http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/

[LostOne4Ever]

22. Talking about a subject without getting the input of the subject is bad philosophy

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]It is telling people what they think.[/font]

Academic philosophy is not about activism and is not required to bend to the popular will of one ideology.

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]Throwing the word activist in there is nothing more than a red herring to distract from the fact that Atheists are telling Stanford they are misrepresenting atheism. If anyone should know what atheists believe or disbelieve...it is atheists.[/font]

I am agnostic and use Huxley's original definition.

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]So am I. That is why I am an agnostic atheist.

I just don't act like a pretentious prick who thinks they are better than everyone because of it. [/font]

I do not care what version of atheism you ascribe to, but the rejection of Flew's redefinition is warranted. It is so warranted exactly because of the mentality of activist atheists, whom behave like strong atheists or anti-theists, but claim they are agnostic atheists.

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]You don't care so much you not only had to post here to try and antagonize us.

Just because you throw the word "activist" in there doesn't magically make the fact that atheist are telling standford that they are misrepresenting atheism disappear. How one behaves, has no bearing on what one's personal philosophy may or may not be.

That said, there is nothing wrong in standing up for yourself and group from blatant lies.[/font]

It is no more than a cop out that trolls on social media use to maintain a dominance of discussion, and it serves almost no use in philosophical discussion.

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]Cop out of what? Taking a position they never held in the first place?

No matter the label one uses one position stays the same. If we did redefine atheism as you and standford wish, that would not change the position of those who are being "activists" just the label. We would still dominate the discussion because the position remain logically sound.

But your post demonstrates exactly why they should change it. Not only does it misrepresent what actual atheists actually think, but it allows disingenuous people to try to ascribe to atheists a position they do not take in order to refute it because they can't refute the person's actual position.

And technically, as you identify as an agnostic...you are making the same exact "cop out" to "troll social media" and "dominate" discussion. You are no better or different than the people you hate.

And BTW, this is the Atheist AND Agnostic SAFEHAVEN. If you can't respect BOTH atheism and agnosticism you should delete your post and leave. You obviously has issues with atheists. Either learn to be respectful to both or you have no place here.[/font]

I think I will be contacting them and thanking them for maintaining academic integrity.

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]You misspelled bigotry. It is spelled "Bigotry" not "academic integrity" something they and anyone who would write a letter to them congratulating them on their bigotry both lack.

Oh and I guess this further proves how much you don't care what version of atheism we ascribe to. [/font]