Atheism isn't a lack of belief itself, rather atheists have to appeal to naturalistic causes to explain the existence of the universe as we know it instead of the theistic proposition which is a deity initiated it.
It depend on the fact that they are full atheist or not. If that's the case, then yes.

Like I said, you can believe in Allah, but it will make you an atheist of everyother religion.

> wants a fresh start
> Still smug posts in the same thread, acting like the sole beacon of truth


Yeah, it's not-a-complotist-nor-other-(insert political pronoun) time
Never said I would change my ways :)
 
It depend on the fact that they are full atheist or not. If that's the case, then yes.

Like I said, you can believe in Allah, but it will make you an atheist of everyother religion.
Show me where the definition of atheism from an academic source which particularizes deity's and doesn't generalize the position of atheism to any and every diety.
 
Show me where the definition of atheism from an academic source which particularizes deity's and doesn't generalize the position of atheism to any and every diety.
That's the problem, there is no define definition of atheism. So you have the choice to define it whenever you want (as long as you are an atheist). All I can do right now is try to give you the best definition, meaning, the more inclusive one.

THis is : Atheism is the absence of belief in one particular god. Meaning that you can be atheist while still being a believer.
 
Saudi Arabia is quite a troublesome place. America is protecting it from iran because allies are still using it's oil however those allies are slowly switching away from oil leading to less interest to protect. They also need money to perform reforms which is why oil prices are so high, but this is pissing off america and china the protector and customer.

What do you all think of the country?I don't like how they run things over there but I also see a very wobbling line they walk.
 
Also I would really happy if those like you @BleakAsh who are talking about atheism would watch this french video.

This is a french sceptic (one of the best if not the best) defying the notion of "belief". I get the definition of atheism from his work.

You can watch it, it's subtitled

It's named "believe or not believe"

 
Saudi Arabia is quite a troublesome place. America is protecting it from iran because allies are still using it's oil however those allies are slowly switching away from oil leading to less interest to protect. They also need money to perform reforms which is why oil prices are so high, but this is pissing off america and china the protector and customer.

What do you all think of the country?I don't like how they run things over there but I also see a very wobbling line they walk.
theocratic dicatorship who are trying to whitewash their image through sports. The US has the obligation to stop selling them weapons altogether.
 
You seem to be under the impression that theism is the only way where you have a belief in a creator.

But there is still deism as well.

And atheism is only the negation of theism.

I already explained this a couple times
not really you beat around the bush reiterating the definition to explain what atheism was whilst misinterpreting and adding to what i said

Deism and Theism are synonymous in this specific regard.. But that's irrelevant since we are discussing atheism

We are discussing atheism having beliefs

The whole point was whatever breed of atheist you may be you'd ought to base the explanaiton of existence and universe on naturalistic premises and i even asked for alternatives to God and nature since you said that's not necessarily the case which you didn't answer,but rather believed that i added to what you said.

Sure, atheism is about not having a belief in god.

I still believe in bigfoot as i mentioned before. Thats possible of course.

That still doesnt necessarily mean atheists have to believe god doesnt or cant exist.

Thats where the shit i explained like 4 times now come into play, with implicit/weak atheism vs explicit/strong atheism

Dont know if there are studies about the ratio of these 2, but from my experience there are more where implicit atheism applies. Because explicit atheism is kinda retarded and unreasonable, since the inexistence of god(s) cannot be proven
You're telling me you prefer believing that god doesn't exist but you aren't certain if there is one as it cannot be proven basically an agnostic atheist.

Facinating but i have to agree with Adam
On this its more Agnostic than atheistic

You just prefer to not believe but aren't certain of either the existence or non existence of God coz you never know

So you are agnostic of god's existence but choose to be athiest coz

Why not (it cannot be proven or falsified)




But i guess i return the favor: your garbage line of reasoning on this topic is no surprise considering you are an evolution denier


Could say the same shit bud 😭

Blud still thinks denying ToL is denying evolution 💀


Or, and hear me out here, we can just say "i dont know" about shit we dont know?!?!?!?

Crazy i know
A reasonable person wouldn't say IDK
If you'd guess the only plausible answers would be natrual or external influences

its either natural or unnatural, call that false dichotomy after you prove there is an in between aside from appelaingto ignorance.
 
H

Herrera95

No, that's another subject. There is a consensus that sex and gender are two very different things.
But actually there is also a consensus that Human are responsible for worldwide climate change. Again, ask climatologue you will mostly have the same answer
There is no consensus at all. If you are not woke you are not saying that shit.

You are avoiding the question here. Or maybe I wasn't clear enough: Do you believe that flat earther's knowledge and scientific knowledge have the same value ?
I wasn't avoiding the question. You were the one who didn't know how to ask to get the answer that you want to.

No they don't have the same value because Flat Earth knowledge is not based on real science but on their imaginary science.

No, that's why there are studies. For that you should go toward sociology.
So by your logic a sociologist MAN have a better knowledge of a non sociologist WOMAN on what is to be a woman.
Post automatically merged:

Well, no.

You are just making shit up or regurgitating shit from your favorite religious apologist.

This is far from true lmao
No I don't. Atheism born with science claims.

Ok you are just trolling right?
You are the one trolling.
Post automatically merged:

Congrats, you are an atheist
I'm agnostic not atheist. They are not the same.
Post automatically merged:

caping much fam??
Yall are caping. Can't understand that atheism is to deny god while agnostic is to not have a religion and that could include believing or not in god.
 
H

Herrera95

Atheism is a position held with certainty that there isn't a god.

If you have to substantiate it you have to appeal to a different cause unless there are other argumentation i am not aware of.. Like appeal to no cause.. Which still seems natrualistic

Ofc that mental gymnastics comes in the form of science, philosophy and argument against what theists claim directly like attributes of god etc

Because atheism is an appeal to naturalistic causes not supernatural.. that universe and existence came to being by a random natrual event.

That's the fundamental difference between atheism and theism and you have to appeal to science and logic to argue the atheistic position.

So saying that athiesm doesn't entail beliefs is dim-witted and ignorant

Its a belief in naturalistic causes of the universe and not supernatural.
Not sure if I understood all of it but is pretty much that.
 
Top