Are atheists materialists?

[ding]

Engineering is the commercial application of science.

What is your background?

Academic psychology.

Excellent. So you are versed in the study of the human mind. What training have you had in natural sciences?

I will not expand on my specific credentials, but my breath includes some physical & biological sciences, but mostly behavioral sciences.

Basic undergraduate classes. Probably more on biology and chemistry than physics.

Did you disagree with my definitions on engineering and science?

“Engineering is the commercial application of science.”
That sounds accurate.

Thank you. How about the definition I provided on science? Do you agree with that one as well?

 

[WinterBorn]

How about "incorporeal things which did not originate from corporeal things"? Saves you trying to say I believe in a soul that is animated by a mover, or some such nonsense.

Can you give me an example of something that is incorporeal that did not originate from something that was corporeal?

Because that literally describes a spirit which is outside of the material world.

Calling it a spirit implies it is sentient. I never said that.

Let me know when you can provide an example.

Let me know when you will provide your definition of "atheist".

I already did. Someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. That no spirits exist that did not originate from the material world. Your turn.

So you define an atheist as someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. In other words, you define atheists as materialists. And then you start a thread asking if atheists are materialists? lol ok

And do you have a source for this definition?

 

[ding]

Can you give me an example of something that is incorporeal that did not originate from something that was corporeal?

Because that literally describes a spirit which is outside of the material world.

Calling it a spirit implies it is sentient. I never said that.

Let me know when you can provide an example.

Let me know when you will provide your definition of "atheist".

I already did. Someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. That no spirits exist that did not originate from the material world. Your turn.

So you define an atheist as someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. In other words, you define atheists as materialists. And then you start a thread asking if atheists are materialists? lol ok

And do you have a source for this definition?

You want to argue with me about my definition? You asked for my definition and I provided it.

So now will you provide an example of your belief of something which is incorporeal that did not proceed from something that was corporeal?

After all that is the subject of the OP.

 

[WinterBorn]

Calling it a spirit implies it is sentient. I never said that.

Let me know when you can provide an example.

Let me know when you will provide your definition of "atheist".

I already did. Someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. That no spirits exist that did not originate from the material world. Your turn.

So you define an atheist as someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. In other words, you define atheists as materialists. And then you start a thread asking if atheists are materialists? lol ok

And do you have a source for this definition?

You want to argue with me about my definition? You asked for my definition and I provided it.

So now will you provide an example of your belief of something which is incorporeal that did not proceed from something that was corporeal?

After all that is the subject of the OP.

Oh I see. I provide you with the standard definition from Merriam Webster and from the Oxford English dictionary, which you have argued with this entire discussion. But I simply asked for your definition and then its source, and you get defensive? lol Too funny.

 

[ding]

Let me know when you can provide an example.

Let me know when you will provide your definition of "atheist".

I already did. Someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. That no spirits exist that did not originate from the material world. Your turn.

So you define an atheist as someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. In other words, you define atheists as materialists. And then you start a thread asking if atheists are materialists? lol ok

And do you have a source for this definition?

You want to argue with me about my definition? You asked for my definition and I provided it.

So now will you provide an example of your belief of something which is incorporeal that did not proceed from something that was corporeal?

After all that is the subject of the OP.

Oh I see. I provide you with the standard definition from Merriam Webster and from the Oxford English dictionary, which you have argued with this entire discussion. But I simply asked for your definition and then its source, and you get defensive? lol Too funny.

I’m not defensive. I don’t care if you agree with my definition.

I think you are stalling.

You made a statement that you believe there are incorporeal things that did not proceed or originate from the corporeal. This was your basis for saying you are not a materialist which is the subject of this OP.

So when I asked you for an example instead of providing one, you tried to claim I never answered your question about providing my definition of an atheist which I did provide previously. So when I provided it a second time you tried to argue on the validity of my definition.

You are stalling because whichever way you answer it you will either prove that you are a materialist or that you believe in spirits. Which is the in between position that you cannot logically defend. You lose either way and that is why you will never provide an honest answer. I have presented you with your conflict in belief.

 

[WinterBorn]

Let me know when you will provide your definition of "atheist".

I already did. Someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. That no spirits exist that did not originate from the material world. Your turn.

So you define an atheist as someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. In other words, you define atheists as materialists. And then you start a thread asking if atheists are materialists? lol ok

And do you have a source for this definition?

You want to argue with me about my definition? You asked for my definition and I provided it.

So now will you provide an example of your belief of something which is incorporeal that did not proceed from something that was corporeal?

After all that is the subject of the OP.

Oh I see. I provide you with the standard definition from Merriam Webster and from the Oxford English dictionary, which you have argued with this entire discussion. But I simply asked for your definition and then its source, and you get defensive? lol Too funny.

I’m not defensive. I don’t care if you agree with my definition.

I think you are stalling.

You made a statement that you believe there are incorporeal things that did not proceed or originate from the corporeal. This was your basis for saying you are not a materialist which is the subject of this OP.

So when I asked you for an example instead of providing one, you tried to claim I never answered your question about providing my definition of an atheist which I did provide previously. So when I provided it a second time you tried to argue on the validity of my definition.

You are stalling because whichever way you answer it you will either prove that you are a materialist or that you believe in spirits. Which is the in between position that you cannot logically defend. You lose either way and that is why you will never provide an honest answer. I have presented you with your conflict in belief.

I do not lose at all. I have stated that I believe in incorporeal things that did not originate from the corporeal. That belief means I am not a materialist. I also stated, and your reportedly believe me, that I do not believe in god. Which makes me, by standard, accepted definitions, an atheist.

But no, I don't think I need to provide examples. What I have already said shows my point. And your propensity for rewording my answers shows you are not really interested in my answer, but in trying to exploit it.

 

[ding]

I already did. Someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. That no spirits exist that did not originate from the material world. Your turn.

So you define an atheist as someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. In other words, you define atheists as materialists. And then you start a thread asking if atheists are materialists? lol ok

And do you have a source for this definition?

You want to argue with me about my definition? You asked for my definition and I provided it.

So now will you provide an example of your belief of something which is incorporeal that did not proceed from something that was corporeal?

After all that is the subject of the OP.

Oh I see. I provide you with the standard definition from Merriam Webster and from the Oxford English dictionary, which you have argued with this entire discussion. But I simply asked for your definition and then its source, and you get defensive? lol Too funny.

I’m not defensive. I don’t care if you agree with my definition.

I think you are stalling.

You made a statement that you believe there are incorporeal things that did not proceed or originate from the corporeal. This was your basis for saying you are not a materialist which is the subject of this OP.

So when I asked you for an example instead of providing one, you tried to claim I never answered your question about providing my definition of an atheist which I did provide previously. So when I provided it a second time you tried to argue on the validity of my definition.

You are stalling because whichever way you answer it you will either prove that you are a materialist or that you believe in spirits. Which is the in between position that you cannot logically defend. You lose either way and that is why you will never provide an honest answer. I have presented you with your conflict in belief.

I do not lose at all. I have stated that I believe in incorporeal things that did not originate from the corporeal. That belief means I am not a materialist. I also stated, and your reportedly believe me, that I do not believe in god. Which makes me, by standard, accepted definitions, an atheist.

But no, I don't think I need to provide examples. What I have already said shows my point. And your propensity for rewording my answers shows you are not really interested in my answer, but in trying to exploit it.

Then provide an example of what you are talking about.

 

[WinterBorn]

So you define an atheist as someone who believes everything proceeded from the material world. In other words, you define atheists as materialists. And then you start a thread asking if atheists are materialists? lol ok

And do you have a source for this definition?

You want to argue with me about my definition? You asked for my definition and I provided it.

So now will you provide an example of your belief of something which is incorporeal that did not proceed from something that was corporeal?

After all that is the subject of the OP.

Oh I see. I provide you with the standard definition from Merriam Webster and from the Oxford English dictionary, which you have argued with this entire discussion. But I simply asked for your definition and then its source, and you get defensive? lol Too funny.

I’m not defensive. I don’t care if you agree with my definition.

I think you are stalling.

You made a statement that you believe there are incorporeal things that did not proceed or originate from the corporeal. This was your basis for saying you are not a materialist which is the subject of this OP.

So when I asked you for an example instead of providing one, you tried to claim I never answered your question about providing my definition of an atheist which I did provide previously. So when I provided it a second time you tried to argue on the validity of my definition.

You are stalling because whichever way you answer it you will either prove that you are a materialist or that you believe in spirits. Which is the in between position that you cannot logically defend. You lose either way and that is why you will never provide an honest answer. I have presented you with your conflict in belief.

I do not lose at all. I have stated that I believe in incorporeal things that did not originate from the corporeal. That belief means I am not a materialist. I also stated, and your reportedly believe me, that I do not believe in god. Which makes me, by standard, accepted definitions, an atheist.

But no, I don't think I need to provide examples. What I have already said shows my point. And your propensity for rewording my answers shows you are not really interested in my answer, but in trying to exploit it.

Then provide an example of what you are talking about.

When I talked about believing in a life force. You changed that to spirit, and then to soul. And then you started with the "you can't be an atheist if you believe you have a soul which a mover uses to animate your soul" or something like that. And then tried to say you used my words verbatim.

 

[ding]

You want to argue with me about my definition? You asked for my definition and I provided it.

So now will you provide an example of your belief of something which is incorporeal that did not proceed from something that was corporeal?

After all that is the subject of the OP.

Oh I see. I provide you with the standard definition from Merriam Webster and from the Oxford English dictionary, which you have argued with this entire discussion. But I simply asked for your definition and then its source, and you get defensive? lol Too funny.

I’m not defensive. I don’t care if you agree with my definition.

I think you are stalling.

You made a statement that you believe there are incorporeal things that did not proceed or originate from the corporeal. This was your basis for saying you are not a materialist which is the subject of this OP.

So when I asked you for an example instead of providing one, you tried to claim I never answered your question about providing my definition of an atheist which I did provide previously. So when I provided it a second time you tried to argue on the validity of my definition.

You are stalling because whichever way you answer it you will either prove that you are a materialist or that you believe in spirits. Which is the in between position that you cannot logically defend. You lose either way and that is why you will never provide an honest answer. I have presented you with your conflict in belief.

I do not lose at all. I have stated that I believe in incorporeal things that did not originate from the corporeal. That belief means I am not a materialist. I also stated, and your reportedly believe me, that I do not believe in god. Which makes me, by standard, accepted definitions, an atheist.

But no, I don't think I need to provide examples. What I have already said shows my point. And your propensity for rewording my answers shows you are not really interested in my answer, but in trying to exploit it.

Then provide an example of what you are talking about.

When I talked about believing in a life force. You changed that to spirit, and then to soul. And then you started with the "you can't be an atheist if you believe you have a soul which a mover uses to animate your soul" or something like that. And then tried to say you used my words verbatim.

Then put it in your own words.

 

[WinterBorn]

Oh I see. I provide you with the standard definition from Merriam Webster and from the Oxford English dictionary, which you have argued with this entire discussion. But I simply asked for your definition and then its source, and you get defensive? lol Too funny.

I’m not defensive. I don’t care if you agree with my definition.

I think you are stalling.

You made a statement that you believe there are incorporeal things that did not proceed or originate from the corporeal. This was your basis for saying you are not a materialist which is the subject of this OP.

So when I asked you for an example instead of providing one, you tried to claim I never answered your question about providing my definition of an atheist which I did provide previously. So when I provided it a second time you tried to argue on the validity of my definition.

You are stalling because whichever way you answer it you will either prove that you are a materialist or that you believe in spirits. Which is the in between position that you cannot logically defend. You lose either way and that is why you will never provide an honest answer. I have presented you with your conflict in belief.

I do not lose at all. I have stated that I believe in incorporeal things that did not originate from the corporeal. That belief means I am not a materialist. I also stated, and your reportedly believe me, that I do not believe in god. Which makes me, by standard, accepted definitions, an atheist.

But no, I don't think I need to provide examples. What I have already said shows my point. And your propensity for rewording my answers shows you are not really interested in my answer, but in trying to exploit it.

Then provide an example of what you are talking about.

When I talked about believing in a life force. You changed that to spirit, and then to soul. And then you started with the "you can't be an atheist if you believe you have a soul which a mover uses to animate your soul" or something like that. And then tried to say you used my words verbatim.

Then put it in your own words.

That didn't stop you before. Besides, the fact that I have said I believe in the incorporeal that did not originate in the corporeal is sufficient to prove my point.

 

[ding]

I’m not defensive. I don’t care if you agree with my definition.

I think you are stalling.

You made a statement that you believe there are incorporeal things that did not proceed or originate from the corporeal. This was your basis for saying you are not a materialist which is the subject of this OP.

So when I asked you for an example instead of providing one, you tried to claim I never answered your question about providing my definition of an atheist which I did provide previously. So when I provided it a second time you tried to argue on the validity of my definition.

You are stalling because whichever way you answer it you will either prove that you are a materialist or that you believe in spirits. Which is the in between position that you cannot logically defend. You lose either way and that is why you will never provide an honest answer. I have presented you with your conflict in belief.

I do not lose at all. I have stated that I believe in incorporeal things that did not originate from the corporeal. That belief means I am not a materialist. I also stated, and your reportedly believe me, that I do not believe in god. Which makes me, by standard, accepted definitions, an atheist.

But no, I don't think I need to provide examples. What I have already said shows my point. And your propensity for rewording my answers shows you are not really interested in my answer, but in trying to exploit it.

Then provide an example of what you are talking about.

When I talked about believing in a life force. You changed that to spirit, and then to soul. And then you started with the "you can't be an atheist if you believe you have a soul which a mover uses to animate your soul" or something like that. And then tried to say you used my words verbatim.

Then put it in your own words.

That didn't stop you before. Besides, the fact that I have said I believe in the incorporeal that did not originate in the corporeal is sufficient to prove my point.

Except I have no idea what you are talking about. I don’t think you do either. You can’t even provide an example.

 

[Karl Rand]

Let me know when you will provide your definition of "atheist".

Problem is there are many kinds of atheist. You may want to suggest there’s only one kind but many ‘atheists’ want to distinguish their particular form of ‘unbelief’ in differing ways.
I self describe as agnotist simply because to me the term ‘God’ is so riddled with mindless superstition of multiple kinds it’s next to meaningless. I coudn’t begin to describe the entity I was claiming didn’t exist.
Underlying all of this though is that peculiar human terror of ever admitting ‘I don’t know’.

 

[WinterBorn]

I do not lose at all. I have stated that I believe in incorporeal things that did not originate from the corporeal. That belief means I am not a materialist. I also stated, and your reportedly believe me, that I do not believe in god. Which makes me, by standard, accepted definitions, an atheist.

But no, I don't think I need to provide examples. What I have already said shows my point. And your propensity for rewording my answers shows you are not really interested in my answer, but in trying to exploit it.

Then provide an example of what you are talking about.

When I talked about believing in a life force. You changed that to spirit, and then to soul. And then you started with the "you can't be an atheist if you believe you have a soul which a mover uses to animate your soul" or something like that. And then tried to say you used my words verbatim.

Then put it in your own words.

That didn't stop you before. Besides, the fact that I have said I believe in the incorporeal that did not originate in the corporeal is sufficient to prove my point.

Except I have no idea what you are talking about. I don’t think you do either. You can’t even provide an example.

What is difficult about my believing in the incorporeal? We have discussed this all throughout the thread. And now you have no idea what I am talking about?

 

[WinterBorn]

Let me know when you will provide your definition of "atheist".

Problem is there are many kinds of atheist. You may want to suggest there’s only one kind but many ‘atheists’ want to distinguish their particular form of ‘unbelief’ in differing ways.
I self describe as agnotist simply because to me the term ‘God’ is so riddled with mindless superstition of multiple kinds it’s next to meaningless. I coudn’t begin to describe the entity I was claiming didn’t exist.
Underlying all of this though is that peculiar human terror of ever admitting ‘I don’t know’.

ding has, several times, told me I am not an atheist. I fit the standard description standard, but wanted to know his.

And I have no terror of admitting 'I don't know'. ding seems to think my doing so is an admission of a lack of belief or something.

 

[ding]

Then provide an example of what you are talking about.

When I talked about believing in a life force. You changed that to spirit, and then to soul. And then you started with the "you can't be an atheist if you believe you have a soul which a mover uses to animate your soul" or something like that. And then tried to say you used my words verbatim.

Then put it in your own words.

That didn't stop you before. Besides, the fact that I have said I believe in the incorporeal that did not originate in the corporeal is sufficient to prove my point.

Except I have no idea what you are talking about. I don’t think you do either. You can’t even provide an example.

What is difficult about my believing in the incorporeal? We have discussed this all throughout the thread. And now you have no idea what I am talking about?

You mean besides the fact that you can’t provide an example of what you are talking about. And when I try to drill down using the words you used in an attempt to better understand it you say I am putting words in your mouth. The reality is there is no middle ground and that is why you can’t even begin to express your beliefs except in the most minimal way and that is only to deny the reality that everything you believe exists did proceed from the material world.

 

[WinterBorn]

When I talked about believing in a life force. You changed that to spirit, and then to soul. And then you started with the "you can't be an atheist if you believe you have a soul which a mover uses to animate your soul" or something like that. And then tried to say you used my words verbatim.

Then put it in your own words.

That didn't stop you before. Besides, the fact that I have said I believe in the incorporeal that did not originate in the corporeal is sufficient to prove my point.

Except I have no idea what you are talking about. I don’t think you do either. You can’t even provide an example.

What is difficult about my believing in the incorporeal? We have discussed this all throughout the thread. And now you have no idea what I am talking about?

You mean besides the fact that you can’t provide an example of what you are talking about. And when I try to drill down using the words you used in an attempt to better understand it you say I am putting words in your mouth. The reality is there is no middle ground and that is why you can’t even begin to express your beliefs except in the most minimal way and that is only to deny the reality that everything you believe exists did proceed from the material world.

I believe I have provided examples previously. You might want to review the thread.

You didn't rephrase what I said to better understand what I said. In fact, when you used different words (with religious connotations) you were not even talking to me. You were asking other people about their opinion of whether or not I am an atheist. And then, you tried to use their answer. I believe you said "2 other people agree with me that you are not an atheist", or something similar.

If you understand the meaning of the words "incorporeal" and "corporeal", it should be quite easy to understand what I believe without further explanation.

 

[ding]

Then put it in your own words.

That didn't stop you before. Besides, the fact that I have said I believe in the incorporeal that did not originate in the corporeal is sufficient to prove my point.

Except I have no idea what you are talking about. I don’t think you do either. You can’t even provide an example.

What is difficult about my believing in the incorporeal? We have discussed this all throughout the thread. And now you have no idea what I am talking about?

You mean besides the fact that you can’t provide an example of what you are talking about. And when I try to drill down using the words you used in an attempt to better understand it you say I am putting words in your mouth. The reality is there is no middle ground and that is why you can’t even begin to express your beliefs except in the most minimal way and that is only to deny the reality that everything you believe exists did proceed from the material world.

I believe I have provided examples previously. You might want to review the thread.

You didn't rephrase what I said to better understand what I said. In fact, when you used different words (with religious connotations) you were not even talking to me. You were asking other people about their opinion of whether or not I am an atheist. And then, you tried to use their answer. I believe you said "2 other people agree with me that you are not an atheist", or something similar.

If you understand the meaning of the words "incorporeal" and "corporeal", it should be quite easy to understand what I believe without further explanation.

It’s not. Thanks for proving my point there is no middle ground.

 

[WinterBorn]

That didn't stop you before. Besides, the fact that I have said I believe in the incorporeal that did not originate in the corporeal is sufficient to prove my point.

Except I have no idea what you are talking about. I don’t think you do either. You can’t even provide an example.

What is difficult about my believing in the incorporeal? We have discussed this all throughout the thread. And now you have no idea what I am talking about?

You mean besides the fact that you can’t provide an example of what you are talking about. And when I try to drill down using the words you used in an attempt to better understand it you say I am putting words in your mouth. The reality is there is no middle ground and that is why you can’t even begin to express your beliefs except in the most minimal way and that is only to deny the reality that everything you believe exists did proceed from the material world.

I believe I have provided examples previously. You might want to review the thread.

You didn't rephrase what I said to better understand what I said. In fact, when you used different words (with religious connotations) you were not even talking to me. You were asking other people about their opinion of whether or not I am an atheist. And then, you tried to use their answer. I believe you said "2 other people agree with me that you are not an atheist", or something similar.

If you understand the meaning of the words "incorporeal" and "corporeal", it should be quite easy to understand what I believe without further explanation.

It’s not. Thanks for proving my point there is no middle ground.

You're welcome.

Thank you for proving my point as well.

 

[ding]

William James said, "We can act as if there were a God; feel as if we were free; consider Nature as if she were full of special designs; lay plans as if we were to be immortal; and we find then that these words do make a genuine difference in our moral life."

Thus proving we are spiritual beings and were made for more.

 

[WinterBorn]

This only proves that William James claimed it. It does not prove we are spiritual beings.