WJ

Free!

We crossed. You said:

"Because that which we have never seen, or has ever deemed to be credible by using logic and reason is always shunned as false or impossible."

How is the mere use of logic supposed to make some-thing appear that exists as phenomena in your mind? For instance, atheism is a belief in concept just like theism is a belief in a concept. What are you expecting to see or experience from your/this belief? Well, you would rightfully answer nothing, right? If there exists nothing, then how do you justify your belief in nothing? Or in this case, the fact that God doesn't exist?

I'm trying to make sense of your arguments/justification but I keep coming back to a belief in a some-thing or concept about a some-thing or, simply a suspended belief, like agnosticism.

Maybe the question relates to your sense of logic, but I can't be certain because part of the God phenomenon [what we know, have heard, percieve or maybe exerience-for some people, about the concept of God] is outside the domain of human logic. No?

Walrus

WJ

Koy!

Thats easy. "You claimed atheism is a religion. Prove it."

Atheism is a concept.
Concepts are based on a human belief system.
Religion is a belief system in the concept known as God.
Therefore, Atheism is just another religion.

Now, you tell me what is wrong with this syllogism? If it is not sound and assumes too much, reconstruct it. Then I'll critique yours.

I await you reply.

Walrus

Rational Ag

-Rational Ag

Mageth

Atheism is a word.
Words are given definitions by humans.
Religion is a word defined as a belief system in the concept known as God.
Therefore, Atheism is just another religion.

The 2005 Corvette is a concept.
Concepts are based on a human belief system. (???)
Religion is a belief system in the concept known as God.
Therefore, the 2005 Corvette is just another religion.

These make about as much sense as what you said, WJ.

General Zod

I have made it look appropriately ridiculous, I think.

Mageth

Spot on, Sartre. Sometimes you just can't improve on the original.

General Zod

That syllogism can in fact equate every concept in the world with every other one. Try it with, say, Christianity and Hinduism. Or Christianity and peanut butter.

[ April 24, 2002: Message edited by: Sartre ]</p>

Eudaimonist

Religion
Genus: belief system
Differentia: belief in the truth of a god-concept (i.e. belief that some god or gods exist)

Atheism might share religion's genus to a small extent -- atheism is a concept, or a position on some concept, at least -- but, and this is the important point, atheism certainly does not share religion's differentia. Therefore, atheism cannot be a religion.

[edited for clarity]

[ April 24, 2002: Message edited by: Eudaimonist ]</p>

hinduwoman

WJ, what is your definition of religion as such?
Then explain why you think atheism to be a religion.

free12thinker

You said
"How is the mere use of logic supposed to make some-thing appear that exists as phenomena in your mind?"

Uh..that's kinda the point. The mere use of logic cannot make somethhing (God) appear, if it merely exists in our minds. God exists in peoples minds, through faith. I can't make him appear. You can't make him appear. So logically (a word you don't seem to grasp) he doesn't exist outside of your own mind. Or any other theists for that matter.

You said
"For instance, atheism is a belief in concept just like theism is a belief in a concept."
I'll take a stab at this one. If Atheism is a belief in a concept, it is the concept that there is no God. Now this concept cannot be sold as absolute truth, and we don't try and sell it as such. But this concept can be sold as true until proven wrong . And atheists don't hold the burden of proof to prove it wrong.
Now theism is a belief in a concept to. It is a belief that a God exists. Now this concept cannot be sold as absolute truth anymore than atheism. And I don't think you're trying to sell it as absolute truth. But people have died for not buying it as absolute truth. And people have lost their ability to think for themselves by buying it as absolute truth.

And before you ask me why the burden of proof lies on theists, I will give you a parallel.

If me and you are walking around Walmart in Indiana, and I tell you I just saw George Bush walk into the bathroom, who does the burden of proof lie on. Do I have the task of proving he did, or do you have the task of proving he didn't.
That's what I thought. Now of course, there is no burden of proof required in stating that a banana is yellow, or that you went 70 mph in your new BMW. Those are plausible things, and we don't question the plausible.

Is God outside the domain of human logic? I've heard this way too many times to count, but I always answer as such. It is just this train of thought (awesome god:too awesome to comprehend) that serves as a terrific crutch for theists. They can't answer all of the questions surrounding God's mystery, so they say "Maybe it stretches human logic". Sounds pretty convenient.