Dangers of atheism -Sam Harris

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: luthier

Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

Correct

In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.

Incorrect, the only people that attempt to define atheists like this are theists attempting to shift the burden of proof.

Most inclusively, atheism is the absence of belief that any deities exist.

Correct, atheists do not posses the belief that gods exist, that's not the same as saying gods do not exist.....they've just not been convinced by the claims that god/s do exist.

Which Atheists though. Harris and the New Atheists definetley make a claim gods do not exist. They are made up.

Indeed they might, but to describe them as atheists saying nothing other than they have not accepted the claims made by theists for the existence of god/s.


Is a pantheist an atheist too?

I took that from a definition of atheism.

Who says you have the only definition of atheism. Care to site a source that days yours is the only one.

Atheism has many sub groups. But the definition I gave is a valid one. And no the only people using my second definition are not theists. They are Atheists scholars themselves. There is a whole history of debating the existence of God. I can give you plenty of sources on this if you need them. Or you can go to Google scholar yourself and read up.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: vjr1113

thats not true i dont believe in the reality of Zeus. therefore i lack a belief in said god. i dont have to say there is no Zeus (claim), only that i dont believe in claims asserting Zeus exists (theism)

Only nothing has no reality. All nothing is the same. Zeus has a reality, even if it is mythological. Your claim to "lack of belief" is only propagating this mistake.

by reality you mean totally imaginary? you must, otherwise the hot chick in my brain with 20 boobs is real.

a reply to: vjr1113

again not true. the opposite of guilty is not innocent its not guilty.

We are talking about belief, not guilt. To say you lack belief is certainly untrue, given that you believe you lack belief.

a reply to: vjr1113

by reality you mean totally imaginary? you must, otherwise the hot chick in my brain with 20 boobs is real.

Yes, even imaginary. If you believe that chick in your brain to be a 1-to-1 ratio to nothing, then you've thrown reason out the window. Only nothing does not exist. If you say anything else does not exist, you've failed.

originally posted by: chr0naut
I just found that several of the assumptions he made were actually insulting to his 'opponents', despite the measured tone.

I think it could only be considered an insult for those that have little faith. How much of an insult would it be if someone told you that you were wrong when in your heart you knew you were right?

a reply to: vjr1113

hot chick in my brain with 20 boobs is real.

Now why in the hell would you imagine that. 20 boobs ? That's not your thing, right ?

I remember the 3 boobs mutant from Total Recall...its still unsettling

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: vjr1113

again not true. the opposite of guilty is not innocent its not guilty.

We are talking about belief, not guilt. To say you lack belief is certainly untrue, given that you believe you lack belief.

its about claims, its an example. the just because i dont believe in aliens doesn't mean there arent aliens out there. only that i dont believe claims of aliens is true.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: vjr1113

by reality you mean totally imaginary? you must, otherwise the hot chick in my brain with 20 boobs is real.

Yes, even imaginary. If you believe that chick in your brain to be a 1-to-1 ratio to nothing, then you've thrown reason out the window. Only nothing does not exist. If you say anything else does not exist, you've failed.

you heard it here folks, imaginary things are real. by reality i mean the physical universe not thoughts.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: vjr1113

again not true. the opposite of guilty is not innocent its not guilty.

We are talking about belief, not guilt. To say you lack belief is certainly untrue, given that you believe you lack belief.

Now you overdoing it man.

Believing you lack belief makes you a believer.

I call that verbal masturbation. No offense intended.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Now you overdoing it man.

Believing you lack belief makes you a believer.

I call that verbal masturbation. No offense intended.

No offense taken. I'm not the one who is wrong.

a reply to: vjr1113

you heard it here folks, imaginary things are real. by reality i mean the physical universe not thoughts.

Thoughts are a result of the physical universe, and therefor real.

a reply to: vjr1113

its about claims, its an example. the just because i dont believe in aliens doesn't mean there arent aliens out there. only that i dont believe claims of aliens is true.

"I don't believe" is different than "I lack belief". Unless you can find me this hole where belief is missing, you lack nothing of the sort.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: vjr1113

you heard it here folks, imaginary things are real. by reality i mean the physical universe not thoughts.

Thoughts are a result of the physical universe, and therefor real.

i disagree completely. thoughts cannot manifest into matter. no matter how hard you try. you cant pick things up with your minds.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: vjr1113

you heard it here folks, imaginary things are real. by reality i mean the physical universe not thoughts.

Thoughts are a result of the physical universe, and therefor real.

Thoughts are real because there is an "observer". Otherwise it's impossible to prove they exist at all. But that may be the skeptic Hume in me.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: vjr1113

its about claims, its an example. the just because i dont believe in aliens doesn't mean there arent aliens out there. only that i dont believe claims of aliens is true.

"I don't believe" is different than "I lack belief". Unless you can find me this hole where belief is missing, you lack nothing of the sort.

to believe something is to accept something is true. its true that i dont believe in a god. saying i lack the acceptance of x claim is also valid.

there's physical reality and imaginary. there's no middle ground. either it exists in reality or it doesnt.

originally posted by: vjr1113

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: vjr1113

you heard it here folks, imaginary things are real. by reality i mean the physical universe not thoughts.

Thoughts are a result of the physical universe, and therefor real.

i disagree completely. thoughts cannot manifest into matter. no matter how hard you try. you cant pick things up with your minds.

Refer to Hume and then Kant for this arguement.

a reply to: vjr1113

i disagree completely. thoughts cannot manifest into matter. no matter how hard you try. you cant pick things up with your minds.

That's not what I said, is it? I'm saying the brain and its processes are real. The woman in your thoughts isn't a non-physical reality or object, "something that doesn't exist", it is real in the sense that something real is occurring when you think of it.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The opposite of belief is doubt, not "lack of belief".

ah, yes. doubt. something that arises in the absence of extraordinary evidence. i agree with you on that point, the opposite of belief.

"Lack of belief" is an atheist-conjured word to distance himself from belief in general, which is an utter mistake, and also wrong.

its actually three words.

There is simply no such thing, action, position called "lack of belief". Belief does not turn to lack of belief. Belief does not end where lack of belief begins.

i would argue that there is. i call it "indifference". the halfway point between skepticism and conviction.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: vjr1113

i disagree completely. thoughts cannot manifest into matter. no matter how hard you try. you cant pick things up with your minds.

That's not what I said, is it? I'm saying the brain and its processes are real. The woman in your thoughts isn't a non-physical reality or object, "something that doesn't exist", it is real in the sense that something real is occurring when you think of it.

well there you go. terms and labels.

when i talk about something being real i mean the universe. it exists as a concept but not the same way my PC exists.

if you say god only exists in a mind, thats fine. but say so next time.


by the way there seems two be two different "reals" being used. i dont care about whats going on in your head, only about what can happen in the physical. metaphysics are nice but they can only be so real.

a reply to: vjr1113

well there you go. terms and labels.

when i talk about something being real i mean the universe. it exists as a concept but not the same way my PC exists.

if you say god only exists in a mind, thats fine. but say so next time.

In your mind or not, either way, it exists.