Atheism: Love it or Leave it? - Part 2

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]354461[/split]

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]292482[/split]

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

I am the destroyer and creator!!!



Of these threads....

 

[the amazing fro]

Thread manager!!!

Now there's a evil demented supreme being if I ever saw one....

 

[Dr.]

Right. Atheism isn't asserting anything. If you believe, you're a theist...EVERYONE ELSE is an atheist. If your answer is "I don't know" then surely you do not believe...so...you're an atheist.

Yes, indeed. I think most atheists (including the well-known ones) take a pragmatic – even mundane – approach to the definition. In the absence of evidence (or a compelling argument) atheism is simply the rational default.

aside] Non-belief in unicorns is entirely coherent – not conceptually problematic at all. If there was a word for this type of non-belief, it might be “a-unicornism.” Only a persnickety pedant would insist on “unicorn agnosticism” on the grounds that – hey, you never know – a relic population of horned equines might be discovered tomorrow. Well, if that happened, the “a-unicornists” would become “unicornists.” No need for equivocation in the meantime. [/aside

Technical terms like agnostic/gnostic atheism might be of value to professional philosophers. But those terms tend toward obscurantism in general conversation. And “agnosticism” – as a single word, distinguished from “atheism” – doesn’t provide much clarity either.

In one version, it means that the existence/non-existence of god(s) is unknowable. So this agnostic has little sympathy for the “knowledge” that both theists and atheists claim to have. But there’s a faint whiff of posturing in this sage, third option. In practical terms, the agnostic is almost indistinguishable from the atheist. Both reject unsupportable religious claims.

In the other version of agnosticism, the existence/non-existence of god(s) is, in theory, knowable – it just hasn’t happened yet. This agnosticism is cautionary fence-sitting, a final decision withheld pending further evidence. But, again, this could be a definition for atheism.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Originally Posted by GhostPoet
See, I think that's the problem with our country in particular (the USA) we are force fed to be self relient. It may be a fact in some other countries, but ours in particular has a huge issue with this. It's given us an ego...it's made us spoiled children, rejecting any kind of authority. It's why we are so selfish and unconcerned with the lives of others. It's made us cold and hard hearted.

I think if the England riots are proving anything, it's that being reliant on the government to survive makes people spoiled children who reject authority and are unconcerned with the lives of others... Not self reliance.

Freedom from the whims of merciless dictators does not mean we know nothing of authority or respecting others.

It just means we have the right to decide on our own laws, our own authority, by way of votes and elections.

It's not a perfect system, but it's the fairest one we have.

And I think you'll find in times of dictatorship, the world is a much more cold, hard and selfish place to be. There is almost no place for kindness to strangers.

 

[the amazing fro]

^^
I'm getting deja vu

 

[redhawk23]

In one version, it means that the existence/non-existence of god(s) is unknowable. So this agnostic has little sympathy for the “knowledge” that both theists and atheists claim to have. But there’s a faint whiff of posturing in this sage, third option. In practical terms, the agnostic is almost indistinguishable from the atheist. Both reject unsupportable religious claims.

You are correct that there is essentially little difference between the two terms. I think why many people choose to lean towards the "agnostic" tag is to distance themselves from a lot of the social baggage associated with "atheists."

Atheists are more often villainized. The general public view of atheists is of being quite militant, religious hating and intolerant (somewhat ironically) Even non-believers themselves may associate the term this way and wish to distance themselves from it. They may technically be atheistic themselves but do not see in themselves the things they associate with "Atheists". People have much less of a knee jerk reaction to "agnostics." Its just a more socially acceptable term in many circles.

I'm not justifying the non-committal stance this might imply, just explaining what I've experienced and have heard from others.

As others have explained and broke down, agnosticism is not some midground or third option but colloquially that is how the term is used and thought of.

 

[Calvin]

Yeah, it seems to certainly be a stance of not wanting the stigma that goes with saying "oh, I'm an athiest." When you tell most religious people you're agnostic these days, they usually go "oh, cool, yeah I can understand that, we're not that different then." But if you say they're an athiest they'll often act like you're crazy, stupid, or evil. I'm generally fine with that, myself.

 

[DBryan]

I think if the England riots are proving anything, it's that being reliant on the government to survive makes people spoiled children who reject authority and are unconcerned with the lives of others... Not self reliance.

Freedom from the whims of merciless dictators does not mean we know nothing of authority or respecting others.

It just means we have the right to decide on our own laws, our own authority, by way of votes and elections.

It's not a perfect system, but it's the fairest one we have.

And I think you'll find in times of dictatorship, the world is a much more cold, hard and selfish place to be. There is almost no place for kindness to strangers.

That interpretation of what happened in England is completely seperate from reality.

 

[8wid]

Reliance on the government to survive makes most people weaker, controlled, and ignorant in a corrupt system. The riots in England are being in directly created by the highly empowered corporate financial industry who have deliberatly created war, recession, and civil disorder to expand their agenda of profiteering off of damage to economies and higher prices off goods and services. Violence is only making the wealthy more wealthy.

 

[redhawk23]

^arguement for a different thread you guys.


So how 'bout that lack of God eh?

 

[Manic]

I'm thinking I might do like Alan Moore and just create my own personal religion by worshipping a statue I got at a yard sale.

 

[8wid]

I'm thinking I might do like Alan Moore and just create my own personal religion by worshipping a statue I got at a yard sale.

You could worship the sun like George Carlin did.

 

[Thatguyroman]

Yeah, it seems to certainly be a stance of not wanting the stigma that goes with saying "oh, I'm an athiest." When you tell most religious people you're agnostic these days, they usually go "oh, cool, yeah I can understand that, we're not that different then." But if you say they're an athiest they'll often act like you're crazy, stupid, or evil. I'm generally fine with that, myself.

I personally echo this sentiment.


Some people honestly act like being an atheist is worse than being a Nazi. I grew up in an almost fanatically religious family. Atheist was a word I never even dared think, let alone say until I was like 18.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

^arguement for a different thread you guys.


So how 'bout that lack of God eh?

Apologies. I should have known that using the England Riots as an example of state dependance would lead people away from the arguement.

What I was actually making a point against (which everyone seems to have missed) was the assertion that it's self reliance that causes people to reject authority and be spoiled children with massive egos.

Which on a daily basis, I just don't see.

The people around me who have to fend for themselves; those are the people who actually respect what they are given, appreciate the luck that does come their way, and earn everything that they have in life.

It's the people who want everything taken care of for them, and all their decisions taken out of their hands, that don't appreciate what they have.

And looking at that from a religious perspective, I feel exactly the same.

As an Atheist I feel I can be MORE appreciative of life, of the time that I have, because I don't have that feeling of security that God provides.

I can't just sit here going 'Oh well, if I die, i'll go to heaven and everything will be great', I can't go to confession when i've done something wrong and suddenly have a completely clear conscience about it and I can't be okay with everything that happens in my life just because 'God works in mysterious ways'.

I try to appreciate how lucky I am to even exist, I try to appreciate that I only have the one lifetime to do something with, and I want it to be something wonderful of my making... not something someone else had planned.

 

[redhawk23]

Don't assume that you appreciate your life more than religious folks. This is really no different from when religious groups try to claim that an atheist is missing something, that their lives are not whole without God.

Their reasons may be different for doing so, but don't assume that you value your life more than religious folk value theirs.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Don't assume that you appreciate your life more than religious folks. This is really no different from when religious groups try to claim that an atheist is missing something, that their lives are not whole without God.

Their reasons may be different for doing so, but don't assume that you value your life more than religious folk value theirs.

I am assuming nothing but my own opinion.

I feel statements only people

Personally I feel more appreciative of my life knowing that it was not handed to me, but that it was a complete cosmic coincidence, that I should revel in and not take for granted that I get anything MORE afterwards.

That's not an assumption, it's just how I feel.

 

[bullets]

I can't just sit here going 'Oh well, if I die, i'll go to heaven and everything will be great', I can't go to confession when i've done something wrong and suddenly have a completely clear conscience about it and I can't be okay with everything that happens in my life just because 'God works in mysterious ways'.

I don't think religious types do something wrong and then shrug it off like that. People live with guilt whether they go to a confession or not.

 

[8wid]

Who here likes James Rhandi the psychic buster?

 

[DBryan]

I remember when I was first trying to express to my family that I was an agnostic, they compared it to scientology.

They're two completely different things.

Very hard to discuss these things with my family.

 

[Norman Osborn]

...

 

[Bat-Mite]

I remember when I was first trying to express to my family that I was an agnostic, they compared it to scientology.

They're two completely different things.

Very hard to discuss these things with my family.

Oh, I've been there. I think it ultimately comes down to people fearing what they don't understand. Families tend to have certain expectations that everyone within the family will follow religious tradition, and when that doesn't happen (which becomes more common these days as people educate themselves), they don't really know what to do about it. It's not something that they really prepare for because it's not a possibility that most people even think about. When it does happen, the knee-jerk reaction is that any foreign religious belief (or lack thereof) is cult behavior--that someone has corrupted their son/daughter/brother/sister/cousin, etc., because it's a lot easier to accept that (and make some unseen villain responsible for the situation) than it is to consider that the family member in question is of sound mind and is choosing his/her own path because they find fault with the family's traditional religion.

 

[bullets]

Wasn't there a religion thread?

Also , religious discussion with the fam has never been easy for me either.

 

[DBryan]

So, just my personal opinion, but I'd say that over the last 10 years, athiesm and the related agnosticism has been on the rise in a big way.

What's weird from my personal experience.

I first became an athiest at about 11. I kept it to myself for YEARS, although every now and then I'd make arguments for it around friends, even teachers, etc. I don't recall meeting one single other athiest in that time period.

When I hit about 18, I first went to a type of a 'community college', there I met most of my long time friends. Five guys, all athiests. All of them grew up in totally seperate environments from myself but we all were like minded in a number of ways (but not identical by any means). And from that time on, I met more and more people who were athiests. It's at a point where I am 27 years old, and I belief that outside of my family and community, I know more athiets and agnostics than I know truely religious people.