Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Earthquake Damage]

Eh, I'm afraid you have lost me, I've never mentioned any specific god.  Unless you believe I think that photons are god?  I'll respond if you are clearer in your statement.

You described a particular god, one that is omniscient, omnipotent, and actively hides its existence from us.  That god's existence is irrelevant.  We will not discover it in any time frame, because it is willing and able to prevent us from doing so.  Not that god.  I said nothing about the significance of any god, just the one you described.

[Darvi]

Well, if you're applying a ridiculously loose definition of a religion and a crazily tight definition of atheism... sure, I guess I'm not an atheist.  Wow!

On the other hand, that means that, say, Richard Dawkins isn't an atheist either.

Actually I meant that Atheism is the total rejection of any concept of god. You accept the possibility, so you're evidently not rejecting.

[Farmerbob]

1) Is "I don't think there's a god" a cause?  No.

Then why argue about it?

Non-sequiter.  I can think something's true without it being a cause.

If you told me that 2+2 was 5, I would tell you that it isn't, even thought 2+2=4 (or, indeed, mathematics as a whole) isn't a cause.

2) Is it a principle?  No.

Then why argue about it?

Non-sequiter.  See above.

3) Is it a system of beliefs?  No.

Atheism most certainly is a system of beliefs.  A very simple one, but a system nonetheless.

It's not a system.  It is one absence of a belief.  Even if you claim that atheism is a belief (using the logic that "everything is a belief", it's not a system of beliefs.  It's one element.  Your morals and general life outlook are not affected by it at all.

4) Does it have to be held with "ardor and faith"?  No.

Most people, if they are not holding to Atheism with "ardor and faith" are actually agnostic.  There's a lot of confusion in the world today about the difference between Agnostics and Atheists.  An atheist believes, with no proof, that there is no possibility of the existence of a deity.  An agnostic believes, BECAUSE there is no proof, that it is uncertain if there's a deity or not.  There's a huge difference between these two, but a lot of people just don't see it.

Wrong.

An atheist does NOT have to believe that there is no possibility of a god.  To be an atheist, you just have to not believe in one.

I don't think a God is impossible.  I think it's about as likely as invisible fairies in my garden or the FSM, but not impossible.  So I call myself an atheist.

Heck, even strong atheism (belief that there's no god) isn't really a religion.

Actually, to be an Atheist you have to actively disbelieve in a deity.  If you simply do not care one way or the other and have no interest in the matter, you would be called Irreligious.


Again from m-w.com

Definition of ATHEISM
1archaic : ungodliness, wickedness
2a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

Definition of IRRELIGIOUS
1: neglectful of religion : lacking religious emotions, doctrines, or practices <so irreligious that they exploit popular religion for professional purposes — G. B. Shaw>
2: indicating lack of religion

[Darvi]

So yay, I finally know the name of my affiliation.
 I've just noticed that I've been actually participating in a discussion about a serious topic. Only happens once or twice a year.

[Farmerbob]

Eh, I'm afraid you have lost me, I've never mentioned any specific god.  Unless you believe I think that photons are god?  I'll respond if you are clearer in your statement.

You described a particular god, one that is omniscient, omnipotent, and actively hides its existence from us.  That god's existence is irrelevant.  We will not discover it in any time frame, because it is willing and able to prevent us from doing so.  Not that god.  I said nothing about the significance of any god, just the one you described.

Ah, I see your point, however it's unfounded.  We can't know that said Deity isn't planning on making itself known tomorrow, or in a week, next decade, or a million years from now.  Perhaps it's waiting for us to grow up as a race, and wants to let us do it mostly by ourselves.

Then again, maybe there's nothing there.

[Darvi]

Eh, I'm afraid you have lost me, I've never mentioned any specific god.  Unless you believe I think that photons are god?  I'll respond if you are clearer in your statement.

You described a particular god, one that is omniscient, omnipotent, and actively hides its existence from us.  That god's existence is irrelevant.  We will not discover it in any time frame, because it is willing and able to prevent us from doing so.  Not that god.  I said nothing about the significance of any god, just the one you described.

Ah, I see your point, however it's unfounded.  We can't know that said Deity isn't planning on making itself known tomorrow, or in a week, next decade, or a million years from now.  Perhaps it's waiting for us to grow up as a race, and wants to let us do it mostly by ourselves.

That's true, but until then, something that doesn't affect it's surroundings is practically nonexistent.

But in that case, how do we know it's God? Or a god for that matter?

[Leafsnail]

Definition of ATHEISM
1archaic : ungodliness, wickedness
2a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

Disbelieve vb vt : to hold not to be true or real : reject or withold belief in vi : to withold or reject belief

In any case, look up Strong and Weak atheism.

[Darvi]

Weak atheism seems like agnosticism to me*. That's the thing with vocabulary, everybody has their own definition of certain words.

*Or people who have no concept of God.

[Leafsnail]

Well, weak atheism does include agnosticism, yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_and_explicit_atheism

[Farmerbob]

Eh, I'm afraid you have lost me, I've never mentioned any specific god.  Unless you believe I think that photons are god?  I'll respond if you are clearer in your statement.

You described a particular god, one that is omniscient, omnipotent, and actively hides its existence from us.  That god's existence is irrelevant.  We will not discover it in any time frame, because it is willing and able to prevent us from doing so.  Not that god.  I said nothing about the significance of any god, just the one you described.

Ah, I see your point, however it's unfounded.  We can't know that said Deity isn't planning on making itself known tomorrow, or in a week, next decade, or a million years from now.  Perhaps it's waiting for us to grow up as a race, and wants to let us do it mostly by ourselves.

That's true, but until then, something that doesn't affect it's surroundings is practically nonexistent.

But in that case, how do we know it's God? Or a god for that matter?

If you want to consider the possibility that a deity exists and it's letting humanity grow up on our own, there are lots of parallels with human raising of human children.

1)  You have to let them learn some things on their own.
2)  You let them believe in some things that are not true, at least for a while.
3)  People tend to try to shield their children from reality to at least some degree.
4)  Sometimes you take a hand in guiding your child without them even knowing it.

There's lots of reasonable comparisons one might make between a benevolent deity and benevolent human parents.

That doesn't mean a deity exists *shrug*

[Darvi]

Well, weak atheism does include agnosticism, yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_and_explicit_atheism

Damn over-generalization making everything confusing.

[Leafsnail]

I dunno, Jewish people get to define what "Jew" means.  Why can't atheists define what atheist means?  I mean, can you actually name anyone that famously fits into the narrow definition of atheism you put forwards?

[Siquo]

Aaaaandd back to semantics 

[Darvi]

I'm all for renaming it "Idontbelievethereisagod-ism"

[Leafsnail]

Well, yeah.

But the basic point is that atheism is not really a religion.  I mean, I would say that a lot of theistic beliefs aren't religions either (I mean, isn't a religion like... y'know, structured?).

I'm all for renaming it "Idontbelievethereisagod-ism"

We use a commonly accepted definition of atheism for convenience.  I'm fine with "Fairy-agnostic" too.