Poll: If you are an atheist, how do you define atheist?
1) Gods do not exist.
2) No gods exist.
3) Do not accept the claims that gods exist.
4) Do not accept the claims that gods exist due to lack of evidence.
[Show Results]
 
What do you mean by "Atheist"?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-08-2015, 07:54 PM
RE: What do you mean by "Atheist"?
(27-08-2015 12:12 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  I have no qualms in saying that I believe Santa, the Tooth Fairy, the Flying Spaghetti Monster do not exist, so I don't really understand why the hesitation among many atheists to say the same in regards to God?

We know what the first three are. We have no clue what a "god" is.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
27-08-2015, 09:13 PM
RE: What do you mean by "Atheist"?
(27-08-2015 06:28 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  So in regards to the Christian God, you would say you believe he doesn’t exist. And the basis for this belief are these supposed internal contradictions?

Where as in regards to perhaps some deistic God, you would fall under the “lack of belief” umbrella?

Yes. The Christian God clearly is a fabrication, like Santa Claus, Allah, Ganesh, Osiris, Zeus, etc... we have no problem calling "100% BS" on those claims.

As far as the more nebulous concept of "a god", especially the ones that are claimed to only exist outside the universe and not interact with it, which is in essence the claim of Deism, there's no way to produce evidence for or against that, so most of us feel it is unfair to make a 100% judgement on that issue. Since such a loosely-defined deity would not care which way we decided, we don't worry about it too much except when pressed into a theological debate on the subject. And even then, since we have no idea which of the random characteristics of this thing y'all call God (this time) happen to be, we can't even do that without some serious definitions given in advance. It can mean so many things!

And no, it's not "just" the internal contradictions. Most of the claims made by most Christians are plainly lunatic if examined using the Scientific Method or, really, a ninth-grade education level's understanding of how the world actually works.

In any more reasonable society, it would be the people asking me to believe in magic (yes, Jesus Magic™ or other Clerics' divine spells, including woo claims of "extradimensional powers", aliens, etc) who would ALL be on the defensive, rather than the ones who think the world operates by the plain old natural laws of physics.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
28-08-2015, 06:13 AM
RE: What do you mean by "Atheist"?
(27-08-2015 06:14 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(27-08-2015 06:04 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Lack a belief in something and don't believe it exists. They're not fucking mutually exclusive statements you twit. One can mean both simultaneously!

Neither are believing something doesn't exist, lacking a belief in something existing, and don't believe it exists. Yet each of these terms have acquired distinct connotations, that trying to use them synonymously allows for a great deal of equivocation.

Something evident to any moron hearing these three statements:

1.) I lack a belief in if you own an American car.

2.) I don't believe you have an american car

3.) I believe you don't have an american car.

According to you 1 and 2 have the same implication, when in reality 2 and 3 do.

If you take the words literally, 1 and 2 are equal.

If we go back to the unbreakable jar of marbles.

Just because I don't accept that the number of marbles is even, doesn't mean I accept it is odd.

I don't believe the number is odd. I don't believe the number is even. I have no belief one way or the other. However, I know that the number of marbles is either odd or even, likewise I know that god (depending on the definition) either exists or doesn't, but I still have no belief one way or the other. I would guess that there is no god, but that's only a guess.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Matt Finney's post
28-08-2015, 06:40 AM
What do you mean by "Atheist"?
(28-08-2015 06:13 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(27-08-2015 06:14 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Neither are believing something doesn't exist, lacking a belief in something existing, and don't believe it exists. Yet each of these terms have acquired distinct connotations, that trying to use them synonymously allows for a great deal of equivocation.

Something evident to any moron hearing these three statements:

1.) I lack a belief in if you own an American car.

2.) I don't believe you have an american car

3.) I believe you don't have an american car.

According to you 1 and 2 have the same implication, when in reality 2 and 3 do.

If you take the words literally, 1 and 2 are equal.

Sure in a very literal sense 1 and 2 are equal, but not in colloquial, commonly understand sense.

In the commonly understand sense 2 and 3 are equal.

Trying to brush this under the rug, leads to great deal of equivocation.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2015, 06:49 AM
RE: What do you mean by "Atheist"?
(27-08-2015 09:13 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  
(27-08-2015 06:28 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  So in regards to the Christian God, you would say you believe he doesn’t exist. And the basis for this belief are these supposed internal contradictions?

Where as in regards to perhaps some deistic God, you would fall under the “lack of belief” umbrella?

Yes. The Christian God clearly is a fabrication, like Santa Claus, Allah, Ganesh, Osiris, Zeus, etc... we have no problem calling "100% BS" on those claims.

As far as the more nebulous concept of "a god", especially the ones that are claimed to only exist outside the universe and not interact with it, which is in essence the claim of Deism, there's no way to produce evidence for or against that, so most of us feel it is unfair to make a 100% judgement on that issue. Since such a loosely-defined deity would not care which way we decided, we don't worry about it too much except when pressed into a theological debate on the subject. And even then, since we have no idea which of the random characteristics of this thing y'all call God (this time) happen to be, we can't even do that without some serious definitions given in advance. It can mean so many things!

And no, it's not "just" the internal contradictions. Most of the claims made by most Christians are plainly lunatic if examined using the Scientific Method or, really, a ninth-grade education level's understanding of how the world actually works.

In any more reasonable society, it would be the people asking me to believe in magic (yes, Jesus Magic™ or other Clerics' divine spells, including woo claims of "extradimensional powers", aliens, etc) who would ALL be on the defensive, rather than the ones who think the world operates by the plain old natural laws of physics.


When you mention physics, and appeal to the scientific method, it appears this is the basis for a belief in why the Christian God doesn't not exist.

But I don't understand why your confidence in physics and the scientific method, doesn't extend to the deistic conceptions of God? Since both require the existence of "spooky stuff", that doesn't operate under the laws of physics? It would require some form of dualism, that would violate a reality that fits the physicalist model?

Why not go the whole yard?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2015, 07:19 AM
RE: What do you mean by "Atheist"?
I believe "God" is as real as Darth Vader, Peter Pan, or The Incredible Hulk.

An atheist is a person who has the good sense to know the difference between fiction and reality.

"True believers" either go to church or Comic-Con....

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2015, 09:10 AM (This post was last modified: 28-08-2015 09:15 AM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: What do you mean by "Atheist"?
(28-08-2015 06:49 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(27-08-2015 09:13 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Yes. The Christian God clearly is a fabrication, like Santa Claus, Allah, Ganesh, Osiris, Zeus, etc... we have no problem calling "100% BS" on those claims.

As far as the more nebulous concept of "a god", especially the ones that are claimed to only exist outside the universe and not interact with it, which is in essence the claim of Deism, there's no way to produce evidence for or against that, so most of us feel it is unfair to make a 100% judgement on that issue. Since such a loosely-defined deity would not care which way we decided, we don't worry about it too much except when pressed into a theological debate on the subject. And even then, since we have no idea which of the random characteristics of this thing y'all call God (this time) happen to be, we can't even do that without some serious definitions given in advance. It can mean so many things!

And no, it's not "just" the internal contradictions. Most of the claims made by most Christians are plainly lunatic if examined using the Scientific Method or, really, a ninth-grade education level's understanding of how the world actually works.

In any more reasonable society, it would be the people asking me to believe in magic (yes, Jesus Magic™ or other Clerics' divine spells, including woo claims of "extradimensional powers", aliens, etc) who would ALL be on the defensive, rather than the ones who think the world operates by the plain old natural laws of physics.


When you mention physics, and appeal to the scientific method, it appears this is the basis for a belief in why the Christian God doesn't not exist.

But I don't understand why your confidence in physics and the scientific method, doesn't extend to the deistic conceptions of God? Since both require the existence of "spooky stuff", that doesn't operate under the laws of physics? It would require some form of dualism, that would violate a reality that fits the physicalist model?

Why not go the whole yard?

I don't see how it'd require the existence of "spooky stuff"; from what I understand of Deism, God operated as First Mover, setting up the physical laws by which the universe (including the Singularity). Science deals with what is testable, and currently we cannot test outside our universe.

If you are aware of some method of testing things that happened in the instant of and "prior to" the Big Bang (quote marks because time is a dimension and there may not BE a "prior to"), please let me know about it.

If you are not aware of this information, then you're being deceptive about my position by building a strawman argument to defeat. Not cool.

Keep in mind that I don't agree with the need for a First Mover, and I'm fairly confident that what happened during the BB will prove to be entirely the product of physics that we don't yet know how to test. But until we do, I must as a practice of intellectual honesty keep room in that "gap" for the possibility that the Deist god (or something like it) exists. Don't think so, but it doesn't hurt me to admit where I don't know things.

Edit to Add: It occurs to me you may have been asking whether I think I could have a belief in a Deist god, given my acceptance of scientific naturalism. If that be the case, then no, don't think the two concepts are compatible. However, if we were able to demonstrate such a deity via the SM (how this could be, I don't know and can't imagine), then I would have to accept a dual position of "things which work by physics" and "things which make the physics operate in various ways"; what philosophy one might use to describe this position, I'll worry about when and if such evidence turns up.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2015, 11:32 AM
RE: What do you mean by "Atheist"?
(28-08-2015 09:10 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  
(28-08-2015 06:49 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  When you mention physics, and appeal to the scientific method, it appears this is the basis for a belief in why the Christian God doesn't not exist.

But I don't understand why your confidence in physics and the scientific method, doesn't extend to the deistic conceptions of God? Since both require the existence of "spooky stuff", that doesn't operate under the laws of physics? It would require some form of dualism, that would violate a reality that fits the physicalist model?

Why not go the whole yard?

I don't see how it'd require the existence of "spooky stuff"; from what I understand of Deism, God operated as First Mover, setting up the physical laws by which the universe (including the Singularity). Science deals with what is testable, and currently we cannot test outside our universe.

If you are aware of some method of testing things that happened in the instant of and "prior to" the Big Bang (quote marks because time is a dimension and there may not BE a "prior to"), please let me know about it.

If you are not aware of this information, then you're being deceptive about my position by building a strawman argument to defeat. Not cool.

Keep in mind that I don't agree with the need for a First Mover, and I'm fairly confident that what happened during the BB will prove to be entirely the product of physics that we don't yet know how to test. But until we do, I must as a practice of intellectual honesty keep room in that "gap" for the possibility that the Deist god (or something like it) exists. Don't think so, but it doesn't hurt me to admit where I don't know things.

Edit to Add: It occurs to me you may have been asking whether I think I could have a belief in a Deist god, given my acceptance of scientific naturalism. If that be the case, then no, don't think the two concepts are compatible. However, if we were able to demonstrate such a deity via the SM (how this could be, I don't know and can't imagine), then I would have to accept a dual position of "things which work by physics" and "things which make the physics operate in various ways"; what philosophy one might use to describe this position, I'll worry about when and if such evidence turns up.

Spooky action is trippy and awesome.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2015, 11:42 AM
RE: What do you mean by "Atheist"?
(28-08-2015 11:32 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Spooky action is trippy and awesome.

Obvious mythological construct is obvious. Big Grin

(Man, I love CinemaSins.)

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-08-2015, 11:49 AM
RE: What do you mean by "Atheist"?
(28-08-2015 11:42 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  
(28-08-2015 11:32 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Spooky action is trippy and awesome.

Obvious mythological construct is obvious. Big Grin

(Man, I love CinemaSins.)

We would be living in better world if it really was the case.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: