Taken from Stanford University Philosophy Talk
"Granted all of that, doesn’t it still seem strange to define one’s life by a negative claim, by the non-existence of something."
I was reading the Stanford University Philosophy Talk describing what an atheist is and what they believe. It seems that philosophers - of all people - should be the ones that understand the basic concepts under discussion.
It is wrong to define an atheist as someone that believes in the nonexistence of god/gods. Atheists doubt the existence of supernatural forces of any kind, goblins, unicorns or gods. What atheist really means is someone that refutes the claims and can't see any point in wasting time on the issue. Period.
Atheists are quite happy that you waste time debating nonsense.
What you meant was an antitheist. Against God.
An Antitheist is someone that is against the idea of God. Think Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris. These are scientists that realized that all the work they can do in a lab helping one field of research is meaningless compared to the unthinking religious masses torquing society towards silly purposes. They chose to make a real contribution by attacking god belief as wrong headed and counter productive.
What you will find if you listen to Dawkins or Harris, or even Christopher Hitchens when he was alive, is that they understand the scripture, the Quran, and so on BETTER than the foolish religious people that attempt to confront them! If people weren't so emotional about their religious programming then they would see how lacking their religious belief was.
Philosopher, be ashamed of your ignorance for what you seek to discredit/ malign.What does your Ph.D. mean if you don't understand what you are talking about?
