Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
350,916
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 17:
Line 17: − − ==Negative Atheistic Reasoning== − − One fundamental idea of negative atheism is the abandonment of faith. As no thing is truly knowable beyond any doubt, to treat an idea as known is to make a false leap. In this respect negative atheism is very similar to agnosticism but is much more atheistic in its views. − − Another common feature of negative atheism is disbelief in god(s) or the lack thereof based on reasons other than evidence for or against divine entities; this can include disagreement with faith in general, as mentioned before. Contradictory to what has been said by some theists, atheism (negative or positive) does not imply an absence of ideas on a matter by the atheist but simply refusal of deist views on the matter. Unlike more traditional religions, atheism does not attempt to take a stance on every matter but those issues on which it does not express a position are filled by other beliefs held by the individual. For instance, one fundamental atheistic view is that life was not divinely created; while it does not offer an alternative to the origin of life on Earth, one is provided by another ideology (such as, though not limited to, abiotic generation or meteoric seeding) allowing a degree of freedom in the atheist's beliefs. This is inherent in the nature of atheism as it is merely a denial of an idea rather than a proposition just as denial of evolution does not require an alternative though the believer will likely hold one.
Reverted edits by IraqiFreedom (talk) to last revision by Conservative
Other theists criticize weak atheism as seeking to "dodge the issue." Terry Miethe argued:
Other theists criticize weak atheism as seeking to "dodge the issue." Terry Miethe argued:
:"the "negative [[atheist]]" ends up denying God's existence just as much as the "positive [[atheist]]." For the believer (and in reality) to deny the idea of God is to deny the actual existence of God no matter what language game you want to play. Remember, Hans Kung is quite correct in pointing out that there is also an "atheistic language game" that is not self-justified…We must not---cannot---arbitrarily "define" out of existence vast ranges of reality simply because they do not meet our predetermined definition. It is not good enough to say that I have no idea of God therefore I am denying nothing about "his" actual existence. You must examine all of reality and answer or explain why millions have had what they thought was an adequate idea or concept of God, from great philosophers to the 'common folk.'"<ref>http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/athart3.htm</ref>
:"the "negative [[atheist]]" ends up denying God's existence just as much as the "positive [[atheist]]." For the believer (and in reality) to deny the idea of God is to deny the actual existence of God no matter what language game you want to play. Remember, Hans Kung is quite correct in pointing out that there is also an "atheistic language game" that is not self-justified…We must not---cannot---arbitrarily "define" out of existence vast ranges of reality simply because they do not meet our predetermined definition. It is not good enough to say that I have no idea of God therefore I am denying nothing about "his" actual existence. You must examine all of reality and answer or explain why millions have had what they thought was an adequate idea or concept of God, from great philosophers to the 'common folk.'"<ref>http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/athart3.htm</ref>
==See also==
==See also==