Deep Dive into the Meaning of Atheism: Blog Review (Caffeine Corner) @SteveMcRae

Deep Dive into the Meaning of Atheism: Blog Review (Caffeine Corner) @SteveMcRae

Steve McRae | Deep Dive into the Meaning of Atheism: Blog Review (Caffeine Corner) @SteveMcRae | Uploaded June 2023 | Updated October 2024, 4 hours ago.
I am reviewing a blog post by Jaco van der Byl on "the meaning of atheism".
Link to blog:

Deep Dive into the Meaning of Atheism
amrestorative.wordpress.com/2022/09/01/deep-dive-into-the-meaning-of-atheism

Gumballs and God better explained
Steve McRae - April 19, 2020
greatdebatecommunity.com/2020/04/19/gumballs-and-god-better-explained

Join this channel to get access to perks:
youtube.com/channel/UC1SzlwfeQ_4-9LuV_00Efuw/join

►Link to the Great Debate Community web page and forums: greatdebatecommunity.com
►Link to the Great Debate Community channel:youtube.com/channel/UCgnIsA-D3PX6g6gi6Nyuewg

😍To help support my channel...any all support is *GREATLY* appreciated!😍
►Patreon- patreon.com/stevemcrae
►Facebook- facebook.com/steveaskanything
►Twitter- twitter.com/SteveMcRae_
►Pinterest- pinterest.com/stevemcrae
►PayPal- paypal.me/StevenMcRae

Deep Dive into the Meaning of Atheism: Blog Review (Caffeine Corner)

DISCUSSION: Katie Joys (#WOACB) Lawyers Snark!

Lets Discuss: #nonsense- Boundries Work Both Ways Becky!

Should Kids have Gender Affirming Surgeries, Puberty Blockers, or HRT? W/Jessica Gill (Open Panel)

$Atheist and Nontheist are NOT the same thing! w/PROOF! 📢 I told you all Atheist Community of Austin, American Atheists, Matt Dillahunty, and Aron Ras usages of terminology lead to an unavoidable contradiction in set theory! Lets see how many New Atheist™ even try to show my proof is wrong as I use their own definitions of atheist (not atheism!) 🤣 They all incorrectly argue that atheist v theist is a strict dicotomy, and I prove that by them prescribing Googles defintions as by defintion leads to an inescapable condradiction in set theory. Feel free to share around! My paper on Academia edu: https://www.academia.edu/121884842/_NonTheist_is_not_the_same_as_set_size_as_Atheist_due_to_sentience_of_members Atheist: a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods. (emphsis added) POSTED IN 3 AM PHILOSOPHY https://greatdebatecommunity.com/2024/07/07/nottheism-is-not-the-same-as-set-size-as-atheism-due-to-sentience-of-members-proof-by-contradiction/#google_vignette “Nontheist” is not the same as set size as “Atheist” due to sentience of members- PROOF by Contradiction STEVE MCRAE JULY 7, 2024 “NONTHEIST” IS NOT THE SAME AS SET SIZE AS “ATHEIST” DUE TO SENTIENCE OF MEMBERS- PROOF BY CONTRADICTION ASSUMPTION: Nontheist := Atheist Purpose of proof: To show this relationship is a category error. Additional assumptions: Theist: Set of sentient beings who believes in God Atheist: Set of sentient beings who do not believe in God. Non-theist (Nontheist) is any element not in the set of theist. Complementary set relationships: Set A and A’ are in U”: A’=UA Assume A’ ⊣ A and A ⊣ T A = (U T) If x ∈ U then x must be (x ∈ T | x ∈ A}: A = {x ∈ U | x ∉ T} Let: U = Universal set of all entities (U) T = Set of theists (A’) A = Set of atheists (A) S = Set of sentient beings capable of holding beliefs (S) Definitions: 1. Theist: x ∈ T ⇔ (x ∈ S ∧ Believes(x, God exists)) If x is a theist ⇔ x is a sentient being and believes God exists. 2. Atheist: x ∈ A ⇔ (x ∈ S ∧ ¬Believes(x, God exists)) If x is an atheist ⇔ x is a sentient being and does not God exists. 3. Not Theist: x ∈ (U T) x is in U, but is not in T Proof: 1. Assume for contradiction that A = (U T) (Given by initial assumptions of A’=UA) where “A” is representing A’ and T is representing A) 2. Consider an entity r where r ∉ S (e.g., a rock) ∀x (x ∉ S → x ∉ A) (from definition of Atheist) r ∉ S ∴ r ∉ A (A rock is not a sentient being. A rock does not believe God exists. Being an atheist requires sentience, therefore a rock is not an atheist) 3. However, r ∈ (U T) because: r ∈ U (as U is the universal set) r ∉ T (as r ∉ S, and all theists must be in S) ∴ r ∈ (U T) (A rock is a nontheist because, a rock is in the Universal set, but a rock is not sentient. All theists must be sentent, therefore rocks are not theists) 4. From steps 2 and 3: r ∈ (U T) ∧ r ∉ A (A rock is a nontheist and is not an atheist)5. This is a contradiction of A = {x ∈ U | x ∉ T} (If x is in U, it must be either in T or A) 6. Therefore, our assumption must be false. Conclusion: Nontheist (the set of entities that are not theists) is not the set as atheist (the set of sentient beings who do not believe in God). QED Short version: “NonTheist” is not the same as set size as “Atheist” due to sentience of members- PROOF by Contradiction Assumptions: 1. Nontheist := Atheist 2. Theist: Set of sentient beings who believe in God 3. Atheist: Set of sentient beings who do not believe in God 4. Non-theist (Nontheist) is any element not in the set of theists Complementary set relationships: 1.Set A and A’ are in U”: A’=UA 2. Assume A’ ⊣ A and A ⊣ T 3.A = (U T) Proof: 1. Assume for contradiction that A = (U T) 2. Consider an entity r where r ∉ S (e.g., a rock) 3. Since r ∉ S, ∀x (x ∉ S → x ∉ A) (from definition of Atheist), r ∉ A 4. However, r ∈ (U T) because r ∈ U and r ∉ T (as r ∉ S, and all theists must be in S) 5. From steps 2 and 3, we get a contradiction: r ∈ (U T) ∧ r ∉ A 6. This contradicts the assumption A = {x ∈ U | x ∉ T} (If x is in U, it must be either in T or A) Conclusion: Therefore, our assumption that Nontheist := Atheist must be false QED$

An Agnostic Reviews an Atheist Reviewing a Christian

Atheological Aholes: 10 Questions for Atheists (ANSWERED BY ME!)

Does Atheism Fail at logic, Morality, Epistemology, and Science?

Creationist thinks evolution makes it sound that humans are part chimp and part Neanderthal

Katie Joy: The Queen of Grift

People are trying to convince me Matt Dillahunty is agnostic? WTF!

Metaphysical Accountings vs Epistemic Justifications

Deep Dive into the Meaning of Atheism: Blog Review (Caffeine Corner) @SteveMcRae