Log in

View Full Version : I don't believe there is a god / i believe there is no god



Black Sheep
16th August 2010, 13:34
I caught the Atheist Experience guys mentioning that these are different.
WHy? :confused:
Aren't these two statements equivalent in english?

RedAnarchist
16th August 2010, 13:37
I would say the first one is more general, whilst the second is probably in regards to the Abrahamic god of the Torah/Talmud, Bible and Quran.

Veg_Athei_Socialist
16th August 2010, 16:35
Atheism means a lack of belief in god. We don't believe there is no god because we can't prove it. It is just as ridiculous to say that there is 100% no god as to say there is 100% yes there is a god. Both statements require supporting evidence but don't have any. As atheists we have not been shown any evidence to support the idea of a god existing so we lack a belief in god until somebody can present convincing evidence that there is one.

Invincible Summer
16th August 2010, 18:37
If you say "I don't believe there is a god," then you are negating all belief.

But if you say "I believe there is no god," then people can pin you on your "belief."


So I think it's better to say the first one.

x371322
17th August 2010, 00:01
Yeah what Basta said. One implies a belief, the other implies a lack of belief. There is a difference.

Black Sheep
17th August 2010, 12:13
If you say "I don't believe there is a god," then you are negating all belief.

But if you say "I believe there is no god," (A) then people can pin you on your "belief."
Ah yes.However i still have the feeling that it's word play.

Today i didn't kill kittens.
Today i killed no kittens.
Same.

If you don't believe there is a god then, in a question
" how many gods do you believe exist? ", by the 'data' given to us by (A) - not anarchy- then it's => you believe no gods exist.

Right? :confused:

Invincible Summer
17th August 2010, 12:54
Ah yes.However i still have the feeling that it's word play.

Today i didn't kill kittens.
Today i killed no kittens.
Same.

If you don't believe there is a god then, in a question
" how many gods do you believe exist? ", by the 'data' given to us by (A) - not anarchy- then it's => you believe no gods exist.

Right? :confused:

Yes, it is word play. Unfortunately, that is how some debates/arguments go sometimes.. the old "Ahhhh so your atheism is belief!! That is faith!!" line.

However, "I don't believe there is a god/ I believe there is no god" is slightly different than "Today I didn't kill kittens / Today I killed no kittens" because in the latter kitten example, "I killed no kittens" retains the exact same meaning as "I didn't kill kittens." However, with the god example, it is different: "I don't believe" vs "I believe."

Black Sheep
17th August 2010, 14:47
However, with the god example, it is different: "I don't believe" vs "I believe." How so?
I believe it is not going to rain tomorrow.
I do not believe it's going to rain tomorrow.

I don't believe kittens exist.
=I reject the proposition of yours that kittens exist.Judging the evidence etc, the proposition that kittens exist is unsupported.
It is not my belief that kittens exist.

However since kittens can ONLY exist or NOT exist you can
I don't believe kittens exist <=> I believe no kittens exist.
The sets of existence and non existence is are independent, their interjection is the empty set.
Similarly a god can either exist or not exist.

The denial of a belief is a belief of the denial.Because belief in existence is binary.

Veg_Athei_Socialist
17th August 2010, 19:12
Ah yes.However i still have the feeling that it's word play.

Today i didn't kill kittens.
Today i killed no kittens.
Same.

If you don't believe there is a god then, in a question
" how many gods do you believe exist? ", by the 'data' given to us by (A) - not anarchy- then it's => you believe no gods exist.

Right? :confused:
Did you read my post?

Black Sheep
21st August 2010, 15:27
Did you read my post?
Yes,i dont disagree.I understand the atheist position.

Did you read mine?
All i am asking is that isn't
"i don't believe in a god" is equivalent to " i believe there is no god " ?

Invincible Summer
21st August 2010, 18:42
All i am asking is that isn't
"i don't believe in a god" is equivalent to " i believe there is no god " ?


The intended meaning may very well be the same, but "I don't believe in a god" does not entail any sort of belief whatsoever. However, "I believe there is no god" states that one has belief - faith, if you will - that there is no god. This is how some people try to pin atheists for being faithful in their faithlessness, which makes atheism "almost like a religion" in their eyes.

Also, saying that one "believes" something is much more of a subjective claim than saying that one "does not believe" something.

Tablo
30th August 2010, 03:45
I'm an atheist. I don't believe there is a god due to lack of evidence. If there is a god then I want it overthrown and burned alive.

G-Rein-Lehr
30th August 2010, 13:52
I'm an atheist. I don't believe there is a god due to lack of evidence. If there is a god then I want it overthrown and burned alive.

What's your definition of "a god"?

communard71
30th August 2010, 14:12
Believers do like to use rhetorical tricks to reposition the argument back upon the atheist. The “ah-ha” moment where they can say- “so you believe in something!” is very important from their point of view, because they can “prove” or at least display that belief is an inherent human trait. From that point on, they can drown you in ridiculous “proof-by-example” dilemmas, i.e. all people have a need to believe in them, you simply haven’t had your personal revelation, or- your belief is being clouded by some evil spirit or whatever. It’s a cheap ploy to score points for believers against atheists but in the end, it shows how intellectually bankrupt believers often are, after all, why should an all powerful deity need debate tactics to prove its own existence?

danyboy27
30th August 2010, 17:32
I'm an atheist. I don't believe there is a god due to lack of evidence. If there is a god then I want it overthrown and burned alive.


this shit is going in my quote, this is just awsome.

ÑóẊîöʼn
30th August 2010, 21:30
What's your definition of "a god"?

Substitute "a god" with any conceivable supernatural being and it still works.

scarletghoul
30th August 2010, 21:36
There's no absolute proof of anything, most of our thoughts are made on rational beliefs based on what is the most likely truth. This is the same for the existence of God, where although there's no proof either way, I think, judging by the available evidence, that God probably does not exist, and in practice this means I believe there is no God

Adi Shankara
31st August 2010, 01:37
I believe there is a higher power that is bound to the fabric of the world, but my belief in a higher power isn't as simple as "superman" or whatever people traditionally assume.

Black Sheep
31st August 2010, 03:30
I believe there is a higher power that is bound to the fabric of the world, but my belief in a higher power isn't as simple as "superman" or whatever people traditionally assume.
I reckon u must be touched, too then.

http://friendlyatheist.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/fsm.jpg

Philzer
1st September 2010, 07:25
Ah yes.However i still have the feeling that it's word play.

I agree.

The basic question of the philosophy is what is primary:
Being or consciousness.

The answer of this question is not a religious question or a question of believing! It is a question of the consciousness. And if the individual answers this philosophical question idealistic, it puts a God. No matter whether poly-mono or pantheistic (pantheistic = democrat).

I have explained the motives for this case here. (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1692105&postcount=125)


-->> most people who lives in capitalism doesnt know the religion-step (god-abstraction) of the capitalistic formation:

pantheism (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1705854&postcount=3)



PS: because there is God only in the human psyche, nowhere, otherwise, he was up to now seen, there is neither a God's proof nor a rebutting evidence.

Many greetings

ÑóẊîöʼn
1st September 2010, 09:17
Am I the only one who can't make heads or tails of what this Philzer person is saying?

Tablo
2nd September 2010, 06:47
I think his English is just a bit weak. I kinda understand him.

Tread Softly
4th September 2010, 14:21
Veg had it right. The normal distinction atheists make is between "I believe there is no god" (which is not too dissimilar to "I believe there is a god") and "I have no belief in god" (which is qualitatively different to "I believe in god"). The point is to show how atheism is not just another belief.