Are atheists materialists?

[WinterBorn]

And still, you do not answer my question.

My belief is that a deity does not exist. Not much to discuss. If I said I do not collect stamps, would you want me to discuss not collecting stamps?

I disagree that the beginning of existence is a seminal event for our beliefs or lack thereof. It happened in the distant past, regardless of which source you believe. That the universe exists is what is relevant. How I live my life is the seminal event. Each interaction with the universe, and especially the lives in it, is the continuous seminal event that defines my life. Not some interstellar example of physics or a myth concerning a hidden deity that waved his hands and made everything appear.

I did answer your question. Your question was why do I feel the need to categorize people. I don't do it the way you think I do. I gave you a very honest and thoughtful answer. See posts #294 and 296.

Those were very good answers as to how. But I asked why.

You are asking me to answer a false premise. When did you stop beating your wife? That's a favorite line of atheist's, right?

No, I am not. I asked why you choose to ignore a very simple definition of the word "atheist" and choose to categorize people based on your perceptions of their beliefs. And then argue that they are not what they claim, despite their beliefs fitting the definition of the word perfectly.

Why do you care what I believe? Does it offend you? Are you defined by my beliefs?

Offend me? lol Not at all. No, I am not defined by your beliefs. Neither are my beliefs redefined or changed because you wish to change or expand the definition of "atheist". But I have no qualms about correcting you when you misstate my beliefs, or attempt to redefine the term.

Why do you care that I am an atheist who believes in things incorporeal? You cannot say that you do not. You have argued for many pages and even started multiple threads in which your issues with my beliefs were discussed.

 

[WinterBorn]

You are planting nothing.

As for your two methods of describing atheists, how you describe them does not change them in the least. Nor does it change the definition of the word. And the definition of the word "atheist" does not describe how they view the world or its origins, other than to say they do not believe a deity was involved.

Only time will tell. It takes a while for a seed to sprout.

Exactly, things are what they are. There is a final state of fact. Objective truth is arrived at through a conflict and confusion process. That's what we're doing here now.

Do you know why truth is discovered? Not how... why?

You obviously think very highly of the effect your words have on others. For someone who refuses to listen, and demands that accepted definitions are incomplete, you certainly expect others to accept your definitions and to listen.

Are yo going to answer my question... Do you know why truth is discovered? Not how... why?

People seek the truth for a variety of reasons.

That isn't the question I asked. Independent of people, do you know why truth is discovered?

If it is independent of people, who discovers the truth?

 

[ding]

Discovering truth has nothing to do with people seeking truth. Lot's of people seek truth and don't find truth.

 

[ding]

Only time will tell. It takes a while for a seed to sprout.

Exactly, things are what they are. There is a final state of fact. Objective truth is arrived at through a conflict and confusion process. That's what we're doing here now.

Do you know why truth is discovered? Not how... why?

You obviously think very highly of the effect your words have on others. For someone who refuses to listen, and demands that accepted definitions are incomplete, you certainly expect others to accept your definitions and to listen.

Are yo going to answer my question... Do you know why truth is discovered? Not how... why?

People seek the truth for a variety of reasons.

That isn't the question I asked. Independent of people, do you know why truth is discovered?

If it is independent of people, who discovers the truth?

Yes. It's really quite simple and obvious at least it was to me AFTER I heard it said.

 

[WinterBorn]

You obviously think very highly of the effect your words have on others. For someone who refuses to listen, and demands that accepted definitions are incomplete, you certainly expect others to accept your definitions and to listen.

Are yo going to answer my question... Do you know why truth is discovered? Not how... why?

People seek the truth for a variety of reasons.

That isn't the question I asked. Independent of people, do you know why truth is discovered?

If it is independent of people, who discovers the truth?

Yes. It's really quite simple and obvious.

Is it? Then stop bandying it around trying to sound better, and tell us why you think truth is discovered. I guess we won't know who discovers it, since you have already stipulated "independent of people".

 

[ding]

I did answer your question. Your question was why do I feel the need to categorize people. I don't do it the way you think I do. I gave you a very honest and thoughtful answer. See posts #294 and 296.

Those were very good answers as to how. But I asked why.

You are asking me to answer a false premise. When did you stop beating your wife? That's a favorite line of atheist's, right?

No, I am not. I asked why you choose to ignore a very simple definition of the word "atheist" and choose to categorize people based on your perceptions of their beliefs. And then argue that they are not what they claim, despite their beliefs fitting the definition of the word perfectly.

Why do you care what I believe? Does it offend you? Are you defined by my beliefs?

Offend me? lol Not at all. No, I am not defined by your beliefs. Neither are my beliefs redefined or changed because you wish to change or expand the definition of "atheist". But I have no qualms about correcting you when you misstate my beliefs, or attempt to redefine the term.

Why do you care that I am an atheist who believes in things incorporeal? You cannot say that you do not. You have argued for many pages and even started multiple threads in which your issues with my beliefs were discussed.

I don't care that you believe in spirits and life forces. So I absolutely can say that. I don't believe it is true. I know you believe it is true. Just as I believe it is false. The truth will be discovered eventually or maybe not. I'm good either way.

 

[WinterBorn]

You obviously think very highly of the effect your words have on others. For someone who refuses to listen, and demands that accepted definitions are incomplete, you certainly expect others to accept your definitions and to listen.

Are yo going to answer my question... Do you know why truth is discovered? Not how... why?

People seek the truth for a variety of reasons.

That isn't the question I asked. Independent of people, do you know why truth is discovered?

If it is independent of people, who discovers the truth?

Yes. It's really quite simple and obvious at least it was to me AFTER I heard it said.

And?

 

[ding]

Are yo going to answer my question... Do you know why truth is discovered? Not how... why?

People seek the truth for a variety of reasons.

That isn't the question I asked. Independent of people, do you know why truth is discovered?

If it is independent of people, who discovers the truth?

Yes. It's really quite simple and obvious.

Is it? Then stop bandying it around trying to sound better, and tell us why you think truth is discovered. I guess we won't know who discovers it, since you have already stipulated "independent of people".

Because error cannot stand eventually it fails. Truth doesn't. Truth stands precisely because it is true.

 

[WinterBorn]

Those were very good answers as to how. But I asked why.

You are asking me to answer a false premise. When did you stop beating your wife? That's a favorite line of atheist's, right?

No, I am not. I asked why you choose to ignore a very simple definition of the word "atheist" and choose to categorize people based on your perceptions of their beliefs. And then argue that they are not what they claim, despite their beliefs fitting the definition of the word perfectly.

Why do you care what I believe? Does it offend you? Are you defined by my beliefs?

Offend me? lol Not at all. No, I am not defined by your beliefs. Neither are my beliefs redefined or changed because you wish to change or expand the definition of "atheist". But I have no qualms about correcting you when you misstate my beliefs, or attempt to redefine the term.

Why do you care that I am an atheist who believes in things incorporeal? You cannot say that you do not. You have argued for many pages and even started multiple threads in which your issues with my beliefs were discussed.

I don't care that you believe in spirits and life forces. So I absolutely can say that. I don't believe it is true. I know you believe it is true. Just as I believe it is false. The truth will be discovered eventually or maybe not. I'm good either way.

You don't believe what is true? That I believe in the incorporeal? That I don't believe in a deity?

 

[WinterBorn]

People seek the truth for a variety of reasons.

That isn't the question I asked. Independent of people, do you know why truth is discovered?

If it is independent of people, who discovers the truth?

Yes. It's really quite simple and obvious.

Is it? Then stop bandying it around trying to sound better, and tell us why you think truth is discovered. I guess we won't know who discovers it, since you have already stipulated "independent of people".

Because error cannot stand eventually it fails. Truth doesn't. Truth stands precisely because it is true.

Not necessarily.

 

[ding]

Are yo going to answer my question... Do you know why truth is discovered? Not how... why?

People seek the truth for a variety of reasons.

That isn't the question I asked. Independent of people, do you know why truth is discovered?

If it is independent of people, who discovers the truth?

Yes. It's really quite simple and obvious at least it was to me AFTER I heard it said.

And?

I answered it in post #328, but now I will ask you if you know why standards exist?

 

[ding]

That isn't the question I asked. Independent of people, do you know why truth is discovered?

If it is independent of people, who discovers the truth?

Yes. It's really quite simple and obvious.

Is it? Then stop bandying it around trying to sound better, and tell us why you think truth is discovered. I guess we won't know who discovers it, since you have already stipulated "independent of people".

Because error cannot stand eventually it fails. Truth doesn't. Truth stands precisely because it is true.

Not necessarily.

Then forget about it. Never think of it again.

 

[WinterBorn]

If it is independent of people, who discovers the truth?

Yes. It's really quite simple and obvious.

Is it? Then stop bandying it around trying to sound better, and tell us why you think truth is discovered. I guess we won't know who discovers it, since you have already stipulated "independent of people".

Because error cannot stand eventually it fails. Truth doesn't. Truth stands precisely because it is true.

Not necessarily.

Then forget about it. Never think of it again.

I have no doubt it will pop up in my head again. But then, so do things from other discussions, things I read in works of fiction, ect.

 

[WinterBorn]

People seek the truth for a variety of reasons.

That isn't the question I asked. Independent of people, do you know why truth is discovered?

If it is independent of people, who discovers the truth?

Yes. It's really quite simple and obvious at least it was to me AFTER I heard it said.

And?

I answered it in post #328, but now I will ask you if you know why standards exist?

Define "standards".

 

[ding]

You are asking me to answer a false premise. When did you stop beating your wife? That's a favorite line of atheist's, right?

No, I am not. I asked why you choose to ignore a very simple definition of the word "atheist" and choose to categorize people based on your perceptions of their beliefs. And then argue that they are not what they claim, despite their beliefs fitting the definition of the word perfectly.

Why do you care what I believe? Does it offend you? Are you defined by my beliefs?

Offend me? lol Not at all. No, I am not defined by your beliefs. Neither are my beliefs redefined or changed because you wish to change or expand the definition of "atheist". But I have no qualms about correcting you when you misstate my beliefs, or attempt to redefine the term.

Why do you care that I am an atheist who believes in things incorporeal? You cannot say that you do not. You have argued for many pages and even started multiple threads in which your issues with my beliefs were discussed.

I don't care that you believe in spirits and life forces. So I absolutely can say that. I don't believe it is true. I know you believe it is true. Just as I believe it is false. The truth will be discovered eventually or maybe not. I'm good either way.

You don't believe what is true? That I believe in the incorporeal? That I don't believe in a deity?

That atheists believe that everything didn't proceed from the material world. You can call it whatever you want. It doesn't change the fact that you believe that human life has a higher meaning.

If, as claimed by humanism, man were born only to be happy, he would not be born to die. Since his body is doomed to death, his task on earth evidently must be more spiritual: not a total engrossment in everyday life, not the search for the best ways to obtain material goods and then their carefree consumption. It has to be the fulfillment of a permanent, earnest duty so that one's life journey may become above all an experience of moral growth: to leave life a better human being than one started it. Solzhenitsyn

 

[ding]

That isn't the question I asked. Independent of people, do you know why truth is discovered?

If it is independent of people, who discovers the truth?

Yes. It's really quite simple and obvious at least it was to me AFTER I heard it said.

And?

I answered it in post #328, but now I will ask you if you know why standards exist?

Define "standards".

Standards: a level of quality or attainment.

But you aren't going to find the answer in the definition.

You will have better luck answering the question I asked by answering why was George Washington buried on a hill or which president wore the biggest shoes.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, I am not. I asked why you choose to ignore a very simple definition of the word "atheist" and choose to categorize people based on your perceptions of their beliefs. And then argue that they are not what they claim, despite their beliefs fitting the definition of the word perfectly.

Why do you care what I believe? Does it offend you? Are you defined by my beliefs?

Offend me? lol Not at all. No, I am not defined by your beliefs. Neither are my beliefs redefined or changed because you wish to change or expand the definition of "atheist". But I have no qualms about correcting you when you misstate my beliefs, or attempt to redefine the term.

Why do you care that I am an atheist who believes in things incorporeal? You cannot say that you do not. You have argued for many pages and even started multiple threads in which your issues with my beliefs were discussed.

I don't care that you believe in spirits and life forces. So I absolutely can say that. I don't believe it is true. I know you believe it is true. Just as I believe it is false. The truth will be discovered eventually or maybe not. I'm good either way.

You don't believe what is true? That I believe in the incorporeal? That I don't believe in a deity?

That atheists believe that everything didn't proceed from the material world. You can call it whatever you want. It doesn't change the fact that you believe that human life has a higher meaning.

If, as claimed by humanism, man were born only to be happy, he would not be born to die. Since his body is doomed to death, his task on earth evidently must be more spiritual: not a total engrossment in everyday life, not the search for the best ways to obtain material goods and then their carefree consumption. It has to be the fulfillment of a permanent, earnest duty so that one's life journey may become above all an experience of moral growth: to leave life a better human being than one started it. Solzhenitsyn

Yet again, you are trying to redefine the term "atheist". Nothing in the accepted definition of the word addresses any higher meaning or belief in the incorporeal. The definition is what it is. It is defined as one who does not believe in any deity. Nothing more.

 

[WinterBorn]

If it is independent of people, who discovers the truth?

Yes. It's really quite simple and obvious at least it was to me AFTER I heard it said.

And?

I answered it in post #328, but now I will ask you if you know why standards exist?

Define "standards".

Standards: a level of quality or attainment.

But you aren't going to find the answer in the definition.

You will have better luck answering the question I asked by answering why was George Washington buried on a hill or which president wore the biggest shoes.

I asked because you have a habit of using your own definitions.

The standard for atheism is not believing in any god or deity. That is the sum total of the meaning of the word.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, I am not. I asked why you choose to ignore a very simple definition of the word "atheist" and choose to categorize people based on your perceptions of their beliefs. And then argue that they are not what they claim, despite their beliefs fitting the definition of the word perfectly.

Why do you care what I believe? Does it offend you? Are you defined by my beliefs?

Offend me? lol Not at all. No, I am not defined by your beliefs. Neither are my beliefs redefined or changed because you wish to change or expand the definition of "atheist". But I have no qualms about correcting you when you misstate my beliefs, or attempt to redefine the term.

Why do you care that I am an atheist who believes in things incorporeal? You cannot say that you do not. You have argued for many pages and even started multiple threads in which your issues with my beliefs were discussed.

I don't care that you believe in spirits and life forces. So I absolutely can say that. I don't believe it is true. I know you believe it is true. Just as I believe it is false. The truth will be discovered eventually or maybe not. I'm good either way.

You don't believe what is true? That I believe in the incorporeal? That I don't believe in a deity?

That atheists believe that everything didn't proceed from the material world. You can call it whatever you want. It doesn't change the fact that you believe that human life has a higher meaning.

That also does not change the fact that I am an atheist.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Are atheists materialists?
⁜→ denmark, et al,

Yes, I do not think I could challenge that particular take on me; although I still think I have an open mind. After all, we can discuss attributes that we would like to be assigned to any deity, and even go rounds on the topic of what we do not know about the attributes and characteristics of a deity.

RE: Are atheists materialists?
⁜→ denmark, et al,

How could anyone actually know anything about a 'Supernatural Entity?"

It is sad that so few are honest. Most appear to support their cultural or family views.
I doubt ANYONE “knows” about any supernatural entity.

(COMMENT)

To know something about a manifestation, you have to be able to define it relative to a given reality. How do you do that?

That is like saying you know something about the Supreme Being? First, you have to tell me what a Supreme Being is, and how I would be able to distinguish it from a parlor trick.

Most Respectfully,
R

I think your position is “ignosticism”, based on a discussion i had with a practical philosopher.
A variant of agnosticism?

(COMMENT)

The term "God" is a very specific deity. That deity may be a different "principal object of faith" (faith-based) from religion to religion, but within the religion, characteristics of the deity seems to be clear.

It appears to me that the Supreme Being for the Catholics, is a kind of "associative" identity (The Father, The Son, The Holy Ghost → multiple attributes that describe a single relationship with each person), as opposed to a "dissociative" identity disorder (multiple personalities → one benevolent, encouraging growth and development with time - while another - one dark, lethal, unforgiving and forcefully condemning).

Most Respectfully,
R