• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:88]Atheism is a political doctrine

Prof_Lunaphiles said:
You have very nuanced argument - you are splitting hairs merely to make a counterargument.
Click to expand...

No, it is an historical fact. Theism is irrelevant to the regulation of a sedentary society and much of the Ten Commandments were appropriated from an earlier document. These regulations are necessary for the maintenance of a sedentary society.

Chances are you are jealous, as well.
Click to expand...

That is just an asinine conclusion. Please try to maintain an adult level of conversation and dispense with the puerile ad hominems, thanks.

Provide the proof of your argument that the Ten Commandments were borrowed.
Click to expand...

Look to the Code of Hammurabi.
 
NWO_Spook said:
No, it is an historical fact. Theism is irrelevant to the regulation of a sedentary society and much of the Ten Commandments were appropriated from an earlier document. These regulations are necessary for the maintenance of a sedentary society.



That is just an asinine conclusion. Please try to maintain an adult level of conversation and dispense with the puerile ad hominems, thanks.



Look to the Code of Hammurabi.
Click to expand...

Bringing facts into the discussion will have no effect on his opinions.
 
zyzygy said:
We don't know what his definition of your words is. He may think that you are complementing him.
Click to expand...

Well, if one is stupid enough to claim that atheism is a political doctrine, while exonerating theism from such a claim, then one may believe anything I suppose.
 
NWO_Spook said:
Well, if one is stupid enough to claim that atheism is a political doctrine, while exonerating theism from such a claim, then one may believe anything I suppose.
Click to expand...

Very true. Not reading the rules here is a stupid act too.
 
Is not collecting stamps a hobby doctrine?
 
Prof_Lunaphiles said:
No it is not. Arguing against the dictionary is like arguing against the flawed conventional wisdom - there are errors, because the ideas are not deliberated under the revelations of contemporary sophistication.
Click to expand...

What proof do you have of these ideas not being deliberated? You appear to think that merely saying something makes it true. We can discuss this when you get back from your holiday.
 
Prof_Lunaphiles said:
You have very nuanced argument - you are splitting hairs merely to make a counterargument.

Chances are you are jealous, as well.

Provide the proof of your argument that the Ten Commandments were borrowed.
Click to expand...

I doubt if you are jealous.
 
Prof_Lunaphiles said:
There is a major error in the popular definition of "atheism," because of various reasons of convenience, compliance, and lack of reliable knowledge classification, in the past.​

To get it straight, you have to go over the three terms that are being compared. You you have to understand what theism and humanism are, and why atheism is not in the same classification category:

  • Theism is the ontological doctrine that suggests that a supernatural deity orders/defines reality.
  • Humanism is the ontological doctrine that suggests that humans order/define reality.
  • Atheism is a political doctrine that opposes theist doctrine as the basis for public policy, because it is absurd to designate an ontology as the antithesis of a designated ontology; which is what you are doing when you suggest that atheism has something to do with determining what exists - (lack of) belief in the existence of a supernatural dimension of reality - gods.

My argument is valid and sound. Your counter-arguments are based on dogma - compromised definitions from bygone eras of sophistication dominated by Christian dictionary editors unwittingly appeasing the Christian world.

Smarten-up - Stay Woke​
Click to expand...

Talk about trying to limit the discussion with your own narrow terms.

Atheism is a lock of belief in any god. Period. No matter how you try to spin it.
 
Arjay81 said:
Talk about trying to limit the discussion with your own narrow terms.

Atheism is a lock of belief in any god. Period. No matter how you try to spin it.
Click to expand...

And nothing to do with politics.
 
Prof_Lunaphiles said:
Atheism is a political doctrine that opposes theist doctrine as the basis for public policy, because it is absurd to designate an ontology as the antithesis of a designated ontology; which is what you are doing when you suggest that atheism has something to do with determining what exists - (lack of) belief in the existence of a supernatural dimension of reality - gods.
Click to expand...

Atheism is not a political doctrine.


No politics are involved, atheists live quite happily in political system as diverse as the USA, India, China and Russia.
 
Prof_Lunaphiles said:
My argument is valid and sound.
Click to expand...

Unless you are planning a deception so as to disturb a handful of people on an online politics forum, why would you make serious statements about things which you believe to be either unsound or invalid? This would make you a monumental imbecile given that you took the pain of insulting everyone who disagrees with your post which would then include yourself. However, this statement does appear to be curious. When you provide definitions, validity never is an issue: definitions are formally also (trivial) theorems. Moreover, who would write down a set of definitions coupled with an insult and a curious hypothesis regarding the history of dictionaries and call this an argument?

Prof_Lunaphiles said:
Your counter-arguments are based on dogma - compromised definitions from bygone eras of sophistication dominated by Christian dictionary editors unwittingly appeasing the Christian world.
Click to expand...

On your first post, you somehow decide that everything everyone else will bring to bear on the topic is necessarily dogmatic, presumably in contrast to what you wrote. Nowhere in your discussion did you take note of the common use of the word "atheism," except to insinuate that it is being misused. It is a matter of politeness, expediency, dogmatism or outright ignorance per your own judgement to use the word "atheism" in any other way than that which you intend it to be used. The irony is that you took some pain to write down a definition of theism, a manifestly etymologically similar term, and didn't notice the asymmetry you introduced in their definition -- an asymmetry that most people do not commit. Theism is a belief in God (in fact, it usually means the God mentioned in Abrahamic religions), but seem to ignore that the prefix "a" usually means "absence." Somethings are moral, others are immoral and others still are amoral.

If a theist is someone with a belief in God, an atheist is someone without such a belief, though it is commonly used to mean the slightly stronger position of disbelief. Unlike your definition, this treats both words symmetrically. It is also a language everyone around me will understand. If you walk around talking about atheism to mean activists who require religious abstinence from politicians in their public service, nobody will understand what you mean. Not all people who do not believe in God take issue with politicians informing their policies with their own view of what is moral and of what isn't moral.
 
Rich2018 said:
Atheism is not a political doctrine.


No politics are involved, atheists live quite happily in political system as diverse as the USA, India, China and Russia.
Click to expand...

And yet when a so called Christian dabbles in politics, they are indeed considered political...
 
Elvira said:
And yet when a so called Christian dabbles in politics, they are indeed considered political...
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to be harsh, but you need to read this thread from the beginning, because the OP is literally makes up his own meaning for words, and doesn't accept the dictionary definitions, which of course makes conversation nearly impossible.

If an atheist is "dabbling in politics" then those actions are considered political as well. It's by definition. In the OPs terms (applying them to Christianity), just being a Christian makes a person political.
 
JustHanging said:
I'm not trying to be harsh, but you need to read this thread from the beginning, because the OP is literally makes up his own meaning for words, and doesn't accept the dictionary definitions, which of course makes conversation nearly impossible.

If an atheist is "dabbling in politics" then those actions are considered political as well. It's by definition. In the OPs terms (applying them to Christianity), just being a Christian makes a person political.
Click to expand...

It absolutely does not...I am a Christian who takes the stand Jesus took, I loyally support God’s Kingdom and remain neutral in the political affairs of the world...Matthew 24:14; Daniel 7:13, 14; Luke 4:43; 17:20, 21...

“My Kingdom is no part of this world.” John 18:36
 
Elvira said:
And yet when a so called Christian dabbles in politics, they are indeed considered political...
Click to expand...

Yes, and when an Atheist dabbles in politics you my call him/her a politician.


That doesn't make the concept of Atheism anything to do with politics.


Any Atheist my dicus science, it doesn't make him/her a scientist.
 
Rich2018 said:
Yes, and when an Atheist dabbles in politics you my call him/her a politician.


That doesn't make the concept of Atheism anything to do with politics.


Any Atheist my dicus science, it doesn't make him/her a scientist.
Click to expand...

6 of one and half dozen of the other...political is political...
 
Elvira said:
6 of one and half dozen of the other...political is political...
Click to expand...


Not at all, I discuss politics, does that make my historical studies political?

Are you really saying that an Atheist who also discusses science make his religious views "scientific"?
 
Rich2018 said:
Not at all, I discuss politics, does that make my historical studies political?

Are you really saying that an Atheist who also discusses science make his religious views "scientific"?
Click to expand...

Just going by your definition of a political Christian...;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom