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
Google

Reply #116: Why havent' you apologized yet? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-17-06 02:28 AM
Response to Reply #79
116. Why havent' you apologized yet?
Swear to God, Beam, you are so far out of line it ain't even funny. Does this antagonistic assualt usually work for you?

No I did not-- "Did you or did you not try to redefine my atheism?" This seems completely unhinged, at this point. Are you reading anything I say or is this a stock all-occasion reactionary position?

I told you I was responding to your unrepetant huffiness and WOULD read your quotes when I had time. I came back to do that tonight and find you have heaped on more abuse:

"You didn't even read the information I posted, O. You've gone from ignorance to willful ignorance by refusing to learn about the labels you're attaching to people."

:wtf:
 
So despite that fact of your _______ behavior, here's what I learned from the information you provided:

"Weak atheism, or negative atheism, is the lack of belief in the existence of deities. It does not imply strong atheism, which asserts that no deities exist. Weak atheists generally find a lack or absence of evidence justifying belief in any deity. They occupy a range of positions that entail non-belief, disbelief, and doubt of theism."

"Strong or positive atheism is the philosophical position that no deity exists. It is a form of explicit atheism, consciously rejecting theism. A strong atheist may go further and claim that the existence of certain deities is logically impossible.

"While the terms weak and strong are relatively recent, the concepts they represent have been in use for some time. In earlier philosophical publications, the terms negative atheism and positive atheism were more common."

Well blimey, lookee there. There are actually many STRAINS of atheism and they all have different TERMS which proves that using ATHEISM only, without the specific terms defining the various minute details of non/dis/partial/anti/belief, is SURE to cause the semantic problems that I observed, and OP'd about, and you are perpetuating with pointless hostility.

Gee Whiz-- you mean there ARE terms that specfiy the varions positions of atheism's diversity? Golly, wonder why people don't bother to throw a "strong" or "weak" in front of the A-word once in a while.

Unless it's more fun to just spit and piss and fight about it.

You do not want to get in front of that 2X4.

Peace.

Out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

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

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
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