Ok, so we've got a greenlight on a new thread for this. However, considering the way the last one went, here are a few ground rules.
This thread is not about just stating your own viewpoint. This thread is about making cogent arguments to convince others. You're entitled to your own beliefs, and you don't have to defend them to us. However, if you post in this thread expect to have your beliefs challenged by one group or another. "I can believe whatever I want, and you're all fascist Nazi douchebags for trying to change me" is not an acceptable defense, whether you're an atheist or a theist.
This thread is not about Evolution vs. Creationism. While these are interesting topics which might be a subset of this topic, they lead to way too much derailing. And it's a peeve of mine. If you want to discuss it, start another thread; it's certainly a sufficiently volatile topic. Likewise, this isn't about the Big Bang vs. Creationism, or any other Scientific Theory Involving History vs. any other Religious Account Of History.Fuck it, go ahead and talk about these, but be exceptionally careful to stay civil. It's very likely you'll come to a point where you have to debate what are appropriate fundamental assumptions about how to define truth, and while that's sure to be interesting, I don't want
that to be here unless everyone seems to be on board with it because it gets very tangential indeed. Otherwise, be willing to accept the disagreement for now, or start a new thread.
No vague references to the other thread. If you want to refer back to an argument that's already been made, you need to go find the post it appeared in, and quote it.
I'm going to reserve a post below this one. As arguments start to get made repeatedly, I'd appreciate if whoever calls it out as such makes a note of the post where it was made first and PMs me the quote. I'll then add it to that post in a list of Arguments That Are Not Original. I'm asking for your help here, because I doubt if I'll have time to keep track of everything myself. If I ever find that I no longer have the stomach to deal with this anymore, somebody else can step up: make a post cataloging new ones, and I'll link to it in the Arguments That Are Not Original post.
EDIT: Oh, yeah, and just to make it clear,
stay civil. I don't care if you're insulting another poster directly or implicitly, or even if you're insulting a random group of people who have no presence here, this type of thread gets out of control quickly. So basically as soon as I see the word "idiot" or really anything along those lines getting bandied about, this thing gets a lock. You know, barring the inevitable jackass who starts posting "idiot idiot idiot idiot" over and over again in an attempt to make me lock it.
CLARIFICATION:
This is my thread-moderator voice. It is necessary for this thread to make a distinction between when I'm participating in the discussion, and when I'm telling people to behave themselves. I don't want people thinking I'm making ad hominem attacks because I can't think of any other way to argue; when I use it, this red text isn't a rebuttal. It's only meant to be a warning that people need to adjust their attitudes or start a new thread for bashing people who don't agree with them, because I don't want it here.ADDITIONAL EDIT: So there was an argument about terminology around page 160-something. To resolve it, we're going to use a fixed set of definitions.
*An Atheist is a person with no belief in a deity. This is a very broad category.
*An Implicit Atheist is a person who has no position of any kind, typically through being unaware of the concept of belief in a deity.
*An Explicit Atheist is a person whose beliefs include no belief in a deity; they are aware that this belief is absent.
*A Weak Atheist is an Explicit Atheist who does not believe a rational belief about a deity can exist.
*An Agnostic is a Weak Atheist who explicitly believes a rational belief about a deity is impossible. The distinction is the same as that between "I believe there is no God" and "I do not belief there is a God", a typical distinction made in discussions of Atheism.
*A Strong Atheist is an Explicit Atheist who actively believes that there are no deities.
DIAGRAM OF INCLUSIVENESS. This diagram shows the relationships between the above groups in a handy, graphical manner. Posters are welcome, even encouraged, to refer to it whenever a terminology debate erupts because somebody didn't read the OP.
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES: Okay, I'm stealing some conflict-handling rules.
If the rules in this OP are violated, or I decide a conversation has become too serious a derail, I'll first post a warning. In the case of derails, I'll try to post two; one an unofficial "hey, guys, let's bring this to a close, okay", the second an official "We're not going to be talking about this anymore" message. Only the official warning will use red text.
If the problem continues, I will then lock the thread for 3 days. I will explicitly state that this is the case in the warning.
If, after the thread is opened, the problem still persists, I will repeat locks until it either stops or I get tired of opening the thread. If there's a specific person I believe is responsible, I will instead simply report the poster in question and post a warning telling people not to respond; any responses will result in a lock for 3 days, with no warnings. I recommend you use the ignore functionality if you have to (we have that, right?). If moderator action of any kind is taken, you're not to discuss it in this thread - we're not a thread for celebrating or lamenting bans or mutes. Violation of this rule will result in lock for 3 days, with no warnings.
When a derail occurs, I'll add it to the second post and note it as such. Posters are not to bring up the topic again without first PMing me - if you can convince me that you have a rational argument that's new to the discussion, which you think we can discuss civilly, then you can make the actual post. I'm sorry to make this necessary. I'll follow the same procedure for derails above (starting with an informal warning, then an official one, then moving on to locks) if an old derail crops up again; I understand that new posters won't be familiar with the thread's history with these topics, so I don't want to be too draconian about it.
Author
Topic: Atheism Redux [READ THE FIRST POST] (Read 185551 times)