Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does Atheism = No beliefs?
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 30 of 414 (551346)
03-22-2010 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Den
03-22-2010 12:11 AM


So I ask again, what beliefs are unique to Atheism?
Like others have said, atheism is a disbelief in gods, and that's it. However, a vast majority of atheists also consider themselves to be skeptics so one could say that skepticism is a strong part of atheism, but not necessary outcome of atheism.
What do skeptics believe? Generally, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Many atheists are just as comfortable debunking UFO's, Bigfoot, and crop circles (of ET origin) as they are religious or creationist claims. I, as an atheist, view religious claims and paranormal claims about the same and am skeptical of them for the same reasons. Other famous atheists, such as Penn Jillette and James Randi, seem to be made of this mold.
So what beliefs are unique to atheists? In general, I would say the belief that you need evidence to back up your claims. Faith is not a way to arrive at a model of reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Den, posted 03-22-2010 12:11 AM Den has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(1)
Message 44 of 414 (551391)
03-22-2010 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by New Cat's Eye
03-22-2010 3:47 PM


Re: Definition of religion:
I agree that a simple lack of belief in something could not be considered a religion.
I'm talking about the positive disbelief atheists, and also the anti-religious, or even militant, types as well.
Next you will tell us that you don't have enough faith not to believe in God.
Your definition includes:
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly;
C'mon now. An argument from conflation is below you. If I religiously watch football on Sundays is that the same as the religion practiced at the cathedral down the street? Do you really think those are the same thing?
Where particular set of beliefs = gods do not exist
So not believing in Santa Claus is now a religion? Really? We are quickly heading into the "not collecting stamps is a hobby" territory.
That'd be easy to throw together and I think somebody already has:
http://firstchurchofatheism.com/
Or sense you said anwhere, anyhow, I offer you The Cult of Reason during the French Revolution
How long did the Atheist Church last? About as along as the Organization of Non-Stamp-Collectors of America?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-22-2010 3:47 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 48 of 414 (551408)
03-22-2010 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by New Cat's Eye
03-22-2010 4:32 PM


Yes, and I find that some of those sub-groups of atheism are quite religious, themselves. That is the point I'm making.
Especially the 'rid-the-world-of-religion' ones, quite ironically.
You are conflating passion with religion. Surely someone can be passionate about something without it being religion.
Why do theists want atheism to be a religion so badly? Have you ever heard an atheist claim that christianity is just another form of objective reasoning?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-22-2010 4:32 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(1)
Message 90 of 414 (551594)
03-23-2010 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Den
03-23-2010 1:29 AM


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.
Evidence for an all powerful, all knowing, and ever present supernatural deity that created the entire univers and everything in it who also affects everyday events shouldn't be that hard to objectively identify, if that god actually exists. Also, if there were ample evidence why do theists rely on faith as the basis of their beliefs?
In the end, you are blaming atheists for the lack of evidence for your god of choice. Sorry pal, but it isn't the fault of atheists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Den, posted 03-23-2010 1:29 AM Den has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(2)
Message 91 of 414 (551596)
03-23-2010 10:03 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by Den
03-23-2010 9:47 AM


Nothing is wasted in nature, nothing is wrong or imperfect, Nature is a perfect cycle of transformation, from the sun which transforms Hydrogen to Helium, to the plants that transform light into plant matter, to the tiger which transforms antelopes into baby tigers. Nothing is wasted, Nature in all its forms is perfect.
Only 10% of energy is passed between trophic levels. In layman terms, plants are only able to turn 10% of the energy they receive into food. When herbivores eat those plants they can only transfer 10% of that plant food into energy for themselves. When a carnivore eats the herbivore once again only 10% of the energy makes it to the carnivore. When a scavenger eats the carnivore only 10% of that energy makes it to the scavenger. From the plant to the scavenger only 0.01% of the energy from the plant through the web of life makes it to the scavenger. By my math, 0.01% is much less than a perfect 100%. This is just one example of many that we can cite for imperfection in nature.
And if nature were perfect why do we have vets and doctors? In America, we spend 1 dollar of every 6 just to fix this supposed perfection.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Den, posted 03-23-2010 9:47 AM Den has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Den, posted 03-23-2010 10:18 AM Taq has replied
 Message 102 by Peepul, posted 03-23-2010 2:10 PM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(2)
Message 93 of 414 (551602)
03-23-2010 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Den
03-23-2010 10:18 AM


If it is not hard as you say please provide an answer. I'm not asking you to provide proof, I asking what do you require as proof?
God appearing to above a city of millions and predicting the outcome of the next lottery. That would be a nice one.
You know, the same evidence you would need to be convinced that Santa Claus exists. Or perhaps you could list the evidence you would require to believe in one of the thousands of gods you currently disbelieve in. Stealing from Stephen Roberts . . . I contend that we are both atheists. I just happen to disbelieve in one more god than you do. When you understand why you disbelieve in all those other possible gods you will understand why I disbelieve in yours.
ABE:
Arent most vets dealing with the problems created by man made incestually inbred animals such as mutated cats, dogs and livestock? Anyway I think your are missing the point that perfection is a subjective matter, I dont believe that perfection and imperfection exists, its all perfect, I know you might find that hard to grasp, I probably need to work out how to explain this better.
You seem to have confused the word "existence" with "perfection". The only requirement you seem to have for something being perfect is that it exists. That doesn't make any sense.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Den, posted 03-23-2010 10:18 AM Den has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Den, posted 03-23-2010 1:09 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 103 of 414 (551662)
03-23-2010 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Den
03-23-2010 1:09 PM


You might have to think about it for a while and try to explain it to yourself, cause I've done my best, a good theology teacher can probably explain what Im saying alot better.
Yeah, just like I need a used car salesman to tell me that a car blowing out blue smoke is the "perfect family car".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Den, posted 03-23-2010 1:09 PM Den has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(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 replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


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 replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 144 of 414 (551833)
03-24-2010 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by New Cat's Eye
03-24-2010 12:35 PM


Re: Why Not Sort By Belief?
It just bugs me to see all the "obnoxious" atheists going much further than nothing more than disbelief all the while falling back on just that when they're criticized.
The problem arises when critics of atheism conflate atheism with atheists. The worldview of one atheist does not reflect on all atheists, nor atheism itself. The common thread among ALL atheists is atheism which is a lack of belief in supernatural deities.
Also, you are ignoring the unavoidable social conflicts involved. Atheists have long been on the defensive for holding the minority view in western cultures. Some have even described discrimination against atheists as the last acceptable form of discrimination. We are asked the same questions over and over, such as "Are you an atheist because you hate God" or "Are you an atheist because you don't want to be the product of a Creator". Many of our answers to general questions have these specific questions in mind. It is much like scripted chess openings, if you will. Our opening arguments are often meant to counter the most common gambits.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-24-2010 12:35 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(1)
Message 154 of 414 (552091)
03-26-2010 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 149 by New Cat's Eye
03-25-2010 5:33 PM


It seems to me that the neo-atheists want to distance themselves as far from being religious as possible. To them, it could be an insult.
That is exactly what theists are trying to do when they claim that atheism is a religion, is it not? Theists are trying to insult atheists by trivializing their own beliefs. It's the philosophical equivalent of a suicide bomber. When you claim that atheists are religious you are trying to insult them, are you not? You are trying to project your own perceived weaknesses onto atheists in an attempt to refute their views, are you not? "Atheism is a religion" really means "They are just as bad as us christians" does it not?
So when I say they're religious, they fall back on:
"Nuh-uh... atheism is just a lack of belief in god and nothing more"
Well, they ARE acting like religious people.
So atheists are going to cathedrals and worshiping a god? Really? Are atheists sending out missionaries to convince others to believe in a supernatural deity?
"ZOMG! TEH RELIGUNZ R SOO TERRIBLE. THEY SHOULD ALL VANISH! YEAH ATHEISM!"
That's not religion, chief. That is holding an opinion which is different than being religious. According to your view, a non-religious person is someone who is completely apathetic towards any conceivable opinion that humans have ever had. IOW, the only way to be non-religious in your eyes is to be brain dead. As soon as you state a preference of one thing over another you are religious. That just doesn't make any sense.
It seems that they use their "pure" atheism to fuel something bigger and then when their hypocrisy is pointed out, they fall back onto the "pure" form. Well I think its bogus.
Is there a tenet of atheism that prevents atheists from being passionate in their views? If there is, please reference it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-25-2010 5:33 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-26-2010 2:39 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 156 of 414 (552123)
03-26-2010 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by New Cat's Eye
03-26-2010 2:39 PM


Yes and no. First off, the neo-atheists think they're better than the religious, so it doesn't have to be saying they're as bad as us as it could be saying they're not as good as they think.
Neo-atheists think that their position is based on evidence and reason. Using bad logic and equivocation to falsely accuse them of being religious only confirms their argument.
But its not an attempt to trivialize religion, its an attempt to expose the hypocrisy of being religiously against religion.
You are conflating terms. Atheists do not believe in supernatural deities so how could they use a belief in supernatural deities against a belief in supernatural deities?
Its not so much as projecting my own perceived weaknesses as it it just getting them to acknowledge their own weaknesses.
I think you just proved my point.
Using atheism as a springboard for religious behavior, and then retreating to atheism being nothing more than a belief, doesn't require atheism to have a tenet.
Arguing your point passionately is not religious activity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-26-2010 2:39 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 185 of 414 (552632)
03-30-2010 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 172 by Den
03-28-2010 4:09 AM


First read my last post again, the fact you have raised these questions validate my arguement, you have not educated yourself on the opposing arguments.
Instead of alluding to these arguments why don't you detail them?
The fact you must ask these questions, exposes the problem with the current one sided education system, we are creating a system of drones, one class called Athiest the other Religious.
There are tens of thousands of christian biologists that reject ID and use the theory of evolution in their work. The only ones trying to create a conflict between science and religion seem to be the ID/creationist crowd.
Start with lets say St. Thomas Aquinas writings in Summa Theologica, and go from there, why not look at it yourself?
Why don't you discuss it here?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by Den, posted 03-28-2010 4:09 AM Den has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by Den, posted 04-10-2010 8:32 AM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 189 of 414 (554809)
04-10-2010 9:46 AM
Reply to: Message 186 by Den
04-10-2010 8:32 AM


I make my arguements in vain to those who have already made their choice, your choice is one of ego.
I am not the one who claims that an all powerful creator deity is completely involved in my day to day life. The ego it takes to believe this is beyond my capacity.
You are mistaken regarding the scientific community, Dawkins is seen by many scientists as a joke, his argement has been destroyed by countless scientists, search for the relevant Dawkins debates on google.
Who cares about Dawkins? I could care less. What matters to me is the evidence. Have any?
You use atrocities committed in the name of Religion to revolt against God,
How can I revolt against someone who doesn't exist? I am no more revolting against God than you are revolting against Santa Claus. Get over yourself.
"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
Steven Weinberg, quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by Den, posted 04-10-2010 8:32 AM Den has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 194 of 414 (555599)
04-14-2010 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by onifre
04-13-2010 7:17 PM


Re: Atheism is the new form of evangelism!
So either you're completely full of shit, or you went through god's speedy belief course. Either that, or we atheist are some bad-ass undercover evangelist! So undercover that we didn't even know it. And, sadly, more effective than actual evangelist.
I wonder what will happen when we tell him we don't believe in Santa Claus either. Should we place bets on which takes longer, atheists converting to christianity or Santa Clausism?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by onifre, posted 04-13-2010 7:17 PM onifre has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024