"Is Atheism a Belief or a Lack of Belief?"

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
In everything man thinks, he has a belief.

No, not necessarily. I am thinking about a bird in the tree outside. I have no belief about whether such a bird actually exists. I lack belief.

The only time someone could be rightfully described as lacking in belief is when they've yet to be exposed to the concept.
False, as demonstrated above.

The atheist who self-describes as lacking a belief cannot have an opinion on the topic. That is utter nonsense... or lack of logic.
As demonstrated above, it is perfectly possible to lack belief as well has have an opinion.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
There ya go: they believe God does not exist.

No, not all self describe atheists believe that God does not exist.

No lack there, except common sense.
Some atheists are not self described atheists and have never even heard of God. They are totally without an opinion on the topic.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Then you're agnostic, not an atheist.

That is not what 'agnostic' means.

Originally posted by twhitehead
That is not what 'agnostic' means.

An agnostic is one that believes that nothing can be known about the existence of God or of anything beyond the material world.

Is that even a belief? It is irrational to think that one can believe in something that there's no knowledge of in which to make a basis for belief. In other words, there is no basis for belief where there is no knowledge.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
"A-theist is a person to whom the topic of God or gods is a matter of rejection."
With respect, you are wrong. I am an atheist, but I have never 'rejected' god. I freely accept that there might be a god or gods.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Then you're agnostic, not an atheist.

Whoa there, you are contradicting yourself big time.

You said to me [repeatedly] that:

Unfortunately for your little club, the term "atheist" does not mean "lack of belief" (which, as demonstrated,
is a non-sensical phrase), but rather "does not believe/rejection of."

And yet here you are when faced with someone who claims that they simply lack belief in gods and
has not 'rejected' their existence and does not claim that they don't exist and instead of telling them
that their position is impossible or nonsensical you tell them that they are an agnostic...

So apparently you do allow people to lack belief, you just don't allow atheists to do so...
Hypocrite.

It is obviously true [as has been demonstrated many times in this thread already] that it's absolutely
possible to lack belief in a claim. Belief in a claim being a "firm conviction" that it is true/false.
Anyone with half a brain can think of claims that they do not have a firm conviction as to the truth or
falsity of the claim.
As I said in one of my posts, I have no idea if the world really consists of lots of tiny vibrating strings as
is proposed by String Theory. It might, or it might not. I do not have a firm conviction either way, I lack
belief. And I could present a never ending number of such claims for which I have no belief either way.

Your claim that it's not possible to simply 'lack belief' in any proposition you come across is patently
and obviously absurd and wrong. Which will of course not stop you making it as demonstrated by
your claim that the Earth is flat... You just don't care how obviously wrong you are.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Whoa there, you are contradicting yourself big time.

You said to me [repeatedly] that:

Unfortunately for your little club, the term "atheist" does not mean [b]"lack of belief" (which, as demonstrated,
is a non-sensical phrase), but rather "does not believe/rejection of."

And yet here you are when faced with someone who claims ...[text shortened]... d by
your claim that the Earth is flat... You just don't care how obviously wrong you are.[/i][/b]

If you lack a belief in God or gods, you don't have one. If it were simply not a topic you
could make your claims, but when you declaring your stance in the face of others that
have that belief that is whole sale rejection.

Originally posted by josephw
An agnostic is one that believes that nothing can be known about the existence of God or of anything beyond the material world.

Is that even a belief?

Yes, it is a belief about knowledge.

Originally posted by KellyJay
If you lack a belief in God or gods, you don't have one. If it were simply not a topic you
could make your claims, but when you declaring your stance in the face of others that
have that belief that is whole sale rejection.

Yes, some atheists do declare a whole sale rejection of the concept of God. Not all atheists do so.

Originally posted by KellyJay
If you lack a belief in God or gods, you don't have one. If it were simply not a topic you
could make your claims, but when you declaring your stance in the face of others that
have that belief that is whole sale rejection.

I can only guess what you are trying to say here.

If you lack a belief in God or gods, you don't have one.

You don't have one what?

If it were simply not a topic you could make your claims,

If what were simply not a topic? I/we/you could make what claims?

but when you declaring your stance in the face of others that have that belief that is whole sale rejection.

When you're declaring what stance? in the face of others that have what belief? What is whole-sale rejection?


There are many atheists who would love for a god or gods [and associated afterlives] to exist... they just are not
convinced that they do. They can't find sufficient evidence or reason to become convinced that such beings exist.
So they lack belief in such beings, until someone can present them with evidence sufficient to justify forming
belief in the existence of a god or gods. These people have not 'rejected' anything or anyone.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I can only guess what you are trying to say here.

[i]

If you lack a belief in God or gods, you don't have one.

You don't have one what?

If it were simply not a topic you could make your claims,

If what were simply not a topic? I/we/you could make what claims?

[quote]but when you declaring your stance in the fac ...[text shortened]...
belief in the existence of a god or gods. These people have not 'rejected' anything or anyone.

They can't find sufficient evidence or reason to become convinced that such beings exist.
Ah.
So they're convinced God does not exist.
At least, they're operating under that assumption.
Makes sense.

Originally posted by twhitehead
No, not all self describe atheists believe that God does not exist.

[b]No lack there, except common sense.
Some atheists are not self described atheists and have never even heard of God. They are totally without an opinion on the topic.[/b]

Some atheists?
To whom do you refer?
Pre-sub-conscious children?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]They can't find sufficient evidence or reason to become convinced that such beings exist.
Ah.
So they're convinced God does not exist.
At least, they're operating under that assumption.
Makes sense.[/b]

No, because again, there is a position between being convinced that something is true,
and being convinced that something is false, and that's not being convinced either way.

Which is a fact obvious to all people with brains... A category you evidently don't belong to.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Whoa there, you are contradicting yourself big time.

You said to me [repeatedly] that:

Unfortunately for your little club, the term "atheist" does not mean [b]"lack of belief" (which, as demonstrated,
is a non-sensical phrase), but rather "does not believe/rejection of."

And yet here you are when faced with someone who claims ...[text shortened]... d by
your claim that the Earth is flat... You just don't care how obviously wrong you are.[/i][/b]

The agnostic has a belief: he cannot make up his mind and therefore operates under the assumption that God does not exist.
Like a person with the winning lottery ticket who cannot believe his good fortune, he could have his winnings confirmed but chooses to remain in his pre-winning routine and never cashes in.
Did he win, or did he lose the lottery?
Did he make a decision about his course of action?
The agnostic's inaction is akin to action, and since no action can be executed without prior thought and belief, the agnostic has a belief as well.

The question of the shape of the earth is rife with opinions on both sides.
What I have done is present objective, falsifiable inquiry of the topic by asking two questions.
No one who is of the opinion that the earth is an oblate spheroid has been able to adequately or accurately address either question.
You are no exception to this indictment.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The agnostic has a belief: he cannot make up his mind and therefore operates under the assumption that God does not exist.
Like a person with the winning lottery ticket who cannot believe his good fortune, he could have his winnings confirmed but chooses to remain in his pre-winning routine and never cashes in.
Did he win, or did he lose the lottery?
...[text shortened]... to adequately or accurately address either question.
You are no exception to this indictment.

The agnostic has a belief: [THEY] cannot make up [THEIR] mind and therefore operates under the assumption that gods do[] not exist.

Fixed that for you...

No, an agnostic person may assume that gods do not exist, or they may believe that they do
exist but don't claim to know that they do or claim that it cannot be known if they do.
You can be an agnostic and a theist as well as an agnostic and an atheist.
It's also not necessarily true that an agnostic has not made up their mind on the topic [they may
or may not].

Like a person with the winning lottery ticket who cannot believe [THEIR] good fortune, [THEY] could have [THEIR] winnings confirmed but chooses to remain in [THEIR] pre-winning routine and never cashes in.

No it's really nothing like that at all.

Did [THEY] win, or did [THEY] lose the lottery?

Ok, lets go with a lottery example and show why it doesn't prove your point.

A person buys a lottery ticket.
The lottery draw happens, the ticket they hold is now either a winning or a losing ticket [we will
ignore smaller wins and just look at the jackpot].
They have not yet watched the news or otherwise come across the information on what the winning
numbers are... They do not know if their ticket is a winning one or a loosing one.
They are agnostic about whether or not they have a winning ticket because they do not currently have the
information to know either way. They might believe that they have lost [it's by far the most likely outcome],
they might believe that they have won [people believe in less likely things], or they might not have any
belief either way.
Then they come across [or seek out] a news outlet that tells them what the winning numbers are.
They compare those numbers to the ones on their ticket and now they KNOW whether the ticket
is a winning one or a loosing one. They are now a gnostic on the topic of whether their ticket was
a winning one or a losing one.

In your example the ticket is a winning ticket and so they know now that they have won. They have evidence
to support that position. [they could always delude themselves into thinking that the evidence is wrong in
which case they don't know that they have won, but that's rather unlikely and bares no relation to what
is happening here].

Did [THEY] make a decision about [THEIR] course of action?

Which course of action? Buying the ticket? They probably didn't do that by accident.
Choosing not to cash in? Well you put choosing into the sentence so in your example they made a choice.
Probably a bad choice all things being equal, although then again if they are so unbalanced by discovering
they won that they delude themselves into thinking they lost then maybe not cashing in is the right thing
for them to do.

The agnostic's inaction is akin to action, and since no action can be executed without prior thought and belief, the agnostic has a belief as well.

That is not even remotely close to being true.
There are an infinite number of things I am not doing right now. If you define not doing an action as an action then
there are an infinite number of actions I am taking right now that I am not thinking about.
Therefore your argument is and must be false.

The question of the shape of the earth is rife with opinions on both sides.

Not scientifically. Of course there are morons such as yourself with all kinds of crazy ideas, but that doesn't
make any of them valid or worthy of consideration.
The question of whether the Earth is flat or not was settled beyond reasonable dispute many centuries ago.
Only crazy people or liars claim otherwise... You are both of course.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I can only guess what you are trying to say here.

[i]

If you lack a belief in God or gods, you don't have one.

You don't have one what?

If it were simply not a topic you could make your claims,

If what were simply not a topic? I/we/you could make what claims?

[quote]but when you declaring your stance in the fac ...[text shortened]...
belief in the existence of a god or gods. These people have not 'rejected' anything or anyone.

You should come back to this post in a week or two and see how you prove me point.