Is not collecting post stamps a hobby?

ou (presumably) do not believe in the loch ness monster. Does that mean you believe in its nonexistence?

Here are the two statements you are making:

1. I don’t believe in the non-existence of God.
2. I don’t believe in the existence of God.

You are contradicting yourself.

A hobby by definition is a pursuit, albeit a relaxing one, so the absence of a pursuit equals the absence of a hobby. A belief, on the other hand, can be based on anything, whether it be the existence of a deity or nonexistence of a deity.

The distinction to be made here is between “not believing” in something and “believing in the nonexistence” of something.

Sorry you are not able to see the point. There is always a flip side of everything. That is what you people don’t seem to understand.

You say that atheists who “do not believe” in the existence of God. If you “do not believe” in that, it means you “do believe in something else”. You do not believe in the existence of God because you believe in the non existence of God.

They are two sides of the same coin. There is no point just showing one side and hiding behind it.

Your question could be viewed in two ways: Is NOT “collecting post stamps” a hobby…? …and… …is NOT “believing in the existence of a god” a believe?

OR

Is “NOT collecting post stamps” a hobby…? …and… …is “NOT believing in the existence of a god” a believe?

Colecting stamps is a hobby. Not collecting stamps is not a hobby.

Believing in the existance of a God is a belief. Not believing in the existance of a God is also a belief.

How’s that for muddying the waters? Have fun!

Thanks for the interesting answers.

I guess you could make it one by sending excessive letters… Not believing in God is a personal belief.

“Sorry you are not able to see the point. There is always a flip side of everything. That is what you people don’t seem to understand.”

‘You people’?

“You say that atheists who “do not believe” in the existence of God. If you “do not believe” in that, it means you “do believe in something else”.”

No it doesn’t. You (presumably) do not believe in the loch ness monster. Does that mean you believe in its nonexistence? Why would you believe in something’s nonexistence without evidence to show it doesn’t exist?

And if not believing in something’s existence implies belief in its nonexistence, does that mean I believe in things I’ve never heard of before?

Another way to demonstrate it: Belief is not a binary condition - you can believe something ‘strongly’ or ‘weakly’. You can believe in the nonexistence of something ‘strongly’ or ‘weakly’. What lies between the weakest belief in the existence of something, and the weakest belief in the nonexistence of something? Non-belief.

Why is it so difficult to conceive that someone can simply lack belief in something, without asserting its nonexistence?