Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 92 (8876 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-18-2018 12:59 PM
186 online now:
Aussie, AZPaul3, caffeine, DrJones*, GDR, Larni, ooh-child, PaulK, ringo, Tangle (10 members, 176 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Bill Holbert
Post Volume:
Total: 844,389 Year: 19,212/29,783 Month: 1,157/2,043 Week: 202/507 Day: 30/83 Hour: 7/9


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
67
8
910
...
28NextFF
Author Topic:   Does Atheism = No beliefs?
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 398
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009
Member Rating: 5.0


Message 106 of 414 (551677)
03-23-2010 5:38 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Den
03-23-2010 1:29 AM


Oh Won't You???
You wont find an Athiest actively trying to pursue evidence of such beings or forces, which is why I think it proves they are wrong in claiming that an Athiest remains objective. An agnostic remains objective, an Athiest has made their mind up, so they are intellectually bound on the subject.

And how is it that you presume to know the mind of others? Would it surprise you to learn that it is precisely the active pursuit of such questions (often from a position of belief) that led us to our ever-tentative rejection of god claims?

Also, would it kill you to learn how to spell atheist? It kind of makes it look like you are inattentive to detail - not a good attribute in one making grandiose claims about the nature of reality.

Capt.


Is it getting solipsistic in here, or is it just me?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Den, posted 03-23-2010 1:29 AM Den has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 949
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 107 of 414 (551694)
03-23-2010 8:17 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by AZPaul3
03-22-2010 8:46 PM


Re: Differences Differ
You are a dedicated theist. I understand this is difficult for you to wrap your mind around. You seem to need to see atheist as some sort of body of philosophical parameters.

I don't "need" to see it, I just see it! I don't think anyone in this thread is saying all atheists are compelled or required to be liberals or militantly oppose religion, I'm just saying that atheism tends to organize its people in certain ways, with beliefs about how the world works or how society should function. There are respected polls that clearly show a correlation between science and atheism.

Each atheist chooses their own mix of philosophical tenants. Some are Humanists, some are epicurean, some are Spinozan, choose any one of a hundred philosophies. There are even atheist Republicans. Hell we're more fragmented than even you christians!

I agree that Christians are fragmented. Hence the many descriptive terms, like "mainstream Christians", "fundie Christians", "theistic evolutionists" that are often found on message boards such as these. If atheists are more fragmented, how come we don't see references to "mainstream atheists", "fundie atheists", etc.? Don't you think it would be a good thing for atheists to be grouped like Christians often are, just for identification purposes? Would you mind the term "fundie atheists", for followers of people like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins, who want to see all religion "eradicated"?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by AZPaul3, posted 03-22-2010 8:46 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by lyx2no, posted 03-23-2010 8:38 PM marc9000 has responded
 Message 117 by Capt Stormfield, posted 03-23-2010 9:28 PM marc9000 has not yet responded
 Message 122 by AZPaul3, posted 03-23-2010 11:52 PM marc9000 has not yet responded
 Message 123 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-23-2010 11:59 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 949
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 108 of 414 (551695)
03-23-2010 8:20 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Granny Magda
03-22-2010 9:32 PM


Atheism has little or nothing to do with evolution.

ooookay.

PS, regarding your avatar; yes, twice, but my aim with a shoe is improving...

Gotcha!! THAT'S what all atheists have in common, they ALL want to throw shoes at GW!!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Granny Magda, posted 03-22-2010 9:32 PM Granny Magda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Granny Magda, posted 03-23-2010 9:02 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 949
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 109 of 414 (551696)
03-23-2010 8:25 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Peepul
03-23-2010 1:45 PM


I think the word 'religious' as used by CS CAN be appropriate when describing non-theistic beliefs.

For example, if people venerate a belief system, use it to define their values, resist criticism of it and changes to it, and criticize or judge others who believe differently, then it's fair to call their attitude 'religious'.

VERY well stated. I don't think its completely fair for atheists to claim some kind of lofty, neutral position as they define and criticize politically with the same passion as religious people.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Peepul, posted 03-23-2010 1:45 PM Peepul has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 949
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 110 of 414 (551697)
03-23-2010 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Peepul
03-23-2010 1:54 PM


peepul writes:

marc9000 writes:

I think it has a very comparable connotation in society. When atheists are asked about themselves or when describing themselves, the subject of evolution will come up just as quickly as the subject of God will come up for a religious person. Prominent atheist people, whether a biologist like Richard Dawkins or a commedian like Bill Maher, always seem to have a politically liberal point of view. Is there a such thing as a radical right atheist?

I don't agree with your first statement. Who brings up evolution? Is it the atheist or the person they are talking to? I don't bring it up when talking about myself.

From the opening post;

quote:
So I ask again, what beliefs are unique to Atheism?

His next answer "We accept Evolution as fact"


There are exceptions to every rule of course, but most any atheist in today's society will make a beeline to evolution when asked about their view of the world. You're saying that a Christian could engage in a 5 or 10 minute conversation with you about human origins and you'd never say a word about evolution?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Peepul, posted 03-23-2010 1:54 PM Peepul has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Taq, posted 03-23-2010 9:13 PM marc9000 has not yet responded
 Message 118 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-23-2010 9:50 PM marc9000 has not yet responded
 Message 120 by Hyroglyphx, posted 03-23-2010 10:08 PM marc9000 has not yet responded
 Message 140 by Peepul, posted 03-24-2010 9:12 AM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
lyx2no
Member (Idle past 2699 days)
Posts: 1277
From: A vast, undifferentiated plane.
Joined: 02-28-2008


Message 111 of 414 (551698)
03-23-2010 8:38 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by marc9000
03-23-2010 8:17 PM


Non Collectors
Don't you think it would be a good thing for atheists to be grouped like Christians often are, just for identification purposes?

How many groups do you think non stamp collectors should be broken into. There are vegetarian non collectors; sadist non collectors; yippy non collectors; teetotaler non collectors; Rastafarian non collectors… ?

Atheism does not lend itself to grouping or sub-grouping any more then any non-X. Why do you find that so hard to understand?

AbE:

There are exceptions to every rule of course, but most any atheist in today's society will make a beeline to evolution when asked about their view of the world. You're saying that a Christian could engage in a 5 or 10 minute conversation with you about human origins and you'd never say a word about evolution?

Post hoc ergo propter hoc much?

Edited by lyx2no, : AbE.


You are now a million miles away from where you were in space-time when you started reading this sentence.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by marc9000, posted 03-23-2010 8:17 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by marc9000, posted 03-23-2010 9:02 PM lyx2no has responded

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2372
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 112 of 414 (551700)
03-23-2010 9:02 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by marc9000
03-23-2010 8:20 PM


Evolution and Atheism
Hi Marc,

Granny writes:

Atheism has little or nothing to do with evolution.

marc9000 writes:

ooookay.

Seriously! These are two separate questions: do gods exist?; is evolution responsible for the diversity of life? Really, they have nothing to do with one another. The answer could be yes to both. Or no to both. Or yes to one, no to the other, in either combination.

In my opinion, the only reason that atheism is associated with belief in evolution is because denial of evolution is the exclusive preserve of theists. Theists have often based their arguments upon ideas that would later come to be superseded by evolution.

Theists have been very keen to use arguments from design to justify their beliefs in God. I think that before the Theory of Evolution emerged as a viable alternative, these arguments, though bad, would have appeared compelling. They may have been flawed arguments, but there was no alternative available. I can only contemplate what I might have thought about God had I lived in the early Nineteenth Century, before Darwin's publication of the Origin. Evolution was poorly developed back then, with no known mechanism. Under such circumstances, I can see how the Paley's argument from design might be appealing.

None of this has anything to do with atheism though, not directly. The only link is that evolution shoots down the argument from design, or a the very least, provides a credible alternative. With one more argument for God eliminated, atheism is one step closer.

It's not the fault of atheists if religions found their arguments upon ideas which then proceed to get shot down by science. Religion has painted itself into a corner by using God-of-the-gaps arguments. As science fills those gaps, religion is inevitably going to be driven back.

Mutate and Survive


"A curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understands it." - Jacques Monod
This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by marc9000, posted 03-23-2010 8:20 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

    
marc9000
Member
Posts: 949
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 113 of 414 (551701)
03-23-2010 9:02 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by lyx2no
03-23-2010 8:38 PM


Re: Non Collectors
How many groups do you think non stamp collectors should be broken into. There are vegetarian non collectors; sadist non collectors; yippy non collectors; teetotaler non collectors; Rastafarian non collectors… ?

Non stamp collectors don't spend a sizable portion of their time criticizing and trying to eradicate stamp collecting, like Dawkins, Harris, and millions of atheists who buy their books spend time trying to eradicate religion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by lyx2no, posted 03-23-2010 8:38 PM lyx2no has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Taq, posted 03-23-2010 9:07 PM marc9000 has not yet responded
 Message 115 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-23-2010 9:10 PM marc9000 has not yet responded
 Message 121 by lyx2no, posted 03-23-2010 11:48 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7632
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.2


(2)
Message 114 of 414 (551702)
03-23-2010 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by marc9000
03-23-2010 9:02 PM


Re: Non Collectors
Non stamp collectors don't spend a sizable portion of their time criticizing and trying to eradicate stamp collecting, like Dawkins, Harris, and millions of atheists who buy their books spend time trying to eradicate religion.

Stamp collectors are not trying to teach bronze age myths in science class in the name of stamp collecting. Stamp collectors are not trying to deny people rights in the name of stamp collecting. Stamp collectors are not covering up child molestation in their ranks in the name of stamp collecting.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by marc9000, posted 03-23-2010 9:02 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16073
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.6


(2)
Message 115 of 414 (551703)
03-23-2010 9:10 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by marc9000
03-23-2010 9:02 PM


Re: Non Collectors
Non stamp collectors don't spend a sizable portion of their time criticizing and trying to eradicate stamp collecting, like Dawkins, Harris, and millions of atheists who buy their books spend time trying to eradicate religion.

That's because no stamp collector ever did this to glorify his stamp collection:

It would be nice if we could just regard religion as a harmless eccentricity, but we can't, because it is not harmless.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by marc9000, posted 03-23-2010 9:02 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7632
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 116 of 414 (551705)
03-23-2010 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by marc9000
03-23-2010 8:33 PM


There are exceptions to every rule of course, but most any atheist in today's society will make a beeline to evolution when asked about their view of the world.

We make a beeline for the power of reason over superstition. Creationists make for an easy comparison that everyone is aware of. If there was a large, vocal christian crowd that spoke out against Special Relativity we would cite Special Relativity as an example of reason triumphing over superstition. If there was a large vocal christian crowd that spoke out against anything that is supported by 150 years of solid science it too would be used as a perfect example of the irrationality that superstitions breed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by marc9000, posted 03-23-2010 8:33 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 398
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009
Member Rating: 5.0


(3)
Message 117 of 414 (551708)
03-23-2010 9:28 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by marc9000
03-23-2010 8:17 PM


Why Not Sort By Belief?
I'm just saying that atheism tends to organize its people in certain ways, with beliefs about how the world works or how society should function.

That's actually quite wrong. Atheism doesn't organize one's beliefs, reality does. That people who place an imaginary figure at the center of their beliefs find this puzzling is hardly surprising. My thoughts on government are based on what I observe and learn about governments. My thoughts on medical research are based on what I observe and learn about the actual subject at hand. My beliefs about morals and ethics are based on what kind of people I would like to have living around me. What the hell would my lack of belief in your imaginary god have to do with anything?

Don't you think it would be a good thing for atheists to be grouped like Christians often are, just for identification purposes?

Why the need to group people by what they don't believe? Seems dumb to me. Why not group people by what they do believe? Humanists. Spinozans. Republicans. You get the idea.

Or maybe not. It seems to me that the essential problem in any discussion with a believer is that they are absolutely unable to understand this one simple concept: Just because your world revolves around your belief in an imaginary friend doesn't mean my world revolves around my lack of belief in same.

Don't confuse the fact that we pay attention to you - 'cause, you know, you've got a history of killing us and are currently trying mightily to screw up our schools - with the not-a-fact that this means our lives and values and opinions are built around not being you. Trying to frame other people's lives in the reflection of your own beliefs is supremely arrogant and supremely uninformed.

Capt.


Is it getting solipsistic in here, or is it just me?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by marc9000, posted 03-23-2010 8:17 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Hyroglyphx, posted 03-23-2010 9:58 PM Capt Stormfield has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16073
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.6


(1)
Message 118 of 414 (551712)
03-23-2010 9:50 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by marc9000
03-23-2010 8:33 PM


You're saying that a Christian could engage in a 5 or 10 minute conversation with you about human origins and you'd never say a word about evolution?

Well obviously if anyone engaged me in a ten minute conversation about human origins, then I'd mention evolution --- just as if someone engaged me in a ten minute conversation about what two plus two is, I'd mention the number four.

What's your point?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by marc9000, posted 03-23-2010 8:33 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5603
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 119 of 414 (551714)
03-23-2010 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by Capt Stormfield
03-23-2010 9:28 PM


Re: Why Not Sort By Belief?
Why the need to group people by what they don't believe? Seems dumb to me. Why not group people by what they do believe? Humanists. Spinozans. Republicans. You get the idea.

If I'm understanding him correctly, that is precisely his point. While I think he is being far too categorical, it is a fact that many atheists wear on their sleeve their non-belief in such a way that it masquerades as a belief system -- a pseudo-religion, if you will.

That being said, I understand what you are also trying to say. It seems to me that you are pointing out that not all atheists, if we can all agree that "atheism" at the base level simply means (a) "negative" (theos) "god [no god], then any additional philosophical beliefs that stem from that root are almost irrelevant.

Obviously not all atheists take their irreligion a step further than mere disbelief and form humanist churches and ascribe to some deep and meaningful secular philosophy. Are you then distinguishing between the difference between a common atheist and an atheist who goes a step further with humanism?

It seems to me that the essential problem in any discussion with a believer is that they are absolutely unable to understand this one simple concept: Just because your world revolves around your belief in an imaginary friend doesn't mean my world revolves around my lack of belief in same.

Well, that may or may not be true for you, but hang around the forum a while and you will see just how detached some of the resident atheists are with their unbelief.

It's kind of the same things if you think about it. The loudest and most boisterous one's are the kind that make an indelible impression on their counterparts, which usually negatively impacts them. It's often the shitty Christians you know the most because their always saying something idiotic and controversial. That same principle applies to those in the atheist community, and that is because they turned disbelief in to a proactive thing.


"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston
This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Capt Stormfield, posted 03-23-2010 9:28 PM Capt Stormfield has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by cavediver, posted 03-24-2010 4:12 AM Hyroglyphx has responded

    
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5603
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


(1)
Message 120 of 414 (551715)
03-23-2010 10:08 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by marc9000
03-23-2010 8:33 PM


There are exceptions to every rule of course, but most any atheist in today's society will make a beeline to evolution when asked about their view of the world.

No, Marc, that's what the apologists allege and you are following suit. Then it becomes a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy by inciting atheists to talk about their beliefs and non-beliefs. That may seem like it confirms your suspicions that atheists sit around all day and dream up ways to argue with Christians on evolution, but I think it's a fantasy fed by apologists.

You're saying that a Christian could engage in a 5 or 10 minute conversation with you about human origins and you'd never say a word about evolution?

That's an entirely different thing as it is a very specific topic. That's like saying, "So if you were talking about the first chapter in the book of genesis, are you telling me that Adam and Eve wouldn't be brought up?"

You initially stated that when talking about their view of the world, atheists would "make a beeline to evolution."


"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston
This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by marc9000, posted 03-23-2010 8:33 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

    
Prev1
...
67
8
910
...
28NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018