Tarski wrote:Nothing much turns on the answer to the question of whether babies should be considered atheists or not.
And yet, watch how fiercely atheists will argue that the word needs to be understood that way despite its usage over millennia. If everyone is born an atheist then atheism is natural and theism is unnatural. That's the whole point.
Buffalo wrote:The word "atheist" simply means without god - as in, no belief in gods.
Oh. When someone says the word "Television" do you understand it as a greek root for far (tele) and latin word sight (visio) as a conjunction for far sight and not as transmission device as everyone else understands it?
Buffalo wrote:The word "atheist" simply means without god - as in, no belief in gods. That describes every baby I've ever met.
This is the etymological fallacy, Buffalo. The word atheism was developed millennia ago and has been used ever since to refer specifically and exclusively to those who deny the existence of deity. It is only recently that a minority of atheists has made a push to redefine the word.
Buffalo wrote:The word "atheist" simply means without god - as in, no belief in gods.
Oh. When someone says the word "Television" do you understand it as a greek root for far (tele) and latin word sight (visio) as a conjunction for far sight and not as transmission device as everyone else understands it?
That's not really relevant. The definition I'm using is a legitimate one - albeit the most inclusive of possible definitions.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.