Terrapin Station

Am I sure that this was already corrected for you many times? Yes. Atheism has nothing to do with that issue.

As someone interested in philosophy, this is a good thing for you to think about, as it has long been seen as an important ontological issue that's of...

I hate to do this when you're being friendly (which I'm grateful for--seriously), but I wouldn't say that really understood what I wrote (so even thou...

Aesthetics is actually largely seen as philosophy of art. "What is beauty" is a traditional question under aesthetics, but a shit-ton of aesthetics ha...

I thought we might be able to discuss some of this stuff on this discussion board. Does that book define racial "constructionism" and explain the epis...

With sports, it's similar to, though not exactly the same as, national pride. People often have pride in their country where, with respect to what the...

Not by a human being. What I wrote is "I'm using the sense of 'natural' where it's distinct from 'made by a person.'" I chose those words carefully. "...

Traditionally, agnosticism is a positive belief that knowledge about the existence of gods isn't possible, or at least isn't practically attainable fo...

I consider myself an "irrational optimist." I keep, irrationally, having hope that he'll suddenly start having a worthwhile good faith conversation ab...

There is "positive" and "negative" atheism. Negative atheists simply lack a belief in gods. Positive atheists have a belief that there are no gods (an...

Yes. I was never a theist. I had basically zero idea about religious ideas until I was in my mid teens, and then when I learned something about religi...

What exactly is the definition of racial constructionism, how are we confirming that there is such a thing, and how are we confirming its effect on pe...

Sure we do. We're not blank slates in every situation. We know that the sort of thing in question is made by people, because we're aware of that type ...

I overtly refuse to consider race a "valid" categorization, and I overtly deny "racial/ethnic experience" as something that should be significant or f...

Yes, I was being sincere. I'm not sure what you're referring to with the first part.

:up:

Order doesn't imply a designer. What tells us that a watch has a designer isn't order. It's the fact that we know that watches are designed. We know t...

For example, take a cheer that New Jersey Devils fans shout during games--"Rangers suck, Islanders blow, Flyers swallow"--that's a Devils pride chant.

What I said is that I think it makes sense to describe some utterances and behavior as exhibiting pride or being prideful. So in that sense, I think i...

Utterances we make--so sounds we make, for example, and behavior we exhibit--so motions we make with our bodies, for example, aren't mental phenomena....

I think it makes sense to describe statements or behavior as exhibiting pride or being prideful (I agree with the distinction suggested for those two ...

I'm just saying it's not a term I normally use. ¯\_(?)_/¯ Do I feel pride about anything? I don't think so. I like stuff I interact with, that I'm a f...

Ah, that too. Although usually I only use the term there to refer to the parade.

Not a term I use outside of (a) talking about lions, (b) talking about sports camaraderie, (c) talking about the U2 song.

Again, atheism isn't a claim about anything. It's certainly not something that forwards normatives about anything. It's just a term for a lack of one ...

That's not at all my disposition, though. To me, it strikes me as a completely absurd, "random," insane-sounding notion.

"Inherent meaning" is not the same thing as meaning in the semantic sense, is it? When I assign meaning to a term or to something like a visual artwor...

My atheism is a consequence of (a) not being at all indoctrinated with religion as a kid, and then (b) as a mid-teen, hearing some religious views fin...

It certainly wasn't clear that you believed those things suggested that all events must have a cause. That seems like a completely arbitrary idea in r...

No. This is such a basic and simple thing to understand. Atheism isn't anything like an ideology, a body of theory, a school of thought. It's only a t...

It was already corrected for you many times, by many different people, that atheism has nothing to do with beliefs about whether there is any "mystery...

Not at all. But that you think this underscores how poor your reading comprehension is. You're very similar to Isaac in that. It's rare that you don't...

I'm skeptical about unconscious mental content. That doesn't imply that I believe that everything is mental and thus conscious mental content. Acciden...

The way that we know a watch is designed isn't via making interpretive analogies with anything. The way that we know that a watch is designed is becau...

True that.

Atheist and it's of no consequence for my philosophical views. Normally, I almost never think about religious issues. I don't take them seriously. I d...

That you're commenting on it? Yes. You're one of the folks with serious, almost continual reading comprehension problems.

By the way, if your theism makes it so that you can't understand the notion of not having a particular belief, then it doesn't seem very useful.

That doesn't have anything to do with atheism.

Can I tell you why you don't understand it? No. It seems weird to me that you'd have difficulty with it, because it seems so simple to understand not ...

You don't understand that you don't have that belief?

For example, you lack a belief that Frank Zappa at a Whopper from Burger King on March 5, 1982. Does that make sense to you?

Yes, good points.

But is the following statement true or false: 1. God does not exist. :grin:

So you already asked in this post earlier in the thread: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/340427 I already started my answer in this ...

It sucks that it's almost impossible to actually have a conversation with someone with a different point of view here (and on boards like this in gene...

Doublespeak? Look at the 2nd page of this thread. It's not as if you didn't see it. You responded to it already. Some sort of short-term memory weirdn...

Didn't you read the second page of this thread? You even responded to me about it.

When we have free will discussions, folks have a problem with saying that the sciences posit anything random. Why in this context would we assume that...

You're going with "I was joking"?