10 Signs You Are an Unquestioning Atheist

reply to post by Stewie


Well you'd have to accept that an "outter body experience" is actually possible. I on the other hand think of it as more of a dream state. Also as another question to you, can you PROVE that you've had an outter body experience?

I'm not saying that it is completely illogical or ignorant to be atheist. All I am saying is that just as religious people are passionate about their beliefs, so are atheist. If you don't fall into that catagory I commend you.

Atheism, is, in a sense, a religion of faith just as well....faith in science.

The idea of things being "proven" is an example of this faith.

For example, there is the "theory" of evolution. By definition, this means it's an idea backed up by evidence, but it is not yet the "proven law" of evolution. That said though, it certainly has a lot of evidence...but, even that, doesn't preclude the involvement of a supreme power to put it all in motion...

Many of the ideas scientists hold dear, are still in the "theory" stage, believe it or not...so, anyone who claims these ideas are de-facto correct, is operating from faith...

That said, I am neither Christian, nor atheist (or any other ism...although I guess Agnostic would come close)... I believe there is some kind of force behind it all, and we're not just a happenstance of chance, but I don't believe that man's slapping a label on it, and including a few arcane rituals to make a religion of it, makes it truth....

reply to post by Gazrok


Very well put, I believe you may have explained atheism better then anyone else I've met. I say the same thing all the time that Atheism, although not a religion per say (Since it isn't recognized), but that just like all other religions Atheism is based on Faith. The same principle that every other religion goes on and as you said so does science (How science isn't a religion yet I don't know). So I constantly have to chuckle when I see a thread up that is supposed to "degrade another's thoughts" and I think that if any religion were replaced by Atheism in the title (Christianity, Islam, Buddism etc.) there would be a major out cry by those people saying they've been hurt by this thread and calling for the member to be
. Yet I suppose in the end it's better to be above the ignorance and to just laugh it all away. Great post I'd star it if I could.

[edit on 2-4-2010 by NoJoker13]

Originally posted by Gazrok

I'm not saying that it is completely illogical or ignorant to be atheist. All I am saying is that just as religious people are passionate about their beliefs, so are atheist. If you don't fall into that catagory I commend you.

Atheism, is, in a sense, a religion of faith just as well....faith in science.

The idea of things being "proven" is an example of this faith.[

For example, there is the "theory" of evolution. By definition, this means it's an idea backed up by evidence, but it is not yet the "proven law" of evolution. That said though, it certainly has a lot of evidence...but, even that, doesn't preclude the involvement of a supreme power to put it all in motion...

Many of the ideas scientists hold dear, are still in the "theory" stage, believe it or not...so, anyone who claims these ideas are de-facto correct, is operating from faith...

That said, I am neither Christian, nor atheist (or any other ism...although I guess Agnostic would come close)... I believe there is some kind of force behind it all, and we're not just a happenstance of chance, but I don't believe that man's slapping a label on it, and including a few arcane rituals to make a religion of it, makes it truth....

there's faith and there's blind faith. I really shouldn't have to say no more than that.

reply to post by Gazrok


No No No

You can not have faith in facts. Faith is belief that is not based on proof. You are the second person (i think) to call atheism "faith in science" which is totally wrong. Science means "To know". You can't have faith in that which you already know.

Atheism is not a philosophy, it is not even a world view; it is simply an observation.

I wrote this earlier in this thread:

The Bible was written at a time when nobody new what a rainbow came from or how a volcano erupted, nor did they know anything about microbiology or even how the body functioned. If we understood the natural world we lived in from the begining then god would have never come up. God was born out of mans ignorance, God is Man made. But we created God so that we could tell ourselves and others "We do not need to understand the natural world, we have the GSM and through him or it or whatever we understand the world" And Its so totally bogus...

Once again, God was born out of mans ignorance of the natural world.

Lets put the toys away children and get on with our lives.

God= Santa Clause for adults

[edit on 4-4-2010 by Letmypeoplego]

reply to post by NoJoker13


I did have an out of body experience and I did my best to rule out what it was not. You are correct that it cannot be proven unless a person has had one.

I did rule out drugs, pure oxygen and dizziness. No drugs were given to me at the time (asked the doctor and paramedics), no pure oxygen (regular nitrogen mixture that we all breathe was given to me) and I have experiences dizzy spells before so I could rule that out (much different experience and sensations).

I still do not know any much more except that we do have a soul.

reply to post by Gazrok


Science is not faith based. I will use an example as I know if I go on the roof and drop an apple off of it, the apple will fall to the ground. This is a provable act, not an act of faith. The Laws of Gravity are in effect when I drop an object off the roof. Science tries to understand them and figure out how it works.

I know we orbit around the Sun and the Moon orbits around us. That has been proven time and time again, and is easily proven by any one out there (it takes a lot of traveling throughout the year for that one though).

Science is not faith based in any way. Science is based on facts and theories that are tested to see if they are right or wrong.

Originally posted by trueperspective
1 You think the statement “My linage derives from evolved lizards” is more logical then “A higher intelligence created intelligent life on earth, according to their kind.”

2 You don’t accept the idea of God, but you talk about him more then most religious zealots

3 You despise the idea of faith, but you have a hyper-abundant amount of trust in “time and chance”

4 You despise organized religion by being a part of an organized religion against organized religion.

5 You claim that religious people are brainwashed, but you spout off quotes from renowned atheists to defend your beliefs.

6 Your best defense to the idea that religious people cram their beliefs down people’s throats is to cram your beliefs down people’s throats (Richard Dawkins)

7 You say the Bible is utterly made up non-sense, then use stories from it to condemn God…who you claim doesn’t exist.

8 One of your favorite arguments against believing the Bible is that it was written by men, but you unquestioningly believe science text books…written by men

9 You get stark raving mad when someone says God (who doesn’t exist) will send you to Hell (a place that doesn’t exist), and use that as “evidence” that God doesn’t exist.

10 You deny the testimony of countless millions of believers, but trust the research of a few hundred atheist...and call that being "open-minded"


[edit on 31-3-2010 by trueperspective]

I'll indulge you. I do not find God or Evolution very relevant in daily life.

1- Yes, I think the lizard statement is more logical. You are being overly simplistic in your description of evolution. I firmly believe that humans at this time cannot comprehend the complexities and chaos(chance) of galactic evolution. There is more to evolution than life on this space rock we call earth.

2- This is a confusion of terms that many people have, including adherents. This is an example of Agnostic behavior. A true atheist would not debate the existence or non-existence of a Deity.

3- Yes. I find time and chance to be much more reliable than faith. I could give many examples. I'll give one. Given enough time and chance, this planet will no longer be able to support life as we know it. This will be brought about for any number or combination of reasons. Happily, life will continue in other parts of the universe.

4- I cannot speak to that. One thing I do know. I do not proselytize my beliefs and views to anyone.

5- Again, I cannot speak to that. I look to myself for answers.

6- This could be inherited behavior due to living under proselytism for nearly 1700 years. In any case, I disagree with it.

7- I have never seen any evidence that various cultures sacred works are divinely inspired. Again, you are being overly simplistic by considering only the bible in your argument. As to the bible, it is a fact that the story of Adam & Eve and the story of Noah are a retelling of parts of the Epic of Gilgamesh.

8- Science is verifiable. Observation and experimentation(time) combined with luck(chance) has given us all the known sciences today. Including the keyboard that we used to type this. Theoretical Science is very similar to Theology. The main difference is that Theology studies the realms of the Divine. Theoretical Science studies the realms of the Physical Universe.

The various religions sacred texts are not verifiable. They are all very interesting and a great insight into early civilization. Divinely Inspired? No evidence.

9- Once again, you are only considering the Christian version of Damnation. There are many other religions with completely different beliefs.

10- Testimony regarding Faith/Personal Beliefs and testimony regarding provable fact are completely unrelated.

I think all religions are interesting. All of them have good, but different, values. I take the good from a religion and discard the bad. I don't believe in God, but I do believe in Nature.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
Point of order... Not all Christians are creationists! I can't stress this enough - it annoys me so much as a Christian, that we are always being confused with anti-science creationists!
Vicky

Originally posted by dalepmay

6 Your best defense to the idea that religious people cram their beliefs down people’s throats is to cram your beliefs down people’s throats (Richard Dawkins)

Atheists have never gone door to door to attempt to increase their numbers. They don't have their own TV stations that play 24/7 messages of their beliefs. They do not send fliers to your mailbox trying to convince you to meet with them. Try again.

Course you don't go door-to-door - you don't need to! With the media pretty much doing your work for you, why would you need to?
All the famous contemporary atheists, including the self-styled Four Horsemen (Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and the other American one whose name escape for the moment, are people with what I believe Americans call a "bully pulpit".
You try again!
Vicky

reply to post by Vicky32


Yes, because when they go on Fox News and Bill O'Reilly tells Dawkins that he's scared of the good professor...that's a bully pulpit.

I'm sorry, but this statement goes against how the media really is. They don't have a bully pulpit anywhere in the world, they simply are finally being allowed to speak about atheism without being shouted down

reply to post by trueperspective

Originally posted by trueperspective
1 You think the statement “My linage derives from evolved lizards” is more logical then “A higher intelligence created intelligent life on earth, according to their kind.”

Why yes, I do think that my lineage derives from evolved lizards at one point at which the evolutionary history of reptiles and primates diverged.

Of course, how is that illogical? I mean, the basic premise here is that I'm unquestioning...because I question your belief for valid scientific reasons.

Counterpoint two would have to be that there are a multitude of theists that support naturalistic evolution.

2 You don’t accept the idea of God, but you talk about him more then most religious zealots

Because it can be a dangerous idea...

3 You despise the idea of faith, but you have a hyper-abundant amount of trust in “time and chance”

This is a straw man argument. We don't have any amount of trust, we have evidence that 'time and chance' produce really cool stuff.

4 You despise organized religion by being a part of an organized religion against organized religion.

Atheism isn't organized. At all. There are 500-750 million atheists worldwide (or more), very few of them belong to an organization and even the largest organizations top out at hundreds of thousands.

5 You claim that religious people are brainwashed, but you spout off quotes from renowned atheists to defend your beliefs.

So quoting people is the same as being brainwashed now? Wow...that's...that's just ignorant.

6 Your best defense to the idea that religious people cram their beliefs down people’s throats is to cram your beliefs down people’s throats (Richard Dawkins)

I'm sorry, but how is Richard Dawkins cramming his lack of a single belief down anyone's throat by writing a book, hosting conferences, and taking part in discussions, all of which are non-compulsory? He doesn't go around on street corners, he doesn't do anything to force people to listen to him. His means of communication of his lack of belief to the world are all voluntary. He hasn't attempted to force people to not believe in anything, has he?

7 You say the Bible is utterly made up non-sense, then use stories from it to condemn God…who you claim doesn’t exist.

We use it to condemn the character, much like a critic could condemn the character of Edward Cullen for being a creepy ephebophile stalker using the Twilight novels.

8 One of your favorite arguments against believing the Bible is that it was written by men, but you unquestioningly believe science text books…written by men

Actually, the argument is that it was written by incredibly wrong men, while science text books aren't unquestioningly believed. They're accepted so far as the evidence supports their claims.

So that's 8 signs in a row that are pure ignorance, let's see if you can redeem yourself with the last two.

9 You get stark raving mad when someone says God (who doesn’t exist) will send you to Hell (a place that doesn’t exist), and use that as “evidence” that God doesn’t exist.

I'm sorry, but which atheist uses people telling us we're going to hell as evidence that a deity doesn't exist? We don't even need evidence that a deity doesn't exist because there is an entire lack of evidence that one does exist. Atheists don't tend to put forth positive disproofs, we just tend to disassemble the positive proofs which are all lacking.

Now, it's the sentiment of the statement that angers us, not that there's any truth to it. It's just a really mean thing to say if you're an individual that believes in eternal punishment. It's not nice at all.

10 You deny the testimony of countless millions of believers, but trust the research of a few hundred atheist...and call that being "open-minded"

Argumentum ad populum, an easily identifiable logical fallacy. Just because more people believe something doesn't mean it is true.

Now, testimony is useless in truth claims. Why? Because those countless millions of believers tend to disagree with each other, there have been some brutal evidences of this throughout history.

And again, popularity of a belief holds not a single shred of weight towards its validity.

Atheists also don't rely on atheist research, because such a field doesn't exist. We do accept scientific research, which is carried out by both theists and nontheists alike. However, we only accept that research so much as it is logically sound and follows the evidence found in the natural world. It's not like we just accept it because some atheist dude said it.

Also, to let you know, a good number of atheists become so without exposure to atheist writings. I personally didn't have any exposure to atheist writings upon my deconversion (though I did have exposure to pretty much every sort of religious writing), yet I still managed to make a choice.

Anyway, ignorant post.

reply to post by Vicky32


Which is why I constantly tell creationists that evolution isn't something that's exclusively for atheists. It's something that's for...everyone. Because it is science and science is open to the world at large.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Vicky32

 

Yes, because when they go on Fox News and Bill O'Reilly tells Dawkins that he's scared of the good professor...that's a bully pulpit.

I'm sorry, but this statement goes against how the media really is. They don't have a bully pulpit anywhere in the world, they simply are finally being allowed to speak about atheism without being shouted down

I wouldn't know about that... I am proud to say that I have never watched Fox News (although it is rumoured to be shown here in New Zealand.)
The media here in New Zealand is proudly secular which would be fine, if they didn't go a lot further - into campaigning for atheism
Don't bang on about the USA - I neither know nor care!

reply to post by Vicky32


Well, would you please provide examples from New Zealand's media of atheism getting a bully pulpit?

Oh, and I don't live in the USA either, I live in Malta. I just made an incorrect assumption based upon the majority of ATS being from the USA. I apologize.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Vicky32

 

Well, would you please provide examples from New Zealand's media of atheism getting a bully pulpit?

Oh, and I don't live in the USA either, I live in Malta. I just made an incorrect assumption based upon the majority of ATS being from the USA. I apologize.

First, I would just like to say that I am pleased that you have confirmed what I have noticed - that the majority of people here are American! (An American woman tore me a new one for assuming that this was an American site - she tried to tell me it's British, which leads me to say as Bugs Bunny did - "It is to laugh" - even the formatting gives that away with things such as 'center', and 'fill out'.. I has upset me greatly that everyone assumes I am American - one person accusing me of 'treasonous' thoughts because of my remarks about their military!
Well, to answer your question - you'd have to be here it's so pervasive. But example one - the go-to guy for all TV and radio journalists whenever religious issues come up, is Lloyd Geering who even though he's 90 still churns out books preaching 'Christianity without God' (an absurdity.) Geering was featured in a celebrity interview on National Radio on Christmas Day. (You may argue that he is not an atheist. He still has a position in the Presbyterian church, but in effect he uses that literal pulpit to preach - atheism!)
On Christmas Day, the only Christian programming was on in what my brother called "the centre of the night" - as if it is something that must be kept hidden from the sensitive and from children.
On a TV "reality" show about weddings, all but one couple were happily living together (one of them for 10 years - why they were getting married at all is beyond me!) But one of the couples was a Christian couple - not living together, and wedding in a church. All the ridicule to which they were subjected - in the show and in trailers for it, showed anyone watching, that the norm is considered to be atheism/agnosticism, and that anything else, Christianity or Islam especially, is weird, suspect and possibky illegal!
Dawkins' atheist bus campaign was met here with a huge "so what?" from the public and the media. The leader of the NZ group was on TV, practically begging for someone to oppose the bus campaign, in order to justify its existence. He was doomed to disappointment - and the 'Atheist bus' campaign ended early, for lack of purpose.
Our Education Act says that education must be "free, secular and compulsory". Don't misunderstand me - I am in favour of that!
However, that has led to a huge and abiding intolerance of religion being anywhere near schools.
I can't think of a specific example right now, but I shall get back to you!
Vicky

Atheism,

The belief that there was "nothing" and "nothing" happened to "nothing" and then "nothing" magically exploded for no reason, creating "everything" and then a bunch of "everything" magically rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs.,

Makes Perfect sense.....

Soul

reply to post by trueperspective


This is the most wittiest post i have seen on ats since i joined. It's all 100% true to because every person i have run across has said the exact same stuff you posted to me.

Your OP was the equivalent of using a nuclear bomb to take out a bullseye. It made me smile.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell". -C.S. Lewis