Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > There's no such thing as an "atheist."      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 wolfman4142
Joined: 12/20/2016
Msg: 351
There's no such thing as an atheist.Page 15 of 19    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19)

before I can answer your question, please define delusional.


From a religious aspect I'd define the mass delusion amongst those types of people as pretending to know or have knowledge no one can possibly have. For example: "I know there is a god and this is what he wants" or "I know what happens when we die" or "I know your purpose for this world".
 funchesf
Joined: 6/27/2014
Msg: 352
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/27/2017 3:00:21 PM

Posted By: kidreason29
without the question, there is no atheism/theism,

asking someone "if they have a belief in God" when you knew "they had no concept of God" in itself is irrational ...either way where is the Atheism?


Posted By: kidreason29
and the question requires a rational conscious mind to comprehend,

no asking the question was irrational ....and what if they asked you for proof ...that still wouldn't qualify as being Atheism


Posted By: kidreason29
without that they are neither a theist/atheist/agnostic

that's because at that point in time they wouldn't be part of The God delusion ...first you would have to either convert them or they would have to reject the belief ....to suck them into The God Delusion you would either have to label them or cause them to label themselves ....that label would be Atheist


Posted By: kidreason29
Otherwise we are talking about religion before language, and god before language, which is possible.

THE QUESTION
which came first ...knowledge or God? ...funches 3:16


Posted By: kidreason29
Question: how does the inner dialogue in a deaf person sound?

it doesn't have to sound ...they still have other senses that can be used to have an inner dialogue


Posted By: kidreason29
before I can answer your question, please define delusional.

use any definition you want ...as long as when you describe God you don't sound delusional
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 353
view profile
History
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/27/2017 3:17:08 PM

if a human didn't hold a conscious belief in the existence of God ...then why would they refer to their self as an Atheist or non-believer .....wouldn't a theist have to give them the title of Atheist or be the direct cause for the need for such a title?

If a human is a non-theist, why would they refer to themselves as atheistic or non-believer? I agree in terms of general day-to-day going-to-the-store, etc -- yeah, why would they? Many run-of-the-mill theists don't either. If a non-theist lives in an environment where there's basically non-theists -- yeah, they really wouldn't. But there are cases where a non-theist would refer to themselves as a non-thest -- When the Subject Comes Up.

I'm a non-follower of soccer. I don't refer to myself as that unless the subject comes up. Obviously this subject comes up rarely (in the US when not tied to any kids' soccer practices). But when going into forums, or coffee talks about various items -- it certainly can come up. It doesn't take a theist to give them any label in reference, but someone who isn't a theist can, when talking about subjects in which there's certain POVs held by theists or certain theists and why it doesn't pertain to themselves ("But, I'm not a theist, so that's why I don't believe [x] will happen when [y] occurs...").

that a person with an irrational belief or delusion will try to pull others into their delusion and that is what happens when someone refer to themselves as an Atheist ...they in turn have made themselves part of that delusion

I don't agree with that - lol. I mean, that can be so, but just because one refers to themselves as theist or non-theist or football-fan or non-football-fan doesn't mean they've made themselves as part of any delusion. It can be a quite factual position they're in, not a delusional one.

But yes, some CAN use labels to create delusions, if that's where you're getting at. Much like the term 'atheist'. It means and Only means non-theist. But the label 'atheist' has a bad connotation to it -- and some passionate religious folk will create a Delusion that atheist=anti-theist... so if you're not a theist, you are against/hate the idea of a god, etc.

are you a theist?
no
are you an atheist?
no
are you agnostic?
no
then what are you?
I'm your psychiatrist
why would I need one
because you're delusional

You're either theistic or non-theistic. There is no in-between (and just to note, agnosticism isn't an in-between). I think the delusional person would be the one who would say No to both (or Yes to both) on the question of atheist or theist.

Is this surface bacterial?
No
Is this surface abacterial?
No

The person saying No to both is the delusional one (even if the one asking the question could be any type of person themselves).
 funchesf
Joined: 6/27/2014
Msg: 354
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/27/2017 6:47:33 PM

Posted By: norwegianguy456
If a human is a non-theist, why would they refer to themselves as atheistic or non-believer?

why don't they refer to themselves as heathens, infidels, Satan's helper, lost or Moral-less ..because that is what believers regard them as,.... so a label other than "evil" had to be found that was aesthetically pleasing to both ...that label is Atheist


Posted By: norwegianguy456
I'm a non-follower of soccer.

is soccer the name of a God that you don't follow? ....or you don't believe that soccer exist? ..or unsure soccer exist?


Posted By: norwegianguy456
football-fan or non-football-fan doesn't mean they've made themselves as part of any delusion.

what if they are praying to a God that their team wins the game? ....

also does non-football fan means they don't believe football exist?


Posted By: norwegianguy456
Is this surface bacterial?
No
Is this surface abacterial?
No

The person saying No to both is the delusional one (even if the one asking the question could be any type of person themselves).

here's how the statement should read

Is this surface bacterial?
No
Is this surface abacterial?
No
then what is the surface?
there is no surface there
but I have a belief there's a surface there
..er...ok....slowly I walk backward ...step by step...inch by inch

you're attempting to mix the physical world with the world of faith and in doing so it will always end up sounding delusional the same as calling oneself an Atheist you are making their delusion your acceptable reality and therefore you become part of The God Delusion ..

THE CHALLENGE
come up with something to call yourself that displays that you're not part of their delusion or something to pop them into the reality that they might be having a delusion
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 355
view profile
History
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/27/2017 7:40:01 PM

THE CHALLENGE
come up with something to call yourself that displays that you're not part of their delusion

Critical rationalist.

or something to pop them into the reality that they might be having a delusion

Slap in the face with a wet fish.
 drinkthesunwithmyface
Joined: 3/27/2012
Msg: 356
view profile
History
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/28/2017 5:35:29 AM
I've more and more thought that it's most accurate to just say "I am not religious". After that, you may get a twisted discussion about what 'religious' means, but that's another ball of wax.
 kidreason29
Joined: 9/25/2015
Msg: 357
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/28/2017 2:54:43 PM

But then, who knows, maybe a lot of babies have a kind of instinctive esoteric feeling of some higher other. We wouldn't know for sure. I think that there's supposed to be something different going on anyway in the mind of a human before their brain begins to structure it's thoughts according to linguistics, so we might not be able to know.


similar to my thoughts of religion before language


THE CHALLENGE
come up with something to call yourself that displays that you're not part of their delusion or something to pop them into the reality that they might be having a delusion


The people you see in your dreams are not other people, they are you. It is you acting the part of an other person. They are more of you than they are of other people.

Similarly when I see you (funchesf), I see more of me than you. Because I could not possibly know what you are, unless I was actually you. Therefore what I see, when I see you, is what I see within my mind. If I hated you, the reason would probably be because I hate part of myself. I could not possibly hate you, because I don't know you, I could only hate the idea I have of you, which comes from me. Therefore I could not possibly hate anyone else, only myself and my ideas of people.
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 358
view profile
History
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/28/2017 4:15:08 PM

I could not possibly know what you are, unless I was actually you

Hypotheses about the nature of things are tested against the evidence of observation. This applies to everything - including other people and even yourself.

Many people are not even aware that they do not have absolute knowledge of themselves simply because they experience consciousness. Introspection and self-discovery are some words that other people use to describe their ongoing tests and observations.
 kidreason29
Joined: 9/25/2015
Msg: 359
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/28/2017 5:16:57 PM

THE CHALLENGE
come up with something to call yourself that displays that you're not part of their delusion or something to pop them into the reality that they might be having a delusion



The people you see in your dreams are not other people, they are you. It is you acting the part of an other person. They are more of you than they are of other people.

Similarly when I see you (funchesf), I see more of me than you. Because I could not possibly know what you are, unless I was actually you. Therefore what I see, when I see you, is what I see within my mind. If I hated you, the reason would probably be because I hate part of myself. I could not possibly hate you, because I don't know you, I could only hate the idea I have of you, which comes from me. Therefore I could not possibly hate anyone else, only myself and my ideas of people.


I completed the challenge, by calling myself yourself. And yourself part of myself. Yourself is a yourself because of myself, without myself there is no yourself or otherself. Its not 'yourself to yourself' as you say... rather its 'yourself FROM myself"
 funchesf
Joined: 6/27/2014
Msg: 360
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/29/2017 12:34:33 PM

Posted By: gingerosity
Critical rationalist.

believers that knew what a "Critical rationalist" was would regard one as a follower of a philosophy which could be applied to Religious Scripture


Posted By: gingerosity
Slap in the face with a wet fish.

hopefully not with one of the two small fishes Jesus used to feed the masses with


Posted By: drinkthesunwithmyface
I've more and more thought that it's most accurate to just say "I am not religious

saying "I am not religious" to a believer wouldn't necessarily mean to them that you didn't believe in God ....


Posted By: kidreason29
The people you see in your dreams are not other people, they are you. It is you acting the part of an other person. They are more of you than they are of other people.

I'm pretty sure it's them ..I asked for I.D.


Posted By: kidreason29
If I hated you, the reason would probably be because I hate part of myself..

not necessarily ..hate like fright or any emotion can come and go in a blink of an eye...it's when hate fester that might be an indication that you have issues


Posted By: kidreason29
I completed the challenge, by calling myself yourself. And yourself part of myself. Yourself is a yourself because of myself, without myself there is no yourself or otherself. Its not 'yourself to yourself' as you say... rather its 'yourself FROM myself"

double talking is why you failed the challenge ...also since you're religious it's delusional for you to even accept the challenge
 drinkthesunwithmyface
Joined: 3/27/2012
Msg: 361
view profile
History
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/29/2017 1:05:34 PM


I've more and more thought that it's most accurate to just say "I am not religious
saying "I am not religious" to a believer wouldn't necessarily mean to them that you didn't believe in God ....

Indeed. Though it is my opinion that belief in god isn't the real definitive of religion. At such times, I'd hear some jabber about how their religion isn't religion...or that it is, and others aren't. Whatever.
 wolfman4142
Joined: 12/20/2016
Msg: 362
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/29/2017 3:33:23 PM

Indeed. Though it is my opinion that belief in god isn't the real definitive of religion. At such times, I'd hear some jabber about how their religion isn't religion...or that it is, and others aren't. Whatever.






To me I would define religion as belief in some sort of special knowledge. These examples pretty much cover it. It's delusional wishful thinking.
"I know there is a god and this is what he wants" or "I know what happens when we die" or "I know your purpose for this world"
 kidreason29
Joined: 9/25/2015
Msg: 363
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/29/2017 3:35:03 PM

I'm pretty sure it's them ..I asked for I.D.

then you've just asked yourself as another person for I.D


double talking is why you failed the challenge ...also since you're religious it's delusional for you to even accept the challenge


I've totally out-did your challenge, now you cannot accept defeat and are calling me religious / delusional.
 funchesf
Joined: 6/27/2014
Msg: 364
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/29/2017 4:47:56 PM

Posted By: drinkthesunwithmyface
Though it is my opinion that belief in god isn't the real definitive of religion

for those that claim they have a belief in God but yet follow no religion simply ask if their morals are Godless ...then prepare to listen to deafening silence ...

a believer in God would never admit to having Godless morals and will begin to make up all type of excuses not to answer the question which only proves that they do regard their morals are either from God or are approved by God, either way it makes them religious ..... that's why it's the belief in God itself that makes one religious


Posted By: kidreason29
then you've just asked yourself as another person for I.D

nope...the person called me by name even before I asked them for I.D. ...also can't the very same concept you speak of be applied when one is supposedly conscious? ...


Posted By: kidreason29
I've totally out-did your challenge, now you cannot accept defeat and are calling me religious / delusional.

ok to be fair .... let's test to see if your answer is delusional

KIDREASON'S DELUSIONAL ANSWER TEST
Concern Citizen .......hey kidreason do you have a belief in God? .....
kidreason ................no...I'm myself yourself because yourself is myself
Concern Citizen .......er...ok...slowly I walk backwards....step by step...inch by inch
 kidreason29
Joined: 9/25/2015
Msg: 365
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/29/2017 10:09:03 PM

THE CHALLENGE
come up with something to call yourself that displays that you're not part of their delusion or something to pop them into the reality that they might be having a delusion




ok to be fair .... let's test to see if your answer is delusional

KIDREASON'S DELUSIONAL ANSWER TEST
Concern Citizen .......hey kidreason do you have a belief in God? .....
kidreason ................no...I'm myself yourself because yourself is myself
Concern Citizen .......er...ok...slowly I walk backwards....step by step...inch by inch


You've specifically asked to come up with something to call yourself, and I did, myself, because I am a yourself and a myself. You still don't get it, I've out done your whole challenge, /pats self
 kidreason29
Joined: 9/25/2015
Msg: 366
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/30/2017 12:02:48 AM
I've had this conversation irl,

Guy: im not religious because i don't believe in god
Me: you dont have to believe in a god to be religious
Guy: no, you are religious if you have any beliefs
Me: I don't identify with any religion and I have my own beliefs
Guy: that's being religious
Me: then you are also religious
Guy: no I don't have any beliefs
Me: then what do you believe in?
Guy: Nothing.
Me: that's a belief
Guy: Now hold on a second...
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 367
view profile
History
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/30/2017 10:23:12 AM

why don't they refer to themselves as heathens, infidels, Satan's helper, lost or Moral-less ..because that is what believers regard them as

Because they're not without morals, Satan's helper, and many other labels. Why would they? Answer: There's no reason to go by a negative label just because others are hissing it at you. Although some who are involved in the defense of anti-religion can proudly call themselves infidels, as that one's not necessarily negative.

so a label other than "evil" had to be found that was aesthetically pleasing to both ...that label is Atheist

To most people who are non-theists, atheist isn't -- even though that's exactly what that means. So no, it's not pleasing to both. Atheist wasn't Invented due to some labeling game -- it's a term riding off of theist. It may have been widely used in the labeling game -- to hijack a word that can't be redefined due to it riding off another, but settling it in society Erroneously that it's anti-religious and anti-theist.

is soccer the name of a God that you don't follow? ....or you don't believe that soccer exist? ..or unsure soccer exist?

No, I was using an example, not linking it to a God. Soccer is a sport that I don't follow. Hence, I'm a non-soccer-follower (not a follower of soccer). It doesn't mean I'm anti-soccer.


football-fan or non-football-fan doesn't mean they've made themselves as part of any delusion.
what if they are praying to a God that their team wins the game? ....

... or if they believe jumping off a bridge will change the point spread in a game they love, because Jesus told him so the other night. It has nothing to do with the fact that being a football-fan or non-football-fan itself plays any part of being delusional.

also does non-football fan means they don't believe football exist?

No, it does not say, indicate, or imply that at all. It isn't about existence. It doesn't answer much at all. Just that they lack fandom of the sport of football. Could be Tarzan who lives in the jungle and never heard of it. Could be an angry wife who HATES football because her husband sits on the couch watching it all day (an anti-fan). Could be a variety of things. It doesn't attempt to explain or imply the reason why. That's something else.

Is this surface bacterial?
No
Is this surface abacterial?
No
then what is the surface?
there is no surface there

If you say No to that exact question, you Are agreeing you understand what surface they're alluding to. Otherwise, the answer would Not be No. It'd be "What surface?" or "Which surface?" or "I don't see a surface", etc. If someone answered No while not seeing any surface -- they're either an idiot or playing games that aren't so clever.

If I turned to you and said "Does this woman have breasts?" and we were sitting in an empty field... with no people, no pictures -- nor any reference to any woman in conversation immediately prior to that, I would not say "No" or "Yes". Saying No or Yes = belief held by me that there was a woman you were referring to.
 wolfman4142
Joined: 12/20/2016
Msg: 368
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/30/2017 11:17:59 AM

I've had this conversation irl,

Guy: im not religious because i don't believe in god
Me: you dont have to believe in a god to be religious
Guy: no, you are religious if you have any beliefs
Me: I don't identify with any religion and I have my own beliefs
Guy: that's being religious
Me: then you are also religious
Guy: no I don't have any beliefs
Me: then what do you believe in?
Guy: Nothing.
Me: that's a belief
Guy: Now hold on a second...


One example of a goofy conversation means what? People who don't subscribe to your beliefs based on no evidence doesn't mean they believe in nothing. They believe in things we have evidence of period and nothing else. An abbott and costello skit also doesn't answer the man's question.

Abbott: You throw the ball to first base.
Costello: Then who gets it?
Abbott: Naturally.
Costello: Naturally.
Abbott: Now you've got it.
Costello: I throw the ball to Naturally.
Abbott: You don't! You throw it to Who!
Costello: Naturally.
Abbott: Well, that's it—say it that way.
Costello: That's what I said.
Abbott: You did not.
Costello: I said I throw the ball to Naturally.
Abbott: You don't! You throw it to Who!
Costello: Naturally.
 funchesf
Joined: 6/27/2014
Msg: 369
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/30/2017 11:53:08 AM

Posted By: kidreason29
You've specifically asked to come up with something to call yourself, and I did, myself, because I am a yourself and a myself

all you've done was come up with the concept behind "The Trinity" ......yourself myself and self

self God
myself The Son
yourself The Holy Spirit

all three personalities falls under the title of kidreason29 ...which explains why you claim that other people in your dreams are actually you or yourself myself


Posted By: kidreason29
You still don't get it

that generally happens whenever I'm confronted by nonsense


Posted By: kidreason29
pats self

pats self? ...are you also patting yourself myself? or is it myself yourself?


Posted By: kidreason29
I've out done your whole challenge,

not really ....when confronted with the question "do you have a belief in God" ....perhaps in this case ("No I'm an Atheist") is far better to use then (" No I'm myself yourself because I'm yourself myself")

the challenge was for you to come up with a name to call yourself that displays that you're not part of the delusion not something that would make them think that you were the one having the delusion ...

but you're welcome to try again


Posted By: norwegianguy456
Because they're not without morals, Satan's helper, and many other labels. Why would they?

probably because terms like Atheist didn't exist until the 16th century ...you're trying to argue the point as if the term existed during the times of Moses ....


Posted By: norwegianguy456
Answer: There's no reason to go by a negative label just because others are hissing it at you

actually more than hissing took place ...until terms like Atheist came into play...non-believers were called names associated to evil which in turn caused them to be tortured or killed

Atheist is the politically correct way to call oneself or someone evil .....funches 3:16


Posted By: norwegianguy456
No, I was using an example, not linking it to a God

that statement is a contradiction ...the intent of using an example is to link it to the cause ..if not... then you're guilty of the old adage "mixing apples and oranges"

or in this case mixing followers of soccer and football to followers of God ...seriously?
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 370
view profile
History
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/30/2017 1:02:49 PM

probably because terms like Atheist didn't exist until the 16th century

Atheist existed as soon as theist existed. Now, popularly used? That's a different story, and not what I'm referring to. Atheist and Abacterial are not original terms in any way. They depend on and come into existence when the "theist" and "bacterial" comes in. Just the same as "non-theist" or "non-bacterial" aren't originally coined, and come into existence when they original word they're based on do.

Atheist is the politically correct way to call oneself or someone evil

The usage via False change of definition on the street (like calling something abacterial = anti-bacterial) -- wasn't intended to be politically correct. It's a good strategy to keep people from the non-believing circle of one's religion -- you take a technical word that exists (atheist) but nobody really uses -- and you hijack it and convince people it means something else by using Two definitions: Real & Fake/Negative. You say that atheists are hating god, against god, evil, etc. -- and that's what atheists are definitively. So when someone is maybe fleeting from the religious beliefs about God and they say "Hey, I just don't know, I'm just don't believe it right now... I'm not hating any god, and I wish any god would --," while you cut them off in convo and get to the point: "You don't believe in god, you're not a theist. Which means Atheist. You know what Atheists are, right??" So you instill this in people -- using two conflicting definitions -- to make them (socially & internally) fear not having a belief in god in general. It helps make it "stick" to the population. Sure, it's not honest -- but "good people do it", and hey, ya gotta crack a few eggs to make a omelet, right? ;)

that statement is a contradiction ...the intent of using an example is to link it to the cause

No, it's not a contradiction. It's linked to the cause/reason of going around Labeling Oneself like a name-tag through life.

I'm not a soccer fan. I'm not going to title myself as "Not a Soccer Fan" in general day-to-day life, just because I'm not one, unless I Hate soccer (then it's not merely not being a fan). OR if I'm, say, in a forum about people b!tching about soccer -- yeah, within that Realm -- Yes. But you were bringing up labeling in day to day life -- not in certain arenas where a subject comes up. Then SURE, I'll even identify myself as someone who doesn't eat ravioli, if/when I'm caught up in a subject about people who do or don't.

But to go by a title/name-tag/label in life, as opposed to a categorical label where you're placed when the subject comes up? No need for even many non-theists and even theists out there, let alone those who don't eat ravioli or don't follow badmitten.
 kidreason29
Joined: 9/25/2015
Msg: 371
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/30/2017 2:38:09 PM

They believe in things we have evidence of period and nothing else

why would you believe in something of which you have evidence of? isn't that the opposite of a belief?

and yes you can believe in nothing itself, as a thing in itself, it is still a belief
 funchesf
Joined: 6/27/2014
Msg: 372
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/30/2017 3:48:27 PM

Posted By: norwegianguy456
Atheist existed as soon as theist existed.

the question was ....which came "FIRST".... Atheism or Theism and why?

your answer "as soon as" is not an applicable answer ....the answer can only be either "Atheism" or "Theism"

choose only one from the two please......and without any shenanigans thank you very much

and remember to explain why you choose it


Posted By: norwegianguy456
No, it's not a contradiction. It's linked to the cause/reason of going around Labeling Oneself like a name-tag through life.

then you just made the case why one shouldn't feel forced to label oneself as an Atheist to appease someone else delusions


Posted By: norwegianguy456
I'm not a soccer fan. I'm not going to title myself as "Not a Soccer Fan" in general day-to-day life, just because I'm not one,

your statement "I'm not a soccer fan" in this case is an example of you giving yourself the title "Not a Soccer Fan"

the reason why you are mixing apples with oranges is because there is supposedly no "divine retribution" that drives others to violence against those with the title "Not a Soccer Fan" especially here in The United States....

it may be different in the countries that have riots after soccer games ...when confronted by the rioters just tell them you're not a fan nor follower of their soccer team
 kidreason29
Joined: 9/25/2015
Msg: 373
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/30/2017 5:46:45 PM

why would you believe in something of which you have evidence of? isn't that the opposite of a belief?

and yes you can believe in nothing itself, as a thing in itself, it is still a belief


law derivation: there is no evidence of nothing, if belief requires no evidence, then nothing itself is a belief
 wolfman4142
Joined: 12/20/2016
Msg: 374
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/30/2017 9:48:22 PM

law derivation: there is no evidence of nothing, if belief requires no evidence, then nothing itself is a belief


Who's on first?
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 375
view profile
History
There's no such thing as an atheist.
Posted: 1/30/2017 11:09:31 PM

the question was ....which came "FIRST".... Atheism or Theism and why?

The word "theism" technically came first if you're using a stopwatch, immediately followed by the concept of non-theism aka the word atheism. Basically the same time.
Much like bacterial, thus abacterial. Same answer to your question there, as with any word where "a" before the word applies.
The answer to your question is = "Which word came first, theism or non-theism?" = "Which word came first, political or non-political?"
Now, for the word "atheistic" or "apolitical" as commonly Used terms -- that's a different story. I would guess notably Later, but that's irrelevant.

then you just made the case why one shouldn't feel forced to label oneself as an Atheist to appease someone else delusions

No. You're not reading what I wrote correctly.

your statement "I'm not a soccer fan" in this case is an example of you giving yourself the title "Not a Soccer Fan"

Title? Referring to oneself as not being a soccer fan isn't giving oneself a Title -- they'd have to do more than that. Being equivalent to a descriptive or distinctive Name that is earned or chosen, doesn't quite fit. It's no more a Title as a person than answering "No" to if they ever been in randomly-pointed-out-lady's house before. Not a title. An answer.

To avoid changing the subject on definitions of title vs this vs that -- call it to what fits your liking. Point is, it's no more a "Title" than me not being in the house of a randomly pointed out person. Good luck convincing anyone that's worthy of self-indentification like "Alabama Fan" or "Baptist" or "Son of Jor-El".

why would you believe in something of which you have evidence of? isn't that the opposite of a belief?

Okay, I cut into this one, but it is of course down the rational route to believe in something in which there is evidence. It may be lacking Too Much evidence where it'd be too hasty and at least a bit irrational to Believe In It, or maybe it has complete evidence. If you're assuming full provable evidence on something -- yes, of course you should believe it. Would be irrational not to. If your second question alludes to that full provable evidence on something -- even though it's accepted as a truth, it doesn't mean it's opposite of, nor even lacking a belief. "Yeah, that is true -- the evidence proves it. But because it's proven, I can't believe in it." How is that rational? What am I missing here? :)

and yes you can believe in nothing itself, as a thing in itself, it is still a belief

If you mean the concept of nothing -- the lack of something -- yes. Although modern physics puts this into question, about the existence of Absolutely Nothing, but that's a whole other story. Regardless, one can believe in the Concept of nothing existing -- or the LACK of Something existing. And it doesn't have to be about the fabric of space-time for the belief in nothingness to be true -- but relative to what one's talking about ("I believe there was Nothing there. That damn house was Empty, and I looked around everywhere!")

Now, if one means the lack of a belief is and always is a belief, I disagree. There's plenty of beliefs out there about all sorts of meaningless crap individual people have going on -- and I lack a belief in reference to more crap than I have beliefs about. So no, I don't have a belief on/about/in-reference-to [insert belief about a random relative's random belief here].
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > There's no such thing as an "atheist."