Stem thanks for the research, but it was unnecessary. I well know the differing ideas of what atheism means/is. I also had thought that it would be obvious that when I said ‘deny god’ that I meant god belief(s) … evidently not.
And, I won’t muddy the waters in this post with a discussion about the concept of god, which you appear to say you do not have (“…the "concept" of god exist[s], in the theist brain…”), even though you do know the word ‘god’. You also asked my definition. I do my best to keep it simple, no belief(s) in god(s). This is the case even though one can discuss/debate whether there must be a concept attached to a word or not. On Oct 30, 2:47 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Orn. said >>> And, just as easily anyone could reply: > > No. Only theists are free thinkers because clearly, atheists deny god > ( like this stem cell person) without any true understanding, thus > they are not free thinkers. :-) <<< > > My atheism is not a denial of god. How can one deny that which does > not exist? It is akin to stating "the time before the big bang when > time and space came into existence". One is stating that it is the > case that there was a time (which did not exist) before time came into > existence. Now, granted, the "concept" of god exist, in the theist > brain. (I would say mind but the mind is what the brain does). I > acknowledge the existence of that concept. How do you define your > atheism? > > What Is the Definition of Atheism? > Dictionaries, Atheists, Freethinkers, and Others on Defining Atheism > By Austin Cline, About.com > > "There is, unfortunately, some disagreement about the definition of > atheism. It is interesting to note that most of that disagreement > comes from theists — atheists themselves tend to agree on what atheism > means. Christians in particular dispute the definition used by > atheists and insist that atheism means something very different. > > The broader, and more common, understanding of atheism among atheists > is quite simply "not believing in any gods." No claims or denials are > made — an atheist is just a person who does not happen to be a theist. > Sometimes this broader understanding is called "weak" or "implicit" > atheism. Most good, complete dictionaries readily support this." > > For more go to this site link below. > > http://atheism.about.com/od/definitionofatheism/a/definition.htm > > stemcell > > On Oct 30, 4:13 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > "No. A person can be a freethinker. A theist cannot because they > > believe god exist. Once once takes the title of theist then on has > > crossed the endzone line in my football metaphore. Freethinking > > ends...on that issue." - stem > > > Absolutely stem!.....as you now apprehend reality now and even with > > metaphors aside. > > > And, just as easily anyone could reply: > > > No. Only theists are free thinkers because clearly, atheists deny god > > ( like this stem cell person) without any true understanding, thus > > they are not free thinkers. :-) > > > Of course, not being a theist, this is a hypothetical....and the issue > > turns into a “ ‘tis, tisn’t, tis, tisn’t, tis, tisn’t…..etc.” issue as > > we all know. Such is the result of relative mindstuff and dialectics. > > > On Oct 30, 12:47 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Orn. said >>> All theists are free thinkers, end of discussion! <<< > > > > No. A person can be a freethinker. A theist cannot because they > > > believe god exist. Once once takes the title of theist then on has > > > crossed the endzone line in my football metaphore. Freethinking > > > ends...on that issue. > > > > the·ism [ th ìzzəm ] (plural the·isms) > > > > noun > > > > Definition: > > > > 1. belief in God: belief that one God created and rules humans and the > > > world, not necessarily accompanied by belief in divine revelation such > > > as through the Bible > > > > 2. belief in god or gods: belief in the existence of a god or gods > > > > [Late 17th century. < Greek theos "god"] > > > > the·ist noun > > > > stemcell > > > > On Oct 29, 11:53 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > “YES it is. One has reached a conclusion. That thology might entail a > > > > tea pot, it might entail a man with a beard, a woman with 7 arms, etc. > > > > IF YOU ARE A THEIST....you are NOT a freethinker. Period! End of > > > > discussion...” - stem > > > > > My my stem, so, you consider a statement BY FIAT to require some sort > > > > of process of thinking, some analysis that reaches “a conclusion”? OK, > > > > I’ll play. (By fiat…) > > > > > All theists are free thinkers, end of discussion! > > > > > Geee, that felt good! We should play this more often! We might begin > > > > to believe in pink unicorns! Irony aside, dogma is dogma. > > > > > On Oct 29, 7:04 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Orn. said >>> Is saying by fiat that theists are > > > > > not freethinkers ‘freethought’? <<< > > > > > > YES it is. One has reached a conclusion. That thology might entail a > > > > > tea pot, it might entail a man with a beard, a woman with 7 arms, > > > > > etc. IF YOU ARE A THEIST....you are NOT a freethinker. Period! End > > > > > of discussion... > > > > > > On Oct 29, 5:26 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > “I believe the process of freethought cannot lead to theism > > > > > > therefor a > > > > > > theist is not a freethinker. I have also stated..... I believe > > > > > > freethinking can lead to atheism as it did for me, or something > > > > > > else, > > > > > > perhaps agnosticism which is perfectly > > > > > > acceptable.” - clog > > > > > > “I find it satisfactory to state that a theist is not a freethinker. > > > > > > If someone aspires to be a theist then he is abandoning his > > > > > > freethought and should be regarded as…” – clog > > > > > > > To nit pick socratically, is a belief ‘freethought’? Is finding a > > > > > > notion satisfactory ‘freethought’? Is saying by fiat that theists > > > > > > are > > > > > > not freethinkers ‘freethought’? > > > > > > > On Oct 29, 3:09 pm, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - I have stated....... I believe the process of > > > > > > > freethought > > > > > > > cannot lead to theism therefor a theist is not a freethinker. I > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > also stated..... I believe freethinking can lead to atheism as it > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > for me, or something else, perhaps agnosticism which is perfectly > > > > > > > acceptable. > > > > > > > The next point is do we nitpick where freethought changes to blind > > > > > > > faith? It is probably a pointless exercise - there is some point > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > which a recovering faith follower becomes a freethinker. Do we > > > > > > > need to > > > > > > > identify that point? I suppose it is helpful for the Prethinker > > > > > > > but, > > > > > > > for our purposes, I find it satisfactory to state that a theist > > > > > > > is not > > > > > > > a freethinker. > > > > > > > If someone aspires to be a theist then he is abandoning his > > > > > > > freethought and should be regarded as........... I refuse to > > > > > > > terminate > > > > > > > this sentence. > > > > > > > > On Oct 29, 4:28 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > OK. Correct if wrong. A theist cannot use the PROCESS of > > > > > > > > freethought? In the next sentence you said that that same > > > > > > > > process > > > > > > > > "leads elsewhere for others". > > > > > > > > > WHAT? A theist can use freethought up to and until he > > > > > > > > concludes there > > > > > > > > is a god...correct? But can an aspiring theist be a > > > > > > > > freethinker? I > > > > > > > > think you feel that, yes, that is correct. > > > > > > > > > stemcell > > > > > > > > > On Oct 29, 4:08 pm, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - I'm saying (yet again) that the process of > > > > > > > > > freethought > > > > > > > > > cannot lead to theism. For me the process of freethought led > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > atheism but I accept that it leads elsewhere for others. > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 29, 2:26 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > So Clog. are you saying that a theist is a > > > > > > > > > > freethinker...just someone > > > > > > > > > > you disagree with? My point is that a theist is one who > > > > > > > > > > believe in > > > > > > > > > > the theology that lead them to conclude that here is > > > > > > > > > > absolutly a > > > > > > > > > > god...of their theism. At that point, once they have made > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > conclusion, whether or not it is right, then they are no > > > > > > > > > > longer using > > > > > > > > > > the process of freethinking and thus not a freethinker...on > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > particular issue...which is what we are discussing aren't > > > > > > > > > > we? > > > > > > > > > > > stemcell > > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 29, 2:04 pm, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi y'all (again) your phrase ""A freethinker uses X to > > > > > > > > > > > arrive at his > > > > > > > > > > > beliefs, but only if he arrives at nontheism." > > > > > > > > > > > I patently disagree. As I've said before X doesn't lead > > > > > > > > > > > to theism and > > > > > > > > > > > neither does it lead to nontheism. It has lead me > > > > > > > > > > > personally to > > > > > > > > > > > nontheism, but I'm happy to concede that it has led many > > > > > > > > > > > others to > > > > > > > > > > > (almost as) valid conclusions. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 29, 1:58 pm, Aaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't want to get sidetracked, Taylor. We can talk > > > > > > > > > > > > about the > > > > > > > > > > > > practical conclusions later. Right now, I'm not even > > > > > > > > > > > > sure that > > > > > > > > > > > > everyone is following the simple logic. Assume we agree > > > > > > > > > > > > on the > > > > > > > > > > > > specifics X. We then have: > > > > > > > > > > > > > A freethinker uses X to arrive at his beliefs. > > > > > > > > > > > > Han Solo used X to arrive at his theism (or any belief > > > > > > > > > > > > Y). > > > > > > > > > > > > Therefore, Han Solo is a freethinker. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Several people have objected that they can't imagine > > > > > > > > > > > > how anyone could > > > > > > > > > > > > arrive at theism via X. But that's not relevant to the > > > > > > > > > > > > logical > > > > > > > > > > > > soundness of the conclusion. The only way to > > > > > > > > > > > > *logically* exclude > > > > > > > > > > > > theism from the above conclusion is to specifically > > > > > > > > > > > > include nontheism > > > > > > > > > > > > in the major premise. In other words, you must have: > > > > > > > > > > > > "A freethinker > > > > > > > > > > > > uses X to arrive at his beliefs, but only if he arrives > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > nontheism." > > > > > > > > > > > > > The extra requirement is not advisable because it makes > > > > > > > > > > > > freethought > > > > > > > > > > > > internally inconsistent. (Freethinkers are supposed to > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
