From: Martin Phipps on
On May 4, 3:25 pm, "¥ UltraMan ¥" <u...(a)man.jp> wrote:
> Jeckyl wrote:
> > "¥ UltraMan ¥" <u...(a)man.jp> wrote in message
> >news:59vq7sF2lekskU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> >> Jeckyl wrote:
> >>> "¥ UltraMan ¥" <u...(a)man.jp> wrote in message
> >>>news:59vlrtFbi4qnU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> >>>> Strong atheism holds that no god(s) ever proposed by man have
> >>>> been shown to exist, nor is their existance even necessary to
> >>>> explain the universe.
>
> >>> Yes. That is a belief.
>
> >> No
>
> > Does a strong atheist hold that it is true? ifso , then it is a
> > belif of the strong atheist.
>
> Belief is the absence of Knowledge.

More accurately, belief is the end of reason.

Martin

From: � UltraMan � on
Martin Phipps wrote:
> On May 4, 3:25 pm, "� UltraMan �" <u...(a)man.jp> wrote:
>> Jeckyl wrote:
>>> "� UltraMan �" <u...(a)man.jp> wrote in message
>>>> Jeckyl wrote:
>>>>> "� UltraMan �" <u...(a)man.jp> wrote in message

>>>>>> Strong atheism holds that no god(s) ever proposed by man have
>>>>>> been shown to exist, nor is their existance even necessary to
>>>>>> explain the universe.
>>
>>>>> Yes. That is a belief.
>>
>>>> No
>>
>>> Does a strong atheist hold that it is true? ifso , then it is a
>>> belif of the strong atheist.
>>
>> Belief is the absence of Knowledge.
>
> More accurately, belief is the end of reason.

That does sound better.


From: Fred G. Mackey on
DanielSan wrote:
> Fred G. Mackey wrote:
>
>> Jeckyl wrote:
>>
>>> "Kent Wills" <compuelf(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:hatk331kpodcvs6mel0a1gmeklc6rq8qo8(a)4ax.com...
>>>
>>>> As I understand it, on Fri, 4 May 2007 03:14:47 +1000, "Jeckyl"
>>>> <noone(a)nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> _ Prof. Jonez _ <theprof(a)jonez.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I will gladly show that your pig-ignorant grotesque
>>>>>>>> perverted superstition that you call christianity is
>>>>>>>> utterly false.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please present this proof.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've been asking for proof that atheism is correct for a very
>>>> long time.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Easy ..
>>>
>>> The theist position is to know that god exists
>>> The atheist position is to not know that god exists
>>> There is no proof that god exists
>>> We cannot conclude that god exists or does not exist
>>> Gods existance is unknown
>>> The atheist position is correct
>>>
>>>
>> That's not a proof.
>>
>> Furthermore, the most widley accepted definition of atheism (as well
>> as the primary one listed by dictionaries) is that it is the belief
>> that there are no gods
>
>
> Err, not quite.
>
> atheism: disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
> [Random House Dictionary]

That's the SECONDARY definition. I notice you left out the PRIMARY
definition.

>
> atheism: Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
> [American Heritage Dictionary]

It still includes "denial", doesn't it? What, you didn't like the
secondary definition in this case?

>
> atheism: a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods
> [WordNet 3.0]
>

That's the SECONDARY definition. I notice you left out the PRIMARY
definition.


Didn't like this definition either I see:

American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition -
Cite This Source
atheism [(ay-thee-iz-uhm)]

Denial that there is a God. (Compare agnosticism.)



> atheism: Disbelief in or denial of the existence of deities.
> [Wiktionary]

Even this poor excuse for a dictionary includes "denial" in its primary
definition.

>
> Want more?
>

Naw - you'll just selectively ignore primary definitions.

>
>> - NOT that it is a synonym with agnosticism.
>
>
> Agnosticism (and gnosticism) deals with the knowledge (or lack thereof)
> of spiritual matters...

You've got that backwards.

>
> Atheism (and theism) deals with the existence (or lack thereof) of deities.
>

It deals with BELIEF

> Atheists do not believe in the existence of deities. Period. End of
> discussion.
>

No, they BELIEVE there are none

>>
>>
>> Note that it takes just as much faith to be an atheist as it does to
>> be a member of any OTHER religion, organized or not.
>
>
> Incorrect.
>
From: Jeckyl on
"� UltraMan �" <ultra(a)man.jp> wrote in message
news:5a05f0F2n4dhsU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> Jeckyl wrote:
>> "� UltraMan �" <ultra(a)man.jp> wrote in message
>> news:59vq7sF2lekskU1(a)mid.individual.net...
>>> Jeckyl wrote:
>>>> "� UltraMan �" <ultra(a)man.jp> wrote in message
>>>> news:59vlrtFbi4qnU1(a)mid.individual.net...
>>>>> Strong atheism holds that no god(s) ever proposed by man have
>>>>> been shown to exist, nor is their existance even necessary to
>>>>> explain the universe.
>>>> Yes. That is a belief.
>>> No
>> Does a strong atheist hold that it is true? ifso , then it is a
>> belif of the strong atheist.
> Belief is the absence of Knowledge.

Not at all .. where did you get that idea? Belief is whatever you hold to
be true, in particular things for which you have evidence and knowledge.

see http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/belief "conviction of the
truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon
especially when based on examination of evidence"

Belief CAN also apply to things for which there is no evidence / proof ..
this is sometimes also called 'Faith'.

>>> it's a rational and logical conclusion given the facts.
>> What facts are they ..
> All of them.

In other words, you do not have any facts at all

>>do you have a proof that god does not exist?
> Which god in particular?

Any will do .. the Christian God would be a good start.

>>>>>> but agan, no code of ehtics or values. So no, it would not be a
>>>>>> religion in any useful sense of the word.
>>>>> Exactly.
>>>> There you go .. there was no need for the 'bullshit' remark
>>> Yes there was. Asserting that A-theism might possibly
>>> be a "religion" is a tautological impossibility.
>> Not really .. just not in any useful way. Strong atheism has a
>> particular belief that all strong atheists share. But that is not a
>> useful definition of a religion, as then anything that people hold as
>> true could be a religion.
> Which is why it is misleading to conflate the terms belief, faith and
> religion.

I'm not the one doing that.

Belief is anything you hold to be true (especially with proof)
Faith is firm belief (usually with no proof)
Religion is a set of believe, valud and codes of ethics.

I've not conflated anything

>>>>>>>> Where is your proof the any religion is correct?
>>>>>>> There is none - where is your proof that there are no gods?
>>>>>> Atheists don't need one .. all they need is for there to be no
>>>>>> proof that there are gods .. and that justifies their position
>>>>>> completely.
>>>>> Kent doesn't quite comprehend the obvious, then again he believes
>>>>> that humans exhale Carbon Monoxide and that accusing someone
>>>>> of being pregnant who in fact isn't pregnant is *not* a false
>>>>> accusation.
>>>> I don't see that, in general, being pregnant would be a crime of
>>>> which to be accused in the first place.
>>> Would the accusation be true or false in the instance stated?
>> I have no idea of what the actual instance was. I think it likely
>> that it was not as straightforward as you are saying (ie that you've
>> simplified it possibly to make it seem more absurd) .. some important
>> detail might have been deleted.
>
> Here's the original:

Ta

> Kent Wills wrote:
>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" wrote:
>>> When the jury finds that the person you accused of being pregnant is in
>>> fact not pregnant, then, ipso facto, your initial allegation/charge is
>>> false.
>>
>> If the woman in question had put on a great deal of weight and was seen
>> shopping in the maternity section of the store, there was probable cause
>> to believe she was pregnant. That she turned out not to be pregnant
>> doesn't mean the allegation was false.

Ah .. it appears he is confusing "false" with "unreasonable". I take it
that someone pointed that out, and he couldn't (or wouldn't) see the
difference.

FYI see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof#Standard_of_proof


From: Jeckyl on
"Martin Phipps" <martinphipps2(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1178264123.007452.120210(a)n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On May 4, 3:25 pm, "� UltraMan �" <u...(a)man.jp> wrote:
> Jeckyl wrote:
> > "� UltraMan �" <u...(a)man.jp> wrote in message
> >news:59vq7sF2lekskU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> >> Jeckyl wrote:
> >>> "� UltraMan �" <u...(a)man.jp> wrote in message
> >>>news:59vlrtFbi4qnU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> >>>> Strong atheism holds that no god(s) ever proposed by man have
> >>>> been shown to exist, nor is their existance even necessary to
> >>>> explain the universe.
>
> >>> Yes. That is a belief.
>
> >> No
>
> > Does a strong atheist hold that it is true? ifso , then it is a
> > belif of the strong atheist.
>
>> Belief is the absence of Knowledge.
>
>More accurately, belief is the end of reason.

Yes .. because once you have completed your reasoning, the result if a
belief. i.e. once you have proven to yourself that something is true
(usually thru evidence and logical rational though), then you hold it to be
true, and it becomes part of your personal belief system.

Belief really does not mean that there is no proof .. that idea is more
often called "faith" (although faith can also just indicate a higher degree
of confidence in something)