Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,606 posts, read 55,881,767 times
Reputation: 11862
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozzferrahhtoo
Indeed. We have one word "religion" for a wide spectrum of things and this distracts us from the fact that it matters WHAT people believe too, not just that they are religious.
Take the mixed discipline fighting competitions that have become popular in recent times. Then take grass bowls. We call both of them "sport" yet they have nothing in common at all aside from breathing.
Anyone who thinks that "religion" is a useful word to describe them all should simply consider whether they would like to live on a street populated by extremist fundamental Muslims or extremist fundamental Jains. The former fly planes into buildings. The latter are so anti violence that they use cheese cloth to drink water through in order to reduce the number of creatures they kill while drinking, and sweep the street before them as they walk to reduce the chances of stepping on bugs.
Indeed. The type of society atheists want is one where we do not even have a word "atheist". Take for example racism. We have no need today to call people a-racist. Racism has been so marginalized that we do not even require a term any more for people who are not racist.
A world where religion has been so marginalized that we do not even require the term "atheist" any more is the goal of all of the atheists I have ever met.
So while you are right that religion is the origin of the TERM atheism, I see no reason to think that it is the origin of the state of BEING atheist.
The belief in deities, spiritual forces, preternatural physical forces, humans with magic powers.etc is universal. That's why atheists are but one group. Their God, however, is Chance and Probability.
Only if you are the kind of person who needs to think in terms of gods, worship and the like. Theists clearly are which is why they need to use the language of "Their god is...." in order to render differing positions into terms they themselves understand. Despite the lack of religiosity on the part of atheists, theists have this overarching need to describe them in those terms. The power, and the uselessness, of labels it seems.
Only if you are the kind of person who needs to think in terms of gods, worship and the like. Theists clearly are which is why they need to use the language of "Their god is...." in order to render differing positions into terms they themselves understand. Despite the lack of religiosity on the part of atheists, theists have this overarching need to describe them in those terms. The power, and the uselessness, of labels it seems.
The real difference, Nozz is that theists do not pretend not to notice or acknowledge the "elephant in the room" responsible for our very existence and ability to question such things. Atheists do because "We don't know so what we do know is either attributed to their preferred label "Nature" or ignored as evidence of anything that needs to be labeled. The point, Nozz . . . is that whatever you prefer to call it . . . that which theists label God EXISTS. That existential reality trumps ANY label issues.
Religion is the orgin of Atheism. Would there be Atheist without there first being Theist?
If an anthropologist discovered a remote tribe that had never developed the concept of a deity, that tribe would be correctly described as atheist -- which simply means "lacking god." Even though they had nothing to frame their atheism against.
Anyone from a Zen Buddhist to this hypothetical remote tribesman to a preschooler in a nonreligious family who's never come across the concept of gods to Richard Dawkins may correctly be described as atheist.
As a Pagan on this fourm I have to ask why some on here tend to judge ALL religions as one. Not all religions treat people the same nor do we all judge people for thier belifes or lack of them. Not all of us tend to go around and tell you what you should believe either. The list goes on from there. So why do it?
Because it serves a purpose. It paints religion in general as bad and needs to be eradicated.
If you want to label something that exists "god" then say that means "god" exists then so be it. But to do so is as empty as empty gets.
I can pick up my teapot and instead of calling it "tea pot" simply call it "god". Since the tea pot exists so does "god".
It is a ludicrous, empty and pointless linguistic game to simply relabel things you know exist as "god" in order to be able to say "god" exists.
However you do not stop with simply being ludicrous, you then engage in worse. AFTER labeling something "god" you then start piling on extra attributes to the newly labeled thing. Consciousness, Emotions, Intelligence, Intent, a penchant for laundering souls. You can not stop yourself at simply relabeling, you have to invent baseless attributes and assign them for no reason you are ever making clear to us.
The real difference, Nozz is that theists do not pretend not to notice or acknowledge the "elephant in the room" responsible for our very existence and ability to question such things. Atheists do because "We don't know so what we do know is either attributed to their preferred label "Nature" or ignored as evidence of anything that needs to be labeled. The point, Nozz . . . is that whatever you prefer to call it . . . that which theists label God EXISTS. That existential reality trumps ANY label issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozzferrahhtoo
If you want to label something that exists "god" then say that means "god" exists then so be it. But to do so is as empty as empty gets.
I can pick up my teapot and instead of calling it "tea pot" simply call it "god". Since the tea pot exists so does "god.
It is a ludicrous, empty and pointless linguistic game to simply relabel things you know exist as "god" in order to be able to say "god" exists.
As usual you quote without the context and make inappropriate analogies and unsupportable criticisms. I am not simply labeling anything God. I am labeling the evidence that clearly belongs to God as evidence of God whereas you ignore it or deny it is God using your preferred label "Nature" and run for cover using the "we don't know" so it is a "God of the Gaps" issue.
Quote:
However you do not stop with simply being ludicrous, you then engage in worse. AFTER labeling something "god" you then start piling on extra attributes to the newly labeled thing. Consciousness, Emotions, Intelligence, Intent, a penchant for laundering souls. You can not stop yourself at simply relabeling, you have to invent baseless attributes and assign them for no reason you are ever making clear to us.
You have never fully appreciated the distinction between what can be supported by science and what is strictly BELIEF. Conflating the two AS IF I do not make any distinctions between them is disingenuous. The issue of God's existence is separate from ANY beliefs about God. God's existence is scientifically supportable . . . any BELIEFS (including mine) have to fare for themselves.
If an anthropologist discovered a remote tribe that had never developed the concept of a deity, that tribe would be correctly described as atheist -- which simply means "lacking god." Even though they had nothing to frame their atheism against.
Anyone from a Zen Buddhist to this hypothetical remote tribesman to a preschooler in a nonreligious family who's never come across the concept of gods to Richard Dawkins may correctly be described as atheist.
God's existence is scientifically supportable . . . any BELIEFS (including mine) have to fare for themselves.
So why have you never shown us this science?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
