POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : should-see for both evolution skeptics and adherents : Re: should-see for both evolution skeptics and adherents Server Time
29 Jul 2024 02:31:09 EDT (-0400)
  Re: should-see for both evolution skeptics and adherents  
From: clipka
Date: 19 Jan 2014 19:46:39
Message: <52dc71ef$1@news.povray.org>
Am 20.01.2014 00:19, schrieb Warp:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>> Am 19.01.2014 23:22, schrieb Warp:
>
>>> The test whether you are an atheist or a theist is rather simple:
>>>
>>> Would you say "I believe that a (theistic) god exists"?
>
>> No, that's not the test. The test actually is:
>
>> Would you say...
>
>> ( ) "I believe that a god exists" (=> You're a theist)
>> ( ) "I believe that no god exists" (=> You're an atheist)
>> ( ) "I have no strong conviction on that matter" (=> You're neither)
>
> Atheism is the lack of belief in a god. It doesn't matter how convinced
> you are.

"Writers disagree how best to define and classify atheism,[27] 
contesting what supernatural entities it applies to, whether it is an 
assertion in its own right or merely the absence of one, and whether it 
requires a conscious, explicit rejection. Atheism has been regarded as 
compatible with agnosticism,[28][29][30][31][32][33][34] and has also 
been contrasted with it.[35][36][37] A variety of categories have been 
used to distinguish the different forms of atheism."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

I interpret the term to require "a conscious, explicit rejection", 
because to me that appears to be closer to the typical use of the term 
in common English, i.e. when used neither colloquially, nor as a 
technical term of philosophy, nor as a technical term of conservative 
Christianism.


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.