[quote]therajraj wrote:
Yes an atheists action can be peaceful or violent.
[/quote]
I know. That’s what I said.
[quote]Cheeky_Kea wrote:
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
[quote]Cheeky_Kea wrote:
Atheism is a religion?
[/quote]
Yes. You need a complex mythology or creation story to have a religion. The assertion that there is no god is a religious assertion about the true, metaphysical, nature of the universe, same as saying there is a god.[/quote]
Whaaaaaaat??
You need a complex mythology or creation story to have a religion.
The assertion that there is no god is not a complex creation story, is it?
The answer to the question “is atheism a religious belief?” depends crucially upon what is meant by “religious.”
“Religion” is generally characterized by belief in a superhuman controlling power–especially in some sort of God–and by faith and worship.
(It’s worth pointing out in passing that some varieties of Buddhism are not “religion” according to such a definition.)
Atheism is certainly not a belief in any sort of superhuman power, nor is it categorized by worship in any meaningful sense.
Widening the definition of “religious” to encompass atheism tends to result in many other aspects of human behavior suddenly becoming classed as “religious” as well–such as science, politics, and watching TV.
[/quote]
Yet watch below as you perform the same act of prestidigitation with the word “faith.”
And yet, that’s exactly what they are.
It is no such thing. At it’s core, faith is trust, which necessarily contains the implication of belief.
By atheists it is. So is it surprising that they do not refer to themselves in this manner after having redefined the word to disparage the beliefs of theists?
Bull. Shit.
What’s laughable about this is that there is no way, NO WAY to prove that God does not exist. Yet you follow the absurd statement about skeptical atheism having “no beliefs” with the more absurd positive statement that God does not exist. And if you disagree with this, then we should be calling the whole thing agnosticism.
Perhaps “skeptical” agnosticism? 
Seriously, though, what is your “faith” in science based upon?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Yes an atheists action can be peaceful or violent.
[/quote]
I know. That’s what I said.[/quote]
And you also said they were killing in the name of atheism, which is stupid.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]Cheeky_Kea wrote:
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
[quote]Cheeky_Kea wrote:
Atheism is a religion?
[/quote]
Yes. You need a complex mythology or creation story to have a religion. The assertion that there is no god is a religious assertion about the true, metaphysical, nature of the universe, same as saying there is a god.[/quote]
Whaaaaaaat??
You need a complex mythology or creation story to have a religion.
The assertion that there is no god is not a complex creation story, is it?
The answer to the question “is atheism a religious belief?” depends crucially upon what is meant by “religious.”
“Religion” is generally characterized by belief in a superhuman controlling power–especially in some sort of God–and by faith and worship.
(It’s worth pointing out in passing that some varieties of Buddhism are not “religion” according to such a definition.)
Atheism is certainly not a belief in any sort of superhuman power, nor is it categorized by worship in any meaningful sense.
Widening the definition of “religious” to encompass atheism tends to result in many other aspects of human behavior suddenly becoming classed as “religious” as well–such as science, politics, and watching TV.
[/quote]
Yet watch below as you perform the same act of prestidigitation with the word “faith.”
And yet, that’s exactly what they are.
It is no such thing. At it’s core, faith is trust, which necessarily contains the implication of belief.
By atheists it is. So is it surprising that they do not refer to themselves in this manner after having redefined the word to disparage the beliefs of theists?
Bull. Shit.
What’s laughable about this is that there is no way, NO WAY to prove that God does not exist. Yet you follow the absurd statement about skeptical atheism having “no beliefs” with the more absurd positive statement that God does not exist. And if you disagree with this, then we should be calling the whole thing agnosticism.
Perhaps “skeptical” agnosticism?
Seriously, though, what is your “faith” in science based upon?
[/quote]
Many atheist organizations today define atheism as a rejection of all supernatural claims. That is it. Most do not claim to KNOW to an absolute certainty a god does not exist. But in the relative world, no god exists as there is no proof.
"To take a skeptical position regarding an extraordinary claim for which one has not been provided with compelling evidence is not an act of faith; it is simple common sense. Here is an analogous situation: supposedly, as a Christian, you do not believe in the Roman or Aztec gods. Is it just as much an “act of faith” on your part not to believe in those gods as it was for the Romans and Aztecs to believe in them? If a man walks up to you and says he has an invisible magic elf sitting on his head, do you automatically believe his claim? If not, is it an “act of faith” on your part not to? Or are you simply responding to the claim with common sense and skepticism because the man has failed to provide you with adequate evidence for his elf? Choosing not to believe in something when you have no reason to believe in that thing is not an act of faith, it is just the smart thing to do.
Finally, one can turn to the Bible’s definition of faith–the “substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen”–to see that this is a definition that excludes disbelief. So if you still don’t agree with us that atheism is not a faith, then check your Bibles."
It has to do with the difference between what you believe and what you think you know. For any particular god that you can imagine, a “theist” is one who has a belief in that god. In contrast, an “atheist” is one who does not have a belief in the god. A “gnostic” is one who knows about the existence of god and an “agnostic” is one who thinks that god is unknowable.
Notice that the terms “atheist” and “agnostic”, by these definitions, are not mutually exclusive. You could be an agnostic atheist, meaning you don’t think that the existence of gods is knowable, but you don’t choose to believe in one without further proof. Many people assume that atheists believe that gods can be proved not to exist, but this isn’t strictly true and there is no proper word to describe this. You could call such a person an “untheist”, perhaps. Or, you could just call such a person a “gnostic atheist”, one who doesn’t believe in a god and thinks that his non-belief can be proved.
So there are four possible ways one could be.
- Agnostic-Theist: believes god exists, but the existence of a god is unknowable
- Gnostic-Theist: believes in a god for which he claims knowledge
- Agnostic-Atheist: does not believe god exists, but it can’t be proved
- Gnostic-Atheist: believes it can be proved that god does not exist
Case 3 is sometimes referred to as “weak atheism” and case 4 is sometimes referred to as “strong atheism”. Only strong atheism positively asserts that there are no gods.
Finally, it should be pointed out that when a person is asked about their beliefs and replies that they are agnostic, they are avoiding the question and answering a different one. Someone who can’t positively say he/she believes in a god is an atheist.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Many atheist organizations today define atheism as a rejection of all supernatural claims. That is it. Most do not claim to KNOW to an absolute certainty a god does not exist. But in the relative world, no god exists as there is no proof.
"To take a skeptical position regarding an extraordinary claim for which one has not been provided with compelling evidence is not an act of faith; it is simple common sense. Here is an analogous situation: supposedly, as a Christian, you do not believe in the Roman or Aztec gods. Is it just as much an “act of faith” on your part not to believe in those gods as it was for the Romans and Aztecs to believe in them? If a man walks up to you and says he has an invisible magic elf sitting on his head, do you automatically believe his claim? If not, is it an “act of faith” on your part not to? Or are you simply responding to the claim with common sense and skepticism because the man has failed to provide you with adequate evidence for his elf? Choosing not to believe in something when you have no reason to believe in that thing is not an act of faith, it is just the smart thing to do.
Finally, one can turn to the Bible’s definition of faith–the “substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen”–to see that this is a definition that excludes disbelief. So if you still don’t agree with us that atheism is not a faith, then check your Bibles."
[/quote]
Here’s the thing, and the reason the brand of hot-headed atheism we normally encounter on internet message boards is labeled a religion in its own right: To claim the existence of God is an absurdity (or that belief in him is) creates an equally absurd assumption on the part of the claimant. That is, if there is no God, then all of existence as we know it was created from absolutely nothing at all. There is a thread already dedicated to it so I’m not going to delve into it any further here, but NO MATTER WHAT, theist or so-called atheist, when you peel away every layer and get down to the very core of what we can know, ALL OF US make assumptions of the nature of existence based on pure faith.
Atheists like to try and frame the discussion so that they appear to be the rational ones and the theists are little more than dim-witted boors believing in their “sky wizard,” but challenge either to really prove what it is he believes and you will find that both theist and atheist have more in common than most from either group would like to admit.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Yes an atheists action can be peaceful or violent.
[/quote]
I know. That’s what I said.[/quote]
And you also said they were killing in the name of atheism, which is stupid.
[/quote]
They were.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
It’s an artform
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ[/quote]
I know. Mocking Christians and Christianity is the last tolerated form of bigotry that is still acceptable. Everybody else is off limits.
But alas, Jesus predicted exactly this, that we would be mocked and persecuted and so we are. But it’s ok, we’re used to it.[/quote]
RE: Piss Christ…
[Serrano] has also said that while this work is not intended to denounce religion, it alludes to a perceived commercializing or cheapening of Christian icons in contemporary culture.
Carry on.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
The problem with some of you atheists is that you’re just flat out dumb ass knuckleheads. You don’t even know what the fuck you believe much less what other atheists or theists believe.
But you get on a message board like this trying to sound all sophisticated and urbane and such but you flunk out big time when it comes down to basic logic much less sound philosophy.
Sheesh. No wonder you ding dongs get beat to a pulp on threads like this one; it’s like taking candy from a baby.[/quote]
For the record I am NOT actually an Atheist.
I thought this was an interesting debate so I attempted to provide some clarification…which in hindsight may have been misguided, but it does seem there are a few people on here who misunderstand what Atheism is (right now you are probably thinking I am one of them!)
I thought Cortes’s replies to my ramblings were well thought out and interesting.
You however in your two replies to me basically come off sounding like a typical arrogant, condescending cunt.
You can stick your patronising tone up your asshole.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Cheeky_Kea wrote:
…Not being any belief at all, atheism can’t motivate anyone in any direction to do anything…
[/quote]
Laughably incorrect.
a the ism
noun
- the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
- disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Go start over and rewrite your post that so that it begins with an accurate basic premise. Then your subsequent words might be considered plausible.[/quote]
O.K it’s time to play your game and be a condescending prick.
What you and others seem to be attempting to tell me is summarised in the basic following equation.
Non-belief = belief.
In other words the disbelief or non-belief of an Atheist is still technically a belief.
Here is the – acting like I’m speaking to a particularly dim-witted child version – of my answer for Push, who likes to address others this way so I assume would like to be addressed this way in turn.
Not believing is the exact opposite of belief. Hence the qualifier “NOT”
It’s very basic English.
“NOT + verb” is the opposite of “verb”
Let me show you why the argument that “not believing is a belief” fails.
Is NOT knowing the same as knowing?
Is NOT playing the same as playing?
Is NOT staying the same as staying?
Is NOT eating the same as eating?
Is NOT jumping the same as jumping?
When you argue that “not believing is the same as believing” you’re flat out factually wrong.
So if we were however to stay with the premise that “Saying you dont believe in god is still a belief.”
Would the following statements all be true?:
- Saying you don’t know math is still knowing it.
- Saying you don’t have a pencil is the same as having it.
- Saying you don’t eat vegetables is the same as eating them.
Not believing is by definition not believing.
It is a lack of belief by definition.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
What’s laughable about this is that there is no way, NO WAY to prove that God does not exist. Yet you follow the absurd statement about skeptical atheism having “no beliefs” with the more absurd positive statement that God does not exist. And if you disagree with this, then we should be calling the whole thing agnosticism.
[/quote]
Fair enough.
The burden of proof usually lies on the one claiming the existence of something/someone, not the other way around.
If I told you I had a magic Unicorn that could predict the lottery numbers and that all you need to do was provide me your banking details and password over the internet and I will deposit it’s winnings in your account…you would most definitely want me to prove this assertion before you gave me those details.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Here’s the thing, and the reason the brand of hot-headed atheism we normally encounter on internet message boards is labeled a religion in its own right: To claim the existence of God is an absurdity (or that belief in him is) creates an equally absurd assumption on the part of the claimant. That is, if there is no God, then all of existence as we know it was created from absolutely nothing at all. There is a thread already dedicated to it so I’m not going to delve into it any further here, but NO MATTER WHAT, theist or so-called atheist, when you peel away every layer and get down to the very core of what we can know, ALL OF US make assumptions of the nature of existence based on pure faith.
Atheists like to try and frame the discussion so that they appear to be the rational ones and the theists are little more than dim-witted boors believing in their “sky wizard,” but challenge either to really prove what it is he believes and you will find that both theist and atheist have more in common than most from either group would like to admit.
[/quote]
Good post.
I will try to speak my heart and not try to be all “sophisticated and urbane”
For me personally it is probably the line of least resistance that I am taking.
In other words I do make assumptions about the universe and the reality that surrounds me everyday and they may be leaps of faith–as you say.
I find it safe to assume that it is impossible to add the numbers two and two and get 497.
I also I find it safe to assume that no even number greater than two is prime.
Because it is easier and more pragmatic for me to assume that when I roll out of bed in the morning that the floor will be there (baring some huge calamity!) that the sun will have risen (baring an even bigger calamity) than it is for me to assume some of the assertions made about God.
That leap of faith is too large for me.
I wish to make it clear that is only the Personal, interventionist, Anthropomorphised, exclucivist type God I reject.
You asked me before what my faith in science was based on.
I have no faith in science in the way that you mean it. (We will get caught up in a definition war on this word if we are not carefull.)
Science and (logic for that matter) contain the seeds of their own destruction. I don’t necessarily have to have faith in absolutes when I deal with science, because if better evidence or facts to the contary become available I can accomodate them, update my knowledge, be rid of outdated notions.
We are all tomorrows food.
No, science cannot explain everything.
You say that if I don’t believe there is a God then I have to accept that nothing suddenly exploded and became everything.
Those are the only two alterantives huh?
The trouble is the same with both arguments, they regress ad infinitum.
Atheism is to belief what baldness is to hair color.
A group of believers in a popular cafe not named Starbucks.
Atheist: “What do you believe in?”
Christian: “I believe there is a God.”
Atheist: “Well I believe there isn’t a God.”
Agnostic: “Well I don’t know what the heck to believe!”
Atheist & Christian: “Shut up!”
Atheist: “Back to our coversation. I believe that there isn’t a God.”
Christian: “So you still believe in something. Your Belief is that there isn’t a God.”
Atheist: “NO! I don’t have a belief. Theists have beliefs! We have the abscence of a belief!”
Christian: “You’re contradicting yourself. The abscence of a belief is still a belief system. Your BELIEF is that you refuse to BELIEVE anything pertaining to any theist religion or God.”
Atheist: “NO! We don’t believe in anything”
Christian: “Choosing not to believe is still a belief system. Just as white and black are colors and the abscence of lighter hues.”
Atheist: “Fuck that! I done told you that I don’t believe in no sky wizard!”
Christian: “Why do you have to get so angry? I’m just calmly stating the facts.”
Muslim: “All non believers and Christians are infedels who should be killed!”
Atheist & Christian & Agnostic: “Shut up! Random guy! Kick him out!”
Random Guy: “As you wish.”
Muslim: “I will be back! INFEDELS!”
Christian: “Back to the convo. Choosing not to believe is still a belief system. Your belief is that you have the abscence of all the theist belief systems, therefore having a said belief. Everyone believes in something. Including you, who’s belief is the refusal to believe in anything.”
Atheist: “Get out of my head you sky wizard loving, anti-baby killing lover!”
Christian: “Dude whats with the aggression? Dude if Atheists really wanted respect they would STOP disrespecting other religions. Because the majority of the populous have religous beliefs, thats why you guys can’t get into office. Nobody wants to vote for somebody who talks about what religion they practice with a condscending tone. Fairy tales, Sky wizard, Sky cake, Looney Tunes, Book of lies…I could go on and on. Really?”
Atheist: “Well I’m a free thinker!”
Christian: “Dude we’re all free thinkers! Stop embarrassing yourself.”
Atheist: “Science is greater than any religions Sky WIZARD!”
Christian:“I’m done with you. Come back and talk when you’ve grown up. Door’s always open.”
Atheist: “What if I don’t want to believe the door is open? What if I want to believe all doors are closed?”
Agnostic: “Dude, Really? I mean, this is even coming from me here. ME!!! Wow”
Muslim blows the wall down with explosives and comes busting through the wall like the Kool-Aid Man.
Muslim: “OOOH Yeah! I told you I’d be back!”
Agnostic & Christian & Atheist + Some Random guy: “Oh GOD please don’t hurt us!”
Muslim: “Guys, its not that serious, I just want to talk. I haven’t had a chance to say my peace!”
Atheist: “Oh right, Say your piece, that’s ironic!”
Muslim: “Didn’t you just call on God for help?”
Atheist: “I didn’t mean to…er… I mean I…I’m going to take my ball and go home!”
FIN
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
A group of believers in a popular cafe not named Starbucks.
Atheist: “What do you believe in?”
Christian: “I believe there is a God.”
Atheist: “Well I believe there isn’t a God.”
Agnostic: “Well I don’t know what the heck to believe!”
Atheist & Christian: “Shut up!”
Atheist: “Back to our coversation. I believe that there isn’t a God.”
Christian: “So you still believe in something. Your Belief is that there isn’t a God.”
Atheist: “NO! I don’t have a belief. Theists have beliefs! We have the abscence of a belief!”
Christian: “You’re contradicting yourself. The abscence of a belief is still a belief system. Your BELIEF is that you refuse to BELIEVE anything pertaining to any theist religion or God.”
Atheist: “NO! We don’t believe in anything”
Christian: “Choosing not to believe is still a belief system. Just as white and black are colors and the abscence of lighter hues.”
Atheist: “Fuck that! I done told you that I don’t believe in no sky wizard!”
Christian: “Why do you have to get so angry? I’m just calmly stating the facts.”
Muslim: “All non believers and Christians are infedels who should be killed!”
Atheist & Christian & Agnostic: “Shut up! Random guy! Kick him out!”
Random Guy: “As you wish.”
Muslim: “I will be back! INFEDELS!”
Christian: “Back to the convo. Choosing not to believe is still a belief system. Your belief is that you have the abscence of all the theist belief systems, therefore having a said belief. Everyone believes in something. Including you, who’s belief is the refusal to believe in anything.”
Atheist: “Get out of my head you sky wizard loving, anti-baby killing lover!”
Christian: “Dude whats with the aggression? Dude if Atheists really wanted respect they would STOP disrespecting other religions. Because the majority of the populous have religous beliefs, thats why you guys can’t get into office. Nobody wants to vote for somebody who talks about what religion they practice with a condscending tone. Fairy tales, Sky wizard, Sky cake, Looney Tunes, Book of lies…I could go on and on. Really?”
Atheist: “Well I’m a free thinker!”
Christian: “Dude we’re all free thinkers! Stop embarrassing yourself.”
Atheist: “Science is greater than any religions Sky WIZARD!”
Christian:“I’m done with you. Come back and talk when you’ve grown up. Door’s always open.”
Atheist: “What if I don’t want to believe the door is open? What if I want to believe all doors are closed?”
Agnostic: “Dude, Really? I mean, this is even coming from me here. ME!!! Wow”
Muslim blows the wall down with explosives and comes busting through the wall like the Kool-Aid Man.
Muslim: “OOOH Yeah! I told you I’d be back!”
Agnostic & Christian & Atheist + Some Random guy: “Oh GOD please don’t hurt us!”
Muslim: “Guys, its not that serious, I just want to talk. I haven’t had a chance to say my peace!”
Atheist: “Oh right, Say your piece, that’s ironic!”
Muslim: “Didn’t you just call on God for help?”
Atheist: “I didn’t mean to…er… I mean I…I’m going to take my ball and go home!”
FIN[/quote]
[quote]Cheeky_Kea wrote:
You say that if I don’t believe there is a God then I have to accept that nothing suddenly exploded and became everything.
Those are the only two alterantives huh?
The trouble is the same with both arguments, they regress ad infinitum.
[/quote]
Actually, that is not what I was saying. Explosions have nothing to do with it. Either all of this came from nothing or it came from something. Stated thus, there really are only two alternatives, and the only one that must (necessarily) regress ad infinitum is the atheist supposition of a cosmos lacking an Uncaused Cause, or Necessary Being. Again, it has been covered nearly ad infinitum here, so I’m not going to get into it and derail this thread too, but see the cosmological argument (from contingency) if you are interested.
Bottom line: I’m at least as big a fan of science as you are. I have no fear of it, my religion welcomes and nurtures scientific inquiry, and neither I nor, do I believe, most Christians go about our days blaming malicious spirits for our broken air conditioner or imagining God was the one behind the recent Japanese tsunami. I’m not talking about day to day stuff. I am talking about epistemology, what it is possible to know, the very limits of knowlege that simple empiricism could never even hope to approach. It is around that event horizon that, if you are really honest, it starts to become clear that atheists don’t have any sort of monopoly on the truth, and that the sheer magnitude of what we don’t know, what we cannot ever even hope to know in this life, should be, should be enough to bring most of these debates to a screeching halt.