Please Explain Atheism To Me

[thecurly1]

I'm a Catholic, have been all my life. I'm not clear with atheists though. If you guys don't believe in God, in the conventional sense, shouldn't He be like the Tooth Fairy? An imaginary figure worth nothing?

Any more insight would be appreciated.

 

[Godless]

Atheism..

Atheism is sometimes define as "the belief that there is no god of any kind", or the claim that a god cannot exist. While these are categories of atheism, they do not exhaust the meaning of atheism-and they are somewhat misleading with respect to the basic nature of atheism. Atheism, in its basic form, is not a belief: it is the absense of beliefl. An atheist is not primarily a person who believes that a god does not exist; rather, he does not believe in the existence of god.*George H. Smith, "The Case agaisnt God".

I hope this can help you understand atheism.

 

[Tyler]

You will receive as many different answers to this question as are possible. Atheism means many different things to many different people. And everyone is an atheist for a different reason.

Simple put, atheism means a-theism. Without-religious belief.

Many theists will attempt to lable atheists as those who have rejected god. If you wish to hear a nice rant on why this is illogical, simply ask Tiassa. Rejecting a god means first having a view of god. More often than not in Western society this means rejecting the Judeo-Christian god. Which, quite obviously, is not the only concept of god(s).

My view of atheism is at the moment the most logical conclusion I have thought of or heard. As such, it's the mindset I carry. However, I'm open to anyone arguing different and have changed my own view a number of times.

Think of a court of law. Now, as far as my last check there was zero proof to suggest we are born with a knowledge of or connection with god. In a logical, legal or scientific set up one does not accept anything as truth until it has been proven. As I have never seen proof of god (or proof of a specific god) there is no reason to believe.

Now, many agnostics claim it is more logical to be agnostic because it does not state that god does not exist in certainty. Well, neither does my atheism. As far as my court analogy goes, agnostisism (in common form) seems to give too much credibility to any god(s).

I believe it's unlikely I will ever truly know whether god exists or not. However, I'll be believing in water witching, fairies and everything else before I choose to believe in god(s) without proof. And my atheism will likely remain my atheism until someone else comes along and proves scientifically that god exists.

 

[Walker]

Atheism = common sense.

 

[Xev]

Athiesm is the lack of belief in a God or Gods. Without theism, eh?

The exact reason for this lack of belief depends on the athiest. One might be raised without religious inculcation (as I was) or one might later reject such inculcation (as is the case with many athiests).

I, personally, am a intuitive and logical athiest. I've never felt the existance of God, nor is such a belief logical for me.

That is, my athiesm has two prongs, like a diamond in a setting:

A: I do not believe in God intuitively. I am Godless and Faithless. Calvin would say that I am predestined to be damned.

B: I do not believe in God logically, as to do so would violate Ockham's razor without cause.

However, logic is a tool and its use depends on the person who uses it. Theism is a perfectly logical choice for many individuals.

There is a third sort of athiesm, which is not athiesm itself but in which the athiest acts as the Hebrew Satan or the Christian Lucifer did - as an opposer and accuser of God. That is, one believes in God, but refuses to submit to him, either as the Jews do through absolute obedience and fulfillment of the Law (slavery, or " 'ebed" as God refers to the house of Isreal) or through redemption through Christ's intercession for God's mercy.

Such a person is what I term an Nietzschean athiest - one who refuses to submit to God's will and elevates his own will.

"I ain't a slave to a God that doesn't exist" declares the Nietzschean athiest, and effectively flips off the God he believes in.

 

[Adam]

From a thread I started about this very matter...

From the thread Atheism Adam's Way. (There's more there, I just thought I'd post a few snippets from it.)

Ah well, I have a little spare time, so I'm going to waste it clarifying something. I have seen sciforums users many times say these things:
- Atheism is not believing in god.
- Atheism is a rejection of god.
- Atheists here are focused on christianity.
- Atheists reject all things supernatural/spiritual.

These things are brought up again and again like the tastiest cud, yet are simple tiresome rubbish.

Atheism is by definition not believing or following any religion. To me, this means I do not follow buddhism, islam, christianity, shinto, wicca, or anything else like that. I do not focus on any one particular religion. If I mention atheism in connection with christianity more than in connection with other religions, that is simply because two out of three topics in the Religion forum are about christianity. If they were about shinto, my posts might contain material connecting atheism with shinto.

Atheism is not a rejection of god/buddha/allah/tree-spirits, or anything else. An act of rejection requires an initial acceptance that there is something to reject. Since no such initial acceptance has been made, there can be no rejection. However, I do realise that in many places where religion is more common, some people do actively make atheism an act of rejection against whatever religion is common there.

I do not reject all things supernatural or paranormal or whatever. I suspect there is more to us all than meat, but I have no reason to accept such. I would not be terribly surprised if we have spirits or whatever; but then, I would not be surprised if we don't. All such things are in my Undecided tray.

Is it a problem leaving so many matters in my Undecided tray? Not really. These are things which basically have no effect on my life at all. Life and me get along just fine the way things are.

Why did I become an atheist? I didn't. I was born one. Religion is learnt behaviour, not inborn. My family has no religion at all, I was raised entirely without it.

Do I care for my own life? Sure do.

What is the main target of my life? What is the meaning of life? No idea. I'm still trying to figure it out.

What is your guidance through your life?
What do you believe?
Science, law, government, your brain, others people brain? Are you sophisticated? Are they sophisticated?

My guidance is my conscience, my ability to rationalise things, et cetera. I need no threat of eternity in hell or promise of eternal reward to get me to do what I consider the right thing. I see myself as superior to someone who only does the right thing because they fear the consequences of doing otherwise. I need no reason or excuse.

What do I believe? All sorts of things. I believe people are good and bad, and I believe in possibilities and probabilities. I beileve in justice more than law. I do not believe "revenge" is a dirty word.

Science, law, government, my brain? I believe law exists, but it's mostly a bad idea overall. For now we need it simply because people need the threat of consequences to keep them in line. But I would much prefer it if people could be civil to each other because they want to. Science? Yes. Science is not a thing to believe in, it is the human endeavour to understand the universe. I believe in the value of we humans trying to understand the universe. Government? See my opinion of law. But I guess government is required to run state assets, even if we can ever get rid of nations and be civil to each other. My brain? I believe it's quite a good brain, but no, it doesn't hold all the answers yet. Am I sophisticated? That depends what you mean by sophisticated.

Do you care on what is right or wrong according to your life?
If you say yes, What you gonna use to judge something right or wrong?
Again: science, law, government, your brain, others people brain? Are you sophisticated? Are they sophisticated? Are you/they got consistent values?

I care what is right or wrong, but I'm well aware that what I consider right and wrong may be very different to what other people consider right and wrong. I'd say my values and ethics and all are mostly consistent, yet I maintain the ability to change them if new information is encountered which affects them.

What if there is an offer to solve those anwers that very make sense? Which many people believe it, but there is "God" in this offer?
Will you take it?

Well, to me, you might as well be saying "The sock-stealing aliens have all the answers and you can live a better life if you just heed their words". A myth is a myth. Maybe the stories have good examples of how to behave in a civilised manner, maybe they don't. If they do, I may take those examples into consideration.

You're seems prefer to follow your family tradition rather than search any possibilities you can choose.

My family "tradition", to use your term, is to learn for yourself rather than accept anyone else's truth. As I grew and learnt I studied religions as well as many other things. I never found anything in any religion which would make that religion of particular interest to me, certainly not enough to base my life around it.

How long do you think you gonna figure it out by yourself without good giudance? Isn't that not too late then?

I really don't have any expectation of figuring out the meaning of life. I would rather die with questions than answers.

Sounds arrogant and ignorant to me. Leads you to become closed minded. Close minded leads to nothing.

It is close-minded to have a conscience rather than live by rules dictated by someone else? I disagree. You seem to be saying one should accept the ethics written in a religious text, rather than think about things. Simple acceptance like that, to me, is close-minded.

Are you believe you're (and human endeavour to understand the universe) sophisticated enough to find ultimate guidance to everybody's life? History shows that people ALWAYS makes mistakes. Is it good enough for to hold on? Do you really not intend to find faster solution?

No, I don't presume to think that I can figure out the goal or meaning of each individual's life. I suspect the meaning of life is different for each individual. Yep, people make mistakes, as you say. Perhaps you are making a mistake by paying attention to your bible? No, I do not intend to find a fast solution to the meaning of life. Again, I'd rather die with questions than answers.

You see, right or wrong are seems very relative. It seems change along ages and seem difference in everyone 's point of view. This can mess up the whole world because there is no standard law to justify what is right and wrong. We always search for absolute truth. Human, all people in the world working together unable to make this, an absolute rule that can applied right in ceturies. We need it from "something" better than human.

I think there are some basic standards of law which should be applied in all nations, for all people. Such as "Don't use violence except in defence". Apart from such basic rules, everyone should be free to deal with life in their own way.

My offer is: "Look there is a book, I know that is a good book. I have read it yet. Learn it. Compare it with all of other references you know. Sense it with your heart. Proove it, is it right or wrong according to highest science available, any logical you think it make sense. I will also warn you that some part of the book takes more time to understand. And then you free to dump it, or take it as your life handbook".

I read a little of the Qur'an, and found it about as valuable to me as any other religious text. A few good ideas, a few bad ideas, and lots of fairy tales. Prove it? No thanks. I have no need or desire to do so. If you wish to have it accepted as some kind of Truth, it is up to you to prove it.

 

[~The_Chosen~]

Originally posted by Walker
Atheism = common sense.

Why is that? Funny.

Atheism has many meanings, but most athiests are atheists because of religious prejudice or some sort of contempt/dislike towards religion/God.

Other than that, the real "neutral" one would be the agnostic.

Atheists may argue all they want that "all humans are born as atheists" but this has a certain false logic to it, the state of atheism is the natural state and not atheism itself.

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by ~The_Chosen~
Atheism has many meanings, but most athiests are atheists because of religious prejudice or some sort of contempt/dislike towards religion/God.

Most atheists I know are atheists because religions make claims without the benefit of evidence.

Atheists may argue all they want that "all humans are born as atheists" but this has a certain false logic to it, the state of atheism is the natural state and not atheism itself.

Would you mind clarifying what you mean by false logic? How can one have a belief (even an undecided one) if one has never even been exposed to a concept?

~Raithere

 

[Xev]

Can we ignore Chosen, discuss things of relevence, and hope he wanders back to www.mephisto-subliminal.com/ ?

Peace.

 

[~The_Chosen~]

Originally posted by Raithere
Most atheists I know are atheists because religions make claims without the benefit of evidence.

That also, but the key here is they dislike religion and any notions of God. A very small amount of atheists aren't prejudice, but it is safe to say most are. You can find it here all over sciforums.com.

Would you mind clarifying what you mean by false logic? How can one have a belief (even an undecided one) if one has never even been exposed to a concept?

~Raithere

An atheist is one who rejects/denies God or one that does not believe or lack a belief in God. They identify themselves as, "I do not believe in God." That is what makes them an atheist, the identification; however, no one is born as an atheist. You could debate that they are born in a certain state of atheism, the state of lacking a belief in God(s).

If we are in a world where any ideas of any God has not been introduced, then such we would lack a belief in God; nevertheless, we do not identify ourselves as such. Atheists do, and calling such people atheists only means you are identifying them as such.

Originally posted by Raithere
Can we ignore Chosen, discuss things of relevence, and hope he wanders back to www.mephisto-subliminal.com/ ?

Peace.

Xev, I can't hope to tolerate such crap from you. Must you incessantly trouble me on this matter? How immature are you?

And I don't appreciate you telling others to "hope he wanders back to www.mephisto-subliminal.com/" I have never heard of such a site until you introduced it to me. And do you have a life? How do you find all these sites yourself? This is wasted energy to try to make irrelevant jokes about a person; I don't appreciate your demeanor at all.

 

[Katazia]

thecurly1 – there are definitions of atheism on the web, in dictionaries, and in encyclopedias. I suspect you’ve probably examined such definitions at some time, assuming you have a genuine interest. But the perception of atheism has evolved over the centuries. Two millennia ago Christians were atheists since they did not follow the normal ideas of gods. For most of the past 20 centuries, atheists were vilified and considered wicked and not worthy of serious consideration. There remains to this day a stigmatism that surrounds the idea of atheism, brought about, most certainly, by traditional religions that deliberately teach that those who do not believe in a god are abnormal, an element of propaganda most certainly. But many atheists also practice forms of propaganda, and who attempt to assert a certainty of an absence of evidence for gods. Perhaps they are correct, but there should remain a possibility that the universe is far more complex than most of us realize, and perhaps a god or gods of some type do exist. The current traditional religions, born of ancient people who had none of the knowledge we have today that explains the nature of the universe, must be primarily mythological and derived from ignorance and superstitions. Such ideas seem to appeal to those who desperately want answers to ultimate questions and are simply not satisfied with the science offering of “we don’t have any answers yet”. Religious beliefs appear more to be that of impatience. Atheism exists because theism exists. The two sides posture against each other with neither attempting to look for objective truths. Theists, atheists, agnostics, all seem to be cliques, with each looking for comfort among themselves. Those genuinely looking for truth would most likely not adopt any labels, since to do so seems to implicitly limit potential considerations and openness.

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by ~The_Chosen~
That also, but the key here is they dislike religion and any notions of God. A very small amount of atheists aren't prejudice, but it is safe to say most are. You can find it here all over sciforums.com.

I don't know that dislike has much to do with it… it's that they disagree. Rarely have I met an atheist (and I would argue that there are relatively few) who, as you put it "are atheists because of religious prejudice or some sort of contempt/dislike towards religion/God".

Now, I agree that many atheists (I wouldn't go so far as to say most) have a poor opinion of most religions and often of religious people… but I find that the theists are often much more aggressive and judgmental in their behavior. How many atheists have come knocking on your door to convince you there is no god? How many atheists broadcast and publicize the notion that religious people are intrinsically evil and the cause of most of the suffering in the world?

That is what makes them an atheist, the identification; however, no one is born as an atheist. You could debate that they are born in a certain state of atheism, the state of lacking a belief in God(s).

If we are in a world where any ideas of any God has not been introduced, then such we would lack a belief in God; nevertheless, we do not identify ourselves as such. Atheists do, and calling such people atheists only means you are identifying them as such.

Yes, in order for the label atheist to exist there must be a concept of God. However, the state of "lacking a belief in God(s)" can exist without the label. Imagine a race of aliens that had no concept of God. We could observe these aliens and accurately label them atheist without the aliens themselves ever being exposed to the concept.

~Raithere

 

[Technar]

thecurly1, you say you are a Catholic, and I say you are an atheist. Refute me, if you can!

 

[Ekimklaw]

Atheism - MY definition

Atheism - The belief that all bad things in the world are caused by a being that does not exist.

 

[Angelus]

Christianity: the belief that just because a 2000 year old book has been well preserved it must all be true.

 

[Xev]

Past two posts: Flamebait.

 

[Ekimklaw]

Caught!

Hey Xev,

Ok, so I'm stirring the pot a bit (hehe)... however, I really do believe there is an element of truth to my definition.

By the way, things are dull around here now. I recall those good debates in the past where my pulse was racing, and my adrenaline was pumping...

Here's to the "good old days"...

-Mike

 

[Adam]

Raithere

Atheism does not require the acceptance of the term "god". There are religions without gods.

 

[Xev]

Mike:

Well, I'm up for a fight anytime. So here goes:

Your God might not exist as a fact, but as a concept he is one hell of a sadist.

First rule of Fight Club....

Edit for Nietzsche:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/travis_denneson/antichrist.html

The antichrist:
http://www.fns.org.uk/ac.htm

 

[Squid Vicious]

Re: Caught!

Originally posted by Ekimklaw
Hey Xev,

Ok, so I'm stirring the pot a bit (hehe)... however, I really do believe there is an element of truth to my definition.

By the way, things are dull around here now. I recall those good debates in the past where my pulse was racing, and my adrenaline was pumping...

Here's to the "good old days"...

-Mike

i miss The Park.

with regard to your definition... there a quite a few of those, yes. amusing, is it not? not all though. don't make too many assumptions.