Should Atheism be a thing????

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: scojak

originally posted by: Woodcarver
It is not actually the gods we disbelieve in, it is the claim that gods exist that we do not believe.

But why don't you believe the claim that gods exist?

Seems to me it would have to be that you don't believe in the gods themselves. You surely couldn't say, " I believe in gods, but I don't believe your claim that gods exist."

So logically you have to disbelieve in gods as well, no?

Ah...here's the disconnect...

There are actually some people that make the argument that atheists 'disbelieving' in god/s means that atheists know god/s exist but choose to disbelieve its/their existence due to some kind of defiance/denial.

You seem to be more grounded than that though.

***

Also, i wouldn't even want to try to disprove your personal beliefs. If they work for you...I don't see anything wrong with them or anything worth dissecting. They're no better or worse than my own.

You gotta be you and I gotta be me!

What exactly are beliefs or a belief system?

Who are you? Or rather who do you believe you are? Does that make you you or simply your perception or belief of you?

Without beliefs what are we exactly?

Imagine being an actor or actress from the age of 2. By adulthood you have taken so many personas is it possible to differentiate yourself from your alter egos? Like Tupac after the movie Juice or Jim Carey.

You don't want to disprove someone's beliefs because you have to be you and I have to be me. Right?

But what if the basis of who we are is built on a lie? All we are is an expression who who we perceive ourselves to be.

If all roads truly lead to Rome and the basis of our belief system to this day was based on usurping the Jewish Messiah to quail an uprising, where does that leave us and our current belief system?

How can we ever understand who we are when our entire past is dictated by the victors and their version of history?

I object to your ethos about disrupting other people's ethos! I say, "nay" disrupt away.

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree

originally posted by: Raggedyman


Not believing in itself is not so much, it's when that non belief becomes evangelical, a fact a statement to be shared and preached
I know non believers who I wouldn't call atheists, they just don't believe, others, they preach their non belief at people
The non belief becomes a creed to be spread

Others who reject their belief become targets of ridicule or conversion.

You don't see the hypocrisy in this? Religious folk get mad because atheists are spreading atheism... Atheists get mad because religious folk are spreading their religion... Meanwhile people like me just sit here and watch the world burn because ya'll are too dumb to realise you're two peas in a pod quarreling over whose pod it is...

A2D

Of course I see the hypocrisy and have called it out countless times

I don't like Christian, religious or atheist fundamentalists, they are all the same and have said so many times

It's a human thing

a reply to: MotherMayEye

That is what I was afraid of. So atheism is just a lack of BELIEF in gods and not that gods don't exist. If that is true then there is no distinction between atheist and agnostic.

That seems to complicate things immensely, at least in my world.

There should be a way to simplify this.

Oh well, thank you again for the education.

a reply to: Agree2Disagree

LOL, a perfectly acceptable answer.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Akragon

No my intelectual giant friend and hero who calls anyone who disagrees with him a moron, you super smart man you
You are my hero, belittling people, I want to be just like you, arrogant and smarmy
Low go cry to a mod that I am not calling you a moron but pointing out that calling people names makes you feel superior, you need to do that, I wonder why though

And like i said... over the past few years i've realized i am actually your hero, and i am honored

You chase me down in so many threads and say the same thing... almost as if its pre-recorded

so again, my thanks, and i look forward to the praise you give me when you dedicate a thread to my greatness

In the mean time... try to get what i say straight...

i generally don't call people names unless its needed, unlike you and your religious friends which we've all seen so many times in OH so many threads

I use it when its needed... in the case of flat earthers, its needed.... simply because theres nothing else more appropriate to call them but Morons

Don't like it.... TOO BAD

see how that works?

originally posted by: scojak
a reply to: Agree2Disagree

Where did the energy come from?

Fundamentally, there is the idea of Nothing and the idea of Everything. They cannot be separated and one cannot precede the other. There is no escaping either idea. They both exist.

The energy is inherent in these two ideas that are fundamental, inescapable, and inseparable.

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
I object to your ethos about disrupting other people's ethos! I say, "nay" disrupt away.

I'll gladly share my opinions, understandings, and beliefs. But I don't really have a desire to persuade anyone else to believe like me or disrupt their beliefs. My beliefs are fluid because I learn things that impact and change them all the time.

And that touches on what you asked about knowing who you are. I change, all the time. I bet most people do. I have to define myself daily.

Oh, those d*mn victors try to write our history...but that doesn't make it our actual history.

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: MotherMayEye

That is what I was afraid of. So atheism is just a lack of BELIEF in gods and not that gods don't exist. If that is true then there is no distinction between atheist and agnostic.

Eh, for me, it's a profound lack of belief. Profound enough that I would prefer to call myself an atheist than agnostic.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: burgerbuddy

But in what way do we assign a group designation for believing the provable??

There is no ism for those who don’t believe in dragons..

You mean no one has made it up yet.

Dragon deniers is more apropo.

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
If all roads truly lead to Rome and the basis of our belief system to this day was based on usurping the Jewish Messiah to quail an uprising, where does that leave us and our current belief system?

How can we ever understand who we are when our entire past is dictated by the victors and their version of history?

Well, the entire Jewish religion is a big "racist" thing. Kind of "amusing" to see it's rise to glory these days ... and it's also kind of "amusing", that the Romans who were intelligent enough to think out the "usurping" of the all-good-doer-who-will-make-the-human-race-extinct Messiah, were actually murdered to extinction and the murderers settled on their lands, living in tents and watching the monumental buildings rot to dust.

What's even more funny, is the fact that people are being doctrined to live like "cows" and get milked away for free labor, and given dry health-reduced twigs to eat. And then told a story about Santa Claus, whose supposedly the creator of life ... and how many of these "cows", have ever thought that "life" that Santa Clause created, is about "murdering" to "survive".

The Romans had it right, Yahweh is IAHNVHS or Janus ... which proves that all the doctrined religions are a lie. They're not just a lie, in the sense that Santa doesn't exist ... it's "origin" is.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

The absence of belief is NOT belief!

originally posted by: Jefferton
If relgion can be a thing, based on evidence..

Then atheism deserves to be "a thing".

Do atheist have faith that there are no gods?

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Jefferton
If relgion can be a thing, based on evidence..

Then atheism deserves to be "a thing".

Do atheist have faith that there are no gods?

no, in fact i am open to people presenting evidence. I have just not seen anything that compels me to believe. Do you have any evidence to present?

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Jefferton
If relgion can be a thing, based on evidence..

Then atheism deserves to be "a thing".

Do atheist have faith that there are no gods?

do you believe in magical unicorns? Is that non belief, a kind of faith? Or is it safe to say that magical unicorns prob don’t exist, because there is absolutely no reason to think they exist?

In fact, since we know that magic doesn’t exist, is it safe to claim that anything described as having magical properties, def doesn’t exist, and could not actually exist?

This is exactly how i justify my atheism. Every god i have heard of has properties which make it impossible to accept, so i figure none of them are real until someone presents some compelling evidence.

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree

originally posted by: Raggedyman


Not believing in itself is not so much, it's when that non belief becomes evangelical, a fact a statement to be shared and preached
I know non believers who I wouldn't call atheists, they just don't believe, others, they preach their non belief at people
The non belief becomes a creed to be spread

Others who reject their belief become targets of ridicule or conversion.

You don't see the hypocrisy in this? Religious folk get mad because atheists are spreading atheism... Atheists get mad because religious folk are spreading their religion... Meanwhile people like me just sit here and watch the world burn because ya'll are too dumb to realise you're two peas in a pod quarreling over whose pod it is...

A2D

It’s not so much that christians spread their beliefs that bothers me personally, it’s that they lobby and try to change laws to support their un verified beliefs, which force me in some very odd ways to comply. In my town there are some wierd laws that originate from christian practices that just don’t need to be pushed onto everybody.

a reply to: IAMNOTYOU

But religious people believe in sceince too...


Aka you can’t seperate them into a unique group by that variable.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

I think I've found some definitive back-up for you.

Atheism: Definition as impossible or impermanent
Before the 18th century, the existence of God was so accepted in the western world that even the possibility of true atheism was questioned. This is called theistic innatism—the notion that all people believe in God from birth; within this view was the connotation that atheists are simply in denial.[59]

There is also a position claiming that atheists are quick to believe in God in times of crisis, that atheists make deathbed conversions, or that "there are no atheists in foxholes".[60] There have however been examples to the contrary, among them examples of literal "atheists in foxholes".[61]

Some atheists have doubted the very need for the term "atheism". In his book Letter to a Christian Nation, Sam Harris wrote:

In fact, "atheism" is a term that should not even exist. No one ever needs to identify himself as a "non-astrologer" or a "non-alchemist". We do not have words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive or that aliens have traversed the galaxy only to molest ranchers and their cattle. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs.

Atheism, as a description, is recent, and it's Western. It is based upon a distinctly Western definition for God. People in other times and/or places have not had the benefit of Modern post-Christian definitions.

Suppose a heathen defined god(desse)s as those without which we would not have come to live. The Sun, the Earth, the Sky, the Rain/and or River, the tribal heroes, ancestors, and etc. would all fit into the definition of god(desse)s.

So a post-Christian Atheist says, "I have no belief in gods."
The Heathen replies, "What?! Are you blind? Look around. Touch. Feel."

a reply to: pthena

If I hold an "apple" in my hand I say "apple". You and I see it and experience it. Nobody denies the existence of apples.

However, I can't hold "God" in my hand. I can't walk over to God and shake his hand. There is no evidence for God's existence.

No, as you have said, ALL of existence, every moment, and every experience, is evidence for God's existence. The problem with this association is it is a subjective choice that only exists in your mind. This why atheism exists. The absence of belief is NOT belief. The word "atheism" should really be "non-theist". I do not think it is a strong argument to same to someone "you must choose theism because I did" as a logical argument in supporting a belief in God.

Sorry theists, until you provide a shred of credible evidence for the existence of God you will have to continue to just have faith.

originally posted by: Woodcarver

do you believe in magical unicorns?

In an unlimited universe can there be magical unicorns?

In fact, since we know that magic doesn’t exist, is it safe to claim that anything described as having magical properties, def doesn’t exist, and could not actually exist?

What is magic, but tomorrow's science, right? You are pretty narrow minded... show a lighter to a cave man and it is magic... Show a calculator to Newton and it is magic...lol

This is exactly how i justify my atheism. Every god i have heard of has properties which make it impossible to accept, so i figure none of them are real until someone presents some compelling evidence.

You live in an abstract world...about 90% of your thinking is abstract...everything around you was an abstract thought at first... but now it is real... you can't even make breakfast without abstractly creating it first...religion is a byproduct of just the way we think...are black holes real? Have you touched one to determine if it is real, but I bet you believe in black hole, don't you.

Stop thinking for some reason religion is some concrete existence when you are an abstract minded creature...lol

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
Of course, but what else do we apply that same logic to???

Consider the following words, which also exist;
Materialism
Consumerism
Formalism
These are describing states of mind rather than full belief systems, which suggests we ought not be too dogmatic about the significance of the "-ism" suffix.

In any case, "-ism" was a side-issue.
The line taken in the OP was that no label for this group of people should exist, and my logic on that point is applied whenever people who want to communicate use labels.

P.S. Also "populism".