You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #44: Concept. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
westerebus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-11 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #10
44. Concept.
Edited on Sat Sep-17-11 03:25 PM by westerebus
What baby's lack is the ability to conceptualize while they are still in the infant stages of development.

That does not make them anything but a-conceptual. Pre gnostic, prior to knowing.

Tabula Rasa. A clean slate.

There is no non belief involved (passivity). Dis-belief, denial of (activity). There is no belief involved.

There is neither passivity or activity attached, as there is no concept to attach to.

What is active is the development of the ego, the self in relation to the environment.

For infants this is the relationship to the caregiver, the mother as life support system.

God does not enter the equation. Infants are secular, they are devoid of a religious state.

The religious state is imposed at the want of the parent(s).

Infants get no choice in the matter.

If the intent is to label infants as atheistic, that would be true in a sense, as they don't believe in anything.

As they do not believe in anything, because they lack the ability to conceptualize in their early stages, they lack knowledge.

So that makes them: Agnostic.

Case in point, when an infant is baptized, they have no concept of what the ceremony or words or god are about.

So while they are now members of that religion, they remain agnostic.

That would make a baptized infant a church member, an agnostic, and as not believing in anything, atheistic all at the same time.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
  -The Most Effective Argument for Atheism That I've Ever Seen rug  Sep-16-11 03:25 PM   #0 
  - And here is the REAL key to what is being said:  Indydem   Sep-16-11 03:50 PM   #1 
  - If you really believe  skepticscott   Sep-16-11 04:45 PM   #9 
  - "If we all just left each other the hell alone, the world would be a far better place."  NMMNG   Sep-16-11 09:08 PM   #21 
  - My sky wizard can beat up your sky wizard..... n/t  HysteryDiagnosis   Sep-17-11 07:27 AM   #36 
  - Yeah, I mean Christians have  Goblinmonger   Sep-17-11 08:56 PM   #49 
  - most religions precluding leaving others alone...  Deep13   Sep-18-11 12:31 PM   #91 
  - I'm not an atheist either, in that I believe the whole is greater than the sum of its parts  villager   Sep-16-11 03:53 PM   #2 
  - Atheism is the default. You need an argument for anything else. nt  valerief   Sep-16-11 04:16 PM   #3 
  - No you don't.  rug   Sep-16-11 04:22 PM   #4 
  - Yes. You do. We're all born atheists. We have to be taught otherwise.  valerief   Sep-16-11 04:26 PM   #5 
     - No. No you don't.  rug   Sep-16-11 04:27 PM   #6 
        - Shoo. Scat. You have no proof. Go away. nt  valerief   Sep-16-11 04:28 PM   #7 
           - Sigh.  rug   Sep-16-11 04:33 PM   #8 
              - That's an interesting definition of atheism.  laconicsax   Sep-16-11 05:02 PM   #10 
              - I'll just call newborns aPlutonians then.  rug   Sep-16-11 05:07 PM   #12 
              - Ah, but atheism isn't about asserting nonexistence. It's about non-belief.  laconicsax   Sep-16-11 06:38 PM   #15 
                 - It's a specific nonbelief, a nonbelief in theism. Otherwise, it would simply be nonbelief.  rug   Sep-16-11 08:21 PM   #16 
                 - Wrong, as usual.  darkstar3   Sep-16-11 08:23 PM   #17 
                    - As usual? This from a guy who sees religious leaders suppporting immigrants to be bigotry?  rug   Sep-16-11 08:35 PM   #18 
                       - Wrong again, because I wasn't the one who even mentioned bigotry.  darkstar3   Sep-16-11 08:41 PM   #19 
                       - Deleted message  Name removed   Sep-16-11 08:46 PM   #20 
                       - Deleted message  Name removed   Sep-16-11 10:44 PM   #24 
                          - Deleted message  Name removed   Sep-16-11 10:47 PM   #25 
                       - You don't realize you have proven the point.  rug   Sep-17-11 12:18 AM   #26 
                          - The same way no one ever said "not baseball" until after baseball was invented. n/t  laconicsax   Sep-17-11 12:30 AM   #27 
                          - It would be pretty stupid to say it before.  rug   Sep-17-11 12:52 AM   #28 
                          - Whoosh!  laconicsax   Sep-17-11 02:11 AM   #33 
                             - I see you're unfamiliar with dialectics.  rug   Sep-17-11 08:16 AM   #37 
                                - Is that the book by L. Ron Hubbard?  laconicsax   Sep-17-11 10:33 AM   #40 
                                - I'm unsurprised you confuse Hegel with Hubbard.  rug   Sep-17-11 03:20 PM   #42 
                                - Oh, you said dialectics. I thought you said dianetics.  laconicsax   Sep-17-11 08:12 PM   #46 
                                - Weak.  rug   Sep-17-11 09:00 PM   #51 
                                - You said bigotry, not me.  laconicsax   Sep-17-11 09:49 PM   #59 
                                - Deleted message  Name removed   Sep-17-11 11:20 PM   #64 
                                - "Get over yourself and your borrowed ideas"  laconicsax   Sep-18-11 12:25 AM   #86 
                          - There can't be anyone who "doesn't believe in" fairies  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 12:55 AM   #30 
                          - You don't realize the problem.  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 12:54 AM   #29 
                          - You don't realize the obvious.  rug   Sep-17-11 01:02 AM   #31 
                             - You just lost  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 01:25 AM   #32 
                             - Only in the sense that I'm engaging you.  rug   Sep-17-11 08:24 AM   #38 
                                - Ok then,  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 02:59 PM   #41 
                                - All these posts and nothing to say here?  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 09:35 PM   #58 
                             - BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ and you lost big time. Don't play English teacher, mmmmkay.  Goblinmonger   Sep-17-11 09:02 PM   #53 
                                - Actually you're right about that.  rug   Sep-17-11 09:06 PM   #55 
                                   - Well, I knew believe was intransitive  Goblinmonger   Sep-17-11 09:32 PM   #57 
                                   - if the state is paying you, you should.  rug   Sep-17-11 11:05 PM   #61 
                                   - I actually have an English minor  Goblinmonger   Sep-17-11 11:24 PM   #67 
                                   - Oh bullshit.  rug   Sep-17-11 11:32 PM   #71 
                                   - Like hell you did.  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 11:33 PM   #73 
                                   - You? You are feeling bullied?  rug   Sep-17-11 11:34 PM   #74 
                                   - Actually I'm feeling amused at this particular moment.  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 11:36 PM   #76 
                                   - And you know more about that law than I.  Goblinmonger   Sep-17-11 11:36 PM   #77 
                                   - It hasn't, nor did I say it had.  rug   Sep-17-11 11:44 PM   #79 
                                   - I did not reference 2352 specifically.  Goblinmonger   Sep-17-11 11:51 PM   #81 
                                   - And my seminary background  Goblinmonger   Sep-17-11 11:44 PM   #78 
                          - But the theists  Goblinmonger   Sep-17-11 08:59 PM   #50 
                       - Now look up "disbelief"  dmallind   Sep-19-11 04:53 AM   #101 
                 - +1000  valerief   Sep-16-11 09:54 PM   #23 
              - Concept.  westerebus   Sep-17-11 03:24 PM   #44 
                 - Gnosticism is about knowledge, theism is about belief,  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 03:50 PM   #45 
                    - Hi, darkstar.  westerebus   Sep-18-11 09:54 PM   #100 
                       - So am I. So, I strongly suspect, is darkstar. Both atheistts too though  dmallind   Sep-19-11 05:07 AM   #102 
                          - That would not surprise me.  westerebus   Sep-19-11 12:24 PM   #103 
              - We generally define ourselves as non-believers. Atheism is passive.  ZombieHorde   Sep-16-11 05:28 PM   #13 
              - Classi9c atheism is indeed passive.  rug   Sep-16-11 05:34 PM   #14 
                 - Skepticism is a conclusion; atheism is a state of being.  ZombieHorde   Sep-17-11 10:18 AM   #39 
                    - Atheism is an intellectual conclusion, not a state of being.  rug   Sep-17-11 03:22 PM   #43 
                       - When did you come to the conclusion that you don't believe in Amaterasu?  laconicsax   Sep-17-11 08:40 PM   #47 
                       - Shotly after I learned about them.  rug   Sep-17-11 09:03 PM   #54 
                          - Based on your own reasoning, you were.  laconicsax   Sep-17-11 09:55 PM   #60 
                             - No, that was your reasoning.  rug   Sep-17-11 11:12 PM   #62 
                                - What is the state of your belief in concepts to which you have yet to be introduced?  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 11:19 PM   #63 
                                - Agnostic.  rug   Sep-17-11 11:23 PM   #65 
                                   - Read #45. That is not a state of belief.  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 11:24 PM   #66 
                                      - You can't have belief without knowledge.  rug   Sep-17-11 11:25 PM   #68 
                                         - False.  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 11:31 PM   #70 
                                         - Belief is not based on the scientific method.  rug   Sep-17-11 11:33 PM   #72 
                                         - I used the method as a simple example that anyone might be able to understand.  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 11:35 PM   #75 
                                         - That's plain wrong.  rug   Sep-17-11 11:48 PM   #80 
                                         - So tell me what you know about God, and please be sure to cite confirmed facts.  darkstar3   Sep-17-11 11:55 PM   #82 
                                         - Which is why atheism precedes theism.  laconicsax   Sep-18-11 12:17 AM   #85 
                                         - Is there anything about specific disbelief that is confusing you?  rug   Sep-18-11 11:30 AM   #89 
                                         - No, but I think it might be confusing you...  laconicsax   Sep-18-11 12:08 PM   #90 
                                - Yes, that is my position. It's counter to yours.  laconicsax   Sep-17-11 11:29 PM   #69 
                                   - You're really not getting this, are you?  rug   Sep-18-11 12:14 AM   #84 
                                      - You already made my case for me in #68. It's sad that you don't understand how.  laconicsax   Sep-18-11 12:36 AM   #87 
                       - I think Pentecostals should be able to say what Pentecostalism is all about.  ZombieHorde   Sep-17-11 08:41 PM   #48 
                       - That might be true if there was an atheist Vatican.  rug   Sep-17-11 09:22 PM   #56 
                          - I agree there is a divergence  ZombieHorde   Sep-18-11 12:13 AM   #83 
                       - I was an atheist until I was 8  NMMNG   Sep-17-11 09:01 PM   #52 
              - If someone has never heard of god  EvilAL   Sep-18-11 02:04 AM   #88 
                 - Happy?  westerebus   Sep-18-11 08:08 PM   #94 
                 - Someone who has never heard of god.  rug   Sep-18-11 09:26 PM   #95 
                    - Kludgy to a fault. Surely there's a word that encompasses that concept.  darkstar3   Sep-18-11 09:35 PM   #97 
                       - What do you call someone who has never heard of Brazil?  rug   Sep-18-11 09:43 PM   #98 
                          - False equivalence. No one "believes in" or "lacks belief in" Brazil.  darkstar3   Sep-18-11 09:48 PM   #99 
  - Bingo  NMMNG   Sep-16-11 09:09 PM   #22 
  - Given the definiotion of atheism  tama   Sep-17-11 04:43 AM   #34 
  - right. nt  Deep13   Sep-18-11 12:32 PM   #93 
  - Ehm,  tama   Sep-16-11 05:06 PM   #11 
  - "If we crave some cosmic purpose ..."  Jim__   Sep-17-11 07:14 AM   #35 
  - Carl Sagan was most assuredly an atheist. nt  Deep13   Sep-18-11 12:32 PM   #92 
  - Page 2.  rug   Sep-18-11 09:29 PM   #96 
     - I don't believe him.  Deep13   Sep-19-11 04:56 PM   #104 
        - Ah, context.  rug   Sep-19-11 04:59 PM   #105 
           - Yeah, context. And since when are newspaper quotes reliable...  Deep13   Sep-19-11 08:40 PM   #107 
  - Sagan actually was not an Atheist, but a 'non-theist"  Taverner   Sep-19-11 05:59 PM   #106 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC