Help with Atheism

[Dr Mundo]

By now, unless you have been skipping all of my Posts, you should know my position on the term Atheist. This is the single most important issue in my opinion before we can move forward in our understanding and have meaningful conversations. I have been accused Many times by Tony, CH, Mitch.. i think those are the only ones that I claim to know that No Gods exists. Its been expressed in a many number of ways. Either I supposedly outright said there can't be a God, I have a biased towards God, I'm in denial, Just to name a few. What I want to know is Have I made my point clear on what I mean when I say Atheism is a Lack of belief in any Gods? If I could only chose one message to convey, or to add to the discussion it would be that.

I think one way around this is the use of K.T.R.'s new term found here viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2579 So I may start to use it I suppose. But I have grown really found of the Term Atheist, It covers ONLY the issue of belief in God(s) perfectly. The fact that you can not deduce a world view from it is not a flaw, its not meant to address that.

Any help on this would be great, Let me know. Have I made my case clearly? Have I not? Both Atheists and Theists respond Please and thank you.

[humanguy]

There isn't any such thing as "Atheism." There's no uniting philosophy, no central tenets.

I'm atheist because I'm called that, that's the category I go in and it's my category because I'm convinced that god is a human invention, so obviously I do not believe in the Christian God, although to be fair I don't believe in anything else either.

The people who are atheist are all over the place as individuals. Some are staunch individualists, some seek comfort in a collective, some are as dumb as a bag of hammers. Some are liberal and some conservative. Some are the worst sons-of-bitches you would ever be well-advised to steer clear of. The ones I call professional atheists, they're as big a pain in the ass as the Bible-thumping zealots. The whole lot of them need to put it back in their pants and get real lives.

Mainly atheist simply means that you're a godless human being. But then, everyone is godless as far as I'm concerned!

[Dr Mundo]

There isn't any such thing as "Atheism." There's no uniting philosophy, no central tenets.

I'm atheist because I'm called that, that's the category I go in and it's my category because I'm convinced that god is a human invention, so obviously I do not believe in the Christian God, although to be fair I don't believe in anything else either.

The people who are atheist are all over the place as individuals. Some are staunch individualists, some seek comfort in a collective, some are as dumb as a bag of hammers. Some are liberal and some conservative. Some are the worst sons-of-bitches you would ever be well-advised to steer clear of. The ones I call professional atheists, they're as big a pain in the ass as the Bible-thumping zealots. The whole lot of them need to put it back in their pants and get real lives.

Mainly atheist simply means that you're a godless human being. But then, everyone is godless as far as I'm concerned!

Yes I know that, What I am hung up on is the fact that the term atheism is misunderstood. All it says is that we don't believe in God and nothing else. I think because Theists rely so heavily on their God for morals, ethics, understanding, and all those things that its hard for them to imagine life without God. So they say such bizarre things about Atheism.

[Keep The Reason]

Yes I know that, What I am hung up on is the fact that the term atheism is misunderstood. All it says is that we don't believe in God and nothing else. I think because Theists rely so heavily on their God for morals, ethics, understanding, and all those things that its hard for them to imagine life without God. So they say such bizarre things about Atheism.

Christians demonstrably don't rely on god for morals because if they did, they would follow the moral guidelines of their gods and they don't. (Some theists do, but in the USA the vast majority of Christians simply don't). You can't even argue that Jesus adhered to the OT morals; in fact he got executed for not doing so. Theists by and large don't like what non believers say because it scaresbthe shit out of them. We confront most of them with their inner doubts, and they've been trained since birth to respond to doubters as the minions of evil.

It's really hard to build a foundation on a negative label, though not impossible (Abolitionists succeeded). Atheism as a term only exists because theism is so pervasive. Sam Harris et al points out we don't have labels for a-astrologists because astrology doesn't command the degree of "respect" accorded to theism

Worse however, is that atheism as a label owes it's very existence to theism-- our philosophical opponents even get to define our identifier, that's how ingrained religion and theism is. And of course, theists as a collective say the word "atheist" with a hint of a sneer.

That's why Reasonist works so well. We take the theist entanglement out of our identifier. Reasonism does embrace a lack of belief in gods, but on the terms of reason, not as a reactive position to theism itself. Reasonists are a-UFOists, a-theistic, a-Big Footists, a-astrologists, etc. And believers in those things are, most commonly Faithiests.

We take control of the labeling, we don't let them define us, we define our worldview ourselves.

[Dr Mundo]

Yes I know that, What I am hung up on is the fact that the term atheism is misunderstood. All it says is that we don't believe in God and nothing else. I think because Theists rely so heavily on their God for morals, ethics, understanding, and all those things that its hard for them to imagine life without God. So they say such bizarre things about Atheism.

Christians demonstrably don't rely on god for morals because if they did, they would follow the moral guidelines of their gods and they don't. (Some theists do, but in the USA the vast majority of Christians simply don't). You can't even argue that Jesus adhered to the OT morals; in fact he got executed for not doing so. Theists by and large don't like what non believers say because it scaresbthe shit out of them. We confront most of them with their inner doubts, and they've been trained since birth to respond to doubters as the minions of evil.

It's really hard to build a foundation on a negative label, though not impossible (Abolitionists succeeded). Atheism as a term only exists because theism is so pervasive. Sam Harris et al points out we don't have labels for a-astrologists because astrology doesn't command the degree of "respect" accorded to theism

Worse however, is that atheism as a label owes it's very existence to theism-- our philosophical opponents even get to define our identifier, that's how ingrained religion and theism is. And of course, theists as a collective say the word "atheist" with a hint of a sneer.

That's why Reasonist works so well. We take the theist entanglement out of our identifier. Reasonism does embrace a lack of belief in gods, but on the terms of reason, not as a reactive position to theism itself. Reasonists are a-UFOists, a-theistic, a-Big Footists, a-astrologists, etc. And believers in those things are, most commonly Faithiests.

We take control of the labeling, we don't let them define us, we define our worldview ourselves.

You are right I shouldn't have said they rely on their God for those things. No denying that those things are linked to their religion, all i meant was that I can see where the misunderstanding could have come from, and that its time to get past that. As for Reasonist I do see your point. I also think this should be more widespread. You have convinced me on the use of that word.

Can any theists please give a statement as to their understanding on what atheism is though, I'd like to know.

[ChristianHeretic]

Dr M, we Christians really don't care which title you choose, just as long as you're consistent. I'd just like to know which one we're using before a conversation. In other posts here, both definitions of "atheist" are used in the same thread by "nonbelievers" and it just gets freekin' confusing! I can tell you from my experience here though, you seem to be in the minority of the 5 variety atheist vs. the 6 or practical 7 variety. Based on my current interpretation of the terms (which admittedly could be completely wrong), somewhere between 5 and 7 is where assertive "belief" develops based on one's perception of the "probability" of the existence of God.

However, we also have the same problem with the term "Christian." At least you only have a couple of varying forms of the term "atheist," we have dozens at least to deal with! All claiming rights to the title.

[Dr Mundo]

Dr M, we Christians really don't care which title you choose, just as long as you're consistent. I'd just like to know which one we're using before a conversation. In other posts here, both definitions of "atheist" are used in the same thread by "nonbelievers" and it just gets freekin' confusing! I can tell you from my experience here though, you seem to be in the minority of the 5 variety atheist vs. the 6 or practical 7 variety. Based on my current interpretation of the terms (which admittedly could be completely wrong), somewhere between 5 and 7 is where assertive "belief" develops based on one's perception of the "probability" of the existence of God.

However, we also have the same problem with the term "Christian." At least you only have a couple of varying forms of the term "atheist," we have dozens at least to deal with! All claiming rights to the title.

Thanks, for your input. I'm not really looking for a title, I just want some understanding on what atheism is, which is just a non belief in God(s). It does not necessarily mean that someone believes that no God(s) can possibly exist. Or that we have a bias against God. If someone says that no Gods can exist I will argue with Theist, that this particular Atheist making this argument is unjustified in his claim. If you are referring to the Dawkins scale from 1-7, after reading the definition for 6. I think it fits me perfectly.

[ChristianHeretic]

Dr M, we Christians really don't care which title you choose, just as long as you're consistent. I'd just like to know which one we're using before a conversation. In other posts here, both definitions of "atheist" are used in the same thread by "nonbelievers" and it just gets freekin' confusing! I can tell you from my experience here though, you seem to be in the minority of the 5 variety atheist vs. the 6 or practical 7 variety. Based on my current interpretation of the terms (which admittedly could be completely wrong), somewhere between 5 and 7 is where assertive "belief" develops based on one's perception of the "probability" of the existence of God.

However, we also have the same problem with the term "Christian." At least you only have a couple of varying forms of the term "atheist," we have dozens at least to deal with! All claiming rights to the title.

Thanks, for your input. I'm not really looking for a title, I just want some understanding on what atheism is, which is just a non belief in God(s). It does not necessarily mean that someone believes that no God(s) can possibly exist. Or that we have a bias against God. If someone says that no Gods can exist I will argue with Theist, that this particular Atheist making this argument is unjustified in his claim. If you are referring to the Dawkins scale from 1-7, after reading the definition for 6. I think it fits me perfectly.

Here's the difference between a 5, 6 and a 7, from how I understand Dawkin's scale:
A 5 doesn't "know" and therefore really won't assert an opinion of God's non-existence
A 6 does "know", but to save face in his skeptical community, will claim that he's obviously not "certain" about this "knowledge" of his and
A 7 "knows" and is 100% certain about this "knowledge"

The problem I have with the scale is I wouldn't say I'm 100% sure about ANYTHING? But that certainly doesn't mean I don't have beliefs. I believe that I'm not going to be hit by an asteroid tonight...would I say I'm 100% certain? No. Would I put money on it? Yes. I believe that this chair I'm sitting in is going to hold me. Again, am I 100% certain? No. I believe with close to 99.9999% probability that I'm actually the one sitting here typing this message. And I would even say any of these are so probable, if I were pushed, I would be comfortable replacing the term "believe" with "know" in the statements above. But could I be wrong about any of them in spite of the fact that I "know"? Yes.

The frustrating thing I hear from atheists is the assertion that you are absent of "belief" because you don't claim to be a 7. Again, at some point between agnosticism and a 7, you "believe" based on a lack of evidence, personal conviction, low probability in your view, something, and therefore, you do in fact have a "belief" that there is no God in the same way that many theists have a belief that there is a God.

If someone says that no Gods can exist I will argue with Theist

But there is one word in this sentence that makes ALL the difference. The word "can." If you changed that word to "do," well then, which side are you on now? If the statement is "no Gods do exist?" Is your answer "I don't know, I certainly don't believe in any Gods" or is your answer "yes, that's correct. Although I'm not 100% certain, I would agree that no Gods do exist?"

Notice also that on Dawkins scale, the separate sides are mirror images of one another, with one exception. 2 & 3 use the term "believe" yet for 5 & 6, he uses "skeptical" and "improbable" rather than "believe." I don't know why he chooses to do this other than the fact that he probably holds such disdain for the term "belief" that he refuses to actually admit it can be the result of his skeptical process using deductive reasoning, probability, or any other cognitive process he is willing to condone.

[Dr Mundo]

Here's the difference between a 5, 6 and a 7, from how I understand Dawkin's scale:
A 5 doesn't "know" and therefore really won't assert an opinion of God's non-existence
A 6 does "know", but to save face in his skeptical community, will claim that he's obviously not "certain" about this "knowledge" of his and
A 7 "knows" and is 100% certain about this "knowledge"

This is what a 6 is: De-facto Atheist: I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable and I live my life under the assumption that he is not there. In no aspect of my life 'now' do I need god to explain any of it. And I fight for the "atheist cause" because I think its reprehensible that such misunderstanding of atheist is prevalent in America today. We are normal people just like everyone else. I listen to a Modesto based christian radio station in central Cali and what i hear said about atheist is just upsetting. I also think we would be better of without religion but that is an other topic for a different Thread. Back to the scale, I have absolutely no belief in God or Gods, My life functions just fine with the assumption that no God is helping me so I feel right at home as a 6. I am a 6, and I don't "know" like you think I "know", But what do you think about the Fertzer? Do you know it doesn't exist? Why bother worrying about whether or not it exists and just say, Who cares I have lived my whole life just fine with out it and if someone says we can't measure or test this Fertzer and its actions in our own world. What good is it to even worry about it. That is how I feel about your God. Evidence, this is what separates the 6's from the 7's. Evidence is the single most important aspect to this scale.

The problem I have with the scale is I wouldn't say I'm 100% sure about ANYTHING?

That's not the problem with it, I think that is the point of it actually. It shows the irrationality behind a 1 and a 7. It shows what problems absolute certainty present.

But that certainly doesn't mean I don't have beliefs. I believe that I'm not going to be hit by an asteroid tonight...would I say I'm 100% certain? No. Would I put money on it? Yes. I believe that this chair I'm sitting in is going to hold me. Again, am I 100% certain? No. I believe with close to 99.9999% probability that I'm actually the one sitting here typing this message. And I would even say any of these are so probable, if I were pushed, I would be comfortable replacing the term "believe" with "know" in the statements above. But could I be wrong about any of them in spite of the fact that I "know"? Yes.

What separates your beliefs from your knowledge is Evidence. Nothing is more important in being justified in claiming knowledge. So with that said I think you can understand my position more clearly right?

The frustrating thing I hear from atheists is the assertion that you are absent of "belief" because you don't claim to be a 7. Again, at some point between agnosticism and a 7, you "believe" based on a lack of evidence, personal conviction, low probability in your view, something, and therefore, you do in fact have a "belief" that there is no God in the same way that many theists have a belief that there is a God.

What word would you use for me then? I am not a theist. So I must be an Atheist. Theism says you have a belief in at least one God. I don't fall into that category therefor I am an Atheist. I am fine with going on with my life as if no God existed, but I would never claim that I know No God(s) exist. It really, genuinely is an absence of a belief. Does it make sense now why Atheist say it really is just a lack of belief, not a worldview, or Dogma, or a bias towards God?

But there is one word in this sentence that makes ALL the difference. The word "can." If you changed that word to "do," well then, which side are you on now? If the statement is "no Gods do exist?" Is your answer "I don't know, I certainly don't believe in any Gods" or is your answer "yes, that's correct. Although I'm not 100% certain, I would agree that no Gods do exist?"

I would be on the side that has evidence to demonstrate its position. If you have evidence for God, then I would be on your side. If no evidence exists, then the most honest position to take would be to state, We do not have evidence for God, so we will reserve judgment until we do have any evidentiary support for this God. Same goes for any other mystical entity.

Notice also that on Dawkins scale, the separate sides are mirror images of one another, with one exception. 2 & 3 use the term "believe" yet for 5 & 6, he uses "skeptical" and "improbable" rather than "believe." I don't know why he chooses to do this other than the fact that he probably holds such disdain for the term "belief" that he refuses to actually admit it can be the result of his skeptical process using deductive reasoning, probability, or any other cognitive process he is willing to condone.

[/quote][/quote] I can understand why, it is generally excepted by most Christians that the reasons they come to Jesus or to Christianity is not fact based but Faith based. So believe is a much more appropriate word than what a 5/6 would use. I don't know why there is such a growing concern for being able to use science to prove God, Jesus clearly said that the ones who believed after seeing were to be commended but that those who believed with out seeing are blessed. For 5/6 evidence has much more sway than for a 2/3. (generally speaking) There really is no belief about God. once we start to get into specifics though then I do have beliefs. For instance Islam, it is my belief that the God of the Muslims is a man made legend. same as Christianity.

[ChristianHeretic]

(generally speaking) There really is no belief about God. once we start to get into specifics though then I do have beliefs. For instance Islam, it is my belief that the God of the Muslims is a man made legend. same as Christianity.

So you have no "belief" in God, but you "believe" the God of Christianity is a man made legend? Perfect, no belief except for your beliefs. This is the same problem we have with the term atheism. When you try to move from one definition of a term to another in the same post, it just gets confusing?

So do you have beliefs about God or don't you?

BELIEVE
1: a : to have a firm religious faith
b : to accept something as true, genuine, or real
2: to have a firm conviction as to the goodness, efficacy, or ability of something
3: to hold an opinion

I understand you don't have 1a, but you do have 3 correct? And if in fact you "hold an opinion" (ie believe), is that opinion that there is no God? I understand EVERY atheist has no "religious faith", but do you have "beliefs" about God?

[mitchellmckain]

Its a lot of hot air rhetoric by the more irrational atheists following a new popular dogma, so that they can hypocriticaly condemn beliefs with no objective evidence out of one side of their mouths while freely spouting an endless stream of opinions with no objective evidence to support them out of the other side of their mouths.

We must ignore and can laugh at the "we don't have a belief" nonsense rheotoric in the same way that we must ignore and can laugh at the fundie claim that they don't interpret scripture. The fact remains that they confont the question "does God exist?" and their belief answers that question in the negative. Of course theirs isn't like other beliefs. LOL They never are. All the beliefs of man are all different. And yet they also have commonalities. In this case the commonality with every other sort of religious belief is that its conclusions have no objective evidence to support them.


I very much like interesting responses to this question, "Does God Exist?" My own response as a kid was to say that I don't think the question is whether God exists but what is God? It seemed to be quite effective in making the people asking leave me alone.

What do you think of the following response?

"I never found the question very interesting or meaningful and still don't. I have more important things to think about."

Those who use the default position rhetoric, saying that everyone is born an atheist will of course call this person an atheist. I am not even sure that I would call this person an agnostic, because I don't believe in ANY default positions.

[Dr Mundo]

So you have no "belief" in God, but you "believe" the God of Christianity is a man made legend? Perfect, no belief except for your beliefs. This is the same problem we have with the term atheism. When you try to move from one definition of a term to another in the same post, it just gets confusing?

So do you have beliefs about God or don't you?

BELIEVE
1: a : to have a firm religious faith
b : to accept something as true, genuine, or real
2: to have a firm conviction as to the goodness, efficacy, or ability of something
3: to hold an opinion

I understand you don't have 1a, but you do have 3 correct? And if in fact you "hold an opinion" (ie believe), is that opinion that there is no God? I understand EVERY atheist has no "religious faith", but do you have "beliefs" about God?

Right, I don't have any beliefs about God. something specific like the christian God or Zeus, or any other type of specific God then I can say I believe that they are made up. I would never say they are impossible just that I believe for the most part that they have all been made up. But God in general who knows. I just hold an opinion about it yes. So my belief that Zeus or Yahweh are just man made constructs is just an opinion.

[Dr Mundo]

Its a lot of hot air rhetoric by the more irrational atheists following a new popular dogma, so that they can hypocriticaly condemn beliefs with no objective evidence out of one side of their mouths while freely spouting an endless stream of opinions with no objective evidence to support them out of the other side of their mouths.

Condemn? Dogma? I hope we can become internet friends after this. I'd like to talk to people who don't share the same thoughts on things and see how and where we differ on our beliefs, in a friendly and respectful manner.

We must ignore and can laugh at the "we don't have a belief" nonsense rheotoric in the same way that we must ignore and can laugh at the fundie claim that they don't interpret scripture. The fact remains that they confont the question "does God exist?" and their belief answers that question in the negative. Of course theirs isn't like other beliefs. LOL They never are. All the beliefs of man are all different. And yet they also have commonalities. In this case the commonality with every other sort of religious belief is that its conclusions have no objective evidence to support them.

Here lies the true problem, I think i see it now. You believe certain things about God. I don't know if you are a christian so lets just assume for now you are. When I say I don't have any beliefs on God maybe you are limiting that only to your God. If we were only talking about your God, then I would be a lot more comfortable saying, I very much doubt that Yahweh exists. you would do the same for Allah, or Quatzequatel the Mayan God. That still leaves the door open for things we have yet to define or discover, If it turns out that Jesus is actually God however, I would have no problem acknowledging the fact that he is God.

I very much like interesting responses to this question, "Does God Exist?" My own response as a kid was to say that I don't think the question is whether God exists but what is God? It seemed to be quite effective in making the people asking leave me alone.

I think that is a far better question.

What do you think of the following response?

"I never found the question very interesting or meaningful and still don't. I have more important things to think about."

Those who use the default position rhetoric, saying that everyone is born an atheist will of course call this person an atheist. I am not even sure that I would call this person an agnostic, because I don't believe in ANY default positions.

I wouldn't call that person an atheist, Unless he specifically says what his beliefs are about God, you can't know if he is an Atheist or a Theist. You are born an Atheist though. Does a new born believe in God, yes or no? I really don't get why you guys don't understand the point that in order to be classified an Atheist all you really need is for the answer to be No, to the question Do you believe in God(s). If however you think a new born believes in God, then they would be Theists. Its impossible to be anything other than a Theist or an Atheist. You either believe or you don't. I would assume he was an agnostic, I'm agnostic for probably the same reason that person would be.

[JustJim]

Dr Mundo,

I understand your point, and your frustration, surrounding the idea that babies are born atheist based on the fact that when they are born, they don't believe in god(s), which is also true of atheists, and is a definition of atheist. You're opinion is that atheism is merely a lack of belief in gods, is not the same as a disbelief in gods, and is all that is required to be classified as atheist.

But I also understand Mitch's (and others') point that when babies are born they also don't disbelieve in gods, which they see as an important description of atheism that goes beyond merely lacking belief. IOW, to them, lacking belief in god(s) is also not the same as disbelief in god(s), but that the most complete understanding of atheism would include such disbelief. Their understanding is that newborn babies don't believe, and they don't not believe. They are "blank slates," with no knowledge or experience to base any beliefs or non-beliefs on. So they are neither theists nor atheists. Their default position, if you think they must have one, would be a null position.

Jim

[ChristianHeretic]

Right, I don't have any beliefs about God. something specific like the christian God or Zeus, or any other type of specific God then I can say I believe that they are made up. I would never say they are impossible just that I believe for the most part that they have all been made up. But God in general who knows. I just hold an opinion about it yes. So my belief that Zeus or Yahweh are just man made constructs is just an opinion.

Again, the problem with this discussion, this is what it SOUNDS like you're saying (However, I'm thoroughly confused again, so please correct me where I'm wrong):
Q: Do you believe in God?
A: No, "I don't have any beliefs about God."
Q: Ok, so you're agnostic about the God of Christianity?
A: Oh, the God of Christianity? No, the God of Christianity is "just a man made construct"
Q: But isn't this an opinion about God? And based on the definition above, isn't this opinion a "belief"?
A: Yes.
Q: So you DO have a belief about God?
A: No, no beliefs about God, just any God currently proposed...
Q: So which God in particular don't you have beliefs about?
A: I don't know, propose another God and I'll tell you if I have an opinion about Him.
Q: So basically, you have a belief that every currently proposed God is a "man made construct", but you have no beliefs about the countless other possibilities of Gods?
A: Yes.

Ok, I would probably agree with you, of those things that have yet to be proposed, I am also either agnostic or have no beliefs about them. So in the future, I will be clearer on my question. Do you believe the Christian God exists? And I think your answer to this is not "I don't know." It sounds like your answer is, "No, I don't believe the Christian God exists." Therefore, you have an opinion/belief about the Christian God. I think...