... the other Black experience
Atheist Deffinition on Dictionary.com
Dictionary.com's definition of Athiest
"a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings."
? this seems very false to me. What is a being? it is simply something that exists. it could be a car, the sun, and idea, it could be anything. its just something that exists.
definition of "being" according to dictionary.com
1.
the fact of existing; existence (as opposed to nonexistence).
2.
conscious, mortal existence; life: Our being is as an instantaneous flash of light in the midst of eternal night.
3.
substance or nature: of such a being as to arouse fear.
4.
something that exists: inanimate beings.
5.
a living thing: strange, exotic beings that live in the depths of the sea.
and then what is the definition of supreme?
1.
highest in rank or authority; paramount; sovereign; chief.
2.
of the highest quality, degree, character, importance, etc.: supreme courage.
3.
greatest, utmost, or extreme: supreme disgust.
4.
last or final; ultimate.
this is the dictionary.com deffinition. So I would take this to be some what of a dictator type thing.
now for example, the sun (a being) and the characteristics that it has supreme like qualities. why? because humans do not have control over it. we can not make it set (make the earth turn around faster so that its not shining on a certain area) we can't make it rise, or the fact that it circulated around the sun. So to say that "a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings." and the sun obviously being a supreme being...is that like saying that atheist don't believe that the sun exists? that sounds obscure right?
P.S.
Earlier I said that ideas can exist. And it probably raised the question "if god is an idea, and it can be a being, then technically god can exist? yes, but only as an idea. Just like St. Patrick's day, or the amount of money, something ware humans have to put their faith into it in order for it to be in existences. and if they didn't, it would be dead. The real question should be, "is god real?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by PhEbE Bee Machine on -
thank you ! :D
-
Permalink Reply by Spookycreep on
-
You're a philosopher. God help you.
-
Permalink Reply by Chris Asrk-pa El on -
Well..
-
Permalink Reply by PolarVibez on -
You make a very compelling point. So.. the defintion should be based on reality of this "existence". And there in lies the rub.No one would ever agree on examples presented as to why god is or is not real. So the definition should read: a person who does not believe in the idea of god as a tangible concept? Maybe. I dunno. One to marinate on. This is just another example of how we are limited by language. Especially english and most western based forms of writing.
Good point. Good ass point. Damn.
-
-
How do you figure that the sun and the moon_ which has no consciousness, no intelligence or mind_ is greater than us? True we can't control the sun but the sun can't tell you what one plus one is either. I think mind is the highest thing we know so if there is a supreme being it's more likely to be an absolute mind. At any rate I don't think one can prove or disprove the existence of a supreme being through rational argument. On what could we base such arguments? Only experience can reveal such a being and even then the experience is open to interpitation so the "help" from this angle is not that convincing either_ unless it's you that had the experience...then, all the rational argument in the world won't convince you otherwise. In the end I think the best any of us can do is decide this issure for ourselves and ignore all other answers. It all comes down to a question of what works for you, what allows you to sleep peacefully at night.
-
Permalink Reply by PhEbE Bee Machine on
-
To POLARVIBEZ:
I'm confused about the concept of god. I remember this group of atheists were protesting against the slogan "one nation, under god." or the "in god we trust" thing on the dollar. Because Theism being very dominant in America, I think a lot of people will jump to the conclusion that they are talking about god in theistic terms. But if the concept of god is nothing more than a supreme being, they could be talking about the government, or the police force, or a patriarch, and possibly the dollar itself. that being said, It seems like it is a strong characteristic with some people not to question the concept of god on all levels of civilization. So your interpretation seemed really spot on. But I would have added theistic in front of god. Thank you. You helped A LOT! And the language barrier thing DEFINITELY exists.
Even though i'm confused about the concept, I think their definition of god was good, but again, like you mentioned about how certain language and language users operate, I think the definition was a little broad.
-
Permalink Reply by Indigo Sweater on -
Hmm.... is this not just semantics?
-
Permalink Reply by PhEbE Bee Machine on
-
Yeah. We can't really exacerbate a definition fully just simply looking @ one little definition.True. It takes an entire school of ideas. I wanted to post this to spark a conversation on developing the concept of atheism more...I think it has come along way, but Im still confused about some subjects that I feel are very under developed.
Indigo Sweater said:
Hmm.... is this not just semantics?
-
Permalink Reply by PhEbE Bee Machine on
-
I don't believe in formulaic superiority. I was using the sun as an example of how it can be a supreme being according to the dictionaries definitions that are being given. I never stated (neither do I believe) that the sun is an "almighty" entity that is a complete dictation in every aspect our lives. When you applied the concept of formulaic superiority with intelligence and the ability to understand math (a man made system), I found that to be extremely human-centric.
For the most part, I think the concept of superiority is false in itself.
what help? I don't see how me encouraging people to ask "is god real?" (not even being specific weather they choose to use rational arguments or not) is challenging the legitimacy in theism. =/
I believe for the most part you took what I wrote completely out of context.
Spookycreep said:How do you figure that the sun and the moon_ which has no consciousness, no intelligence or mind_ is greater than us? True we can't control the sun but the sun can't tell you what one plus one is either. I think mind is the highest thing we know so if there is a supreme being it's more likely to be an absolute mind. At any rate I don't think one can prove or disprove the existence of a supreme being through rational argument. On what could we base such arguments? Only experience can reveal such a being and even then the experience is open to interpitation so the "help" from this angle is not that convincing either_ unless it's you that had the experience...then, all the rational argument in the world won't convince you otherwise. In the end I think the best any of us can do is decide this issure for ourselves and ignore all other answers. It all comes down to a question of what works for you, what allows you to sleep peacefully at night.
© 2013 Created by Matthew.
