[photon]

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

You're focusing far too much on the parts instead of the whole. A belief system has to check multiple boxes.

Wholes are comprised of parts, if parts are missing the whole isn't whole.

If the boxes don't make for a good definition of a belief system then yes lots of things might check all the boxes and be a belief system by that definition. I don't need to look at the whole to decide if a check box is reasonable or not because each box must in itself be valid.

"A belief system is a set of mutually supportive beliefs." is the simplest definition I can find. By that definition atheism is not a belief system.

You've talked about an academic definition, but you haven't provided it just proposed a variety of boxes. Lets have the academic definition, then we'd have something to proceed on.

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

If you can HONESTLY tell me that believing you can't fly informs your world view and that you base significant social, political, and philosophical beliefs on the idea of not being able to fly, while being part of a community that all should follow particular beliefs associated with not flying, then you're right, it's a belief system. We can call it Anti-Flightism if you'd like.

So by your criteria if believing I can't fly doesn't "significantly" influence my social, political, philosophical beliefs and create a community where all should follow particular beliefs then it's not a belief system? What constitutes significant? How do you measure it? Beliefs grow up into belief system if they randomly happen to become influential?

Doesn't make sense, I think the clear academic definition you spoke about is necessary.

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

Atheism is a belief system. If it isn't, why would it matter if an Atheist believes in Aliens? Or Crystal Power? According to MarchHare, those people probably aren't atheists, and even you agree it's hard to pin down.

It doesn't matter that they believe in aliens or crystal power. That someone's beliefs are hard to pin down because they lack the ability to properly reason and articulate clearly isn't relevant. If on a questionnaire that asks "Do you believe in god(s)" if they check no they are an atheist, because that's what the word means.

My point was that not all atheists are the kind that appreciate science, form educational organizations and discuss it on the Internet.

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

Isn't your definition of atheism the singular lack of belief in god/deities? So why in the world would ANYONE question someone's atheism if aliens and the power of crystals, two entirely separate things from gods and deities, were other beliefs of theirs?

He wasn't questioning it based on aliens or the power of crystals.

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

Would you say that, perhaps, aliens and crystal power do not fall in line with the "system" that which most true atheists follow?

No, because there is no system that true atheists follow. You're the one claiming that it's a belief system, so provide all the foundational beliefs of the belief system. You're the one that says belief systems have "community that all should follow particular beliefs associated" with, what are those beliefs all atheists should follow?

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

That is Fundamentalism. That is also a belief. They believe that the Bible is literal and should be taken as such without variation. This belief informs a multitude of other beliefs. It is a belief system.

No, the multitude of other beliefs is the belief system. The belief that earth is 6000 years old doesn't originate with the belief that their religious text is inerrant, it originates from one particular interpretation of the religious text. If they want to know what the correct belief is with respect to the ultimate destiny of a person, they don't (and can't) check their belief that their religious text is inerrant, because that belief doesn't speak to the question of human destiny. They have to check the beliefs formed from the religious text, the belief system.

Just because A follows from B does not mean A IS B.

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

Nearly every belief system has a central belief, and every central belief informs a range of related, important beliefs that are generally accepted by followers of that belief system.

That still doesn't make that central belief a belief system. Just because A follows from B does not mean A is B. Provide your academic definition of a belief system and we can tell from there.

And what important beliefs are generally accepted by all the followers of the belief system that is atheism.

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

That, or the Alien Crystal Powers Guru is as much as atheist as anyone else, without even the notion that they should have someone questioning their atheism because of seemingly unrelated beliefs they hold.

Of course the Guru is as much an atheist as every other atheist if he answers no to the question "Do you believe in god(s)?". That's the only criteria.

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

Well sure you do. You're propositioning your friends with the question of "If there were evidence, would you cease belief in God?".
In order for your question to be comprehensive, you'd surely have to qualify evidence.

Ah ok well I typically wouldn't ask something that specific way because it doesn't work that way (you generally can't prove a negative). I was speaking more generally about the question of what would change one's mind (which is why I said "that exact question (what evidence would change their mind)". Usually the discussion is around positive claims if it's involving evidence.

I didn't see the intended context of your question originally when I talked about burden of proof.

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

Absolutely. The only problem is that you talk about Atheism in an "all encompassing way" but talk about Theism differently.

I don't think so, I tried to specifically point out that not all atheists fit into a specific stereotype, and raised the point that not all theists are dogmatic.

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

Most Theists, I gather, are flexible and would change their belief system based on known information. Much like most Atheists.

God created the world, so the story goes. Some people (creationists) believe evolution not to be real. Most theists believe it to be very real. That's a pretty prime example of the opinion of theists changing, and a good example of their acceptance towards change given the change of information.

That's my issue with the "Atheists would change if the information was sufficient". I'm sure most would. As would most theists. Neither phrases should be uttered conclusively or in a manner that encompasses all who follow either.

Of course, I always say that digging down to the actual ideas of the person is far more useful than stereotypes or generalizations when talking about specifics. If the discussion is about generalities then information supporting the generalities is important.

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

EDIT: By the way, I'm really enjoying talking about this with you. It's making me think a little more, and my view if adapting as we go. Hope I've been tolerable so far

If I didn't like discussing it I wouldn't be discussing it.