U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-21-2018, 10:16 AM
 
34,481 posts, read 8,888,267 times
Reputation: 4788

Advertisements

I agree. I am not blaming Christianity for Hitler, though His Godfaith - and he had one - was based more on Christianity than anything else. I only point to that when there is a claim that Hitler was an atheists. Though we don't get it so much these days.

But we still get atheism blamed for Stalin, though what he did was more to do with power than atheism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-21-2018, 02:12 PM
 
Location: Top of the South, NZ
15,883 posts, read 12,444,377 times
Reputation: 5058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terryj View Post
I think that a lot of scientist have been labeled "atheist" when they are more along the views of "agnostic".

I think that Carl Sagan summed it up pretty good with this quote: "An atheist has to know a lot more than I know." He was an agnostic who, while maintaining that the idea of a creator of the universe was difficult to disprove, nevertheless disbelieved in God's existence, pending sufficient evidence.

Thomas Edison was an agnostic and thought that religious dogma destroy young people minds, he called them incurably religious. He said, "The great trouble is that the preachers get the children from six to seven years of age, and then it is almost impossible to do anything with them. Incurably religious; That is the best way to describe the mental condition of so many people. Incurably religious."
I have to disagree with this Sagan fella - there is no minimum level of factual knowledge required for either belief, or disbelief.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2018, 09:52 PM
 
34,481 posts, read 8,888,267 times
Reputation: 4788
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe90 View Post
I have to disagree with this Sagan fella - there is no minimum level of factual knowledge required for either belief, or disbelief.
Correct. I have great respect for Sagan, Tyson and the other Unbelievers, but while they know a lot of science, they apparently misunderstand (as I did myself once) the actual logical position of atheism, and someone who does not know for sure that there is a god (agnostic) can also be someone who does not accept the claim that there is a god (an atheist).

I also accept the possibility that they know this very well but are trying to avoid the massive bad Rap that the term 'atheist' has in the US. It is different here in a way that would probably astonish the average American. It truly makes no difference in any walk of life other than religious minister (and even then) if you are an atheist.

Dennet, and Sam Harris indeed know the logic very well but proposed dumping the 'atheist' label, for tactical reasons, not because it wasn't what they were. . The scientists may know that 'agnostic' is actually very acceptable to the US religious public. No wonder they like to use it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2018, 09:37 AM
 
524 posts, read 144,952 times
Reputation: 227
Atheism is a construct of people who try to circumscribe everything to 'science'. Much of science has been debunked and is continuously being debunked.

Science is the art, if you will, of 'progress', nothing more. There is nothing wrong with science, but science for the sake of science make Johnny a dull and ignorant boy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2018, 10:04 AM
 
Location: WV and Eastport, ME
10,277 posts, read 10,383,387 times
Reputation: 6937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Objective Detective View Post
Atheism is a construct of people who try to circumscribe everything to 'science'. Much of science has been debunked and is continuously being debunked.

Science is the art, if you will, of 'progress', nothing more. There is nothing wrong with science, but science for the sake of science make Johnny a dull and ignorant boy.
You've got a very strange definition of Atheism. Have you looked at the FAQ in the Atheism and Agnosticism forum? The definition of Atheism has absolutely nothing to do with science.
__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
City-Data Terms of Service: http://www.city-data.com/terms.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2018, 10:42 AM
 
Location: Colorado Springs
18,895 posts, read 8,873,507 times
Reputation: 18302
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy View Post
You've got a very strange definition of Atheism. Have you looked at the FAQ in the Atheism and Agnosticism forum? The definition of Atheism has absolutely nothing to do with science.
I think you're right that the other poster has a very strange definition of atheism. Atheism is not just science. To me, atheism is looking at life and saying god? I don't sense such a presence, so if you're going to convince me about god, then you're gonna have to give me some real evidence. That's where the link is with science.

It's sort of like when you get sick to your stomach. You probably think back to what you've been eating. Food poisoning, stomach acid, etc. That's not a scientific approach..you're just contemplating things. But then, if the problem seems severe or continuing, you move on to the scientific analysis, so you go to the doctor and perhaps have some tests.

Atheism can be looked at at several levels. But unfortunately, christians do not look at christianity at several levels. Or perhaps I should say that they choose to put on their blinders so that they only look straight ahead at the bible, but refuse to see anything in their peripheral vision...such as science. Or if they do bring in science, they twist and twist to develop fake science to fit a belief they already have and will not change.

I've often thought that there is one thing that would shake christianity to its core -- if tomorrow we found that Jesus Christ was actually a Black African. We already have all these pictures of Jesus looking like Jeffrey Hunter, which he CERTAINLY did not. And that comes down to the basic difference between people who think truly scientifically, and people who think religiously. The former let science take them to wherever it leads, even if it's where they don't want to go. The latter desire only the same one thing (if they're christians) -- the bible. The former actually contemplate. The latter regurgitate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2018, 03:08 PM
 
Location: Northeastern US
14,070 posts, read 8,562,897 times
Reputation: 6003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Objective Detective View Post
Atheism is a construct of people who try to circumscribe everything to 'science'. Much of science has been debunked and is continuously being debunked.

Science is the art, if you will, of 'progress', nothing more. There is nothing wrong with science, but science for the sake of science make Johnny a dull and ignorant boy.
Atheism is a label for people who do not believe in any gods. Many of them are philosophical naturalists / empiricists but some are not and the label still holds for the scientifically illiterate atheist, so long as s/he doesn't believe in any gods.

Science is the outworking of a methodology called the scientific method. Technology (applied science) is a sign that scientific inquiry actually works, but it is not itself science, and technologists (e.g., engineers) are not scientists. "Progress", then, is a side effect of science. The direct output of science is an increasingly accurate knowledge of the natural world.

Now most atheists are atheists because they were, firstly, skeptics. Skeptics require evidence. Science requires evidence. So there's a resonance there that's entirely understandable. But atheists tend to disbelieve in deities AND to embrace science for the same reason: someone who does not afford belief to the unsubstantiated tends to have a problem with unfalsifiable deities and an affinity for the scientific method.

I trust you will now stop mischaracterizing both atheism and science, now that you understand what both are and aren't.

Somehow though I suspect that within weeks or even days or possibly hours, you will post some nonsense like the above as if you'd never been informed concerning it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2018, 03:47 PM
 
Location: Under Moon & Star
1,577 posts, read 559,406 times
Reputation: 8825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Objective Detective View Post
Atheism is a construct of people who try to circumscribe everything to 'science'.
Science is a methodology, not a cause. The notion that there is insufficient cause to believe in deities is merely an observation, no different than the notion that there is insufficient cause to believe in sasquatches or faeries.

PS - You clearly don't know what 'circumscribe' means.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Objective Detective View Post
Much of science has been debunked and is continuously being debunked.
And what is the only thing that debunks science? Science.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Objective Detective View Post
Science is the art, if you will, of 'progress', nothing more.
No, it's not, though it obviously makes you feel good to invent your own definition of science. Rather self-absorbed, that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Objective Detective View Post
There is nothing wrong with science, but science for the sake of science make Johnny a dull and ignorant boy.
Science for the sake of science is why we're having this conversation. While some of science has specific objectives, much of it is just exploratory. Remember that the next time you visit a doctor - which is essentially an exercise in asking a professional science to apply the scientific method to you, some of which is a result of someones throughout history doing science for science.

The find that you find that boring is irrelevant. It is an interesting admission that you are bored with knowledge. It's also humorous in light of the fact that you fancy yourself a 'detective' on some level. You come off as someone who is more content with ignorance than with understanding.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2018, 03:50 PM
Status: "Just crying wolf" (set 12 days ago)
 
5,286 posts, read 1,328,038 times
Reputation: 804
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy View Post
You've got a very strange definition of Atheism. Have you looked at the FAQ in the Atheism and Agnosticism forum? The definition of Atheism has absolutely nothing to do with science.
This has been asked before, but why would you think YOUR definition of atheism applies to everyone. If someone wants to define atheism a certain way, why would we not simply believe them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2018, 04:02 PM
 
Location: minnesota
5,254 posts, read 1,676,306 times
Reputation: 1835
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie View Post
This has been asked before, but why would you think YOUR definition of atheism applies to everyone. If someone wants to define atheism a certain way, why would we not simply believe them?
It's up to the person identifying as an atheist as to what atheist means. I keep getting called an agnostic by religious people but I don't see it that way. Enough religious people already what to define atheism as the belief that there is no God. It's not up to you to define it for someone else. I know you like to argue about who is a Christian and who is not based on specific beliefs about Christ. Don't bring your confusion over here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top