Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

stone space

(6,498 posts)
49. I guess that I'm just an old school atheist. I believe that there is no God or Gods.
Sun Aug 3, 2014, 01:07 AM
Aug 2014

For half a century, I've simply called myself an atheist, and agnostics just called themselves agnostics. (Sure, there are shades of grey, but that's pretty much true of everything, and the trichotomy of theists/agnostics/atheists at least discretizes the spectrum at a finer level of granularity than a linguistic dichotomy would.)

Now, agnostics on the internet (though not in real life, as near as I can tell) are calling themselves "agnostic atheists", so I suppose that I had better start calling myself an "atheist atheist" whenever I post on the internet, just to distinguish myself from the folks who used to call themselves agnostics.




does this map to the "strong atheist" / "weak atheist" terminology i've seen thrown around? yodermon Jul 2014 #1
Yes, it does. Htom Sirveaux Jul 2014 #2
No, you have it wrong Warpy Jul 2014 #4
Where did these definitions come from? nt Htom Sirveaux Jul 2014 #5
No that isn't right. Warren Stupidity Jul 2014 #14
Since there's usually never a reply after you post that chart, I'm replying here. Iggo Jul 2014 #42
indeed. Warren Stupidity Jul 2014 #43
You mean forcing atheists to prove a negative? Warpy Jul 2014 #3
"Proving a negative" is just an excuse. DetlefK Jul 2014 #8
Your analogy is wrong. cleanhippie Jul 2014 #46
Atheists don't need to be forced to "prove negatives". stone space Aug 2014 #48
The current terminology is inadequate to describe the myriad of positions cbayer Jul 2014 #6
But walking into the flames is fun!!! intaglio Jul 2014 #7
Aliens. DetlefK Jul 2014 #9
It's a lazy and easy argument that is used all the time. cbayer Jul 2014 #10
Yes: "If someone just believes, they don't owe anybody anything" Beartracks Jul 2014 #30
I agree with that. cbayer Jul 2014 #35
To bad people make concrete real world decisions edhopper Jul 2014 #36
Not too bad at all. They also make concrete real world decisions cbayer Jul 2014 #41
Actually, to make it analogous, you have to do this: trotsky Jul 2014 #12
Where did I fail? DetlefK Jul 2014 #13
The basic atheist argument is this: trotsky Jul 2014 #16
So apart from failing miserably, your analogy is spot on! AlbertCat Aug 2014 #90
The alien life analogy is a very good one goldent Jul 2014 #47
Two things. trotsky Jul 2014 #11
I wasn't endorsing one model over the other, just attempting description. nt Htom Sirveaux Jul 2014 #39
Nah edhopper Jul 2014 #15
Great post, ed. trotsky Jul 2014 #17
Then why are some people so adamant about this. cbayer Jul 2014 #18
The fuss is about the hatred and stigma attached to the word "atheist," cbayer. trotsky Jul 2014 #19
What "strident" atheist views do you consider as negative baggage... stone space Aug 2014 #50
There are definitely cultural issues edhopper Jul 2014 #23
I think the point about how some may avoid the label because of its cbayer Jul 2014 #24
I don't think the emotions on this are that strong edhopper Jul 2014 #26
You are most likely right, cbayer Jul 2014 #34
Oh well, I'll try to do better next time. nt Htom Sirveaux Jul 2014 #38
This has been partially addressed on DU, as 1) a-theists, vs. 2) anti-theists. Brettongarcia Jul 2014 #20
That is a great post hueymahl Jul 2014 #22
"2) Anti-theists were those who stated positively (or negatively?) that there is no god." Warren Stupidity Jul 2014 #28
I don't think that anybody uses "anti-theist" that way. stone space Aug 2014 #51
You are conflating meaning. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #21
Suppose a hypothetical person says: Htom Sirveaux Jul 2014 #25
If part of that person believes, that trips the 'theist' value. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #29
Does the person's desire not to claim either label make any kind of difference? nt Htom Sirveaux Jul 2014 #37
I don't claim any racial titles, yet the government sees fit to classify me at every turn. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #40
The "one drop" rule for theism? stone space Aug 2014 #54
Words have meaning. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #55
So, because "atheist" starts with an "a", the one drop rule applies? stone space Aug 2014 #56
Um, yes. Because if you're not an atheist, you're a theist. This is not difficult. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #57
I'd say your definition is ahistorical, but you'd probably be able to find one drop of... stone space Aug 2014 #58
What's the name of the intermediary then? AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #59
I'm sorry, but with all due respect, you are the one playing word games here. stone space Aug 2014 #60
That's a lot of words for you to ignore that it is a boolean proposition. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #61
I leave you to your simplistic... stone space Aug 2014 #62
I asked you for an intermediary option. You did not supply one. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #64
I didn't supply a name for "the intermediary" because... stone space Aug 2014 #76
That's not what agnostic means. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #77
Not going to quibble about the word "agnostic". stone space Aug 2014 #78
It was not a diversion, however much you wish to pretend it was to escape a losing position. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #79
The very fact that... stone space Aug 2014 #80
You still don't seem to understand what I was saying, since you insist I was rounding down. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #82
I have a thermometer that measures a spectrum of heat. stone space Aug 2014 #84
Gibberish. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #85
You have a rather bizarre notion of the relation between... stone space Aug 2014 #86
I see you still have nothing to offer. Color me surprised. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #87
What can I offer? stone space Aug 2014 #88
You misuse language, and thus I need to sort myself out? ROFL AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #89
Then make up your own word. stone space Aug 2014 #81
Doubling down, I see. Quite brave of you. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #83
Excellently put. I and most other people are with you 100% on this. cbayer Aug 2014 #63
That's a lie. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #65
I guess you can classify people anyway you please, but that doesn't cbayer Aug 2014 #66
Another contestant with no alternate definition to offer. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #67
I'm not a contestant and I have all kinds of other terms that can be included under cbayer Aug 2014 #68
Please do not distort my statements any more. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #69
Since I don't know what you are talking about, it's going to be hard for me to stop. cbayer Aug 2014 #70
"You maintain that agnostic is meaningless. I reject that and maintain that it is." AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #71
Ok, you don't consider it meaningless, just as something cbayer Aug 2014 #72
You are ignoring the meaning of the root words: theist and gnostic. AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #73
No, I'm not. I am so familiar with this argument that I could cbayer Aug 2014 #74
"some linguistically solid ground here" AtheistCrusader Aug 2014 #75
This message was self-deleted by its author Inkfreak Jul 2014 #27
This message was self-deleted by its author lilithsrevenge12 Jul 2014 #31
And now... xfundy Jul 2014 #32
If atheists are so smart edhopper Jul 2014 #33
Take that, Atheists! Iggo Jul 2014 #45
Or... gcomeau Jul 2014 #44
I guess that I'm just an old school atheist. I believe that there is no God or Gods. stone space Aug 2014 #49
There is a God. And you don't want to meet him. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Aug 2014 #52
see here: stone space Aug 2014 #53
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Agnostics may threaten ag...»Reply #49