Atheist united

[Dras]

Yup. All that stuff you posted is nonsense & ridiculous obfuscation. There either is a 'God', or there isn't. 'Lacking belief' is NOT equivalent to atheism, nor is it pertinent to the discussion. It is vague and dishonest. Atheism is the negation of theism. The denial of the existence of God. The rest is insincere bullshyt.

Why do theist always insists on defining atheism as something it's not? I guess it's obvious, they're trying to manufacture an easier target for themselves. Afterall, arguing absolute extremes is doomed to end in a stalemate, a perpetual scratch if you will. But that's not how the game really works. Show & Prove or go fukk yourself. Period.

Either you believe in God or you don't. Lacking believe IS atheism.

-A new born baby
-an indigenous tribe who observes no God
-Brad Pitt
-A person with complete brain damage
-A person who doesn't know whether or not God exist
-Many Buddhists
-any pet ever
-a 90 year old lady with severe dementia or Alzheimers

These people(or pets) are all atheists. Why? Because they do not hold a belief in God. The reason behind this is irrelevant. If you do not hold a belief in deities you are an atheist. There is no debating this. It is a fact. Be it because you haven't been exposed to the concept of God or you've rejected it out right or if you're suspending judgement, if the belief is not present you by definition are an atheist.

If that belief is in fact present then it is your responsibility to substantiate your claims if you would have others belief them as true. If you cannot do that anything else you say towards the validity of said claims is as bout as valuable as Projectcovo is right now. You don't know what you don't know so don't pretend you know everything. You can't. This is why the scientific method exists. It separates fact from fiction even in itself. Here is where it becomes scary to the believer and where the reactor that fuels faith's crusade on Science rests. Because if [insert religion here] were true, it would emerge from the scientific method and bask in the glory of actuality, it wouldn't hide from it nor fight against. People wouldn't need to have faith in Jesus or Allah or Vishnu or Xenu they'd have evidence and with it real knowledge and real understanding.

 

[TrueEpic08]

All I'm saying is as a race our current base of knowledge of the inner and outer workings of the universe is very limited, an not a good base to dismiss anything such as a concept of a god an I'm not talking about its mythological counterpart but purely theoretical . We live in a world with inherent natural laws, a universe full of mysteries this is all magical to me, as magical as anything written in any religious book. This is where my gripe with atheists is how could you render something so magical to chaotic spontaneity, As an agnostic or deist or w.e i would be labelled i believe there is a supreme force that directs this grandiose of energy.

If our base of knowledge is so limited, how do we KNOW there are inherent natural laws that the universe is based on? We don't. The logic of the scientific method is the determining structure that codifies that thought throughout society.

And how do you KNOW that there is some supreme force directing all of this, or there is some type of magic that directs the world? You don't. Just as scientific theories are just that, theories that can never be fully proven due to both the immense complexity of the world as well as the very nature of our scientifist society, a belief is simply a way for a human to ideologically order and rationalize the world around them. There is nothing wrong with this (I should have made this clear in the last post, as this is the psychological state of ALL human beings, rather than just saying that I live without it. Part of living by what you learn and what is revealed to you is this psychological filter, called in some circles the "imaginary". The edge of whether its useful or obfuscating comes in the way that you use it).

At best, this state allows for a revelation of the world that allows for humans to interpret their desires as they may and experience and fulfill them in the most uninhibited manner they can conceptualize. At worst, it becomes an absolute mystification that poisons and restricts all of the former and calcifies the mind. Most religions and societal/hegemonic structures fall into the latter.

I prefer the term "Base Materialist" for my beliefs (the connection to Bataille and his theories on religion are intentional). Hell, call me nihilistic. I prefer that, one. The closest I get to religion is a type of non-theistic Manichaeism (Too complex to talk about here). Anything other than a religious man or a "spiritualist" that cannot see the world for what it actually is in lived life, and has to see it through a grossly distorted funhouse filter.

(I would like to state here that I do not hate the religious at all; my mother is quite Baptist. I do heavily disdain the religion and mythology, however)

 

[Tesseract]

Why do theist always insists on defining atheism as something it's not? I guess it's obvious, they're trying to manufacture an easier target for themselves.

http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/a9.htm#athe

Atheism

Belief that god does not exist. Unlike the agnostic, who merely criticizes traditional arguments for the existence of a deity, the atheist must offer evidence (such as the problem of evil) that there is no god or propose a strong principle for denying what is not known to be true.

http://www.philosophy-dictionary.org/atheism

The denial of the existence of God. God does not exist. The idea of God is self-contradictory.

-A new born baby
-A person with complete brain damage
-any pet ever
-a 90 year old lady with severe dementia or Alzheimers

None of those is an example of an atheist. The only reason to make this claim is to inflate numbers. You might as well claim a chair or a pencil is an atheist.

-A person who doesn't know whether or not God exist

....is an agnostic.

-Many Buddhists

....don't rule out the existence of God/Gods.

 

[Tom]

::: does a demonic drive by on a random church :::

 

[Dras]

http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/a9.htm#athe

Atheism

Belief that god does not exist. Unlike the agnostic, who merely criticizes traditional arguments for the existence of a deity, the atheist must offer evidence (such as the problem of evil) that there is no god or propose a strong principle for denying what is not known to be true.

http://www.philosophy-dictionary.org/atheism

The denial of the existence of God. God does not exist. The idea of God is self-contradictory.




None of those is an example of an atheist. The only reason to make this claim is to inflate numbers. You might as well claim a chair or a pencil is an atheist.



....is an agnostic.



....don't rule out the existence of God/Gods.

@ this nicca posting geocities sites with poor definitions to prove his point. You probably designed that shyt yourself as a response. The fukk outta here. Why make things difficult?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheist

-noun
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

-You're taking subsets of of atheism(Hard atheism/Gnostic Atheism) and applying it to the root. Atheism in and of itself makes no claims about the existence of gods. It speaks only to belief. I can't spell it out more plainly than that.

-Yes, any pencil or chair that doesn't believe in a god or gods is an atheist

-Why do you find it so hard to understand that agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive?

-Most atheists don't rule out the possibility of any sort of "god". I'm one of the many. You can however rule out particular concepts of deities, say, Magical Jesus, just as one would any other clearly mythical being, like Medusa. No, I can't prove with absolute certainty that Medusa doesn't exist, but does that make it more likely that she does? Would I be over stepping my bounds by saying flat out she doesn't? Is the statement Medusa isn't real a leap of faith? Of course not....unless you substitute Medusa with a fictional character to which a person holds a deep personal attachment(like Magical Jesus). Similarly, my admonishment of Medusa shouldn't automatically be applied to anything else...say Aliens. Just as my admonishment of Magical Jesus shouldn't automatically apply to any other idea or definition of greater beings, entities, energies and/or forces.

Jesus is a myth. There could be some higher intelligence or transcendent force at the heart of the Universe or the heart of some greater system of which the Universe is part. I don't know. Because I don't know I hold no belief. This makes me an atheist.

 

[Tesseract]

@ this nicca posting geocities sites with poor definitions to prove his point. You probably designed that shyt yourself as a response. The fukk outta here. Why make things difficult?

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/

‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God. I shall here assume that the God in question is that of a sophisticated monotheism. The tribal gods of the early inhabitants of Palestine are of little or no philosophical interest. They were essentially finite beings, and the god of one tribe or collection of tribes was regarded as good in that it enabled victory in war against tribes with less powerful gods. Similarly the Greek and Roman gods were more like mythical heroes and heroines than like the omnipotent, omniscient and good God postulated in mediaeval and modern philosophy. As the Romans used the word, ‘atheist’ could be used to refer to theists of another religion, notably the Christians, and so merely to signify disbelief in their own mythical heroes.

 

[Dras]

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/

Are you dense?

What is the negation of light? Darkness
What is the negation of sound? Silence
What is the negation of life? Death
What is the negation of belief in Gods(theism)? Atheism

 

[Propaganda]

 

[Tesseract]

Are you dense?

No, but you're intellectually/philosophically dishonest & insincere if you think 'lack of belief' = atheism.

What is the negation of belief in Gods(theism)? Atheism.

Exactly my point.

 

[Propaganda]

arguing religion with dafunkdoc is a one way ticket to semanticsville.

 

[Dras]

No, but you're intellectually/philosophically dishonest & insincere if you think 'lack of belief' = atheism.



Exactly my point. Notice 'negation of belief' instead of 'lack of belief'.

You're either trolling me or you're terrible at reading.

A. It's intellectually dishonest to use words properly. Gotcha

B. That was not the point you were making at all. Were that the case you wouldn't have dismissed the visual aids I posted earlier or had anything to say to me since then.

Negation of belief isn't the same as the assertion something doesn't exist.

"I believe it will not rain tomorrow"

"I have no reason to believe it will rain tomorrow" or "I don't belief it will rain tomorrow"

These are not the same statements.

 

[Tesseract]

arguing religion with dafunkdoc is a one way ticket to semanticsville.

Your mother is a one way ticket to the clinic.

Get off my dikk.

 

[Dras]

arguing religion with dafunkdoc is a one way ticket to semanticsville.

+ rep for saving me from wasting anymore time.

 

[Tesseract]

You're either trolling me or you're terrible at reading.

A. It's intellectually dishonest to use words properly. Gotcha

B. That was not the point you were making at all. Were that the case you wouldn't have dismissed the visual aids I posted earlier or had anything to say to me since then.

No, it's intellectually dishonest to hide your position and attempt to co-opt those who do not share it on the basis of one flimsy criteria. My first and second posts in this thread dismissed those visual aids......before you even posted them, and state my point.

Negation of belief isn't the same as the assertion something doesn't exist.

Atheism =/= 'lack of belief' since 'lack of belief' is neither true nor false. Ahh, 10 posts. Time to go somewhere else not full of bullshyt.

 

[Villians of the day]