Is Atheism just another religion under guise of "non-religion"?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-01-2017, 02:38 AM
RE: Is Atheism just another religion under guise of "non-religion"?
(16-01-2017 01:17 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(15-01-2017 11:36 PM)morondog Wrote:  Gents and Ladies, I feel that we're being intolerant of psikey's stupidity. We need to give him a safe space to be a thick fuck. Let's all try to be polite in the face of his undeniable lack of ability. After all we shall never change his mind by reminding him that he's as dense as a fucking lead ingot. Mockery begets mockery, as the good book says. Vitriol begets vitriol. All is vanity, says the prophet.

That's satire, right? Consider

Satire??? Me?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
16-01-2017, 09:26 AM
RE: Is Atheism just another religion under guise of "non-religion"?
(16-01-2017 02:38 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(16-01-2017 01:17 AM)Chas Wrote:  That's satire, right? Consider

Satire??? Me?

That's sarcasm, right? Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
16-01-2017, 09:42 AM
RE: Is Atheism just another religion under guise of "non-religion"?
(28-12-2016 11:12 PM)Disciple 21x Wrote:  Is atheism just a religion of nonreligion? What I mean is are atheists especially ones in this forum just trying to proselytize people into atheism? And objectively could evolution and the views of Richard Dawkins be seen as just atheist doctrine? Am I even allowed to ask these questions or are they too inconvenient? I know atheists don't see themselves as religious. But really haven't atheists just replaced God with no god or just themselves as gods? What I mean by that is instead of worshipping a cosmic being whose existence cannot be proven or even disproven (Much like a flatlander attempting to prove the existence of a space lander or debunk the existence thereof) you just merely worship science, technology, the laws of physics, or simply yourselves. Could you be doing this without even realizing it? And aren't atheist beliefs just as outrageous and incredible as any religious beliefs? My case in point is the God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. He admits in his forward he isn't truly an atheist but rather a scientific pantheist. He has no problem attributing god-like qualities to the universe or even the multi-verse. In fact his only logical argument against the existence of God kinda falls apart in the fourth chapter. He says he cannot accept God as a theroy because he is a "skyhook" and an "infinite regression." And he rejects outright something as "complicated as God" as self existent and eternal. Yet he has no problem with a Darwinian multi-verse (which is infinity regressive not to mention must be very complicated by it's very nature) or a big bang/big crunch multi-verse (which is also very complicated and eternal/self existent by it's nature). Really by the same maxim Dawkins reject God as a theory, so is his counter argument rely. But my point is let's say I buy Dawkins case. Isn't that just as if not more so incredible than any creator? And wouldn't that take the same measure of faith as belief in any god? Or is it different because we replace a god with a universe or even a non-anthropomorphised force of nature. I don't know atheists help me out here.

No, atheism is not a religion. It's an individual's lack of a god belief. It doesn't tell you what the individual does believe.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2017, 09:57 AM
RE: Is Atheism just another religion under guise of "non-religion"?
(15-01-2017 02:48 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  We end up with a semantic problem that many of today's atheists regard as logic.

One so called atheist told me that it meant "Not a Theist".

Back in the 60s, when I decided I was an agnostic, it meant a person that believed the non-existence of any God.

Therefore it was a Belief that could not be proven even if there were/is no God.

But my dictionary had a stupid definition of agnostic back in the day. It said: "a person that believes it is impossible to know whether or not any God existed".

So by agnostic I simply mean that I do not know.

But atheism is a Belief about a negative.

psik

When approaching any either/or unanswered question, the only reasonable starting position is "I don't know". The same is true when questioning the existence of any god. "I don't know" is the neutral starting point. To answer the question, you look for evidence one way or the other. However, there can be no evidence that there is no god in existence because it is simply impossible to be everywhere in every universe, perhaps even outside the universe if there is such a thing, in order to be certain. Therefore, it is only reasonable to look for evidence that a god exists - which should at least be possible to find if one does exist. Until there is said evidence, it is only reasonable remain at the neutral position. This is also called agnostic atheism. The neutral position, if you followed that, is not a belief. It's a position of waiting for evidence and holding no belief without it. If we could know that there is no god, then it would be gnostic atheism. In that case, it would be knowledge, not belief. Either way - agnostic or gnostic - atheism is not a belief.

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Impulse's post
16-01-2017, 10:04 AM
RE: Is Atheism just another religion under guise of "non-religion"?
(15-01-2017 02:48 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  One so called atheist told me that it meant "Not a Theist".

And that "so-called" atheist was correct. Adding the "a" to the root negates the meaning of the root.

Something that's not symmetrical is asymmetrical. Asymmetrical = not symmetrical.

Atypical = not typical

Asymptomatic = not with symptoms

Therefore atheist = not a theist

It's really no more complicated than that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Heath_Tierney's post
16-01-2017, 10:19 AM
RE: Is Atheism just another religion under guise of "non-religion"?
There are atheists that think a good way to compete with religion is to buy a building, meet on Sunday, and set up their own set of ideas of moral lists. I hate that idea, but that does not mean ALL atheists are a religion, just like all baptists are blacks or all baptists are Tea Party Trump voters.

I hate adding the word "ism" to anything.

Christianity is a religion, but the claim that Jesus represents the sun of the one true god, is a claim, a position.

Just like while Islam is a religion, bot sunnis and shiites view that same book differently. But the claim Allah is the one true god, is a position.

"Atheist" is the "off" position on god claims, outside that we are just as diverse in our economic political views. So when I hear about other groups of atheists setting up a shop and calling it a church, that individual group has started a religion, but "atheist" itself merely is a position, and I don't want it to become treated like a religion.

Human's are tribal because we evolved to be social and forming groups of ANY label helps increase survival, but no, I don't want the word "atheist" turned into a loyalty oath or a religon.

Secular law in the west already has the idea of protecting pluralism. Our species morality is in or evolution. Our species capability to be cruel or compassionate is in our genes, not in our positions. Our ability to understand evolution, helps us understand our behaviors good or bad.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2017, 10:27 AM
RE: Is Atheism just another religion under guise of "non-religion"?
Fuck psikey is back, I recommend release of nuclear weapons to sterilise the thread. Love the use of the term so called atheist especially as there's no such thing as a so called atheist don't you just hate it when woo merchants try to tell you what you are or are not ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2017, 11:08 AM
RE: Is Atheism just another religion under guise of "non-religion"?
(16-01-2017 09:26 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-01-2017 02:38 AM)morondog Wrote:  Satire??? Me?

That's sarcasm, right? Consider

Heaven forbid.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2017, 09:01 AM (This post was last modified: 19-01-2017 09:18 AM by Velvet.)
RE: Is Atheism just another religion under guise of "non-religion"?
(15-01-2017 05:56 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  It is just such a pity that a rejection is not a PROOF. Laugh out load

psik

Psikey, there is indeed some etymological controversy, especially when debating philosophy students as they sometimes insist on debating in perspective of "world view" and/or "belief" as a broader term instead of putting in perspective of propositions.

In case you really didn't understand and is not trolling, I will explain.

Theists (Agnostic) believe in god existence, but don't claim to know that it exists, and sometimes even think that "it can't be known" either or not it exists.

Theists (Gnostic) believe in god existence and claim that they know that he exists and that this knowledge was revealed to them thus they can't prove it.

Atheists (Agnostic) Do not believe that god exists, but they don't claim to know if he does or doesn't exist, some think that "it can't be known".

Atheists (Gnostic) Do not believe that god exists and claim to know that he does not, this stance is also sometimes conflated with Antitheism in which the person holds the belief for the negative, despite what apologetics say is still possible to defend this stance without relying on faith, it can be supported (in the right circumstances) by absence of evidence:

Quote: In some circumstances it can be safely assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of proof of its occurrence as positive proof of its non-occurrence.
— Copi, Introduction to Logic (1953), p. 95

PS: In the recent years the term Antitheist is also being used as a way to refer to people who have a political/social stance against religion as a whole, seeing it as a problem and arguing its disadvantages to society, and that confuses some people about those terms.

PS2: Some Atheists have the bad habit of shifting his stances in debates, using arguments that imply the non-existence of god as a Gnostic Atheist or Antitheist would, and when asked for evidence to support their stance, withdraw to the safeness of Agnostic Atheist to avoid the burden of proof, which causes even further confusion.

That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.”
-P.C. Hodgell - Seeker’s Mask - Kirien
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Velvet's post
19-01-2017, 02:02 PM
RE: Is Atheism just another religion under guise of "non-religion"?
(28-12-2016 11:12 PM)Disciple 21x Wrote:  Is atheism just a religion of nonreligion? What I mean is are atheists especially ones in this forum just trying to proselytize people into atheism? And objectively could evolution and the views of Richard Dawkins be seen as just atheist doctrine? Am I even allowed to ask these questions or are they too inconvenient? I know atheists don't see themselves as religious. But really haven't atheists just replaced God with no god or just themselves as gods? What I mean by that is instead of worshipping a cosmic being whose existence cannot be proven or even disproven (Much like a flatlander attempting to prove the existence of a space lander or debunk the existence thereof) you just merely worship science, technology, the laws of physics, or simply yourselves. Could you be doing this without even realizing it? And aren't atheist beliefs just as outrageous and incredible as any religious beliefs? My case in point is the God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. He admits in his forward he isn't truly an atheist but rather a scientific pantheist. He has no problem attributing god-like qualities to the universe or even the multi-verse. In fact his only logical argument against the existence of God kinda falls apart in the fourth chapter. He says he cannot accept God as a theroy because he is a "skyhook" and an "infinite regression." And he rejects outright something as "complicated as God" as self existent and eternal. Yet he has no problem with a Darwinian multi-verse (which is infinity regressive not to mention must be very complicated by it's very nature) or a big bang/big crunch multi-verse (which is also very complicated and eternal/self existent by it's nature). Really by the same maxim Dawkins reject God as a theory, so is his counter argument rely. But my point is let's say I buy Dawkins case. Isn't that just as if not more so incredible than any creator? And wouldn't that take the same measure of faith as belief in any god? Or is it different because we replace a god with a universe or even a non-anthropomorphised force of nature. I don't know atheists help me out here.
I am not interested in converting anyone to anything. "Believing" in atheism is absurd. Science is a tool, and one that invites criticism and challenge. For those who can't live without assurances or definite answers then pick something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like ChurlsGoneWild's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: