Sendraks wrote:Jamest makes claims to knowledge, but he can't show what he knows.

The spoon that can be bent is not the true spoon. Tell me that isn't jamest's filosofeezing in a nutshell.

Definition of atheism.
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resou ... is-atheism

angelo wrote:Definition of atheism.
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resou ... is-atheism

That's not an argument, angelo. It's a website you found on the internet and cited, which means you're not alone in accepting that definition. If you're happy with not being alone, instead of being an individual, and making your own arguments, well, that's nothing new.

I do wish people wouldn't spell atheist with an uppercase initial. It's not a name. It's a concept, like vegetarian, or knitter. Giving it an initial capital makes it into a "thing", which it isn't.

angelo wrote:Definition of atheism.
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resou ... is-atheism

Sorry, what's the point of this?

Agrippina wrote:I do wish people wouldn't spell atheist with an uppercase initial. It's not a name. It's a concept, like vegetarian, or knitter. Giving it an initial capital makes it into a "thing", which it isn't.

It is a way of trying to turn it into a religion.

That was on the website Angelo linked to. You'd think atheists themselves would think about what they're doing.

Agrippina wrote:I do wish people wouldn't spell atheist with an uppercase initial. It's not a name. It's a concept, like vegetarian, or knitter. Giving it an initial capital makes it into a "thing", which it isn't.

Why do you wish people would treat the orthography in a particular manner? You're entitled to your own preferences, but it appears as if you also want to make 'atheism' a proprietary term. To some people, it's a concept; to others it's a 'thing', that is, a political 'movement'. That makes it almost useless as either a concept or as a term. And especially as a political 'movement'.

Agrippina wrote:You'd think atheists themselves would think about what they're doing.

Why would you think that? You might wish it, but that's another story. A political one. There is, in fact, nothing about a lack of belief in deities certifying that a person wishes to think about what he or she is doing. One can dismiss belief in deities with malice aforethought, simply by finding the concept inconvenient.

Agrippina wrote:I do wish people wouldn't spell atheist with an uppercase initial. It's not a name. It's a concept, like vegetarian, or knitter. Giving it an initial capital makes it into a "thing", which it isn't.

I never use uppercase initial for the word atheism, or atheist. In fact I hate using uppercase initial for god, christianity or Islam. Why use uppercase to describe an ideology!

Because of proper nouns. You know, grammar.

angelo wrote:

Agrippina wrote:I do wish people wouldn't spell atheist with an uppercase initial. It's not a name. It's a concept, like vegetarian, or knitter. Giving it an initial capital makes it into a "thing", which it isn't.

I never use uppercase initial for the word atheism, or atheist. In fact I hate using uppercase initial for god, christianity or Islam. Why use uppercase to describe an ideology!

It's not "describing an ideology". God is a character in a story, and like all characters in stories, his name gets an initial capital. There's nothing special that makes me want to give him special treatment.

I realize it's bad grammer. I show my disrespect for the followers and their cults by using lower case initials when naming them. My way of protest against them even though it's wrong.

angelo wrote:I realize it's bad grammer. I show my disrespect for the followers and their cults by using lower case initials when naming them. My way of protest against them even though it's wrong.

I used to do the same. Nowadays, however, I see more value in correct grammar and spelling than protesting.

angelo wrote:I realize it's bad grammer.

So when you said 'why use upper case to describe an ideology', what you meant was 'I know why one should use upper case to describe an ideology'.

I show my disrespect for the followers and their cults by using lower case initials when naming them. My way of protest against them even though it's wrong.

So you want to show them that they're so insignificant to you that you're prepared to alter the very structure and rules of the English language for them. Makes sense.

Not capitalising proper nouns simply because one disproves of the ideology in question is just silly
The rules of grammar are not supposed to be freely interpreted. They are there to be adhered to

angelo wrote:I realize it's bad grammer. I show my disrespect for the followers and their cults by using lower case initials when naming them. My way of protest against them even though it's wrong.

Wow. That showed 'em.

surreptitious57 wrote:Not capitalising proper nouns simply because one disproves of the ideology in question is just silly
The rules of grammar are not supposed to be freely interpreted. They are there to be adhered to

You can't miss a couple of full-stops when you're having a go about someone's grammar. Have a word.

I would also say that, as much as one would like to disprove an ideology, disapproval is probably easier to express.

Fallible wrote:

angelo wrote:I realize it's bad grammer.

So when you said 'why use upper case to describe an ideology', what you meant was 'I know why one should use upper case to describe an ideology'.

I show my disrespect for the followers and their cults by using lower case initials when naming them. My way of protest against them even though it's wrong.

So you want to show them that they're so insignificant to you that you're prepared to alter the very structure and rules of the English language for them. Makes sense.

Makes no sense to you, but I just cannot bring myself to use the correct protocols !

Argh! A space before the exclamation mark! There is no god!

What next? Guillemets?