Reply #34: Given the definiotion of atheism

[tama]

that self-confessed atheists prefere for the meaning of privative a (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privative_a), that is indeed the consequense, given the theoretical presupposition of 'tabula rasa'. Equally we could say that we are all born asubjects, aobjects, apersons, a-americans (or what ever nation), a-atheists, a-a-atheists and what ever adefinables, and it is not until we are tought to do so that we start to believe in definitionism.

Of course, the presupposition of 'tabula rasa' should be open to sceptical inquiry and not accepted without questioning. There is also another obvious case for atheistic infants besides the tabula rasa -hypothesis. E.g. supposing that memory of past lives does indeed happen, and supposing that Buddhism is atheistic philosophy(/-religion), in that case Tibetan buddhist tulkus like Dalai Lama are (re)born atheists.

PS: posted this as a new topic, followups preferably there: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x303045