Atheism = just another belief system? (lukewarm, girls, living, issues)
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.
a. The "what we are saying" varies and differs among atheists.
B. That's the point i am making. Atheists here on cd do not agree with other atheists on what atheism is.
I think you are overstating what proof of a God would do to our belief systems. I would still be a humanist, I still wouldn't believe evil entities roam the earth trying to trick humans, I would still believe the logical explanation is the most likely, I still wouldn't believe in good v evil, I would still believe musicians are prophets, it doesn't even necessitate an afterlife. It wouldn't even knock evolution out. If a deity is an answer to the origins of the universe or consciousness there is no guarantee that His involvement goes beyond that. I would have to attribute things to this deity and build a belief system around that deity.
I am not suggesting that it would produce the same belief systems, only that some fundamental beliefs are intrinsic (meaning automatically implied) by the lack of belief in God that would be common and comprise the minimum components of the atheistic belief system. IOW, it is more than ONE and does comprise a belief system.
bold above
they argue about both. atheists here on CD argue about both beliefs AND definitions. they argue and disagree about their beliefs about atheism. and they argue and disagree about their definitions of what is atheism and who are atheists.
bold above
yeah except atheists are not all clear about what atheism is and what it isn't. that's why there is so much arguing and disagreement among atheists on just that. atheists even argue about what the sticky says describing atheism which is posted in the atheism section of the forum.
what's that tired canard some atheists like to trot out "they can't even agree among themselves what god is, and what it means, look at the arguing and disagreement. clearly a sign of muddled irrational thinking. since they can't agree then obviously none of them are right." [which makes no sense whatsoever but bear with me here.] I am pointing out that would also describe atheists here on CD, "they can't even agree among themselves what atheism is, and what it means, look at the arguing and disagreement, clearly a sign of muddled irrational thinking. since they can't agree then obviously none of them are right."
by the way, that part in quotes is not my view. of either atheists or believers. my view recognizes that people have different beliefs, people have different views, and that these different views and beliefs do not indicate muddled irrational thinking, they just indicate different views and beliefs. and just because it is a fact that there are different views, in no way means they are all wrong. they are just different views and beliefs.
the reason i mention the part in quotes is to point out that when atheists use that statement to describe believers, then it applies in the exact same way to describe atheists. if atheists claim it is "true" for one group then it is true for both groups. my view is that it is true for neither group. my view is also this: what IS irrational thinking is the claim that they must all be wrong because they can't come to agreement.
People argue. So what else is new?
Are we having to have a discussion that people argue now? Do we really need to state the obvious?
We live in world where people argue that the earth is flat for goodness sake. This is what human intellect is reduced to. People will argue up is down and left is right. It doesn't mean they are right.
I said right at the beginning of the thread, it's not worth arguing over. Because this is exactly what you end up with every time.
The bottom line is people believe in some thing more because thats what the science is showing everyday, everyway, again and again.
Now we can hide behind fighting religion. But if we are honest, that's political.
I find it very interesting how how every thread in atheism is "debating" a religion in stead of debating ourselves.
Lets put our money up. Lets apply the same standards we do religion-ist to ourselves ... or is that something we fear?
Personally? I feel atheism is stronger than most of the poster representing atheism here present it as. Many us are past believers and are just trying to convince ourselves so that we don't go down the rabbit hole again. Many a scarred and recovering group think.
The bottom line is people believe in some thing more because thats what the science is showing everyday, everyway, again and again.
Now we can hide behind fighting religion. But if we are honest, that's political.
I find it very interesting how how every thread in atheism is "debating" a religion in stead of debating ourselves.
Lets put our money up. Lets apply the same standards we do religion-ist to ourselves ... or is that something we fear?
Personally? I feel atheism is stronger than most of the poster representing atheism here present it as. Many us are past believers and are just trying to convince ourselves so that we don't go down the rabbit hole again. Many a scarred and recovering group think.
We are better than that. well, maybe ...
What? I would love to believe in a personal God. Who wouldn't? Even losing the goofy belief system I had was traumatic because at least my death meant God had finally come to end all suffering. I was left dealing with some pretty harsh realities I hadn't had to deal with as a believer. No one is coming to save the day so it's on us. Even with the desire for it to be true heavily skewing me toward belief I had to admit the evidence was pointing away from a diety.
I am not suggesting that it would produce the same belief systems, only that some fundamental beliefs are intrinsic (meaning automatically implied) by the lack of belief in God that would be common and comprise the minimum components of the atheistic belief system. IOW, it is more than ONE and does comprise a belief system.
Like I said, my conclusion that a deity was highly unlikely came from existing systems that were already in place. I had already ruled out the elitist version of God. Then I ruled out my version.
I am not suggesting that it would produce the same belief systems, only that some fundamental beliefs are intrinsic (meaning automatically implied) by the lack of belief in God that would be common and comprise the minimum components of the atheistic belief system. IOW, it is more than ONE and does comprise a belief system.
I am curious about what fundamental beliefs are intrinsic as a result of a lack of belief in God. I just have a feeling that they can be applied to an atheist and a theist.
I am curious about what fundamental beliefs are intrinsic as a result of a lack of belief in God. I just have a feeling that they can be applied to an atheist and a theist.
Mystic is talking about what must logically follow from our lack of belief. But the weakness of his argument is that his point is only valid for those atheists who actually think about what logically follows.
You may not believe that I own a gold plated Porsche 911, which logically means I must own some other car, or no car at all. But they are not components of your lack of belief in my gold plated Porsche 911.
Mystic is talking about what must logically follow from our lack of belief. But the weakness of his argument is that his point is only valid for those atheists who actually think about what logically follows.
You may not believe that I own a gold plated Porsche 911, which logically means I must own some other car, or no car at all. But they are not components of your lack of belief in my gold plated Porsche 911.
Thank you for clearing that up. I see now that my post was poorly constructed.
My thinking was this:
Quote:
Because I _________, _________, and __________, I lack a belief in a god.
I was curious what exactly would fill in those blanks as those would be fundamental beliefs that result in being an atheist.
But what you are saying seems to be reversed:
Quote:
Because I lack a belief in a god, I _____, _____, and _____.
If I understand you correctly, what you are saying is that I don't have to think past what I don't believe. In other words, I don't have to think you own some other car or no car at all. It is enough that I don't believe you own a gold-plated car.
Thank you for clearing that up. I see now that my post was poorly constructed.
My thinking was this:
I was curious what exactly would fill in those blanks as those would be fundamental beliefs that result in being an atheist.
But what you are saying seems to be reversed:
If I understand you correctly, what you are saying is that I don't have to think past what I don't believe. In other words, I don't have to think you own some other car or no car at all. It is enough that I don't believe you own a gold-plated car.
Correct, you do not have to think past this, and many people do not. And this is true for other beliefs, especially extraordinary ones. It is a quick and easy way our subconscious uses to evaluate claims, especially where one may not have the luxury to sit back and contemplate the big questions.
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.
