Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
 
Old 12-06-2022, 11:32 PM
 
Location: Sun City West, Arizona
50,979 posts, read 24,467,741 times
Reputation: 33029

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals View Post
whatever you say awaits after death, it doesn't go against the fact that , we empirically don't know.
All I'm saying is that not all of us who are atheists believe there is nothing after death...particularly if we are Buddhist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-07-2022, 12:52 AM
 
12,595 posts, read 6,667,120 times
Reputation: 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruithne View Post
I only meant argument in the sense of an exchange of opposing views or defense of a viewpoint.

Well I don't know who 'ya all' are but please don't paste me in with them. I never resort to ad hominem unless it is thrown at me first (even then I have to be pushed very, very hard) and to my knowledge have never directed it at you since you have never directed it at me. We have a mutual personal policy on that type of thing I think.

I'm not going to defend LM - I know you are both perfectly capable of fighting your own battles.

And by the way I have been talked to like that plenty by someone on this forum that you hold in apparent high regard. I've had people gang up on me and follow me around. People who kid themselves they are 'spiritual'. Just saying.



But to reiterate what I said earlier, definitions for things came about as a result of a need to express something:


'Theism' - the definition is clear - 'belief in the existence of a god or gods'.

Atheism - 'disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods'.


Religion - most people would agree it is defined as something like:
'the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.'

We can make statements that atheism is a belief and a religion, but then words lose all meaning.

If atheism is not disbelief, then what is?
If atheism is a religion then pretty much anything becomes a religion.

That's all I'm saying.
It is true that you have always remained above foisting invective. Even for things that are diametrically opposed to your own views.
You are very cool like that.
I must admit that I fall short of that standard in that regard...but, I try to with you...because, well, you know why.

I was Atheist my whole adult life.
I always viewed it as a Belief Position....about God(s).
When the "Lack Belief" thing started to come into vogue...I always found it very strange.
This has been discussed on this board many times...many posts.
From a logic/reason standpoint..."Lack Belief" did not make sense to me.
It is impossible to not have a "Belief" about something you have considered or contemplated. You necessarily will have a "Belief" about it.
The only way you could not have a "Belief" about something is if you never heard of it, or never considered or contemplated it in any way.
I never saw my Atheist view as a "Lack of Belief about God(s)"...I fully understood it as a "Belief in a lack of Gods".
I saw it as a Belief Position and as the doctrine I held.
I had no problem presenting and holding that position: It was my Belief that no God(s) existed, and that was a doctrine I held and considered as very highly probable to be true. As true as most anything.
As you know...I found out later (by coming to this board) that "God" was not limited to just the metaphorical and allegorical Deities in ancient Theological and Mythological writings...and adopted the Pantheist Religion.

I think (I'm very sure) it is the term "Belief" that many Atheists have a aversion to.
They see it as putting stock in things that have not been substantiated, and it goes against a "objective evidence based" protocol.
They also see the term as directly tied to Mainstream Religion...especially Abrahamic Religion...so, they came up with a way to disassociate from the term.
But, nevertheless...it is still impossible to not have a "Belief" about something that you've considered or contemplated...no matter what it is.
To me:
Theism---- Belief a God does exist. Theos: God
Atheism----Belief a God does not exist. A-Theos: No God

As far as "Religion"...I never thought it was limited to "the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods."
Especially since I knew of Buddhism and other Religions that did not provide for a "superhuman controlling power"...but they were "Religions" nonetheless.

Atheists certainly belong on this board, presenting their views...in my opinion.
I think people should tout the merit of their Theological views...even relatively and comparatively. But mostly present their own views, rather than disparage the views of others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2022, 03:03 AM
 
Location: West Virginia
16,728 posts, read 15,727,874 times
Reputation: 10948
This is a thread about Why an Atheist in the R&S Forum? Any further posts about defining Atheism, or arguing whether Atheism is a religion, will be removed as off topic and infractions may be issued.
__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
City-Data Terms of Service: https://www.city-data.com/terms.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2022, 09:10 AM
 
29,555 posts, read 9,765,828 times
Reputation: 3473
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruithne View Post
See my post above.. I was editing mine as you were writing yours.
I saw your edits after I posted my comment...

I assume we agree that it is a question of how we all make these distinctions between what are simple figures of speech vs what are facts, truths and the more commonly known definition of words found in the more commonly used dictionaries. And/or to note these distinctions that are also often found in most dictionaries.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2022, 09:18 AM
 
29,555 posts, read 9,765,828 times
Reputation: 3473
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule View Post
I wasn't attempting to "argue" it.
As per the OP: I noted my view that it is a Religion...my basis for that view...and how that view translates to my feelings about Atheists posting to the board.
Of course...it couldn't just be, "That's your view? Okay, cool...here's my view"...ya all had to bust on me about it.
What's up with that?
You all have to make it that I cannot be counted among the "reasonably intelligent"...that I "can't recognize right from wrong"...that I am "making ridiculous claims"...that I am "dumb, obstinate and unreasonable"...that I am not among "Most intelligent people", but like those that "wanna claim the earth is flat"...and in summation, what I posted is "nonsense".

This level of ad hominem was levied upon me in just one post! https://www.city-data.com/forum/64550046-post92.html
Who talks to someone like that?!
I read you loud and clear. Seems you are not reading any of the many comments explaining why there are those of us who "bust" on you for the reasons we do. What's up with that? Our alternative views, reasons and many explanations are what's up with that...

How are any of us to consider who can be counted among the "reasonably intelligent?" For starters, it is not reasonably intelligent to argue atheism is a religion. Again for all the reasons provided many times already. To insist regardless is what brings the other descriptors to mind; dumb, obstinate and unreasonable." No different than someone who insists the world is flat, or what is the difference? That's a point of view as well. Right?

How to judge what is right or wrong? Reasonable or unreasonable? True or false? A balanced perspective or stubborn and biased?

Clearly, the reason you are at odds with many of the rest of us is because your manner of judgement is altogether very different from ours. Mine. Simple as that! That's why that isn't an ad hominem at all. Or inappropriate all considered...

Last edited by LearnMe; 12-07-2022 at 10:30 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2022, 09:35 AM
 
29,555 posts, read 9,765,828 times
Reputation: 3473
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals View Post
Perhaps it's just a gamble where we do our research, use our logic and pick our side.

I think almost every religion indicates about consciousness after death.

And the truthful answer is, we empirically do not know, "what's after death?", a common question by the entire humanity.

So being an Atheist, you put your faith that there is nothing after death, which puts you just at 50% probability as of a believer who is also at 50% probability when he believes that there is consciousness after death. Both parties are using faith - none has evidence, none empirically knows the answer.

This is one part of believe and non-believe. Both parties have faith and gambling at 50% probability.
And if you throw in the reincarceration theory in the mix then all three parties are at 33.33%, and you keep on going to find out that everyone is playing the game at equal odds.

Part two is, choosing and deciding to live a life under a religious code of morality. And again, there is a 50% odds here. You either decide to do so, or not do so. It's a choice.

So, I think you are not missing much by coming to this forum and finding something that will turn all Atheists into believers. We have already made our calls, we shall now wait, and we will probably see.
With all due respect, I disagree, and I do mean respect, because you do a good job of explaining the rationale that has you concluding what you do. Here is why I disagree...

The problem with your premise is this default about what "we empirically do not know" and how this necessarily means there is a 50/50 chance of one possibility vs another. This is not true. That's not how probabilities work. What might make such equal probability more likely is if there was an equal amount of evidence to justify one conclusion vs another.

Flip a coin, for example, and none of us can empirically know whether the coin will land on it's head or it's tail. That IS a 50/50 chance. We can't empirically know the coin will actually fall to the ground either, but this doesn't mean there is a 50/50 chance it will land on the ground or not. Does it? We have evidence and proofs that let us know the odds are more like 100% the coin will fall to the ground. Bowling; in the same way the odds are not 50/50 one will roll a strike or not. There are reasons, considerations, that make it more or less likely someone will roll a strike or not.

I don't have "faith" about being an atheist. I am considering all the evidence, reason and logic there is to consider with respect to the existence of a god and/or consciousness after death or reincarnation. Without any evidence or proof that something exists, I don't have good justification to believe it exists. Simple as this, and this does not involve any faith. Certainly not like people have faith a god exists in any case. Not the same and not at all equal in terms of probability either.

What "code" I choose to live my life by is also not a matter of probability, but if we were to think so, the probability would not be 50/50 of one possibility either. The number of ways anyone can choose to live their life is infinite. Even with atheists and believers, there are all manner of different "codes" we might adopt.

I appreciate your acceptance of me, an atheist, participating in this forum. Which gets us back to the topic of this thread, but about that too, I'm not thinking the odds someone will finally turn all atheists into believers is 50/50. More like slim-to-none. Much like the the evidence a god exists demonstrates anything even close to a 50/50 chance one does. Again, more like slim-to-none given the evidence we have to consider.

Last edited by LearnMe; 12-07-2022 at 09:47 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2022, 09:45 AM
 
29,555 posts, read 9,765,828 times
Reputation: 3473
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy View Post
This is a thread about Why an Atheist in the R&S Forum? Any further posts about defining Atheism, or arguing whether Atheism is a religion, will be removed as off topic and infractions may be issued.
I've posted a comment or two before getting to your warning here...

Not so much to argue what is atheism any further but to distinguish between facts, reason and logic vs comments born of bias and an obvious agenda that prevents fair, balanced, critical thinking about such distinctions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2022, 01:21 PM
 
12,595 posts, read 6,667,120 times
Reputation: 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
I read you loud and clear. Seems you are not reading any of the many comments explaining why there are those of us who "bust" on you for the reasons we do. What's up with that? Our alternative views, reasons m many explanations are what's up with that...

How are any of us to consider who can be counted among the "reasonably intelligent?" For starters, it is not reasonably intelligent to argue atheism is a religion. Again for all the reasons provided many times already. To insist regardless is what brings the other descriptors to mind; dumb, obstinate and unreasonable." No different than someone who insists the world is flat, or what is the difference? That's a point of view as well. Right?

How to judge what is right or wrong? Reasonable or unreasonable? True or false? A balanced perspective or stubborn and biased?

Clearly, the reason you are at odds with many of the rest of us is because your manner of judgement is altogether very different from ours. Mine. Simple as that! That's why that isn't an ad hominem at all. Or inappropriate all considered...
I would answer you, in detail...but read Post #113.
Though I will see what happens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2022, 08:11 PM
 
6,115 posts, read 3,100,060 times
Reputation: 2410
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
With all due respect, I disagree, and I do mean respect, because you do a good job of explaining the rationale that has you concluding what you do. Here is why I disagree...

The problem with your premise is this default about what "we empirically do not know" and how this necessarily means there is a 50/50 chance of one possibility vs another. This is not true. That's not how probabilities work. What might make such equal probability more likely is if there was an equal amount of evidence to justify one conclusion vs another.

Flip a coin, for example, and none of us can empirically know whether the coin will land on it's head or it's tail. That IS a 50/50 chance. We can't empirically know the coin will actually fall to the ground either, but this doesn't mean there is a 50/50 chance it will land on the ground or not. Does it? We have evidence and proofs that let us know the odds are more like 100% the coin will fall to the ground. Bowling; in the same way the odds are not 50/50 one will roll a strike or not. There are reasons, considerations, that make it more or less likely someone will roll a strike or not.
IMO, one of the major ways probabilities work is, "What question are we trying to answer?"
The question here is, Is there a consciousness after death? The simple answers are Yes or No. (and obviously, the empirical answer is, "We don't really know".)
So, generally speaking, probability in our particular scenario is 50/50
We are flipping a coin, not rolling a dice. And our question above in bold, clearly indicates this.

Now, if we want into granularities, then obviously there are unlimited number of out comes as to what's after death? And we don't have a device (like a coin or dice) that will have unlimited number of choices, and flipping or rolling it will give us one answer.

Also, talking about granularities, even flipping a coin is not 50/50.
Some statistician believe, and their research indicates that it's actually about 51/49 in favor of the side that's up when flipping the coin.

Another granularity is that the head side has a very small quantity of extra metal used to carve the shape, so the coin is very slightly heavier on the head side, and hence there is a slightly higher chance that the coin may land on head side.

So, for the sake of argument, we have to make an assumption that it's 50/50, just as we have to make an assumption that the coin will actually land if flipped in the air.




Quote:
I don't have "faith" about being an atheist. I am considering all the evidence, reason and logic there is to consider with respect to the existence of a god and/or consciousness after death or reincarnation. Without any evidence or proof that something exists, I don't have good justification to believe it exists. Simple as this, and this does not involve any faith. Certainly not like people have faith a god exists in any case. Not the same and not at all equal in terms of probability either.
Which is fine for you - but - I have another "logical granularity" here. And as I have stated before, "Absence of evidence is not necessarily the evidence of absence."

Do you remember the example of oxygen? Did it exist a thousand years ago, when no one had evidence that oxygen exists?

And then obviously, we can't define the evidence of God. We don't have a scientific formula where the numbers will be plugged in and the result will prove an entity to be God or not? And we also dont have a chemicals test where we can put an entity under a microscope to study the specie, run some tests and refer to a book or a chart, and prove that this entity is God.

IMO,
Belief in God comes from "faith" and not the "evidence".

And this "faith" is build by research and looking for "signs of God". And these signs are only for those who truly search for God.
As I have previously stated, the brain does the research and logic part, but the call to faith comes from the heart.

Otherwise, think about it, if there truly was an "Evidence of God" as per everyone's liking then the entire human kind would have had no choice but to believe in God. In which case, what would've been the point of life? God would've created every single one of us, and had entered us into heaven or hell. Why he would've given us life, gave us a choice, and a certain amount of time?? What would've been the purpose of our existence on this earth if all humanity was a believer in ONE God?
Our actions in this world and in this life would've have had no meaning and no effect.

I think God must be having a lot of fun, watching us all trying to play this game of probabilities.

As humans, what can we do about it?
My answer is, now that we are here, lets deal with it.


Quote:
What "code" I choose to live my life by is also not a matter of probability, but if we were to think so, the probability would not be 50/50 of one possibility either. The number of ways anyone can choose to live their life is infinite. Even with atheists and believers, there are all manner of different "codes" we might adopt.
I think we can apply the same logic here to address the oracle of probabilities. What question are we trying to answer? And the question in this case is, whether one decides to live his life by religious code/morality or not?
The general answer is, Yes or No, and hence 50/50 probability.
But I do understand your point as well, so there isn't much to argue here.

Quote:
I appreciate your acceptance of me, an atheist, participating in this forum. Which gets us back to the topic of this thread, but about that too, I'm not thinking the odds someone will finally turn all atheists into believers is 50/50. More like slim-to-none. Much like the the evidence a god exists demonstrates anything even close to a 50/50 chance one does. Again, more like slim-to-none given the evidence we have to consider.
It's actually good to have Atheists here, many of whom, including yourself, have maintained a very high standard of scholarly conversations in a friendly atmosphere.

Human brain is an amazing thing. And my main interest in this forum is to see how the brain in different people, sees and react differently, when looking at the same scene and scenario.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2022, 07:24 AM
 
3,573 posts, read 1,182,867 times
Reputation: 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi View Post
All I'm saying is that not all of us who are atheists believe there is nothing after death...particularly if we are Buddhist.
Most atheists are between organized religions, looking to satisfy natural human religion of by intuition knowing that God is real just having problem accepting man made rules of irganized religions...
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top