Is this, “all babies are atheist?”
Stay off the kool-aid.
What? Belief is a ratioemotional assent. Not rational thought in some kind of pure thing.
You mean having grammar and language and a form of comprehension then.
Calling it “rational” in this context is awkward for historically, it applies to “reasoning”, and the ability to reason (compare/contrast). If you have no need to compare/contrast, you can just believe because it’s presented as true and it stops there.
Reasoning only requires an ability to compare. You can compare using emotions or reactions.
You only need a lesser, a greater and a way to compare and choose.
If a fish has to decide whether its body can fit in a hole, it uses its sensing abilities to decide whether it can fit or not. Vision, whiskers, water current, sound, whatever. I’m not a fish.
It can also be wrong and get stuck.
You don’t need language as we know it to do those things.
I was reframing to confirm that we were starting on the same page and we are. You confirmed it.
Now, are you suggesting all babies and animals that have a form of reasoning skills are, by default, atheist ?
Atheism is a response to a proposition, which requires complex language and thought.
You could say nontheist is a default but you cannot say atheist is a default.
They are distinctly different.
That could be true but it’s not Alen. Atheist is not absence of belief but a rejection of belief.
“In the broadest sense”, is nontheism, which is not atheism.
Shall I use broad form of the word religion now? I know you guys find that annoying.
Big difference though: People have been using broad-form of “religion” for a very long time.
But this broad form of “atheism” is novel and constructed to suit a purpose.
The sad thing about this new style of atheism is that it is perpetually combating with agnosticism. Once upon a time, this was not so and they could be allies but they can no longer be allies once the proselytization began.