logo Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
2023-04-01 00:38:00 CoV Wiki
Learn more about the Church of Virus
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Read the first edition of the Ideohazard

Start From: : Msgs/Page:
2003-11-18 20:00:04 #virus from 2003-11-18 20:00:00 (showing messages 1-30) Bookmark the permanent url.
20:00:04LuciferTime to start
20:00:13LuciferTonight's topic is "defining atheism"
20:00:33LuciferThe motivation for this was a discussion on the list recently
20:00:57LuciferOne vocal person took exception to the definition in the Virian lexicon

Ophis (~Ophis@[death to spam].ip216-239-71-102.vif.net) has joined #virus

20:01:42LuciferATHEISM:(vl) The doctrine that there is no God. Atheists believe that there is insufficient evidence for God and/or that the concept of God is incoherent so its existence is logically impossible.
20:02:13LuciferThis was not meant to be how atheism should be used everywhere
20:02:27LuciferThe purpose was to define how we use it (unqualified) in discussions on the list
20:02:41Lucifer* Lucifer welcomes all newcomers
20:03:17LuciferSo the questions to discuss this evening are: Do we need a change? and, if so, what should it be?
20:03:30localrogerI'd agree with the unnamed vocal person that the Virian definition may be overly narrow. It implies a very positive belief in the nonexistence of God, while I see the term more as "a-theism" -- without theism -- absence of a positive belief on the matter at all.
20:03:33hkhensonalternative would be that there are no gods . . . . yet.
20:03:49hkhensonheh heh
20:04:08LuciferOverly narrow for us?
20:05:06localrogerI don't think that a strong positive belief in the nonexistence of God is necessary for consistency with the rest of the Virian memeset. An absence of dogma would seem to be even more consistent with the Virtues, even if that includes an absence of the dogma that There Is Definitely No God.
20:05:30LuciferWell, yes, no one is being dogmatic afaik
20:05:52localrogerIf you stomp your foot and say "there is definitely no God," then that is a dogmatic statement even if you happen to agree with it.
20:06:05LuciferWho is doing that?
20:06:13Ophis"logically impossible" seems very affirmative for such a nebulous concept. Wouldn't something like "rationally irrelevant" be better.
20:06:20hkhensonI think it would be more shocking if we flat out stated there are no gods, and we regret the fact, so we are in the process of making some of them.
20:06:48localrogerOphis: agree.
20:06:52OphisI like hkhenson's approach :-)
20:07:12prometheusWhat is the distinction between atheism and agnosticism then, localroger?
20:07:54Ophisyou tell me prometheus
20:07:56localrogerAgnosticism is a positive assertion that the matter is unknowable.
20:08:52LuciferThat is not the original meaning
Start From: : Msgs/Page:

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Church of Virus BBS | Powered by YaBB SE
© 2001-2002, YaBB SE Dev Team. All Rights Reserved.

Please support the CoV.
Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS! RSS feed