Author Topic: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism  (Read 2560 times)

SidewalkCynic

  • Made of Star Stuff
  • *
  • Posts: 66
  • Gender: Male
  • What are you looking for?
    • Secular Library
Re: Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #45 on: March 12, 2019, 06:20:52 PM »
If there were a god, then it would have revealed itself to me. There has never been anything more important in the history of Mankind than what I am delivering - scientific collation theory for the organization of technology.

SidewalkCynic

  • Made of Star Stuff
  • *
  • Posts: 66
  • Gender: Male
  • What are you looking for?
    • Secular Library
Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #46 on: March 12, 2019, 06:27:45 PM »
Theism is a doctrine, atheism is an absence of a doctrine not an "anti-doctrine" that would be antitheism. I can be both at the same time, but they have different meanings.
Theism is an ontological doctrine that suggests that a "supernatural" entity defines reality.

Humanism is the ontological doctrine that suggests that humans define reality.

Atheism is a political doctrine that opposes theist doctrine as the basis for public policy.

When you do not recognize atheism as a political doctrine, then you are unwittingly assigning it to the psycho-ontological category that you understand theism to be when you define it as belief in gods, or whatever.
If there were a god, then it would have revealed itself to me. There has never been anything more important in the history of Mankind than what I am delivering - scientific collation theory for the organization of technology.

SidewalkCynic

  • Made of Star Stuff
  • *
  • Posts: 66
  • Gender: Male
  • What are you looking for?
    • Secular Library
Re: Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #47 on: March 12, 2019, 06:28:31 PM »
Theism is a doctrine, atheism is an absence of a doctrine not an "anti-doctrine" that would be antitheism. I can be both at the same time, but they have different meanings.
http://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/index.php?topic=16080.msg385589#msg385589
If there were a god, then it would have revealed itself to me. There has never been anything more important in the history of Mankind than what I am delivering - scientific collation theory for the organization of technology.

SidewalkCynic

  • Made of Star Stuff
  • *
  • Posts: 66
  • Gender: Male
  • What are you looking for?
    • Secular Library
Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #48 on: March 12, 2019, 06:49:48 PM »
It makes me think that you aren't really an atheist, but a closet theist looking to ruffle feathers.
Of course, it could not possibly be because I am an independent and critical thinker. No, that would require me to comply with your ideas of how things are supposed to be.

Word salads like this do not offend your sensibilities because it complies with the psycho-ontological condition that you want atheism to be.
Atheism is the realisation that there is no substantive, reasonable, rational and repetitive evidence for the existence of a sentient intelligence that created and controls the Universe we exist in.

The mere fact that atheists perpetually continue to better define atheism proves that you are not in the agreement that you believe it to be.

But for some reason atheists get all upset when I correctly identify it as a political doctrine!!!

And when you review the objectives of the organized atheist activities you find that they are political organizations campaigning against theist doctrine as the basis of public policy - exclusively!
If there were a god, then it would have revealed itself to me. There has never been anything more important in the history of Mankind than what I am delivering - scientific collation theory for the organization of technology.

Recusant

  • Miscreant Erendrake
  • Administrator
  • Wears a Colander Hat for Special Occasions
  • *****
  • Posts: 6178
  • Gender: Male
  • infidel barbarian
Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #49 on: March 12, 2019, 08:13:24 PM »
-isms are always doctrines, except for the magical theism and atheism terms.
Astigmatism, alcoholism, cretinism . . .

Criticism, colloquialism, barbarianism . . .
Good argument. The medical maladies are diagnosis based on comparisons to documented (stabilized/doctrine) conditions.

https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Isms

Colloquialism and barbarianism, are social descriptions based on comparisons to doctrine by outside observers, as well.

Criticism is an interesting argument. Clearly, a reference to outside observation making comparisons.

So, you feel justified in citing a dictionary when you think it supports your position* but if you don't like the definition you find there, it lacks "a reliable classification system for stabilizing the definitions of words." Do you find an inkling of inconsistency there?

*It doesn't, by the way. In the entry you cite, the primary meaning is "condition." Medical conditions are not dependent on doctrine; they exist and have been given a name. Doctrines may attempt to describe the etiology of a condition, but generally they're irrelevant to its existence. For example the doctrine of humorism will explain the existence of a condition by referring to an imbalance of "vital fluids" in the body, while the doctrine of homeopathy will explain it by referring to some type of "miasm." Again, the condition exists regardless of the doctrine.

It's blatantly obvious that your sweeping claim that "-isms are always doctrines" is incorrect. The suffix ism is "a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence, etc." In the instance of atheism it denotes the state or characteristic of not believing in the existence of gods, and all your double-talk and sneering will not change that.

"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration — courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and above all, love of the truth."
— H. L. Mencken


SidewalkCynic

  • Made of Star Stuff
  • *
  • Posts: 66
  • Gender: Male
  • What are you looking for?
    • Secular Library
Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #50 on: March 13, 2019, 12:03:50 AM »
So, you feel justified in citing a dictionary when you think it supports your position* but if you don't like the definition you find there, it lacks "a reliable classification system for stabilizing the definitions of words." Do you find an inkling of inconsistency there?*

Exactly. We argue within an inconsistent system that was, more than likely, corrupted by the theists who had control of it. It should not be impossible to correct the system - these Latin suffix and prefixes should be consistent.

It doesn't, by the way. In the entry you cite, the primary meaning is "condition." Medical conditions are not dependent on doctrine; they exist and have been given a name. Doctrines may attempt to describe the etiology of a condition, but generally they're irrelevant to its existence. For example the doctrine of humorism will explain the existence of a condition by referring to an imbalance of "vital fluids" in the body, while the doctrine of homeopathy will explain it by referring to some type of "miasm." Again, the condition exists regardless of the doctrine.

It's blatantly obvious that your sweeping claim that "-isms are always doctrines" is incorrect. The suffix ism is "a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence, etc."

But the Wikipedia page did not discuss the these exceptions that I thought were out there, but I could not think of them - I have encountered the argument before, but not as well, as was presented here.

I am going to have to do more research on such, and try to better understand the exceptional instances.

In the instance of atheism it denotes the state or characteristic of not believing in the existence of gods, and all your double-talk and sneering will not change that.
I see this as a problem - it only serves to bolster the theists argument for a supernatural dimension that causes people to believe.

Furthermore, it is an inconsistency on the part of atheists, when they argue that belief is an indoctrinated condition - right??? Atheists will argue that the child is born without belief in gods. Some will claim that atheism is the default. Either way, theism has to be taught, because there is no god to magically cause belief.

The same goes for atheism - a person has no reason to claim to be an atheist until they are taught that there is a culture that campaigns the doctrine that there is a god, . . . and that there is a culture that campaigns that there is not god.

Atheism is not a psychological condition any different than choosing a political doctrine to support, because ultimately humanists are opposed to theist doctrine as the basis for public policy. It would be irrational for a humanist to support policy based on theist religious doctrine.

Humanism is the ontological doctrine that claims that humans define reality.

Theism is the doctrine that claims that a supernatural entity creates and defines reality. Theists believe the doctrine, because they were taught to believe it; they do not believe because the supernatural caused them to believe. Which is what atheists/humanists are allowing for when they define theism as a psycho(somatic) belief, and not a doctrine.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2019, 12:15:45 AM by SidewalkCynic »
If there were a god, then it would have revealed itself to me. There has never been anything more important in the history of Mankind than what I am delivering - scientific collation theory for the organization of technology.

Recusant

  • Miscreant Erendrake
  • Administrator
  • Wears a Colander Hat for Special Occasions
  • *****
  • Posts: 6178
  • Gender: Male
  • infidel barbarian
Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #51 on: March 13, 2019, 04:12:28 AM »
Exactly. We argue within an inconsistent system that was, more than likely, corrupted by the theists who had control of it. It should not be impossible to correct the system - these Latin suffix and prefixes should be consistent.

As I've previously noted, the working of a language is determined by those who speak it, not by an official body like the Académie française (which has failed to effectively police/ossify the French language despite nearly 400 years of effort) nor by a self-appointed language reformer. You seem determined to ignore this, as evidenced not only by your fantasy of reform but also by your theory of a theist effort to "corrupt" language.

You're free to ignore or disbelieve the above, but unless you present evidence showing that my understanding is incorrect, there's no reason I would give any credence to proclamations about your grand project to correct language via a "scientific enforcement to stabilize semantics."

I am going to have to do more research on such, and try to better understand the exceptional instances.

How do you propose to carry out this research? It seems to me that you can't rely on dictionaries, because you don't consider them useful unless you think they agree with your ideas. Why would any other works on language be more trustworthy than dictionaries? They're almost certainly subject to the same theist "corruption" that you believe infests dictionaries and language in general.

In the instance of atheism it denotes the state or characteristic of not believing in the existence of gods, and all your double-talk and sneering will not change that.

I see this as a problem - it only serves to bolster the theists argument for a supernatural dimension that causes people to believe.

How does a straight-forward definition bolster theist argument?

Atheism is not a psychological condition any different than choosing a political doctrine to support, because ultimately humanists are opposed to theist doctrine as the basis for public policy.

Atheism ≠ humanism, of course. Humanism as I understand it holds the good of human beings as its ideal. Atheists on the other hand may have ideals contrary to the good of human beings. I've encountered more than one atheist who would prefer that humanity die off entirely. In any case, if a theist doctrine aligns with the ideals of humanism there is no reason why a humanist would oppose it, just because it happens to be theist.

It would be irrational for a humanist to support policy based on theist religious doctrine.

Not necessarily--see above.

Humanism is the ontological doctrine that claims that humans define reality.

I wouldn't consider humanism to be an ontological position let alone an ontological doctrine, but perhaps you can direct me to a source that will illuminate the ontology of humanism. It's just that when I look at a source like this, I find hardly any mention of ontology in regards to humanism. The closest is "Nature [is] the totality of being . . . a constantly changing system of matter and energy which exists independently of any mind or consciousness. . . . it is up to humans to find the truth, as opposed to seeking it through revelation, mysticism, tradition or anything else that is incompatible with the application of logic to the observable evidence."

It seems that humanists don't believe that humans define reality, rather they believe that reality exists independent of humanity, and is discoverable through rational inquiry. If you believe that source is mistaken, I'd appreciate it if you provided a source that supports your assertion.

Theism is the doctrine that claims that a supernatural entity creates and defines reality. Theists believe the doctrine, because they were taught to believe it; they do not believe because the supernatural caused them to believe. Which is what atheists/humanists are allowing for when they define theism as a psycho(somatic) belief, and not a doctrine.

The term atheism actually predates theism. Atheism came into English from French around the middle of the 16th century, while theism arrived about a century later as a counterpoint to atheism, according to the Oxford English Dictionary as well as this source. (Unfortunately I cannot link to the OED because it's behind a paywall. If you have a library membership, perhaps you can gain access to the OED online through your library.) The French borrowed athéisme from the ancient Greeks, who had no equivalent to theism because belief in the gods was the norm and needed no name as such.

You'll note that the philosophical source cited above states that theism is a belief rather than a doctrine. There are theistic doctrines of course, but theism itself is not a doctrine. I expect you'll tell me that this is all wrong, and merely another manifestation of language being "corrupted" by those insidious theists.  :eyebrow:
"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration — courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and above all, love of the truth."
— H. L. Mencken


Bad Penny II

  • Not Defeated by the Dark Night of the Soul
  • ****
  • Posts: 1617
  • Idiot Symmetrician
Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #52 on: March 13, 2019, 08:51:01 AM »
I do bemoan some directions that language is taking.
Literally becoming a contronym, the use of decimate to mean devastating. I don't feel too confident taking the high ground but those developments seem rooted in ignorance.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2019, 10:41:54 AM by Bad Penny II »
Certainty disturbs me


Bluenose

  • Buddies With Uncle Bert
  • ****
  • Posts: 1243
  • Gender: Male
  • Final approach to HMAS Melbourne CVS-21 (1980)
Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #53 on: March 13, 2019, 10:24:00 AM »
I do bemoan some directions that language is taking.
Literally becoming an contronym, the use of decimate to mean devastating. I don't feel too confident taking the high ground but those developments seems rooted in ignorance.

Yes, it always amuses me to hear someone say that something or other decimated something else.  Like, what?  It killed one in every ten?  Really?  And how is it even possible if the something else is not animate?
“The story so far:
In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.”

― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

+++ Divide by cucumber error: please reinstall universe and reboot.  +++

GNU Terry Pratchett

Recusant

  • Miscreant Erendrake
  • Administrator
  • Wears a Colander Hat for Special Occasions
  • *****
  • Posts: 6178
  • Gender: Male
  • infidel barbarian
Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #54 on: March 13, 2019, 02:42:41 PM »
It's better if they say that "X was literally decimated . . ."  ;D

In another post I noted the devolution of the word "incredulous," which I find disappointing, somewhat. It seems to me that the internet has sped up the process of people, including professional writers, adopting what had previously been considered solecisms and malapropisms (oh my, more doctrines!!!) and propagating them through the language. Grammar and diction nazis are fighting a losing battle.
"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration — courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and above all, love of the truth."
— H. L. Mencken


Bad Penny II

  • Not Defeated by the Dark Night of the Soul
  • ****
  • Posts: 1617
  • Idiot Symmetrician
Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #55 on: March 13, 2019, 02:51:02 PM »
It's better if they say that "X was literally decimated . . ."  ;D

Ye, so he's IX now.
Certainty disturbs me


SidewalkCynic

  • Made of Star Stuff
  • *
  • Posts: 66
  • Gender: Male
  • What are you looking for?
    • Secular Library
Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #56 on: March 13, 2019, 07:55:28 PM »
The term atheism actually predates theism. Atheism came into English from French around the middle of the 16th century, while theism arrived about a century later as a counterpoint to atheism, according to the Oxford English Dictionary as well as this source. (Unfortunately I cannot link to the OED because it's behind a paywall. If you have a library membership, perhaps you can gain access to the OED online through your library.) The French borrowed athéisme from the ancient Greeks, who had no equivalent to theism because belief in the gods was the norm and needed no name as such.
And when theism is eradicated there will be no need to refer to humanists as "atheists," because it will be silly to refer to oneself as the opposed to something that does not exist!

You'll note that the philosophical source cited above states that theism is a belief rather than a doctrine. There are theistic doctrines of course, but theism itself is not a doctrine. I expect you'll tell me that this is all wrong, and merely another manifestation of language being "corrupted" by those insidious theists.  :eyebrow:

Yes! Exactly. Does it not seem odd to you that "atheism" predates "theism?" How is it that a compound term predates its base word??? They may not have published anything designating theism, but they understood it.

How do you propose to carry out this research? It seems to me that you can't rely on dictionaries, because you don't consider them useful unless you think they agree with your ideas. Why would any other works on language be more trustworthy than dictionaries?
I will try to review the inconsistencies compared to the consistencies in an effort to understand what has happened to cause the inconsistencies.

I believe there is some effort to generate a "synthetic language," or something, and I am pretty sure my efforts in knowledge classification will enhance their efforts.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2019, 08:15:08 PM by SidewalkCynic »
If there were a god, then it would have revealed itself to me. There has never been anything more important in the history of Mankind than what I am delivering - scientific collation theory for the organization of technology.

Recusant

  • Miscreant Erendrake
  • Administrator
  • Wears a Colander Hat for Special Occasions
  • *****
  • Posts: 6178
  • Gender: Male
  • infidel barbarian
Re: The Unresolved Issues of Atheism
« Reply #57 on: March 14, 2019, 07:26:34 PM »
And when theism is eradicated there will be no need to refer to humanists as "atheists," because it will be silly to refer to oneself as the opposed to something that does not exist!

What I see in such statements and in your insistence that atheism is a political doctrine is an attempt to create a mirror image of the fundamentalist Christian right in the US. They have dreams of an eschatological triumph of their belief, and openly pursue political power to enforce their ideals. Their contemptible hypocrisy and pious viciousness have earned them the moniker "Christofascists." An atheist version of that will never get my support.
"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration — courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and above all, love of the truth."
— H. L. Mencken