I do not care if God exists or not.
I don't consider myself an Atheist, or an Agnostic.
My belief is independant from either definition.
I choose to decline the argument entirely due to its pointlessness.
What do you think?
Does that make me Atheist?
>Atheism - disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
Or Agnostic?
>Agnostic - a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
merriam-webster.com
twitter.com
I think that would lean more Atheist, but maybe that's just me.
The terms are not mutually exclusive, you are both.
But if you want to be more specific you should call yourself an apatheist, it would still make you an agnostic atheist but you wouldnt have to use those words, which seems to be a problem for a lot of people.
But I'm not an Atheist. God could exist I just don't care. I'm not agnostic, because I'm not saying nobody knows. I'm making a distinct statement that the entire question isn't worth asking or answering at all in the first place.
My own mind is my own church
Agnostic is more like: a person who doesnt claim to know if a god exists or not or believes we can never know for sure if there is a god or not.
but like this guy sayd, they are not mutually exclusive and you are both.
A (without) + theism (belief in a god) = without belief in a god. An atheist is one who does not believe in the existence of a god(s). Atheism is not even a category. It is the exclusion of a single category, theism. Meaning that someone who is not a theist, is an atheist. The only way to exclude yourself from atheism, is to believe in a god.
Of course if you still want to say you are not an atheist but dont believe in a god you are using the word in another way. You should make this clear every time you talk with an atheist because if you dont you might aswell be speaking another language, You need to agree on what words mean, This is how Atheists use the word atheist.
I'm pretty sure that an agnostic atheist means:
>I don't believe in god, and nobody can know.
I like apatheist. I've never heard that before. Apatheism states that the question is irrelevant. I believe it is separate, distinct, and exclusive to atheism and agnosticism.
en.wikipedia.org
Like i sayd, you are an apatheist but also an agnostic atheist because you dont claim to know either way but you dont believe.
Apatheism, as that guy said, sounds best. Using knowledge of other words (apathy, meaning not giving a shit) and theism, as described in other posts, it basically I don't really care if there is a good, doesn't really matter
God*
You don't care but you don't deny = not athiest
You don't deny = agnostic
You are agnostic.
no its
>I don't believe in god, but i dont claim to know that there is no god.
Atheist = doesnt believe
Agnostic = doesnt know or claim to know
Theist = believes
Gnostic = claims to know for sure
You are an agnostic atheist but more accurately an apatheist.
I really don't think so. My understanding is that Atheism IS a belief. Saying you are not a theist is making a choice. I'm making an outright refusal to choose.
These are good responses. I'd like to keep this discussion going.
Atheist - you have a lack of belief
another guy who doesnt even know what atheism is. How can there be so many retards on the internet?
Atheism doesn't deny god, it simply lacks belief due to a lack of evidence for
>I choose to decline the argument entirely due to its pointlessness.
Starts this fucking thread.
Eat a dick bro.
Agnostic from my understanding means god might exist, god might not exist. Which is still an assertion. I choose to make no such assertion.
Atheism is a belief like off is a tv channel. Atheism is NOT a belief and that is all what it is, not a belief, its the definition of it.
A (without) + theism (belief in a god) = without belief in a god.
Stop making the same fucking strawman argument all the time and talk to atheists honestly you prick.
The part of not caring and considering the mere concept pointless is more akin to a nihilistic approach to spiritualism than anything else.
If God doesn't exist, you don't care. If He exists, you still don't care.
It's detached, uninterested, indifferent, unless it would bring some sort of point or use. That's definitely nihilistic.
You misunderstand then, if you dont claim to know you are agnostic, if you dont claim to believe you are an atheist.
How many times do you have to hear it before you understand it?
It means you don't have a religious stance.
You're irrelgious.
...This term can be applied to a number of modern atheists as well, but it's worth noting that many atheists (such as traditional Buddhists) are religious.
It's a term you rarely hear, as it decribes very few people, many think it's not a possibility, and those who have the trait often find it extreneous.
It's a thing.
Well, it's not a thing, but it's a not thing that can be.
I'm apitheist, I believe that one day the great bumblebee that gives us light will come back down to Earth and take all of us apitheists to the Andromeda galaxy, to restart life without these fucking humans screwing with the environment
The number of retards on the internet is always n+1
Indeed, like Einstein sayd "There are only 2 things that are infinite, human stupidity and the universe and im not sure about the universe."
This should be a secondary splash for Sup Forums
...
You're not a denier and you're not a believer. That's what agnostic is.
If you put your head in the sand and say "I don't acknowledge the world" the world does not go away. Obviously there is a god or there isn't, so the question doesn't disappear just because you don't like it.
In reference to your picture, I don't follow that pattern of logic at all.
>You either believe in god or not.
I'm not suggesting that I don't believe in god. I just don't care, which is separate and distinct.
I you're telling me I can either like chocolate ice cream, or vanilla ice cream, and if I don't like chocolate then I must like vanilla. I say fuck ice cream altogether
I can see that, but I wouldn't say I'm nihilistic either. Although I may not be entirely clear on the definition of nihilist.
Referencing your opinion I refuse to jump. Why can't I just sit on the diving board, or climb down the ladder and not get in either pool.
>You either believe in god or not.
Dude, its a logical absolute, you cant just step outside of logic because you dont care. You dont believe, why is that so hard for you to admit? Are you afraid of the atheist label? wouldnt be the first time i see that.
And your analogy just proves your fear further, in your analogy there is a third choice and many more, you could want both or strawberry.
With belief in a god there is no third option, everything either is or isnt and your belief in a god is not.
You are an Atheist like it or not, next question.
Makes you an Apapatheist.
Us guys do not give a damn about a possible deity, so once a year we gather to blow soap bubbles. Wanna join ?
Nothing in Atheism says you deny god or the existence of, it simply means you lack belief in a higher power. Agnosticism can be a form of both Atheism and Theism.
Haha that may have been my best posts ever.
So you are just afraid of admitting you dont believe, you are squirming around because you cant find a way out. You cant say you believe because you dont but you cant say you dont because you are afraid of being called an atheist.
Life isnt fair, get the fuck over it and grow up.
I don't believe in human-described gods, but I believe it's possible that a god/gods could exist/have existed.
If a god revealed itself, I wouldn't still disbelieve like a stubborn mule, I'd accept my new overlord as denying it would likely result in the annihilation of myself or solar system depeding on how hard blasphemers are smited; this still holds true if the god turns out to be false, but still god-like.
I get that. The question is still there, but I can still keep my head in the sand and be a special little snowflake if I want to, right?
...
>If a god revealed itself, I wouldn't still disbelieve like a stubborn mule
neither would i, are you saying this is what an atheis must do? you really have no clue do you.
Go educate yourself, go look up atheism, anti-theism, agnosticism, apatheism and while you are at it deism.
Idk who you are or why you are trying to push your definition of athiesm into this thread.
I get what you're saying. And in binary you're either a 1 or a 0. But what about code that is never written at all? Isn't the lack of a 1 or a 0 still a valid choice?
You sound like an agnostic that doesn't care.
OK! I can get behind Apatheism. But I don't like people making the determination that Apatheism has to include agnosticism it atheism. It is separate and distinct.
...
Why don't you care to study spirituality. The fact life exist is mind blowing to me and just don't get how people wouldn't want to dedicate a big chunk of there life's to researching beliefs
But why can't that be a valid choice? Why can't I "squirm in fear" and still have it my way? Why do I have to pick a camp in the first place?
You're comparing apples to oranges. Not liking ice cream at all is a valid answer when someone asks if you prefer chocolate or vanilla- it's entirely possible to dislike them equally. However you can't say that you don't believe in god, but you also don't not believe in god. That makes no sense. Atheism is a lack of faith in a deity (not to be confused with faith that a deity does not exist). Theism is faith that a deity does exist. Whether you care about the question or not, you must be in one of the two groups. Even if you were ignorant to the question, meaning you've never even heard of the concept of a deity, then you still fall into the category of atheist because you can not have faith in the existence of a deity if you've never heard of the concept of a deity.
the very first words "a : a lack of belief "
So are you one of those faggots who insists that atheist are all certain there is no god and refuse to listen when atheists tell you that is not their position?
Then call yourself an apatheist, you would still be an agnostic and an atheist but if the guy you are talking to know what apatheist is he shouldnt bother you with all that.
See
For the answer to your question
Thankyou for proving my point.
Atheist - a lack of belief in god/higher power
Disbelief would be a Gnostic Atheist
I think deep down your scared to think about the big stuff so that's why you play the role of oh I just don't care
because thats how logic first, it doesnt ask your opinion. You dont have to tell which camp you are in, but you have to acknowledge that its impossible to not be either, if you dont you are not just being dishonest to other people but also yourself and that is not a good way to live.
why did i say first when i ment to say works?
Just because I don't care about the answer to this question doesn't mean I don't care about religion or spirituality. I just don't like the idea that you are either 1 thing or you're automatically the other. It makes no difference unless you're forcing that distinction.
I've read the bible, the quran, and the torah. They're all basically identical.
>My belief is independant from either definition.
In other words, you just made shit up on your own.
> I just don't like the idea that you are either 1 thing or you're automatically the other.
Well boohoo, nobody asked for your opinion on the matter and nobody can change the laws of logic so you can keep believing you are somehow special and better than atheists AND theists.
...
>Conceptual innovation has already peaked.
This is kind of on par with the notion of "Atheists still believe in God, they just resent him for some reason and want to rebel".
Some people genuinely don't give a shit and others find the subject interesting but haven't found any evidence to support a belief in Deities.
>but you have to acknowledge that its impossible to not be either, if you dont you are not just being dishonest to other people but also yourself and that is not a good way to live.
This is where I think you're wrong. I don't have to acknowledge anything I don't want to, or anything that doesn't seem worthy of acknowledgement. You're suggesting that I HAVE to make a choice at all and I really don't think that's the case in this argument.
I understand the logic behind the questions and the definitions, but this isn't simple logic, this is a more complex logical sentence, where there are more than just the two answers I've been presented with.
I'm being presented with a proposition that isn't a disjunctive syllogism, and people are forcing the problem to result in the answer for a disjunctive syllogism.
What's the point in believing in gods when all it does is make people kill each other?
Atheism is a badge of honor and the first step to type-1 civilization.
>change the laws of logic
It's not a disjunctive syllogism.
>Either p or q, or both ; not p; therefore q
That's how people are presenting this issue. I'm either Atheist or Agnostic or Both. I'm not Atheist, therefore i'm Agnostic. However this isn't the correct way to solve this problem. I get the logic, I just don't think that this equation is a disjunctive syllogism, I think it's a different and distinct problem. Where neither p and nor q, and neither is a valid choice.
>This is where I think you're wrong. I don't have to acknowledge anything I don't want to
You are right you dont have to, BUT ITS FUCKING STUPID AND CHILDISH.
>You're suggesting that I HAVE to make a choice at all and I really don't think that's the case in this argument.
No, im saying you are either an atheist or a theist, regardless of your choice or opinion, everyone is and to say someone is not is straight up retarded.
There really are only 2 options, saying you dont care isnt an option, but you are free to not care, as an atheist or a theist.
Go look up logical absolutes.
>type-1 civilization.
The first step to a type 1 civilization is to harness all the power available to the Earth. Isms are independent of this problem.
>You are right you dont have to, BUT ITS FUCKING STUPID AND CHILDISH.
But I can still do it. That's my point. You might find it pedantic hair splitting, but it's still a choice that is independent and distinct and rational.
>I'm not an atheist or a theist, so I maintain the ability to be smug and superior to both groups.
If I joined the atheist camp, then I relinquish my freedom to think you're all a bunch of ninnys and consider myself superior to everyone.
You really type a lot about something you claim to have 0 interest in, even started a thread about it.
Im not forcing you to admit that you are an atheist, im trying to get you to wake up and realise you cant always have your way.
Are you still an atheist is you believe in God, but just not in this universe?
What about believing that God existed but is dead?
Theism = Belief
Gnosticism = Knowledge
Agnostic atheists exist, in fact most atheists are. Most atheists also don't care if god exists or not, they just want theists to prove it. So Even if you do or don't care to believe, you're an atheist.
>you cant always have your way.
Pfft fuck that i'm making you bitches my Burger King.
>If I joined the atheist camp,
If you don't believe in god/gods/higher powers than you're already a member
No that would make you a theist, what other universe do you have proof of and access to to say this?
How did he die and where is the body?
You can say whatever you want, doesnt make you right, honest, rational or independent, it really does make you stupid. To go against all reason and say you are something that we all know is impossible, but you can still say it.
>Are you still an atheist [if] you believe in God, but just not in this universe?
No idea how to even start unpacking that one.
>What about believing that God existed but is dead?
I suppose you'd be a... post theist?
It doesn't matter whether or not god exists but if you don't reply to this post Morgan Freeman will die in his sleep tonight.
post theist, that cracked me up.
Im a Transtheist myself.
You'd be a theist, the words predate abrahamic religions and referred to a multitude of gods, there wasn't an exclusion to which god/gods
I'm A/Theism fluid
The way I see it, you guys are denying the antecedent.
>If p then q
>Therefore if not p, then not q
If I believe there is a god then i'm a theist.
Therefore if I don't believe in god, then i'm not a theist.
Which would make me an atheist. Which would be a logical fallacy.
...
But belief an disbelief are irrelevant to me. I don't fit into either camp. It's not as absolute as everyone is trying to make it.
Nigger
Atheist originally meant godless or godlessness, not that you disbelieved in the existence of gods, you simply didn't follow one.
niiiiiiiiigggggeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
If you don't believe, you are Atheist all you need is a lack of believe not a disbelief.
>To go against all reason and say you are something that we all know is impossible, but you can still say it.
That's the same argument you would make to a theist. So now you're not making any argument or having any discussion, you're just patronizing anyone who doesn't see things your way. I'm not falling for that one. I'm independent of your statement.
desu
Trying this hard.
No matter how irrelevant you think they are you still are a theist or an atheist and it absolutely is absolute.
Have you still not checked out logical absolutes?
I understand that. An atheist is the same as a non-golfer. The word itself is paradoxical, you don't ascribe an identity to someone who doesn't golf, you just don't refer to them as a golfer. My statement was about a logical fallacy that everyone seems to think is sound.
>No matter how irrelevant you think they are you still are a theist or an atheist and it absolutely is absolute.
Watch this...
No i'm not.
There, i'm not a theist or an atheist. Tah-dah.
Bad example, you can partake of golf yet not be a golfer, you can't partake in the belief of gods and not be a theist and you can't lack belief in a god and not be an atheist - it simply doesn't matter how much you don't care.
Not really, a theist has a burden of proof so there would be a lot to talk about, you on the other hand are an atheist like me, i was trying to get you to see that but i understand i never will, you just will always believe what you want, no matter how obvious i make it that you are wrong, you can just deny it all day long because there is nothing at stake.
I wish i could give you a situation that forces you to see it, forces you to admit that you were wrong, but i cant. Maybe someone will, maybe you will die because of being too stubborn, i will never know.
Faggot, we all wanted it to happen but you had to fuck things up.
if you admit you don't know either way, you are agnostic
saying that doesnt really change anything, besides im not even asking you, i already know how the situation is, its sad that you have your blinders on and cant see it with me.
Which had nothing to do with theism, I'm agnostic, I also have faith in exactly 0 gods.
>Not really, a theist has a burden of proof
Burden of proof? This isn't Night Court, this is theology and logic. Proof is irrelevant to all of this. Belief isn't something you prove. If you think theists have a burden to prove a god exists then you're not seeing that picture clearly.
>I wish i could give you a situation that forces you to see it, forces you to admit that you were wrong, but i cant.
So... maybe... you're wrong?
>That falling rock will totally stop before hitting me because i say so, i cant die, i am never wrong
>splat
yeah, i could totally see that happening to a guy that stupid.
I don't admit that I don't know either way. I'm not agnostic.
That omission of admission is itself an assertion. This makes me something different altogether.