Question for Atheists and Agnostics

[Hapsburg]

Now, Sky, come on...the word "Athiesm" pretty much fuckin' says what it means: the prefix a-, meaning "a lack of" or "not", followed by theism, coming from the Greek "Theos", meaning "god".
Thus: Atheism = "a lack of a god", or "no-god".

If a kid is born without prior knowledge of any concept of a deity, and kids are...then they are born athiest. It takes years of propaganda, rhetoric, and dogmatic instruction to force religous ideas into a young, impressionable mind.

Now, here's how I see it, on the whole scale of shit:
On one side, ye have religous theism, or the belief or a god for spiritual and religious needs.
On the same region, but far closer to the middle is deism, which is nonreligious belief in a divine entity of some sort that may or may not, but usually does, correspond to scientific knowledge of the day, i.e, modern deism would be: god created the big bang, and watched the effects, and everything after the big bang was natural, because the big bang is commonly accepted scientific knowledge.
Right smack dab in the middle is agnosticism- tnot believing, yet not disbelieving, an odd limbo between athiesm and theism. Comfortably neutral.
Then, there's athiesm, in all it's wonderfully wild shades of gray, from hovering on agnostic to what I term "M*W Athiesm".

And, then, there are people who just don't care, and they usually fall within the span of agnostic, or lightly-hued athiest.

 

[Cris]

Falling,

Atheism is not the default belief,

Atheism isn’t generally considered a belief.

Even now, the multitude of information we've gained about the planets and universe does not even remotely negate a higher power.

But it doesn’t support it either.

Until science explains why/how everything/the first thing came to be in existence(hah!), people will understandably revert to this seemingly instinctual yearning for a god.

Or they might evolve with a higher intelligence to realize the concept has no basis, as all thinking atheists already understand.

 

[FallingSkyward]

Falling,

It doesn't matter. Thiesm is a belief that gods exist. Until taught that or until they develop the idea themselves then everyone is atheist, i.e. without theistic belief.

Uh, as far as I'm aware Atheism is a <i>belief</i> that there is no god, not just a lack of belief in theism. This requirement for belief negates any claim that the child is atheist, for it would have to have a conscious absence, or belief that God is absent from their lives. Assuming this would not be the case when not taught as such, the child is not Atheist. Atheism requires belief, you can't deny that.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Then, there's athiesm, in all it's wonderfully wild shades of gray, from hovering on agnostic to what I term "M*W Athiesm".

*************
M*W: Exactly what is your definition of of "M*W Atheism?"

 

[Cris]

Falling,

Uh, as far as I'm aware Atheism is a belief that there is no god,

So I guessed. This is a rather antiquated idea that is only used by a few, and out of date and incorrect dictionaries.

Please see the religion forum FAQs - a sticky thread at the top of the forum thread list, and particulary this thread to help you udnerstand the terms you are using.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=26679

Enjoy.

 

[Cris]

Falling,

Atheism requires belief, you can't deny that.

Not so. One may simply disbelieve theist claims. The disbelief in a proposition is the not the same as belief that it is false.

 

[FallingSkyward]

Falling,

Atheism isn’t generally considered a belief.

Web definitions for atheism :
the doctrine or belief that there is no God

I'd say Websters is as general as you can get

And even if it isn't considered as such, this so called "atheism" is not relevant to the original topic of conversation. We were talking about the default belief for when the human has the ability to ascertain beliefs.


I'll continue this tomorrow. A.P. English hell in T-minus 7 hours.

 

[FallingSkyward]

i'll check it out later.

 

[Cris]

Falling,

I'd say Websters is as general as you can get

Then buy or access an up to date version.

My version of websters states - atheism:

1 archaic : UNGODLINESS, WICKEDNESS
2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

See the thread reference I gave to understand the differences.

 

[SkinWalker]

FallingSkyward,

It is true, though understandable why you would argue the point, that atheism is the natural starting point. This is abundantly evident in anthropological and sociological study. Moreover, it is very clear just by exercising a bit of critical, unbiased thinking on the subject.

First, let me just remind you of the etymology of the word "atheist:"
Atheist originated in two Greek roots:
"A" which means "without" or "not"
"Theos" which means "deity"

This is from ReligiousTolerance.org, where they also discuss another point which is worth mentioning. The majority of the public *is* theistic, therefore the definition that is included in popular dictionaries such as Websters and even the Oxford English Dictionary are going to be in agreement with the most popularly accepted terminology. This is consistent with other words in the dictionary with meanings that are affected. "Faggot," for instance, was listed in the dictionary prior to the 1970's as a "bundle of sticks." I suspect in a modern collegiate dictionary and with the OED, the definition reflects modern, popular usage. Incorrect as it may technically be. Indeed, the OED lists as definition 6b, "a homosexual male." The term of derision originated most likely from the faggots used in burning heretics and homosexuals -being the last of the true heretics- were the only group to retain the slur, which was at one time used as a contemptuous label for a witch-like woman. Witches were heretics who were burned.

So what of 'atheist?' To the devout theist, the atheist often regarded with contempt and certainly with a certain amount of suspician. I know of theists who can accept that someone of another culture can believe in a god different than they, and even respect that person's beliefs though fully disagreeing. Yet, those same theists cannot accept those for whom there is no theistic belief at all. As if these were tools of the non-existant satan or demons. They've no problems with the Navajo who believes that the Earth herself is sacred and that all things are connected, but the atheist who rejects any god is certainly an evil thing!

But the very notion that there are so many beliefs in the world that are so different is evidence that a belief in any one god isn't the natural starting point for a person. In every culture of the world, one's religion is almost always provided by one's parents. This is more often not the case in Western societies than in non-western, but even in the United States, the overwhelming majority of children adhere to the individual religious cults of their parents. If there is a correct religion, cult, god, etc., then which one? All think theirs is the correct one. Nearly all reject the remaining several hundred out-of-hand.

There is, I would admit, considerable evidence that religion or, more specifically, the propensity to believe is a human characteristic that manifests itself ontologically in nearly all cultures. Belief is a 'mind virus' of sorts and it finds a friendly medium in the human mind. Like a virus, computer *or* biological, the mind virus of belief is able to replicate itself, sometimes accurately and sometimes with mistakes that are subsequently replicated with accuracy so that the 'mutations' persist. These mutations evolve into the complex, hierarchical (and often patriarchal) systems we call religions and worldviews.

Atheism is the absence of belief in theistic worldviews. That's not to say that all atheists are created equal, as it were. Some believe in silliness like 'telepathy' and 'esp,' still others believe in 'magic' and 'alien abductions.' The mind virus takes its hold, the vaccination is critical thought and reason.

Atheism is the natural state. Theistic beliefs, just like the others mentioned in the preceeding paragraph, are learned from others. Transmitted from the mind viruses of others who are infected. As I said, my daughter knows nothing of gods and religion. I've no doubt that once she begins school, I'll be inundated with questions or comments about "god," but until then, she has no thoughts on the subject. She's an atheist. She is without belief in a deity.

 

[Cris]

Skin,

Nice post. Did you consider referencing memetics rather than mind virus?

 

[geeser]

extemely well put, SkinWalker this should be put up as a sticky, if FallingSkyward does'nt understand after that, he has a severe case of the mind virus.

 

[SkinWalker]

Skin,

Nice post. Did you consider referencing memetics rather than mind virus?

Both are ideas that have origins with Dawkins, but I prefer the 'mind virus' analogy. Memes imply that that there is something physical that is transmitted like DNA which contains cultural information. I don't think that religion can be transmitted that way and I don't think Dawkins believes that anymore either. Memes are an interesting concept, but I don't think they're necessary to explain how religion is transmitted from one person to the next.

The mind virus discussion by Dawkins is in The Devil's Chaplain, pp 137-138. Good reading.

 

[Hapsburg]

*************
M*W: Exactly what is your definition of of "M*W Atheism?"

Extreme logic.

 

[James R]

Uh, as far as I'm aware Atheism is a belief that there is no god, not just a lack of belief in theism.

Did you read my post explaining strong and weak atheism?

 

[Kalypso]

Morality and Religion are two very differant things, you need to understand that before I will respond to your post.

No, being raised christian does not make someone turn out "better", more "morally just" nor anything else. They are simply raised christian.

Every heard the addage "Sinning on Saturday, Saving on Sunday?" This refers to the christian population that live as badly as, or worse than the general population because they know they can simply repent at church.

If I were to have kids I would raise them to believe what they could justify for themselves without enforcing any of my own beliefs on them. I figured everything out for myself, and because of this I'm able to debate my beliefs and intelligently form opinions about new topics in the field without having someone else think for me. I believe this is what people should do. If you choose to be religious, that's fine, simply think for yourself and never believe that religion is any more moral than atheism.

 

[snake river rufus]

I would just like to know how you plan to raise your children. ive always thought that a christian upbringing was always better this is for a couple of reasons.

1. if your child goes to a christian school and goes to church in their early years, they are taught values and about morality both ideas are highly beneficial to them and society in general.

2. if your child doesnt grow up to be as intellegent as you then they could continue to follow christianity and their beleifs would give their life meaning. also, much of lifes trauma is easier if there is a god who you can blame, or even pray to.

wadaya think?

I think that you are wrong on several counts as several others have pointed out. but in my own case I just don't want my children falling into that trap. do you teach your children not to let a black cat cross their path "just in case"?

 

[scorpius]

I would just like to know how you plan to raise your children. ive always thought that a christian upbringing was always better this is for a couple of reasons.

same as me,with truth and honesty.
which leaves bible fairy tales out of the equation obviously

born and raised atheist like everyone else I was told the rules of the game very early,which were
if you steal you'll go to prison,
if you kill someone you will be executed yourself
if you make a kid and dont want to marry the girl youll still pay and support this kid until hes 18 .
and there were many many people who ended up locked up in the slammer working hard labour just to pay such support
those my friend were the rules in a country I grew up in.(CZ)

1. if your child goes to a christian school and goes to church in their early years, they are taught values and about morality both ideas are highly beneficial to them and society in general.

unfortunately your bibles morality can also mean killing anyone who doesnt share your beliefs,
such as
"and happy shall he be who takes your litle ones and dashes them against the rock"
www.evilbible.com
www.thewaronfaith.com/bible_quotes.htm

2. if your child doesnt grow up to be as intellegent as you then they could continue to follow christianity and their beleifs would give their life meaning. also, much of lifes trauma is easier if there is a god who you can blame, or even pray to.

and what pray tell could any kid learn from a book that teaches such nonsense as six day creation,man made from dirt,woman made from mans rib ..etc,
its all horseshit
www.skepticsannotatedbible.com

anyhow you give your life meaning not some imaginary sky bully

why would you blame god for anything?
if you are to have any free will youre responsible for all of your actions

it always cracks me up when those morronic ball players win the game and start giving thanx to god,while if they lose they dont blame god at all!

 

[axilmar]

I would just like to know how you plan to raise your children. ive always thought that a christian upbringing was always better this is for a couple of reasons.

1. if your child goes to a christian school and goes to church in their early years, they are taught values and about morality both ideas are highly beneficial to them and society in general.

2. if your child doesnt grow up to be as intellegent as you then they could continue to follow christianity and their beleifs would give their life meaning. also, much of lifes trauma is easier if there is a god who you can blame, or even pray to.

wadaya think?

That's a very interesting question.

Basically, there is only one necessary rule to live by, and that is the rule I will teach my children to follow:

do not do to others what you do not want others to do to you.

As for religion, they will go to school, they will learn what they have to learn, and then I will teach my children to apply logic to what they learn. If they want to follow a particular religion then, they are free to do so.