• FooBarrington@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Deism is without theism, that doesn’t make it atheism. The article is quite clear. Being a position of belief is indicated by the ism. The part before it defines the position of belief. Whether disbelief/lack of belief of the gods, or belief in no gods. It is not being without the belief of the belief in gods.

    Now please clearly explain the difference between the position “no belief in gods” and “no belief in gods because the concept doesn’t yet exist”. That’s what your entire position hinges on, and you haven’t given any arguments for it.

    Also, the article is quite clear in not supporting your position. It says:

    -ism (/-ˌɪzəm/) is a suffix in many English words, originally derived from the Ancient Greek suffix -ισμός (-ismós), and reached English through the Latin -ismus, and the French -isme.[1] It means “taking side with” or “imitation of”, and is often used to describe philosophies, theories, religions, social movements, artistic movements, lifestyles,[2] and behaviors.[3] It is typically added to nouns.

    No mention of requirements regarding pre-existing concepts or anything similar.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Now please clearly explain the difference between the position “no belief in gods” and “no belief in gods because the concept doesn’t yet exist”.

      You can’t form a position of belief on something you don’t know exists. You must first know what something is in order to establish a position of how much you believe it to be so or not so.

      I’m just repeating myself more and more now. Refer back to Tinklipism.

      As for what you’ve somehow understood of isms from that article—genuinely mindblown. You literally just quoted the whole job and point of the ism suffix and…whoosh. It’s staring you in the face; I’m not somehow simplifying it further. I don’t even know what else to give you if your brain glazed over that very efficient, simple, and clear, explanation then landed here…

      No mention of requirements regarding pre-existing concepts or anything similar.

      • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        You can’t form a position of belief on something you don’t know exists. You must first know what something is in order to establish a position of how much you believe it to be so or not so.

        Yes, I understood your point the first time you made it. Do you finally have any arguments for this position? Supporting evidence? Anything? Because I can trivially say “no”, and I’ve thus made just as strong an argument as you’ve made.

        As for what you’ve somehow understood of isms from that article—genuinely mindblown. You literally just quoted the whole job and point of the ism suffix and…whoosh. It’s staring you in the face; I’m not somehow simplifying it further.

        Since you appear to literally be incapable of describing your position beyond “it is this way because I understand it to be this way”, I won’t waste more time on you. Have a good day.