Theism v. Non-Theism

Michael: I do agree with you on one point, and that is that labels don't tell us very much about a person. On that point, you are very much correct.

ZenYen wrote:

Michael5810 wrote: If an Atheist can be someone who says that God doesn't exist, or can be someone who says that, lacking proof, he doesn't believe one way or the other, then the word "Atheist" doesn't tell us a lot about that person.

Your dichotomy is off, Michael. The two positions weren't "God doesn't exist" and "Don't believe one way or another" (the latter IS agnostic, as you say.) The positions were "God doesn't exist" (as a positive, authoritative statement) and "I don't believe God exists" (which is different from "Don't believe one way or another" and from "God doesn't exist.")

How very curious. When you say, "I don't believe God exists", there are two possibilities;

1. You don't believe God exists, and you do believe that He doesn't exist.
2. You don't believe God exists, and you don't believe that he doesn't exist.

If it's #1, then you are an Atheist, because you believe that God doesn't exist.

If it's #2, then you "Don't believe one way or the other", contrary to your claim above.

Saying only "I don't believe that God exists" doesn't fully state your position (or lack of) on the matter, but if you don't believe that God exists, then either you're a #1 or a #2, as described above.

Maybe you could say that someone who says only "I don't believe that God exists" is someone who isn't disclosing whether he's an Atheist or an Agnostic. Is that what you mean? That would be a reasonable characterization.



And your decision to switch out definitions is, I believe, further evidence of your obtuse mode of communication.[/quote]

As an example regarding labels, let me get away from "atheist" (only to avoid further cluttering the discussion on that word) and try another label -- "Christian."

If someone tells me he is Christian, but nothing else, that person hasn't told me much at all. It could signify a literal Bible belief, or a more progressive understanding of the Bible, or a membership in a specific denomination, or a fiercely independent person who reveres Jesus but does not accept most of the usual Christian doctrine. The label itself tells me almost nothing. Most people, when they hear a label like that, fill in the gaps with their own preconceived notion of what the label means. They react to the label, instead of to the person, or real actions or real deeds.

The same goes for the label atheist, which is why you are getting a lot of brushback pitches (forgive the baseball analogy, please, but it's the postseason). You make blanket statements about a class of people based solely upon your own limited understanding of the label "atheist."

ZenYen wrote:Yes, Michael, you are mistaken. My "rudeness" was not unprovoked.

Provoked by my disagreement with something that you believe? But not by rudeness or personal abusiveness on my part.

Michael5810 wrote:

How very curious. When you say, "I don't believe God exists", there are two possibilities;

1. You don't believe God exists, and you do believe that He doesn't exist.
2. You don't believe God exists, and you don't believe that he doesn't exist.

OR ... you could be saying "I don't believe God exists" based on the present evidence or lack thereof, while allowing for the possibility that you could be wrong. An agnostic would not say "I don't believe God exists." An agnostic would say "I don't know." And I base this distinction on knowing lots of people from a variety of philosophical camps on this subject.

Michael5810 wrote:

ZenYen wrote:Yes, Michael, you are mistaken. My "rudeness" was not unprovoked.

Provoked by my disagreement with something that you believe? But not by rudeness or personal abusiveness on my part.

Provoked by your obfuscations and obtuse behavior.

Michael5810 wrote:

ZenYen wrote:Yes, Michael, you are mistaken. My "rudeness" was not unprovoked.

Provoked by my disagreement with something that you believe? But not by rudeness or personal abusiveness on my part.

I don't recall you disagreeing with something I believe (aside from my opinion that you are being obtuse ...).

Hi everybody,

I (amongst others) believe it's time for this thread to retire. I've scanned the posts and it appears the same points and counterpoints are being made in a cyclical fashion. When that happens, all that can be said has been said, and so goes the nature of the interweb foruming... Nobody wins (sorry!).

TigersEyeDowsing wrote:

Hi everybody,

I (amongst others) believe it's time for this thread to retire. I've scanned the posts and it appears the same points and counterpoints are being made in a cyclical fashion. When that happens, all that can be said has been said, and so goes the nature of the interweb foruming... Nobody wins (sorry!).

I haven't looked in in awhile, but it looks like you might be right.