to
see it in action or have it proven in other ways that allowed logical
thought to accept it.

I do believe most positively that hitler was responsible for great evil.
as in
I dont believe he was a good man - theist
Im not open to the possibility that he may have been a good man - agnostic
It is not that I have no belief about him being a good man - atheist

Belief in gods and agnosticism are the same illness
you just have a milder form of it.

I get it. You don't like English. Yell at the dark if you like. I prefer to flip on the light.

Are you saying that you are not open to the possibility to a deity existing? Because if you're not then you BELIEVE there is NO god. If you are then you are agnostic. If you have no belief regarding any god whatsoever then you are agnostic. It's very simple. Why are you struggling with English so?

I get it. You don't like English. Yell at the dark if you like. I prefer to flip on the light.


Well Im not keen on the English but you would be someone who
generally uses a variant on the english language commonly known
as American English.

Do please switch on the light, it is a basic first security measure
especially if no one is going to be home.

Well Im not keen on the English but you would be someone who
generally uses a variant on the english language commonly known
as American English.

Do please switch on the light, it is a basic first security measure
especially if no one is going to be home.

I think it's amusing that so many atheists claim to be so much more intelligent than theists yet struggle so much with basic language (if you're an atheist and you have not trouble with the language then I'm not talking about you).

Agnostic -
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

Atheist -
: one who believes that there is no deity

If you don't hold for the possibility that a deity can exist then you are athiest. If you admit you don't know through faith OR reason then you are agnostic (while you can still think one is more likely than the other).

Can we please stop this nonsense?

I'm not sure I get why you two are in disagreement.
An atheist actvely believes there is no diety. If you ask them if a god exists he'll say "no." I'm one of these. I can't prove there is no god. One cannot prove a negative.

An agnostic says there might be, I don't know, I don't believe you can know. Or they don't care enough to form an opinion.

I'll be back in an hour. I expect the two of you to still be here, arguing the same point. Don't disappoint me.

First rule of how to plead insane: Doing something over and over and over, expecting a different result. AKA, a Nationstates thread of this manner. :p

Good to see my posts have done absolutely nothing to sway the masses or intrest anyone, just as I had planed *evil laugh*

First rule of how to plead insane: Doing something over and over and over, expecting a different result. AKA, a Nationstates thread of this manner. :p
Who said anyone here is expecting a different result? Maybe it's funny watching the same one come up? :p

Who said anyone here is expecting a different result? Maybe it's funny watching the same one come up? :p
Yeah ... and when the arguement happens over and over it is intresting to see how it is argued and what information new people bring into it

I have learned a LOT of things by paying attention to information that someone brings up ... or on how they argue and different logical inferances

I'm not sure I get why you two are in disagreement.
An atheist actvely believes there is no diety. If you ask them if a god exists he'll say "no." I'm one of these. I can't prove there is no god. One cannot prove a negative.

An agnostic says there might be, I don't know, I don't believe you can know. Or they don't care enough to form an opinion.

I'll be back in an hour. I expect the two of you to still be here, arguing the same point. Don't disappoint me.

Dang, I tried not to disappoint you, but she stopped replying and I had to get on a train. I will try harder to meet your expectations in the future. ;)