Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Results 141 to 144 of 144

Thread: When atheism is no longer atheism.

  1. #141
    Himster's Avatar Centurio Primus Ordine
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    An arbitrary, specific yet fleeting point.
    Posts
    7,927
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mangalore View Post
    A deist is not a theist as a theist implies a God intervening and caring for his creation which usually leads to the anthromorphic dogma that he somehow cares for us. A deist just sees the personal need for the first cause argument and thus assumes a creator but doesn't think he created the universe in an imperfect way that needs him to meddle with things.
    A deist is a theist, they believe in a creator god. Admittedly the most vague form of deity imaginable, but a god nonetheless.
    A deist is a theist the same way an apatheteist is an atheist.
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves, but wiser people are full of doubts.
    -Betrand Russell

  2. #142
    Matthias's Avatar Banzai jūden-ki
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    2,731
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by PikeStance View Post
    The label is not important at all.
    Understanding what the definition of a word is (or coming to some agreement on it) is a huge chunk of philosophy. I think labels are terrific for helping people understand positions/not argue against strawmen and being able to talk about ideas in a general manner, rather than just one person's personal opinion. Being able to talk in general is useful and needed, and requires clear labels with well understood definitions.

    Going back to apatheism, there are some on here claiming only atheists can be apatheistic, though I am not sure.

    Can a person be apathetic about something they believe in? If the answer is yes, then it is possible (though I don't think as likely) that theists can be apatheistic. Believing in something doesn't mean you care about it. Heck, not believing in something doesn't mean you don't care about it. There are plenty of atheists who care pretty deeply about the question of whether God exists or not, for various reasons.

    I guess I don't find the term all that useful or necessary.

  3. #143
    Setekh's Avatar Praefectus Legionis
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    21,392
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthias View Post
    Understanding what the definition of a word is (or coming to some agreement on it) is a huge chunk of philosophy. I think labels are terrific for helping people understand positions/not argue against strawmen and being able to talk about ideas in a general manner, rather than just one person's personal opinion. Being able to talk in general is useful and needed, and requires clear labels with well understood definitions.

    Going back to apatheism, there are some on here claiming only atheists can be apatheistic, though I am not sure.

    Can a person be apathetic about something they believe in? If the answer is yes, then it is possible (though I don't think as likely) that theists can be apatheistic. Believing in something doesn't mean you care about it. Heck, not believing in something doesn't mean you don't care about it. There are plenty of atheists who care pretty deeply about the question of whether God exists or not, for various reasons.

    I guess I don't find the term all that useful or necessary.
    I believe you're a male person but I do not care if you're a male or female.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    Middle Kingdom: Total War (Poll)
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...gdom-Total-War

    Cities: Skylines
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...ities-Skylines

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  4. #144
    PikeStance's Avatar Imperial Splendour- PM
    Vault Staff

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Changchun, China
    Posts
    3,181
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthias View Post
    Understanding what the definition of a word is (or coming to some agreement on it) is a huge chunk of philosophy. I think labels are terrific for helping people understand positions/not argue against strawmen and being able to talk about ideas in a general manner, rather than just one person's personal opinion. Being able to talk in general is useful and needed, and requires clear labels with well understood definitions.
    I think labels actually lead to a greater likelihood of a straw man argument. In fact, I have had many occasions when someone made an assumption about my position on an issue based on their understanding of the label. Of course, when they accept I have a different point of view, I was no longer considered that label.

    When it comes to definitions this forum is especially bad. One group would say it means "a"; but no, its "b"; and the circular semantic debate takes off from there. Its a systemic problem here. I personally do not see the value in misrepresenting an another point of view. Its self- defeating to do so. What is the point of debating if you are not trying to understand the point of view of another view? BTW, there is actually a psychological reason for this, but this would just take us on another tangent.

    Going back to apatheism, there are some on here claiming only atheists can be apatheistic, though I am not sure.
    The thing here it was already explained a few pages ago. The construction cannot be "a"- word. It would be this; "a- patheistic." What is a patheistic? An alternative name for this viewpoint is "Apathetic Theism." It is clear the construction is a cropping of the "apathy." This, of course, didn't stop the nonsense of the debate- it continued. The term is more similar to agnosticism; which can take a theistic perspective or a atheistic perspective. Ironically, the OP identified himself (assuming a male) as a atheist. This whole tangent started when someone (won't say who) claimed that they CAN'T be an atheist. Later this same poster asserted it could go either way. Anyway, the last three pages (now) have been ad nauseum [sic?] at best- but that is another systemic problem- these incessant "pissing contest" among certain members.

    [Historical Research Society] [Archivum] [Modding Vault] [Live Action Studio] [BAI Submod for IS]
    [ Under Patronage of Omnipotent- Q ] [ The House of Wild Bill Kelso]

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •