So this is an argument I'm actually having, silly as it may seem. Can atheism be said to be a property of an individual? His argument is that it the lack of a property is not a property at all. This seems to make little sense to me. The notorious odorlessness and colorlessness of carbon monoxide certainly seem like properties of sorts and from what I've seen on SEP "atheism" certainly seems to meet many of the criteria mentioned, such as that it can be predicated on individuals. What is your stance on this issue?
-
Perhaps this might clear things up: rationalskepticism.org/nontheism/…– readyready15728Sep 18, 2015 at 23:28
-
1You may wish to see philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/27922/… . Also, do you mean being atheist is a property? Because athe-ism is a property is weird for other reasons.– virmaiorSep 19, 2015 at 3:10
-
1Hello. "from what I've seen on SEP "atheism" certainly seems to meet many of the criteria mentioned״ - Which SEP article? Which criteria?– Ram TobolskiSep 19, 2015 at 22:11
Add a comment
|