Post by Maverick on Jan 18, 2004 0:47:22 GMT -5
I brought this up on the old message board in this thread.
According to the dictionary, atheism is defined as the following:
In the old thread, I quickly dismissed definitions 2 and 3 on the basis that atheism is not a doctrine or a moral stance. But I want to discuss the first definition with more depth.
My response to the first definition on the old message board was as follows:
Maverick
Someone then tried to argue that definition 1 was valid because it states that there is an "or" between the the "disbelief in" and "denial of" (allowing for the possibility that some ascribe to one portion of the definition while others ascribe to the second).
But I then argued (based on the definition of "deny" that the other person posted) that definition 1 is still incorrect. My response was the following:
Maverick
Does anyone agree/disagree with my argument?
According to the dictionary, atheism is defined as the following:
1. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
2. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
3. Godlessness; immorality.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
2. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
3. Godlessness; immorality.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
In the old thread, I quickly dismissed definitions 2 and 3 on the basis that atheism is not a doctrine or a moral stance. But I want to discuss the first definition with more depth.
My response to the first definition on the old message board was as follows:
Maverick
1. This definition is almost correct. The only thing that makes it incorrect is the addition of the word: denial. Atheists do not deny that a god exists - in order to do so they would have to believe in one first. They don't believe in a deity's existence. Denial is not a part of atheism. (Sadly, even atheists still adhere to the denial part of this flawed definition - even though being an atheist that denies god isn't logically possible.)
Someone then tried to argue that definition 1 was valid because it states that there is an "or" between the the "disbelief in" and "denial of" (allowing for the possibility that some ascribe to one portion of the definition while others ascribe to the second).
But I then argued (based on the definition of "deny" that the other person posted) that definition 1 is still incorrect. My response was the following:
Maverick
As I look at the OED definition of "denial", I see no problem with the way it is definied in sentences 1, 2, and 4. The third sentence is the one I take issue with.
(OED definition of "deny" quoted.)
I do not "refuse to admit the truth of" theism because I don't believe it is truth in the first place. It doesn't make logical sense for me to deny the truth of something that I don't believe is true. It's like admitting the fallacy behind something that I don't believe is fallicious.
There is a contradiction of declarations, if you will. In the first part of the sentence you are stating that you reject something and in the second part you are admitting that there is truth to what you rejected. It makes it sound as if you believe and disbelieve in a god simultaneously - which is not logically possible.
(OED definition of "deny" quoted.)
I do not "refuse to admit the truth of" theism because I don't believe it is truth in the first place. It doesn't make logical sense for me to deny the truth of something that I don't believe is true. It's like admitting the fallacy behind something that I don't believe is fallicious.
There is a contradiction of declarations, if you will. In the first part of the sentence you are stating that you reject something and in the second part you are admitting that there is truth to what you rejected. It makes it sound as if you believe and disbelieve in a god simultaneously - which is not logically possible.
Does anyone agree/disagree with my argument?