Ya, I know TimB, you don’t see it much, you would have to go to a court trial, and watch the lawyers who are masters at twisting the meaning of subject matters.
It is how the mind works. My guess is that it will not work on you or most thinkers of reason, therefore no body in this forum may see the trouble.
Example.
Note, I am not talking about you, me or anyone’s in the forum’s understanding; I want to use the thinking in the world as a whole.
“I do not believe there is aliens."
Will everyone who reads the quote get the same meaning?
Some will think, that I think there is no aliens.
Some will think that there is aliens, but I just don’t believe there are aliens.
What Dr. Terence Meaden says, that by the fact the quote uses the word “aliens" as the subject matter, that you are recognizing there is “aliens".
He says it is “presupposing".
The fact that you say aliens, gives a level of recognition to the word “aliens".
You have to presuppose there is aliens to be able to even speak of or about the aliens.
My thought is “presupposing" is only done by a fraction of the people and will vary by subject matter.
When it comes to the word “God", I think that presupposing is done by a huge fraction of the people.
That’s what happens to a lot of people, and the good lawyers know how to use this flaw in people to help with the trial.
The more two view point disagrees the more this can happen.
When the word “atheist" was defined. The mass of the population understood that there was a god and the god did exist.
That why Dr. Meaden thinks that we should define “atheist" differently.
“The supposed deity that Christians purport to be the creator and ruler of the universe."
This way the subject matter is understood by both sides. And you eliminate the possibility of “presupposing”.
The quote - Atheism is a lack of belief in any god. The result - You are in fact presupposing the “God" exists.Sorry Mike, it doesn't presuppose anything of the kind. All you've offered here is a non sequitur
You know EOC that I have no belief in Billbobgorges.
Now, you are saying that people read this and there will be no presupposing by some people that the Billbobgorges may exist? If they do then they have presupposed. I just said I had no belief in them, I didn’t say they even existed.
I have always for the last fifty years or more thought of myself as an atheist. Got sometime to study religion and eight years back I tried to get a clear picture of what an atheist was. As of today the word does not have a meaning that is clear and means the same thing to all people.
The Christian movement probably helped the most in changing the meaning of atheist. Lot of the dictionaries years ago used terms like “the creator of the universe", and other Christian meanings. In the end the Christians lost ground and their meaning were removed from the dictionaries.
There has been the removal of “God" from the meaning, replace with the word “Deity" in some dictionaries.
Many groups on the web even came up with their own definition to use. They were always very close to one of the dictionary meanings.
In our society today it is not uncommon for these types of problems. Take the word “Employee" for example. Easy word, been around for a long time. A word everyone has used and understands, right? Need the legal definition, go to Black Law Dictionary. But you better not use any of those definitions when dealing with the State or Federal governments. You better pull the code book and find out the definition of each and every department, because what is an employee in one department may not be an employee in another department.
It would be a simpler life if we could all agree in the meanings of words.
About internet site.
There is, unfortunately, some disagreement about the definition of atheism.
The broader, and more common, understanding of atheism among atheists is quite simply “not believing in any gods.”
How we see ourselves is maybe not as important as how others see us.
The problem with “Atheist" is in using the word “God".
Using Deity helped a lot, but does not fix the problem completely.
Now Today
Atheist - A person who believes that there is no god
What is better and will solve the problems.
Atheist - A person who believes that the supposed deity that Christians purport to be the creator and ruler of the universe does not exist.
Now Today Atheist - A person who believes that there is no god What is better and will solve the problems. Atheist - A person who believes that the supposed deity that Christians purport to be the creator and ruler of the universe does not exist.That omits disbelief in any non-Christian deities. If an individual believes in one particular deity, but not others, they are not an atheist. The current definition of Atheist is very functional for most moderately intelligent people. It seems as though you are trying to be "deep" about something that is not complicated.
Mid atlantic, Post #64
Yea, I know, I thought the same thing. This definition is only directed at the Christian gods.
But,
When you look at where the problem is.
It is not with atheists.
It is not with the non-Christian gods.
It is with the Christians.
Just a guess – 99% of the problem is with the Christians gods or believers.
So while it is not perfect. It would almost eliminate the problem. And directing the definition directly at the Christians helps.
The Definition came from Dr. Terence Meaden at the “Atheist Nexus http://www.atheistnexus.org/
{It seems as though you are trying to be “deep" about something that is not complicated.}
I know it seem that way, if the atheists weren’t just the 2% of the population it would be better.
So, how come something so simple can be misunderstood by so many Christians?
ABOUT internet site.
There is, unfortunately, some disagreement about the definition of atheism.
I have other issues too that using Dr. Meaden’s definitions may cause. But I would vote for using his definition because it would help solve the problem and keep it simple.
You know EOC that I have no belief in Billbobgorges.So what? Your post is a red herring. You're still overthinking the problem and looking for complexities and nuances where they simply do not exist. What element of that escapes you?
EOC Post #66
Ok, please tell me, when a site like ABOUT post the following.
[ABOUT internet site.]
[There is, unfortunately, some disagreement about the definition of atheism.]
I’m I wrong to assume you have strong feelings of what the definition should be, which you should, as the data states all atheists pretty much agree on the meaning. I know I have no problem. That’s why I was wondering why there was a problem.
We are only 2% of the population according to the CIA.
What is your thinking for the problem?
Or do you agree that there is even a problem?
Do you think that maybe it’s a bad gene that some Christians have?
The problem does not exist among atheists, it is introduced by believers in any ‘universal pseudo intelligence’ that requires our worship.
The difference is the same as between 'Eureka" …
and ‘Hallelujaa’…
Emoticons appear to be evolving.
I hope it is not against the rules , but there are some expressive smileys around. I have been using it awhile and seems clean. It’s free.
http://www.pic4ever.com/index.php
I copy and paste from the Forum column, seems to work fine.
I think they are fun. Thanks for the link.
Ok, please tell me, when a site like ABOUT post the following.No I won't. There's no need. There is absolutely nothing more to being an atheist then a lack of belief in ANY god. Why are you being so bloody obtuse over something as simple as this?
Yes there is.
The Christians view your statement as there is a god, you just a non-believer.
(Of course us 2%(atheists) fully agree and understand what you mean).
Point being, if we are going to give ourselves a title. We should pick a meaning that most others understand. Not just us.
And just ignoring the problems ABOUT and others are having with the definition will not make the problem go away.
Yes there is. The Christians view your statement as there is a god, you just a non-believer. (Of course us 2%(atheists) fully agree and understand what you mean).Not really, any reasonably intelligent person will also know what atheists mean by saying, "I do NOT BELIEVE a god exists".
Point being, if we are going to give ourselves a title. We should pick a meaning that most others understand[. Not just us. And just ignoring the problems ABOUT and others are having with the definition will not make the problem go away.There is only one word that satisfies all the properties of God without having to believe any of the mythology. It is already in use world wide, by scientists and lay alike. Even theists use the word all the time. We use it because we know exactly what we mean when we see the functions and implication of the practical and abstract use of the scientific word Potential. Among other definitions science defines potential as the inherent properties and abilities of a dynamic system or structure that function as a wholeness, a totality, without purpose, remorse or affection. Then, the final logical argument from the definition of Potential. potential = that which may become reality. Thus, while not all potential becomes reality, all reality is, was, and will be preceded by potential. Even the Big Bang was preceded by Potential. It is the true definition of "creative ability", Potential.
Write4U - Then, the final logical argument from the definition of Potential. potential = that which may become reality. Thus, while not all potential becomes reality, all reality is, was, and will be preceded by potential. Even the Big Bang was preceded by Potential. It is the true definition of “creative ability", Potential.The understanding of God, being resolved here is not really a universal understanding. Only the dualistic theologies are 'resolved' by the above argument. It does not resolve the monistic conceptualization. Potential/Potential made Explicate. Inseparable. The field of Potentiality does not disappear once a Potential is made Explicate. When the Potential of 'Time' manifests. What is the ground of Events within Time? Potentiality. Infinite singularity. Eternal 'Here and Now'. The arguments of Atheists against dualistic conceptualizations of God, is like 5th graders badgering 3rd graders about their lack of education.
Yes there is.No there isn't.
The Christians view your statement as there is a god, you just a non-believer.So what? How they overthink the issue is of no concern to me.
(Of course us 2%(atheists) fully agree and understand what you mean). Point being, if we are going to give ourselves a title. We should pick a meaning that most others understand. Not just us.I don't have to do anything of the kind. What I offered is simple...dirt simple...and hard reality. There's no need to contrive some stupid and excessively complicated soap opera of definitions to suit the whims and misconceptions of a demographic which doesn't understand us, doesn't want to understand us, and is hostile to us to begin with.
And just ignoring the problems ABOUT and others are having with the definition will not make the problem go away.I'm not the one who's insisting there's a problem. The only one who appears to have a problem with "Atheism is a LACK of belief in any god or gods" is you! Do yourself a favor and get past it. Some things just aren't that complicated.
You just said it. What are you arguing?Write4U - Then, the final logical argument from the definition of Potential. potential = that which may become reality. Thus, while not all potential becomes reality, all reality is, was, and will be preceded by potential. Even the Big Bang was preceded by Potential. It is the true definition of “creative ability", Potential.The understanding of God, being resolved here is not really a universal understanding. Only the dualistic theologies are 'resolved' by the above argument. It does not resolve the monistic conceptualization. Potential/Potential made Explicate. Inseparable.
The field of Potentiality does not disappear once a Potential is made Explicate. Right Potential is a property of the universe.
When the Potential of 'Time' manifests. What is the ground of Events within Time? Potentiality. Infinite singularity. Eternal 'Here and Now'. The arguments of Atheists against dualistic conceptualizations of God, is like 5th graders badgering 3rd graders about their lack of education.LOl, to me it is just the very opposite. Theists are like 3th graders badgering the 5th graders about the poor misunderstood pink elephant in the sky.
Got to say, that you guy at a point in theory that I may never reach, trying to keep up.
I have to work in a simpler method until my understanding increases.
The way I see it. 2 + 2 + 2 = 6
Or
Atheist + belief + god = understanding
Where is the mass of mankind today?
? + 2 + ? = ?
Most understand what “belief" is.
So let’s remove Atheist. And we are half way there.
So now if we know what “God" is we can reach understanding.
Is that somewhat close to the theory of “potential" and “true definition?"
I know what god is so I have no problem with potential,
And I agree with conceptualization.
Don’t understand “Potential of Time"
But I had no real understanding of god until Gnostic thought and found it’s really quite simple, which means I have understanding.
And the Gnostic understanding is what you mean by monistic conceptualization.
Now help me with dualistic conceptualizations of God.
That may be me too.
There is not a bone in my body that believes in God or the concept of the creator except in the Gnostic thought.
I fully understand that man created gods, all gods. And you will never convince me otherwise. When I die I return to star dust. Don’t believe in the sprites and junk.
But,
When I think of my Grandfather and Grandmother I know that they are in heaven with their God. And their God Almighty is real. You can try but you will not be able to convince me otherwise.
I do not try and figure it out, because it doesn’t bother me that much, I figure it is just part of being human.
I sure hope this is dualistic conceptualizations of God trait; otherwise call for Nurses Ratched; I’m ready for a lobotomy.
Have you ever considered that Heaven resides in your Mind. When we speak of eternal life, it means “eternally in our memory”. You believe your grand parents are in heaven because YOU remember them fondly and you always will and tell stories of them so that their memory “lives” on in your children and so forth.
This is why we assign heaven to some and hell to others. Jesus, Gandhi, Einstein all reside in Heaven (good memories), Hitler dwells in hell as he will always be remembered as a monster. No one goes to heaven, they build memories and are remembered for their good or bad deeds throughout history (eternally).