I think philisophically nearly all atheists assert their atheism in response to theistic claims. Theists made the initial claim and atheists label themselves such in response. You'd be right with the burden of proof if atheists made the initial claim, but in reality there would be no concept of god(s) if theists didn't make the claim first; there wouldn't be theists or atheists, just an absence of theistic concepts one way or another.
You're confusing atheism with agnosticism; atheism is a belief, whereas agnosticism is a claim to knowledge. An agnostic atheist doesn't believe in a god, but admits there's no way to be 100% certain. A gnostic atheist asserts there is no god for certain, hence they don't believe.
The burden of proof is always on the claimant. If someone claims a god, it's not up to me to disprove their claim. Atheism is simply an absence of belief in a supernatural god, not a claim.
In general, by the definition chosen by those who choose to represent their position with the term "atheism", which is the definition that matters seen as it is their position that the word is intended to communicate, rocks ARE atheists.
Furthermore, from an etymological perspective, it would be consistent with other the Greco-English words to use the prefix a- to simply mean "that which isn't".
The flaw in your hand analogy is that you use hand as an atomic concept, while theism requires both god and belief to already have some definition. If we look at theism as a function of god, belief(god), then its inverse ¬belief(god) is not the same as belief(¬god).
Thank you so much for correcting shadow9392!!! I was halfway through making a video response to fully correct this guy, only to discover now that you've beat me to it. It's refreshing to see someone not only able to pick up every single flaw in everything Shadow said, but also able to communicate it in an extremely simple, plain, and direct manner.
I think you nailed it perfectly, and im relieved to discover there are actually people out there that actually understand the issue.
@LogicalStatements1 As far as I understand it a belief is a proposition in the form of "this is the case." Claims are statements of belief. I'm not sure which of these moves you don't like, but I think I can justify both.
I would also like to know which words you think I leave undefined, that way I can add an explanation as notes to the video.
you use words that (in your opinion) have a definite definition against words that (in your opinion) don't have a definite definition. wtf man..........
@LogicalStatements1 I asked if you think it's ironic to make ambiguous statements about other people's lack of clarification, and you said "Yes."
Now i'll ask, Are you aware that i'm referring to YOUR statement?
I don't believe anything derfros said was ambiguous, but your use of the phrase "using words 'against' other words" is.
As for "doing things for personal gain", i could easily say the same thing about everything every person ever does, making your point quite pathetically pointless.
If you actually found it too boring to respond, then you wouldn't have responded...but you did.
I'm sorry that you find it too "boring" to justify your retarded statements, but as far as i'm concerned, this is nothing more than an admission of defeat. You have no legitimate response and probably realize how stupid you actually sound, so you throw out the excuse "i'm too bored to defend myself".
Most atheists i have come across do not have a positive belief that there is no god, if they are making any claim it is simply that theists have not yet meet the burden of proof.
The same way you do not need to prove that unicorns do not exist to not have a belief in them, why should we need to prove that god does not exist to not believe in him. No you are the one making the claim that god exists and if you want to convince us you will have to prove that your position is actually true.
@ybra Agreed... It would seem as though some people think when you reject the theist claim, it automaticly means that we take the position that there is no god. Sure for some atheist that is true. But with most atheist I have encountered (my self included) that is not the case. watch?v=5WxEwr7tYvM
However, I don't recall him saying he is a theist (I could be wrong).
@ybra you clearly have a different experience with atheists than I do. I attended a few meetings of the Atheists Students Association in my University and the split between strong and weak atheism is pretty much 50-50.
I have also found that a lot of weak atheists say something like "I can't know for sure, but odds are there is no god." That's a positive belief as well...
@derfos666 Well i think it is a difference between what god you are talking about too. I think even the most strong atheist would be agnostic towards a deist kind of god.
But i think there can be arguments made against the existences of some gods, justifying a position of strong atheism towards them. For example most gods are ill defined or even contradictory defined. Or the fact that evidence or arguments for gods consistently fail.
@derfos666 People have been trying to prove gods for a long time and by now i think it is safe to assume that there are no gods or that it don't want us to know it exist. Just like it is safe to assume the same about unicorns, and I think we can agree that not believing in unicorns do not require any real kind of faith.
However I am still open to be shown wrong about both unicorns and gods.
This is just Word Play.
The Bottom line is that an Athiest is simply someone that has yet to be convinced of a God.
"An Athiest is just a Christian That believes in 1 less god"
ParasiteS27 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
God doesn't exist end of.
TheAngryKat 3 months ago
well you're the most mistaken person I've seen in a while..
DrDisErect 4 months ago
He's not called "Shadow9392" He's called "Obviously Jesus"
DrDisErect 4 months ago
I think philisophically nearly all atheists assert their atheism in response to theistic claims. Theists made the initial claim and atheists label themselves such in response. You'd be right with the burden of proof if atheists made the initial claim, but in reality there would be no concept of god(s) if theists didn't make the claim first; there wouldn't be theists or atheists, just an absence of theistic concepts one way or another.
resistnzisfutl 6 months ago
@resistnzisfutl i agree 100%
ZZzzzzzWhat 6 months ago
You're confusing atheism with agnosticism; atheism is a belief, whereas agnosticism is a claim to knowledge. An agnostic atheist doesn't believe in a god, but admits there's no way to be 100% certain. A gnostic atheist asserts there is no god for certain, hence they don't believe.
The burden of proof is always on the claimant. If someone claims a god, it's not up to me to disprove their claim. Atheism is simply an absence of belief in a supernatural god, not a claim.
resistnzisfutl 6 months ago
You are "mistaken".
In general, by the definition chosen by those who choose to represent their position with the term "atheism", which is the definition that matters seen as it is their position that the word is intended to communicate, rocks ARE atheists.
Furthermore, from an etymological perspective, it would be consistent with other the Greco-English words to use the prefix a- to simply mean "that which isn't".
huruey 7 months ago
Comment removed
huruey 7 months ago
Comment removed
huruey 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The flaw in your hand analogy is that you use hand as an atomic concept, while theism requires both god and belief to already have some definition. If we look at theism as a function of god, belief(god), then its inverse ¬belief(god) is not the same as belief(¬god).
huruey 7 months ago
While some people can make the positive claim that there is no god, atheism itself is the lack of belief, meaning no claim
jakejarmell 8 months ago
Thank you so much for correcting shadow9392!!! I was halfway through making a video response to fully correct this guy, only to discover now that you've beat me to it. It's refreshing to see someone not only able to pick up every single flaw in everything Shadow said, but also able to communicate it in an extremely simple, plain, and direct manner.
I think you nailed it perfectly, and im relieved to discover there are actually people out there that actually understand the issue.
Great video!
Wittgensteinism 8 months ago
Way to go against the grain:)
Unworshipediety 8 months ago
you try to exchange belief with claim lol, nice try mate but plurb plarb blurb balalalalla
LogicalStatements1 8 months ago
@LogicalStatements1 As far as I understand it a belief is a proposition in the form of "this is the case." Claims are statements of belief. I'm not sure which of these moves you don't like, but I think I can justify both.
I would also like to know which words you think I leave undefined, that way I can add an explanation as notes to the video.
derfos666 8 months ago
@derfos666 "I would also like to know which words you think I leave undefined, that way I can add an explanation as notes to the video."
To do that i would have to watch your video again, i don't really want to, sorry.
LogicalStatements1 8 months ago
you use words that (in your opinion) have a definite definition against words that (in your opinion) don't have a definite definition. wtf man..........
LogicalStatements1 8 months ago
@LogicalStatements1 What does it mean to use words "against" other words exactly?
Do you find it ironic that you make such an ambiguous statement about someone else not defining themselves clearly?
Wittgensteinism 8 months ago
@Wittgensteinism yes.
he was doing it for his own personal gain, pathetic.
LogicalStatements1 8 months ago
@LogicalStatements1 I asked if you think it's ironic to make ambiguous statements about other people's lack of clarification, and you said "Yes."
Now i'll ask, Are you aware that i'm referring to YOUR statement?
I don't believe anything derfros said was ambiguous, but your use of the phrase "using words 'against' other words" is.
As for "doing things for personal gain", i could easily say the same thing about everything every person ever does, making your point quite pathetically pointless.
Wittgensteinism 8 months ago
@Wittgensteinism Good god :p i'm not going to have a war of words with you for it is boring.
LogicalStatements1 8 months ago
@LogicalStatements1 ahh, the boring excuse---it's always so telling.
If you actually found it too boring to respond, then you wouldn't have responded...but you did.
I'm sorry that you find it too "boring" to justify your retarded statements, but as far as i'm concerned, this is nothing more than an admission of defeat. You have no legitimate response and probably realize how stupid you actually sound, so you throw out the excuse "i'm too bored to defend myself".
Lmao! How pathetic!
Wittgensteinism 8 months ago
@Wittgensteinism I am an alcoholic prick and i cannot be bothered to read what you write.
LogicalStatements1 8 months ago
Most atheists i have come across do not have a positive belief that there is no god, if they are making any claim it is simply that theists have not yet meet the burden of proof.
The same way you do not need to prove that unicorns do not exist to not have a belief in them, why should we need to prove that god does not exist to not believe in him. No you are the one making the claim that god exists and if you want to convince us you will have to prove that your position is actually true.
ybra 8 months ago
@ybra Agreed... It would seem as though some people think when you reject the theist claim, it automaticly means that we take the position that there is no god. Sure for some atheist that is true. But with most atheist I have encountered (my self included) that is not the case. watch?v=5WxEwr7tYvM
However, I don't recall him saying he is a theist (I could be wrong).
DebateCreation 8 months ago
@ybra you clearly have a different experience with atheists than I do. I attended a few meetings of the Atheists Students Association in my University and the split between strong and weak atheism is pretty much 50-50.
I have also found that a lot of weak atheists say something like "I can't know for sure, but odds are there is no god." That's a positive belief as well...
derfos666 8 months ago
@derfos666 Well i think it is a difference between what god you are talking about too. I think even the most strong atheist would be agnostic towards a deist kind of god.
But i think there can be arguments made against the existences of some gods, justifying a position of strong atheism towards them. For example most gods are ill defined or even contradictory defined. Or the fact that evidence or arguments for gods consistently fail.
ybra 8 months ago
@derfos666 People have been trying to prove gods for a long time and by now i think it is safe to assume that there are no gods or that it don't want us to know it exist. Just like it is safe to assume the same about unicorns, and I think we can agree that not believing in unicorns do not require any real kind of faith.
However I am still open to be shown wrong about both unicorns and gods.
ybra 8 months ago
@derfos666 Your an absolute douche,nuff said
PersonWhoEatsPumkins 7 months ago