The problem with Moroni's challenge

[_Buffalo]

As if having different points of view in a philosophy makes it a religion. That's obviously what you were implying.

Yes, I'd also like to suggest that being an atheist takes faith.

Cute, but wrong.

Don't play dumb, please.

Who's playing? I am still trying to figure out how you can make an assertion that most atheists believe there could still be a God. Then when subgenius or I make any comments about atheism, your argument is simply to state that we are know-nothings or atheist babies. Your implication is that in order to understand what atheism is you have to BE an atheist, and that you alone can speak for atheism.

Yes, it's quite clear that you're not just playing dumb. The answer you're seeking is in the definition of the word atheist and the definition of the world "belief." I don't believe in ghosts either, but I admit it's possible I'm wrong. I've just seen no convincing evidence for them.

You don't have to be an atheist to understand atheism. You just have to be quiet for a moment and let atheists explain it to you instead of the usual theist knee jerk that you're engaging in.

I've never met an atheists who didn't acknowledge that it's technically possible there could be a god or two out there somewhere.

I don't know if I can get him on this board but he is Canadian, perhaps I can arrange and introduction, but if you don't know any i suppose he doesn't exist either.

Straw man.

Oh I'm sorry, I thought that's what we were doing... If you can say that you never met an atheist who didn't acknowledge that it's technically possible that there could be a god then I can say that I know one who won't. Its all a big spitting match anyway.

You don't seem to understand what the term "straw man" means either. Hint: straw man isn't a synonym for an anecdote.

You don't seem to understand the terms you're using.

I guess not, the term implicit when combined with atheism makes the terms incomprehensible to me. Care to tell me why?

There's a world at your fingertips. Here's a head start:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_a ... it_atheism

[_NeoMorm]

Yes, I'd also like to suggest that being an atheist takes faith.
....

How so? Please elaborate.

All belief systems revolve around evidences brought to our senses and our ability to digest and discern them. For anything that we cannot directly observe we must have faith of some kind to place any stock in a belief. A belief of things we cannot see, hear, sense etc.

The existence of God cannot be proven or dis-proven. (Even the implicit atheists, cling to that possibility.) Without having a perfect knowledge of all things, the atheist has to have faith that there is no God. Faith in the things men have written, faith in the theories that the belief is founded on. Just as the theist has to have faith on the things men have written and stated.

[_Buffalo]

All belief systems revolve around evidences brought to our senses and our ability to digest and discern them. For anything that we cannot directly observe we must have faith of some kind to place any stock in a belief. A belief of things we cannot see, hear, sense etc.

The existence of God cannot be proven or dis-proven. (Even the implicit atheists, cling to that possibility.) Without having a perfect knowledge of all things, the atheist has to have faith that there is no God. Faith in the things men have written, faith in the theories that the belief is founded on. Just as the theist has to have faith on the things men have written and stated.

Atheism isn't a belief system. It's the exact opposite.

How much faith does it take not to believe in elves, NeoMorm?

You're still misusing the term "implicit atheists."

[_NeoMorm]

Yes, it's quite clear that you're not just playing dumb. The answer you're seeking is in the definition of the word atheist and the definition of the world "belief." I don't believe in ghosts either, but I admit it's possible I'm wrong. I've just seen no convincing evidence for them.

See, now we have just fallen to the level of name calling. I have obviously made a misstep somewhere and offended you. So, if I believe that Jesus is a deity but admit its possible that I could be wrong I am still a theist? That reminds me of the last line of the first vision that was removed for publication in LDS materials by the way, but that's another conversation.

You don't have to be an atheist to understand atheism. You just have to be quiet for a moment and let atheists explain it to you instead of the usual theist knee jerk that you're engaging in.

I am not sure I understand, my knee jerk reaction is to assume things about your beliefs or motives?

You don't seem to understand what the term "straw man" means either. Hint: straw man isn't a synonym for an anecdote.

so can we agree that your evidence is anecdotal if I withdraw my straw man?

There's a world at your fingertips. Here's a head start:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_a ... it_atheism

Funny, I quoted that article a few posts back...

[_NeoMorm]

Atheism isn't a belief system. It's the exact opposite.

Whats the opposite of a belief system?

Let me see if I am cottoning on here... I take for truth only what I can prove or sense directly. I look up into the sky and to my eyes, its blue. I don't have to believe its blue - it just is. The earth's core is liquid iron. I haven't seen the earth's core. I haven't personally done any of the experiments to prove it. I believe that it is based on the evidence I have been shown. Could there be another explanation for the data, possibly, but its unlikely.

How much faith does it take not to believe in elves, NeoMorm?

Only a little, since there is so little evidence to support the existence of elves.

You're still misusing the term "implicit atheists."

Drat! Well let me be explicit in the way I define it.

Implicit Atheist = One who has not seen enough evidence to believe there is a God but admits that such evidence is possible however unlikely.

Explicit (Strong) Atheist = One who believes that no evidence is possible to show that there is a God.

Feel free to correct the above statements to the one true definition.

[_Buffalo]

Atheism isn't a belief system. It's the exact opposite.

Whats the opposite of a belief system?

Let me see if I am cottoning on here... I take for truth only what I can prove or sense directly. I look up into the sky and to my eyes, its blue. I don't have to believe its blue - it just is. The earth's core is liquid iron. I haven't seen the earth's core. I haven't personally done any of the experiments to prove it. I believe that it is based on the evidence I have been shown. Could there be another explanation for the data, possibly, but its unlikely.

This has nothing to do with atheism. Atheism is, simply, not believing in god(s).

How much faith does it take not to believe in elves, NeoMorm?

Only a little, since there is so little evidence to support the existence of elves.

Wrong. It takes none at all. You only need to analyze the probability of elves given the evidence. Either you believe or you don't.

You're still misusing the term "implicit atheists."

Drat! Well let me be explicit in the way I define it.

Implicit Atheist = One who has not seen enough evidence to believe there is a God but admits that such evidence is possible however unlikely.

Explicit (Strong) Atheist = One who believes that no evidence is possible to show that there is a God.

Feel free to correct the above statements to the one true definition.

Implicit atheism is defined by Smith as "the absence of theistic belief without a conscious rejection of it". Explicit atheism is defined as "the absence of theistic belief due to a conscious rejection of it"