Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KnifeMissile
I assure you, I have taken nothing that has been said in this thread (by anybody) personally. I don't think you have deliberately moved discussions to semantic topics. Personally, I think I have made very compelling arguments and you have had little choice by playing Devil's Advocate in scrutinizing the meaning of our terms. I just don't find semantic arguments interesting since the meaning we attribute to words are entirely arbitrary.
|
Well, perhaps I have been misunderstood by you in this thread, but from my very first observation about faith in regards to atheism I have only intended to use the word to describe your belief in the non-existence of god not to label atheism as a religion. (I have taken exception to the subjection of words to serve one purpose before so perhaps this is just another example of that pet peeve.) But I do feel somewhat like I have been backed into this argument by your resistance to the use of a multi-faceted word which can very easily be attributed to a belief in anything.
As far as your conviction that your belief is summed up as neatly as the law of gravity, I beg to differ. I understand that to you the truth of atheism is crystal clear, but to those of us who don't share your conviction and have witnessed similar declarations from those who are equally convinced of the truth of their own beliefs, I'm sorry to tell you this, but your conviction as expressed is only slightly more compelling. And, I have to say this and I don't mean it in a offensive way, I suppose your insistence that we should default to your understanding of things and move forward from there just as, for example, fundamentalist Christians do rubs me wrong way a little. As if to say because I don't believe in Santa Claus, I have no reason to not to be an atheist. Just as a Christian might tell me that because I have a conscience there must be a god. Surely you can see that your conviction begins and ends with you just as anyone else's.
Quote:
|
As a side note, the etymology of metaphysics comes from a chapter of a book that Aristotle wrote and literally means "after physics." It was a chapter that came after the chapter about physics and he titled it as such so that the reader can know that he was no longer talking about the real world and is moving onto the topic of philosophical bullshit...
|
Okay...I take some exception to this statement, as well but I see it has already been addressed.
Quote:
|
Perhaps this is the crux of the discussion here. It may be that religious people want to believe in something that give them "purpose" in life, whereas atheists don't need one beyond what they make for themselves. Indeed, I find it curious that some people say that religion does just this for them since I see no real purpose given by any religious doctorine. They appear as mysterious and unanswering of that question as anything else. The Bible, for instance, only says that your life has a purpose but fails to mention what that purpose is. Perhaps merely the reassurance of one is enough, even if what that purpose is remains unsaid, where atheism doesn't even do that much. However, the idea that these people can't give themselves a purpose in life, even if they don't have to specify what that purpose is, may be the source of ustwo's condescension...
|
Buddhism is very specific about its purpose and not only that gives you a very specific roadmap to follow in order to fulfill that purpose.
And, as for myself, I don't feel I need to have purpose for my own life, I'm just open to the idea that perhaps there is a purpose for the existence of mankind. That's all. I have not given myself over to any belief other than the belief that there are things I don't know with certainty.