Print

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

[Hiiri]

Um. Cause you have to?

Nobody has to play. People play, because they think they might win and get that warm fuzzy feeling inside.

[Criptfeind]

I suppose you could off yourself so you don't have to (Not really, you would still be playing, but playing to lose.), but since you are reading this I am guessing you opted in to play.

[Hiiri]

Ah yes, the eternal "atheism is a religion too" argument.

[Criptfeind]

Um. No.

I am just saying that no religion is a choice just like all the rest.

The choice to ignore it and put'er on auto, but the game is still going.

[Montague]

Atheism requires a leap of faith, to make the assertion, not just the assumption, that there is no god/afterlife, ect.

If you want to play that gambit, you'd be an apatheist, or an agnostic. You could argue you stand a better chance of winning by not picking any sides, but deliberately being opposed to ALL sides, you are almost surely going to lose.

[Criptfeind]

That’s not true ether Montague, or at least what I think you are getting at is not true.

There could very well be a god that only allows atheists into heaven.

[eerr]

That would be very mean.

[Criptfeind]

I would find it very funny.

I am powered by irony.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

It's not very serious, but the idea actually has been brought up that a god introduced religions into the world to weed out the people it doesn't want to let into its afterlife, and only accepts atheists.

Atheism requires a leap of faith, to make the assertion, not just the assumption, that there is no god/afterlife, ect.

No it doesn't. If not believing in god and the afterlife is a leap of faith, than not beleving in any possible concept is a leap of faith.

[freeformschooler]

I would find it very funny.

I am powered by irony.

What is with everyone and their spit-out-your-soda wonderful posts today!?

[Hiiri]

I am just saying that no religion is a choice just like all the rest.

The choice to ignore it and put'er on auto, but the game is still going.

It's a choice of rational thought over superstition. There are only two options here.

Atheism requires a leap of faith, to make the assertion, not just the assumption, that there is no god/afterlife, ect.

That's just... wrong. Atheism doesn't require anything at all. It's not a leap of faith to not believe what theists claim to be true with nothing to back it up.

We're all born atheists, until someone (with authority) tells us otherwise and we buy it.

Edit: The last one is basically going in circles about the burden of proof again.

[Montague]

Nah, because with a god that only accepts atheists, you'd have that rebellious element that would still hate the god that sent them to heaven and then it would be a sort of hell for these types of folks, since they'd find the whole idea of their afterlife repulsive.

Just don't make sense and making an assumption like that, you are playing to lose.

The distinction might be a god that thinks "Well, at least you are not a [insert religious affiliation here] so I suppose you can go to the [nice part of hell/ purgatory/ reincarnated as a cockroach, ect] since you just don't believe in anything, least of all myself"

So sure, you could work your play like that, but its riskier.

Also, to assert there is no god, is an unfounded one, because by the very nature of a God we have to assume its impossible to know if one exists or not. Maybe there is a god but its so detached and disinterested it just doesn't care what people think about it. The "clockwork god" theory, maybe.

So to be an atheist is to deny the possibility of any sort of deity. While an apatheist just doesn't care if one exists or not and an agnostic recognizes that there may or may not be a deity. Atheism is an assertion, like being a theist, while others simply adhere to assumptions.

[G-Flex]

I think Montague is making a distinction between assuming there isn't a god before giving evidence, and asserting that there absolutely-for-certain is no god.

Of course, "atheism" as a term covers both categories, so he's wrong regardless.

You have to take certain assumptions.

Out of all religions, the Abraham ones are the ones that send you straight to hell for not believing. Out of this, Islam canonically accepts Christians and Jews as a sort of side-bet loser and they don't typically go to hell. Other major religions don't have such terrible afterlives for non-believers or heathens. Mormonism is like that, too. Christianity offers the best odds. Of course there is always the chance that the One True God is actually nothing at all like any major world religion, but thats not likely, considering any really vengeful or spiteful god will have a greater following.

I'd put my chips on Christianity. Eastern Orthodoxy, if you have the time and money to spare, but even Unitarian universalism is better then atheist. Atheist is a sure fire way to go to hell no matter who you talk to. Its like hitting on a 20.

Why are you only taking such a select few religions into account when in reality there is an infinite and uncountable number, as I stated earlier, of possible belief systems, deities, and afterlives? Why are you pretending to even know what "all sides" are here? What about the, again, infinite and uncountable number of hypothetical deities who would put you into heaven for being an atheist, or for wearing the right colored hat, or for killing yourself by leaping off the international space station? It's pointless to even draw up a table of possibilities, since... okay, I hate to repeat this, but the possibilities are infinite and uncountable and there is no way to ascertain the relative probability of any of them being true, as Pascal's Wager is meant to work regardless of any evidence for or against an individual belief structure (it's merely a zany game-theory thing).

Nah, because with a god that only accepts atheists, you'd have that rebellious element that would still hate the god that sent them to heaven and then it would be a sort of hell for these types of folks, since they'd find the whole idea of their afterlife repulsive.

I'm an atheist. I would be totally cool with going to Heaven. I mean, seriously, why the hell not?

Also, to assert there is no god, is an unfounded one, because by the very nature of a God we have to assume its impossible to know if one exists or not.

If it's impossible to know if an entity even exists, then for all intents and purposes it does not, as the ontology of that entity has absolutely no bearing on us whatsoever. It's like asking "What might be in another universe that doesn't interact with this one whatsoever?" -- if there's no way to know, then there's no reason to entertain the idea in the first place.

So to be an atheist is to deny the possibility of any sort of deity. While an apatheist just doesn't care if one exists or not and an agnostic recognizes that there may or may not be a deity. Atheism is an assertion, like being a theist, while others simply adhere to assumptions.

No. See above.

[darkrider2]

Athiesm can be a leap of faith or not a leap of faith.

For instance I am leaping because I'm only really athiest because my parents are and I really don't bother to read into it much/I could care less.

My father was born christian and turned athiest due to reading into science, evolution, history, etc... and changing his belief, he isn't leaping he's just following something that makes logical sense to him.

[Bohandas]

Ah yes, the eternal "atheism is a religion too" argument.

Athiesm is a form of religion. Agnosticism is the lack of religion. Agnostics don't strongly believe in any gods, whereas Athiests strongly believe in exactly zero gods.