What being an atheist means in practical terms

Language isn't math, though math can in a way be a language.

 

Who needs comedy central considering the crazy bullshit we always see on here!

Mathematical language
6. Summary
In summary, mathematical symbols are a precise form of shorthand. They have to have meaning
for you. To help with understanding you have context and convention.
http://www.mash.dept.shef.ac.uk/Resources/web-mathlanguage.pdf

 

Avoiding the relevant question again?

 

You do have to admit, as cranky crackpots go, he's mildly entertaining.

 

I pray to a secular material god, Unlike atheists that Huxley see as liars, I can prove my god is real.

are you having trouble comprehending what the word conditions mean, seems like it?
Here I will give you a pretty picture that will clear things up for you.




Maybe you are a super genius and can think of some other equation that matches the condition of: 2 balls on the left and 2 balls on the right, that when combined (added) together become 4 balls total.

So to spell it out, sure there are an infinite number of equations and their corresponding conditions that can come up with 4, however there is only one set of conditions that match 2+2

I told you I do, I even repeat posted it in this post, why dont you simply read what I post?

 

if you can avoid stepping in all the bird ****.

post 97, try reading it, you will find your answer there grasshopper

 

On the contrary 2+2 has only one set of conditions see graphic LOL
Post 97





* Delusion:When you have lost the battle and you give up on reality and let the disorder rule. You begin living your own delusions. Sometimes this is a total break from reality. Other times, it is a total belief of a distorted thought that started out in denial. https://psychcentral.com/blog/humor/2015/11/defense-mechanism-is-denial-distortion-delusion

 

You continue to be disingenuous. It’s a bore. Yawn*

 

Does this spiritualism include a belief in a hereafter that provides the meaning and hope? I refer you to my post 80 for relevance. I describe myself as an agnostic atheist. I promise you nobody will have to defend their personal beliefs against my posts. I respect your right to define your beliefs, label them and hold them and expect you to do the same for me.

 

Thats a big problem this poster has. He gets to pick his favorite definition for your belief system and ignore all alternatives for my belief system. He gets to use an anti -intellectual version of white- out whenever someone provides a panoply of sources, links, and citations to definitions of terms like agnostic, theist and atheist that do not conform to his agenda. He prefers to quote only definitions that are between 75 and 100 years old that conform to his simplistic understanding and his agenda and freeze any changes in the language that reflect nuance, diversity or growth.

We are supposed to just put up with it so he can define agnostic atheism out of existance. I have had to deal with a couple of atheists and theists that are incredibly threatened by agnostic atheism on these sites. They prefer black hats and white hats to hats with gray rims, or beige bands. They just can't agree one which of them is wearing the black hat and which the white hat, but they have nothing but hate for anyone who dares to put on something else.

 

You hit the nail on the head there.

 

Well said. And the irony is, he pretends he is agnostic.

 

LMAO you proved you have no clue what agnostic even is and listen to you now!

YOu should learn to understand the english language, something brits cant seem to comprehend.
your agnostic-atheist is bullshit, they sold you wooden nickels, and you are none the wiser, even today.

Ever hear of Grammarly? The really smart people that do understand the english language? Ever hear of them?

Ever hear of huxley? The inventor of the word agnostic? Of course you did.

Well they are people sunk your nonsense theories and there you are blaming the messenger, making up and projecting all sorts of bullshit that anyone who can read knows it fabricated falsification, because you cant handle the truth.

 

Unfortunately the dictionaries only print popular usage thus promoting an ad populum fallacy for its readers to use out here. How its popularly used and how it was meant to be used are often 2 or more different things

Sure:

Thomas Huxley was openly skeptical, as the biographer Janet Browne describes:

....A few months later, he was to coin the word "agnostic" to describe his own position as neither a believer nor a disbeliever, but one who considered himself free to inquire rationally into the basis of knowledge, a philosopher of pure reason [...] The term fitted him well [...] and it caught the attention of the other free thinking, rational doubters in Huxley's ambit, and came to signify a particularly active form of scientific rationalism during the final decades of the 19th century. [...] In his hands, agnosticism became as doctrinaire as anything else--a religion of skepticism. Huxley used it as a creed that would place him on a higher moral plane than even bishops and archbishops. All the evidence would nevertheless suggest that Huxley was sincere in his rejection of the charge of outright atheism against himself. He refused to be "a liar". To inquire rigorously into the spiritual domain, he asserted, was a more elevated undertaking than slavishly to believe or disbelieve. "A deep sense of religion is compatible with the entire absence of theology," he had told [Anglican clergyman] Charles Kingsley back in 1860. "Pope Huxley", the [magazine] Spectator dubbed him. The label stuck." —Janet Browne[11]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism


What Does Agnosticism Mean?

In the religious sense of the word, agnosticism means neither believing in nor disbelieving the existence of God. Religious agnostics say “We don’t know whether there is a God or not; it cannot be known.”

The problem you are faced with using agnostic-xxxxx is that:
You cant rationally accept and reject atheism at the same time, unless you are a bird of course.
Likewise you cant rationally accept and reject theism at the same time, again unless you are a bird of course.

So thats how agnostic applies to theist, atheist, pantheist, whatever, continuing.

But that’s only one of the ways the term agnosticism is used.

In the general, non-religious sense, agnosticism means being undecided or uncommitted to a particular side of a debate or disagreement.

People who are politically agnostic don’t side with one political party or candidate. Someone who is brand agnostic is not loyal to any particular brand when buying products. In computing, “platform agnostic” is a term that describes software that runs well on different platforms. “Device agnostic” describes software designed to work on various devices, such as computers, tablets, or mobile phones.

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/what-is-agnosticism/

Its simply irrational if not delusional to join agnostic position with any other position since agnostic specifically means not taking a position.


Cry me a river kiddies!
Hows living in the titanic working out for ya?

 

He doesn't realize that's how language works and changes over time, and is why we have multiple languages and multiple versions of each. Language is what people use sounds and symbols to mean. That often changes over time and often words have multiple meanings. Dictionaries try to keep track of the current popular meanings of these word sounds. It really isn't complicated, unless you are so stuck up your own ass that you think others will all use words as you demand they do.

 

So when you gonna come up with some new material? I really dont understand where you people think you can go with your long debunked atheology that has proven to be a massive failure in logic and reason on literally every issue you try to pedal out here. Didnt anyone go to college?

Below is the CORRECT GRAMMAR, you know from the experts at grammar, GRAMMARLY, they are really smart people and they understand grammar.

What Does Agnosticism Mean?

In the religious sense of the word, agnosticism means neither believing in nor disbelieving the existence of God. Religious agnostics say “We don’t know whether there is a God or not; it cannot be known.”

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/what-is-agnosticism/



You cant rationally accept and reject atheism at the same time, unless you are a bird of course.
Likewise you cant rationally accept and reject theism at the same time, again unless you are a bird of course.

I bet the people that never went to college wish they were as smart as grammarly and were able to understand the meaning of agnostic so they can have an intelligent conversation!

 

false they track popular usage, and neoatheists that lack formal education use it to engage in forcing the rest of us into accepting their out of context bar room ad populum fallacies as I have proven. Not gonna happen here pal. whine all you like.

false assertion! nothing has changed,

are you seriously going to pretend and falsify that the grammarly quote is outdated when they have only been around for a few years considering agnostic has been understood for well over 100.

words have meaning regardless if you and your neoatheist pals do not like that meaning.

coming from you, a person that thinks atheists can also be theists, really?

and then claiming math is not a language only a couple posts ago!

Who do you think is goign to take you seriously spouting that level of over the top foolishness

 

the last thing I would ever expect from a neoatheist is an 'in context' debate, when there are no rules preventing them from cheating and posting disinformation

I demand PROPER CONTEXT, a small minority of (mostly brit) neoatheists demand we use their out of context revisionist bullshit.

Huxley, remember him? The guy that created and defined the word 'agnostic'?

Huxley 'loathed' atheism!

(Understandably, just look at all the nutty **** they post out here)

Defining agnosticism
Agnosticism is of the essence of science, whether ancient or modern. It simply means that a man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe. Consequently, agnosticism puts aside not only the greater part of popular theology, but also the greater part of anti-theology. On the whole, the "bosh" of heterodoxy is more offensive to me than that of orthodoxy, because heterodoxy professes to be guided by reason and science, and orthodoxy does not.[10]
— Thomas Henry Huxley

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism


His nice way of saying neoatheists are all ****ing hypocrites pedaling lies under the guise of logic and reason! lol

 

Plenty has changed. The entire English language evolved from earlier language. It was not created de novo in a lab. And it has changed over time to the point that you couldn't understand people speaking early English.

Words have multiple meanings, and it isn't your "neoatheists" who are demanding we all use only one meaning of a word. It is you. You are the one demanding people use words as you want them to, and pretending they did when they made it clear they used the word with a different meaning. Others seem capable of understanding and adapting to whatever meaning is clearly being used for whatever word. Why you can't or refuse to do so is a mystery.

I never said atheists can be theists. I don't know where you invented that one from to try to assign to me.

I didn't say that either. Try to follow what people actually write. I said that Language is not math, and that math often is a language.

I can read the room better than you. I'm being taken more seriously than you are. As it is the case in pretty much every thread I see you in. You have a habit of crackpottery that makes people not take you seriously at all.

 

Not in a month LOL

and each meaning has a different context, you simply dont get it

the hell you didnt

I proved language is math

FALSE
Language is math
In order to be considered a language, a system of communication must have vocabulary, grammar, syntax, and people who use and understand it. Mathematics meets this definition of a language. ... Math is a universal language. The symbols and organization to form equations are the same in every country of the world.Sep 26, 2020

Why Mathematics Is a Language | Mathnasium

Only by your little clan of believers that prove beyond a shadow of doubt they are hypocrites when they post nonsense like agnostic-atheist, a direct contradiction in terms, and they arent educated enough to figure out how foolish they sound out here.

I post citations proving my points, you post nonsense armchair opinions that you dont even understand much less even capable of explaining yet you pretend you are some kind of authority in grammar and logic.

Huxley loathed atheists!

 

I didn't. You should stop lying.

No you didn't. You have a habit of claiming something and then later pretending that you proved it.

Hint: Math being a language doesn't make language math, in the same way that a dog is a mammal, but mammal doesn't mean dog. Cats and rats exist. As does language that is not math.

Only under your insisted meanings of the terms, which they have explicitly stated they are not using. It is not a contradiction the way that they are using the terms.

Irrelevant.

 

yes you did and I am not surprised you deny it.
yes I did, nice false analogy
you first have to understand grammar and context before you can be capable of recognizing a proof. Not my problem.

Thanks for proving you advocate out of context usage!
It is a contradiction as was proven several times in my thread.
Its not possible to be an agnostic-atheist and claim to be rational at the same time.
It is popular with a small segment of militant neoatheists though.

 

Note how you can't quote me saying any such thing. It is probably something you invented with your word equivocation games.

I understand both, and yes it is your problem when you claim to prove something you didn't and that nobody but you thinks you did.

You pretend that all you want. You didn't prove any such thing, and we all see that but you.

Again, that entirely depends on how the speaker defines the terms. You want to force particular usage of terms onto others, and you pretend they say something they don't and contradict themselves when they don't. It is nothing but equivocation error on your part, and again everyone but you can see that.

 

......"turn into a Koko inspired mental circle jerk per usual."

 

And you did it again! You are a theist trying to hobble agnostic atheism with a century's old definition of agnosticism that you prefer we live with, because agnostic atheism so damned inconvenient for you to deal with in your trite, boring and useless war against atheism. That's not our problem, it's not our war and we won't do it.