Hi John T,
I am not quite getting the logic here. How does not believing in God make one religious or part of a religion?
If I don't pray to Allah, does that make me religious?
If I don't collect butterflies, does that make me a collector?
If I don't play tennis, does that me an athlete?
If I don't play the piano, does that make me a musician?
If I don't believe in unicorns, does that make me a believer in mythical creatures?
If I don't teach a college course in Philosophy, does that make me a college Philosophy Teacher?
Religion is a category of certain activities. I cannot understand how not doing those activities which fall under the category of religion makes a religious person.
I am curious because this logic seems to violate one of Aristotle's Laws of Non-Contradiction: the Law of the Excluded Middle:
From Wikipedia
In logic, the law of excluded middle (or the principle of excluded middle) is the third of the three classic laws of thought. It states that for any proposition, either that proposition is true, or its negation is true.
The law is also known as the law (or principle) of the excluded third, in Latin principium tertii exclusi. Yet another Latin designation for this law is tertium non datur: "no third (possibility) is given".
The earliest known formulation is Aristotle's principle of non-contradiction, first proposed in On Interpretation,[1] where he says that of two contradictory propositions (i.e. where one proposition is the negation of the other) one must be true, and the other false
Proposition: Believing in God is Religious
Contrary Proposition: Not believing in God is Religious.
If one of these propositions is true, then the other must be false.
Thus: either the first proposition is true and Believing in God is Religious, in which case not believing in God is not religious, or
the second proposition is true and Not Believing in God is Religious, in which case believing in God is not religious.
It seems you either have to tell us which proposition is true, making the other false, or if you assert both are true, you have to reject/violate Aristotle's Law of the Excluded Middle.
Warmly,
Jay Raskin
John T wrote:outhouse wrote:John T wrote:
I'm sorry if atheists don't believe atheism is a religion but that is simply a delusion.
JT
unsubstantiated rhetoric.
Your no true Scotsman fallacy is noted.
Not believing in mythology does not make one religious.
I'm sorry you missed the irony with my play on words.
Carrier was giving a lecture
he titled: "
Are Christians Delusional?". Yet, it was he who was the deluded one, using his own criteria. Do you see the irony now?
1. Actually, you incorrectly used the term: '
no true Scotsman fallacy'. That is a
fallacy of presumption. For self-correction on what '
no true Scotsman' really means, please see:
http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presum ... -scotsman/
2. Also, you made a similar mistake under
fallacy of ambiguity with; "
Not believing in mythology does not make one religious". That is to say, you made a '
straw-man' argument. See also:
http://www.logicalfallacies.info/ambiguity/straw-man/
Let me guess, you didn't even bother to watch the Carrier video I linked?
John T