Faith

[falcon9]

So, if atheism is not a form of belief system as you say then why is it that many atheists adhere to the same set of beliefs.

Note the excerpt "... there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere."

Such as, God is nonexistent, everything can be explained by science. (That God is nonexistent IS a belief no matter how many times you say it is not).


The answer to your question then is that atheism is subdivided into "positive atheism, negative atheism, pragmatic atheism, axiological atheism and theoretical atheism.  So no, atheism does not "only" involve disbelief. The disbelieved assertion is that "god exists to believe in", (because that claim is not supported by any evidence).  Disbelieving an initial claim is not a stand-alone claim in and of itself, nor is disbelief a "belief" since it is expressly the opposite of belief.

You did not effectively answer my question, I will rephrase so that you cannot use semantics to avoid the actual question again:

The question was effectively answered, it seemingly wasn't effectively understood, (two distinct but, related situations).

Does atheism rely on science to explain occurrences of the world; furthermore, does it rely on science to one day explain the things it has not been able to explain yet.

Some variations of atheism rely upon skeptical/critical thinking processes.  Such critical thinking processes may be the same as or, similar to those of the scientific method.  Such reliance as applicable to atheism not not include "faith" per se; your question appears to be  inherently using 'confidence' as being interchangeable with "faith" and those terms are not equivalent.  Anticipating where your leading questions are leading, I'd estimate that the scientific method has tenetively explained much more "natural" phenomenon than belief in deital forms has.

[Falconer02]

I can't believe you both are still arguing over atheism being a belief system. It's not. The same as theism-- it is a single quality and cannot encompass an entire belief system. Both are single points (one in a belief in a deity or deities and the other is the opposite) and they can't stretch beyond those points that set them apart. I think both of you have complicated it to a point where you're twirling in circles and I think SurveyMack has tried to find technicalities to make it seem like it actually is a belief system.

[falcon9]

I can't believe you both are still arguing over atheism being a belief system. It's not. The same as theism-- it is a single quality and cannot encompass an entire belief system. Both are single points (one in a belief in a deity or deities and the other is the opposite) and they can't stretch beyond those points that set them apart. I think both of you have complicated it to a point where you're twirling in circles and I think SurveyMack has tried to find technicalities to make it seem like it actually is a belief system.

I agree and have argued against characterizing nearly all forms of atheism as an encompassing belief system, (there might be one version that nearly borders upon being a 'disbelief system'; "positive atheism" however, I haven't delved fully into the pro & con arguments related to that version).  The closest concept to an 'anti-belief system' that I could find so far in general research would be satanism; as an inversion of xtian beliefs.

[SurveyMack10]

I can't believe you both are still arguing over atheism being a belief system. It's not. The same as theism-- it is a single quality and cannot encompass an entire belief system. Both are single points (one in a belief in a deity or deities and the other is the opposite) and they can't stretch beyond those points that set them apart. I think both of you have complicated it to a point where you're twirling in circles and I think SurveyMack has tried to find technicalities to make it seem like it actually is a belief system.

I really wasn't trying to find technicalities, I was simply asking yes or no questions. The answers would have led to my explanation as to why it can be viewed as a belief system, but instead of answers to the questions i got long drawn out insults and dodges and arguments over semantics. Often times on this forum there are opinions that wont be accepted if they are not identical to those of others, and that has been the case in this argument and it seems to be a waste of time.

[SurveyMack10]

So, if atheism is not a form of belief system as you say then why is it that many atheists adhere to the same set of beliefs.

Note the excerpt "... there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere."

Such as, God is nonexistent, everything can be explained by science. (That God is nonexistent IS a belief no matter how many times you say it is not).


The answer to your question then is that atheism is subdivided into "positive atheism, negative atheism, pragmatic atheism, axiological atheism and theoretical atheism.  So no, atheism does not "only" involve disbelief. The disbelieved assertion is that "god exists to believe in", (because that claim is not supported by any evidence).  Disbelieving an initial claim is not a stand-alone claim in and of itself, nor is disbelief a "belief" since it is expressly the opposite of belief.

You did not effectively answer my question, I will rephrase so that you cannot use semantics to avoid the actual question again:

The question was effectively answered, it seemingly wasn't effectively understood, (two distinct but, related situations).

Does atheism rely on science to explain occurrences of the world; furthermore, does it rely on science to one day explain the things it has not been able to explain yet.

Some variations of atheism rely upon skeptical/critical thinking processes.  Such critical thinking processes may be the same as or, similar to those of the scientific method.  Such reliance as applicable to atheism not not include "faith" per se; your question appears to be  inherently using 'confidence' as being interchangeable with "faith" and those terms are not equivalent.  Anticipating where your leading questions are leading, I'd estimate that the scientific method has tenetively explained much more "natural" phenomenon than belief in deital forms has.

Please provide proof as to where I mentioned faith.

[falcon9]

I can't believe you both are still arguing over atheism being a belief system. It's not. The same as theism-- it is a single quality and cannot encompass an entire belief system. Both are single points (one in a belief in a deity or deities and the other is the opposite) and they can't stretch beyond those points that set them apart. I think both of you have complicated it to a point where you're twirling in circles and I think SurveyMack has tried to find technicalities to make it seem like it actually is a belief system.

I really wasn't trying to find technicalities, I was simply asking yes or no questions. The answers would have led to my explanation as to why it can be viewed as a belief system ...

In other words, they [/i]were[/i] leading questions.

... but instead of answers to the questions i got long drawn out insults and dodges and arguments over semantics.

No, instead you got answers which differentiated between various forms of atheism which were more accurate than simply answering yes or no to your leading questions.

Often times on this forum there are opinions that wont be accepted if they are not identical to those of others, and that has been the case in this argument and it seems to be a waste of time.

Pot, kettle called and left a message: you're black.

[SurveyMack10]

I can't believe you both are still arguing over atheism being a belief system. It's not. The same as theism-- it is a single quality and cannot encompass an entire belief system. Both are single points (one in a belief in a deity or deities and the other is the opposite) and they can't stretch beyond those points that set them apart. I think both of you have complicated it to a point where you're twirling in circles and I think SurveyMack has tried to find technicalities to make it seem like it actually is a belief system.

I really wasn't trying to find technicalities, I was simply asking yes or no questions. The answers would have led to my explanation as to why it can be viewed as a belief system ...

In other words, they [/i]were[/i] leading questions.

... but instead of answers to the questions i got long drawn out insults and dodges and arguments over semantics.

No, instead you got answers which differentiated between various forms of atheism which were more accurate than simply answering yes or no to your leading questions.

Often times on this forum there are opinions that wont be accepted if they are not identical to those of others, and that has been the case in this argument and it seems to be a waste of time.

Pot, kettle called and left a message: you're black.

Actually, I have told you multiple times that I have no intention of ever trying to convince you of God's existence and that your disbelief in him does not affect me whatsoever, just as my belief in God does not affect you. We are all entitled to our opinions and it would be nice if we could discuss them maturely without the use of personal insults, personal attacks, or degradation of others. I have not problem with you believing God is not real, yet you have a serious problem with anyone on this forum who believes He is- even though it has zero affect on you whatsoever no matter how you try to say that it does.

[falcon9]

So, if atheism is not a form of belief system as you say then why is it that many atheists adhere to the same set of beliefs.

Note the excerpt "... there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere."

Such as, God is nonexistent, everything can be explained by science. (That God is nonexistent IS a belief no matter how many times you say it is not).


The answer to your question then is that atheism is subdivided into "positive atheism, negative atheism, pragmatic atheism, axiological atheism and theoretical atheism.  So no, atheism does not "only" involve disbelief. The disbelieved assertion is that "god exists to believe in", (because that claim is not supported by any evidence).  Disbelieving an initial claim is not a stand-alone claim in and of itself, nor is disbelief a "belief" since it is expressly the opposite of belief.

You did not effectively answer my question, I will rephrase so that you cannot use semantics to avoid the actual question again:

The question was effectively answered, it seemingly wasn't effectively understood, (two distinct but, related situations).

Does atheism rely on science to explain occurrences of the world; furthermore, does it rely on science to one day explain the things it has not been able to explain yet.

Some variations of atheism rely upon skeptical/critical thinking processes.  Such critical thinking processes may be the same as or, similar to those of the scientific method.  Such reliance as applicable to atheism not not include "faith" per se; your question appears to be  inherently using 'confidence' as being interchangeable with "faith" and those terms are not equivalent.  Anticipating where your leading questions are leading, I'd estimate that the scientific method has tenetively explained much more "natural" phenomenon than belief in deital forms has.

Please provide proof as to where I mentioned faith.

You've mentioned your "beliefs", (which rely upon "faith"), often enough to recall these instances yourself however, here you go:

Quote from: SurveyMack10 on September 26, 2011, 06:05:30am:
"Belief in God requires faith"

[SurveyMack10]

So, if atheism is not a form of belief system as you say then why is it that many atheists adhere to the same set of beliefs.

Note the excerpt "... there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere."

Such as, God is nonexistent, everything can be explained by science. (That God is nonexistent IS a belief no matter how many times you say it is not).


The answer to your question then is that atheism is subdivided into "positive atheism, negative atheism, pragmatic atheism, axiological atheism and theoretical atheism.  So no, atheism does not "only" involve disbelief. The disbelieved assertion is that "god exists to believe in", (because that claim is not supported by any evidence).  Disbelieving an initial claim is not a stand-alone claim in and of itself, nor is disbelief a "belief" since it is expressly the opposite of belief.

You did not effectively answer my question, I will rephrase so that you cannot use semantics to avoid the actual question again:

The question was effectively answered, it seemingly wasn't effectively understood, (two distinct but, related situations).

Does atheism rely on science to explain occurrences of the world; furthermore, does it rely on science to one day explain the things it has not been able to explain yet.

Some variations of atheism rely upon skeptical/critical thinking processes.  Such critical thinking processes may be the same as or, similar to those of the scientific method.  Such reliance as applicable to atheism not not include "faith" per se; your question appears to be  inherently using 'confidence' as being interchangeable with "faith" and those terms are not equivalent.  Anticipating where your leading questions are leading, I'd estimate that the scientific method has tenetively explained much more "natural" phenomenon than belief in deital forms has.

Please provide proof as to where I mentioned faith.

You've mentioned your "beliefs", (which rely upon "faith"), often enough to recall these instances yourself however, here you go:

Quote from: SurveyMack10 on September 26, 2011, 06:05:30am:
"Belief in God requires faith"

Obvisouly I've mentioned faith in regard to Christianity as it is a critical part of the belief system. However, we were discussing atheism so when I asked for proof of me mentioning faith I meant as relevant to the current conversation, the one regarding atheism. Sorry if that was not clear. So can you please show where I mentioned faith as a part of atheism as asserted in the following quote by you, falcon9:

"Such reliance as applicable to atheism not not include "faith" per se; your question appears to be  inherently using 'confidence' as being interchangeable with "faith" and those terms are not equivalent."

[falcon9]

I can't believe you both are still arguing over atheism being a belief system. It's not. The same as theism-- it is a single quality and cannot encompass an entire belief system. Both are single points (one in a belief in a deity or deities and the other is the opposite) and they can't stretch beyond those points that set them apart. I think both of you have complicated it to a point where you're twirling in circles and I think SurveyMack has tried to find technicalities to make it seem like it actually is a belief system.

I really wasn't trying to find technicalities, I was simply asking yes or no questions. The answers would have led to my explanation as to why it can be viewed as a belief system ...

In other words, they [/i]were[/i] leading questions.

... but instead of answers to the questions i got long drawn out insults and dodges and arguments over semantics.

No, instead you got answers which differentiated between various forms of atheism which were more accurate than simply answering yes or no to your leading questions.

Often times on this forum there are opinions that wont be accepted if they are not identical to those of others, and that has been the case in this argument and it seems to be a waste of time.

Pot, kettle called and left a message: you're black.

Actually, I have told you multiple times that I have no intention of ever trying to convince you of God's existence and that your disbelief in him does not affect me whatsoever ...

Since your arguments have substantiation, they've remained unconvincing.  This is why my "disbelief" has extended to challenging the claim which you characterized as your "belief", (while attempting to dodge whether _what_ you believe/have faith in has any real existence).
Nor is it possible to persuade anyone who relies upon 'blind faith' that they're tapping around with a white cane regarding their perceptions.  Be that as it may, you've avoided responding to the content of the post you replied to and instead, went off on another whinging tangent, (in lieu of debating the topics _you_ raised).

We are all entitled to our opinions and it would be nice if we could discuss them maturely without the use of personal insults, personal attacks, or degradation of others.

No doubt you can falsely characterize dissenting arguments as "personal" however, what you perceive as 'insulting' and 'degragrading' is no less a subjective perspective than my perception of your publically stated beliefsystem as insulting, degrading, hypocritical and harmful to the wellbeing of others.  Do thousands of years worth of evidence supporting the contention that millions have suffered and died in the name of such religious belief systems really need to be trotted-out?

I have not problem with you believing God is not real, yet you have a serious problem with anyone on this forum who believes He is- even though it has zero affect on you whatsoever no matter how you try to say that it does.

Excellent, then perhaps you'll actually respond to the context of the contended points, (which would make for a pleasant change from the previous pattern of your responses).  Once again, the replies which you may perceive as "insulting" seem to be those which illuminate your own behaviour and that's what you appear to dislike.  The simpler solution would be to cease such behaviour, rather than complain that you're being "insulted" when you get called on it.  As usual, that decision is up to you, however.

[falcon9]

Please provide proof as to where I mentioned faith.

Quote from: falcon9 on Today at 04:23:47 pm:
You've mentioned your "beliefs", (which rely upon "faith"), often enough to recall these instances yourself however, here you go:

Quote from: SurveyMack10 on September 26, 2011, 06:05:30am:
"Belief in God requires faith"

Obvisouly I've mentioned faith in regard to Christianity as it is a critical part of the belief system. However, we were discussing atheism so when I asked for proof of me mentioning faith I meant as relevant to the current conversation, the one regarding atheism.

Just as obviously, your quoted mention of faith is relevant in the context of your attempt to characterize atheism as a "belief system", (which would inherently include "belief" & "faith" concepts).  Therefore, the quote was contextually-relevant.

So can you please show where I mentioned faith as a part of atheism as asserted in the following quote by you, falcon9:

"Such reliance as applicable to atheism does not include "faith" per se; your question appears to be  inherently using 'confidence' as being interchangeable with "faith" and those terms are not equivalent."

Quote from: SurveyMack10 on October 22, 2011, 04:42:10 pm:
"So, if atheism is not a form of belief system as you say then why is it that many atheists adhere to the same set of beliefs."

--Message ID: 434227:
Quote from: SurveyMack10 on October 18, 2011, 08:32:02 pm:
"So as the definitions show, atheism IS a theory or belief system (or doctrine as used above)."


You asserted that "atheism IS a theory or belief system", (via an appeal to authority: webster definition).  Unless you're implying some unspecified differentation between "belief" and "faith"in the religious context, the direct implication of your comments was that 'atheism is a belief system that requires some sort of "faith", (noting that this assertion was challenged as lacking substantiation, not that it was webster's definition but, that you used it as support for your contention and that your contended assertion remains unsubstantiated).

[SurveyMack10]

Please provide proof as to where I mentioned faith.

Quote from: falcon9 on Today at 04:23:47 pm:
You've mentioned your "beliefs", (which rely upon "faith"), often enough to recall these instances yourself however, here you go:

Quote from: SurveyMack10 on September 26, 2011, 06:05:30am:
"Belief in God requires faith"

Obvisouly I've mentioned faith in regard to Christianity as it is a critical part of the belief system. However, we were discussing atheism so when I asked for proof of me mentioning faith I meant as relevant to the current conversation, the one regarding atheism.

Just as obviously, your quoted mention of faith is relevant in the context of your attempt to characterize atheism as a "belief system", (which would inherently include "belief" & "faith" concepts).  Therefore, the quote was contextually-relevant.

If that were true it would mean that EVERY belief system involves the idea of "faith"

So can you please show where I mentioned faith as a part of atheism as asserted in the following quote by you, falcon9:

"Such reliance as applicable to atheism not not include "faith" per se; your question appears to be  inherently using 'confidence' as being interchangeable with "faith" and those terms are not equivalent."

Quote from: SurveyMack10 on October 22, 2011, 04:42:10 pm:
"So, if atheism is not a form of belief system as you say then why is it that many atheists adhere to the same set of beliefs."

--Message ID: 434227:
Quote from: SurveyMack10 on October 18, 2011, 08:32:02 pm:
"So as the definitions show, atheism IS a theory or belief system (or doctrine as used above)."


You asserted that "atheism IS a theory or belief system", (via an appeal to authority: webster definition).  Unless you're implying some unspecified differentation between "belief" and "faith"in the religious context, the direct implication of your comments was that 'atheism is a belief system that requires some sort of "faith", (noting that this assertion was challenged as lacking substantiation, not that it was webster's definition but, that you used it as support for your contention and that your contended assertion remains unsubstantiated).

Nowhere in the above quotation did you show that I mentioned faith as related to atheism.

[falcon9]

Please provide proof as to where I mentioned faith.

Quote from: falcon9 on Today at 04:23:47 pm:
You've mentioned your "beliefs", (which rely upon "faith"), often enough to recall these instances yourself however, here you go:

Quote from: SurveyMack10 on September 26, 2011, 06:05:30am:
"Belief in God requires faith"
[/quote]

Obvisouly I've mentioned faith in regard to Christianity as it is a critical part of the belief system. However, we were discussing atheism so when I asked for proof of me mentioning faith I meant as relevant to the current conversation, the one regarding atheism.

Just as obviously, your quoted mention of faith is relevant in the context of your attempt to characterize atheism as a "belief system", (which would inherently include "belief" & "faith" concepts).  Therefore, the quote was contextually-relevant.

If that were true it would mean that EVERY belief system involves the idea of "faith"


Name one which does not.

So can you please show where I mentioned faith as a part of atheism as asserted in the following quote by you, falcon9:

"Such reliance as applicable to atheism does not include "faith" per se; your question appears to be  inherently using 'confidence' as being interchangeable with "faith" and those terms are not equivalent."

Quote from: SurveyMack10 on October 22, 2011, 04:42:10 pm:
"So, if atheism is not a form of belief system as you say then why is it that many atheists adhere to the same set of beliefs."

--Message ID: 434227:
Quote from: SurveyMack10 on October 18, 2011, 08:32:02 pm:
"So as the definitions show, atheism IS a theory or belief system (or doctrine as used above)."


You asserted that "atheism IS a theory or belief system", (via an appeal to authority: webster definition).  Unless you're implying some unspecified differentation between "belief" and "faith"in the religious context, the direct implication of your comments was that 'atheism is a belief system that requires some sort of "faith", (noting that this assertion was challenged as lacking substantiation, not that it was webster's definition but, that you used it as support for your contention and that your contended assertion remains unsubstantiated).

Nowhere in the above quotation did you show that I mentioned faith as related to atheism.

Unless you're implying some unspecified differentation between "belief" and "faith"in the religious context, the direct implication of your comments was that 'atheism is a belief system that requires some sort of "faith".

[SurveyMack10]

Please provide proof as to where I mentioned faith.

Quote from: falcon9 on Today at 04:23:47 pm:
You've mentioned your "beliefs", (which rely upon "faith"), often enough to recall these instances yourself however, here you go:

Quote from: SurveyMack10 on September 26, 2011, 06:05:30am:
"Belief in God requires faith"

Obvisouly I've mentioned faith in regard to Christianity as it is a critical part of the belief system. However, we were discussing atheism so when I asked for proof of me mentioning faith I meant as relevant to the current conversation, the one regarding atheism.

Just as obviously, your quoted mention of faith is relevant in the context of your attempt to characterize atheism as a "belief system", (which would inherently include "belief" & "faith" concepts).  Therefore, the quote was contextually-relevant.

If that were true it would mean that EVERY belief system involves the idea of "faith"


Name one which does not.

So can you please show where I mentioned faith as a part of atheism as asserted in the following quote by you, falcon9:

"Such reliance as applicable to atheism does not include "faith" per se; your question appears to be  inherently using 'confidence' as being interchangeable with "faith" and those terms are not equivalent."

Quote from: SurveyMack10 on October 22, 2011, 04:42:10 pm:
"So, if atheism is not a form of belief system as you say then why is it that many atheists adhere to the same set of beliefs."

--Message ID: 434227:
Quote from: SurveyMack10 on October 18, 2011, 08:32:02 pm:
"So as the definitions show, atheism IS a theory or belief system (or doctrine as used above)."


You asserted that "atheism IS a theory or belief system", (via an appeal to authority: webster definition).  Unless you're implying some unspecified differentation between "belief" and "faith"in the religious context, the direct implication of your comments was that 'atheism is a belief system that requires some sort of "faith", (noting that this assertion was challenged as lacking substantiation, not that it was webster's definition but, that you used it as support for your contention and that your contended assertion remains unsubstantiated).

Nowhere in the above quotation did you show that I mentioned faith as related to atheism.

Unless you're implying some unspecified differentation between "belief" and "faith"in the religious context, the direct implication of your comments was that 'atheism is a belief system that requires some sort of "faith".
[/quote]

1). You just asked me to prove a negative claim (something you have repeatedly reported as illogical)- this severely hurt your credibility as you asked me to do something you claim to be against
2). Belief and faith are not the same thing, by DEFINITION. Although, it has been proven you choose your definition over webster's so maybe they are the same thing to you.
3). We are not going to agree, so I agree to disagree. I doubt you will do the same, but this is a waste of both of our time.

[falcon9]

Please provide proof as to where I mentioned faith.

Quote from: SurveyMack10 on September 26, 2011, 06:05:30am:
"Belief in God requires faith"
[/quote]

Obvisouly I've mentioned faith in regard to Christianity as it is a critical part of the belief system. However, we were discussing atheism so when I asked for proof of me mentioning faith I meant as relevant to the current conversation, the one regarding atheism.

Just as obviously, your quoted mention of faith is relevant in the context of your attempt to characterize atheism as a "belief system", (which would inherently include "belief" & "faith" concepts).  Therefore, the quote was contextually-relevant.

If that were true it would mean that EVERY belief system involves the idea of "faith"


Name one which does not.

You asserted that "atheism IS a theory or belief system", (via an appeal to authority: webster definition).  Unless you're implying some unspecified differentation between "belief" and "faith" in the religious context, the direct implication of your comments was that 'atheism is a belief system that requires some sort of "faith", (noting that this assertion was challenged as lacking substantiation, not that it was webster's definition but, that you used it as support for your contention and that your contended assertion remains unsubstantiated).

Nowhere in the above quotation did you show that I mentioned faith as related to atheism.

Unless you're implying some unspecified differentation between "belief" and "faith"in the religious context, the direct implication of your comments was that 'atheism is a belief system that requires some sort of "faith". (appendum: atheism is listed by merriam-webster as an _antonym_ of "faith").
[/quote]

1). You just asked me to prove a negative claim (something you have repeatedly reported as illogical)-

Not quite; you invented a false dichotomy, (namely, "If that were true it would mean that EVERY belief system involves the idea of "faith""), as if to imply that there are _religious_ belief systems which do not rely upon faith - or, more likely an implication that there are philosophical schools of thought which are not inherently religious, (and there are non-religious philosophies which are not religious belief systems ... which is the context of discussion). The challenge for you to name one was not a request to prove a negative claim, (since you didn't make a negative claim in that instance).

... this severely hurt your credibility as you asked me to do something you claim to be against

You've attempted to pull this deceit several times before; claiming that something you don't like insulted you and thus "hurts my credibility", (illogical conclusion since credibility does not rest upon your subjective and highly biased empty opinion).  Next time you get the hankering to try pulling that crap again, remember your hypocrisy in this context.

2). Belief and faith are not the same thing, by DEFINITION.


Oh?
"be·lief:
noun bə-ˈlēf

1: a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing
2: something believed; especially: a tenet or body of tenets held by a group
3: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence"
-- merriam-webster


"2faith
verb ˈfāth
transitive verb archaic

a: believe, trust

1faith
noun

a: belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof
(b): complete trust
something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially: a system of religious beliefs" --merriam-webster


Note the "belief and trust in and loyalty to God" part under the definition of "faith".  These definitions contradict your contention which shows that your contention is false.

Although, it has been proven you choose your definition over webster's so maybe they are the same thing to you.

On the contrary, no such thing has been "proven" since I'm using the quoted definitions from merriam-webster to substantiate the interrelated concepts of "faith" & "belief", (exception: merriam-webster's "conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence" under 'belief' contradicts the definition under 'faith' which delineates faith as belief without evidence).

3). We are not going to agree, so I agree to disagree. I doubt you will do the same, but this is a waste of both of our time.

Given that you aren't actually debating but, merely blandly disagreeing without supporting your disagreement with anything other than empty opinions, I concur that it is a waste of time to even agree to disagree with you.