MooseKnuckle
Registered Senior Member
Doom-
Ive read that story before. It was in the book Hyperspace.
Ive read that story before. It was in the book Hyperspace.
random thoughts for atheists/agnostics
- Thread starter SwedishFish
- Start date
That's not true. Atheism is simply disbelief in the existence of God. You don't have to be 100% sure of something in order to believe it. I believe I won't be killed tomorrow, but I can't be 100% sure. As you said, most atheists are agnostic as well, in that they will not claim that they know for sure that God does not exist. If they did make such a claim, they would be gnostic atheists. And yes, that is definitely presumptuous.
Thats the thing,you dont believe you will be killed tommorow.
That means you have FAITH in the idea youll not be killed tommorow.
Thats the irony,atheism is a faith that god dont exist,while religion is a faith he/it does.
There two sides of the same proverbial coin.
That means you have FAITH in the idea youll not be killed tommorow.
Thats the irony,atheism is a faith that god dont exist,while religion is a faith he/it does.
There two sides of the same proverbial coin.
ConsequentAtheist
Registered Senior Member
No. That means he possesses no reason/evidence warranting the belief that he will be killed tomorrow.
that's a good explanation doom. i think it answers the questions i have. believing anything absolutely must require faith. humans are so infantile at this point in the game for us to fully reason either way with facts. the knowledge simply does not exist yet.
to depart on another sci fi tangent, wasn't there something in episode 1 about anakin having a high level of a certain substance or whatever it was? it meant that the force was strong in him. i may have just read this somewhere as i don't remember the movie too well. correct me please. it is a stretch and it is sci fi but maybe, just maybe, scientists in the future will determine there is a non-random energy or substance permeating living things that is the soul. what we know as metaphysical may become just plain and simple physics. (sci fi is fun)
to depart on another sci fi tangent, wasn't there something in episode 1 about anakin having a high level of a certain substance or whatever it was? it meant that the force was strong in him. i may have just read this somewhere as i don't remember the movie too well. correct me please. it is a stretch and it is sci fi but maybe, just maybe, scientists in the future will determine there is a non-random energy or substance permeating living things that is the soul. what we know as metaphysical may become just plain and simple physics. (sci fi is fun)
The 'faith' you are referring to is a ridiculus definition- not being 100% sure of something. When most people talk of faith they talk of blind faith. That is the faith of religion. Positively believing something without evidence of such.
You have to think in probabilities. An atheist is not someone who is '100%' sure god does not exist. They simply do not think it probable.
All the definitions offered by doom are bunk.
In the end, it is simply a judgement call based on probabilities. If you think it is probable a god exists, you are theist. If you think it probable a god does not exist, you are atheist.
You are thinking in absolutes. Thinking in those terms will lead to 'everything is possible' and worthless solipsism.
You have to think in probabilities. An atheist is not someone who is '100%' sure god does not exist. They simply do not think it probable.
All the definitions offered by doom are bunk.
In the end, it is simply a judgement call based on probabilities. If you think it is probable a god exists, you are theist. If you think it probable a god does not exist, you are atheist.
You are thinking in absolutes. Thinking in those terms will lead to 'everything is possible' and worthless solipsism.
MooseKnuckle
Registered Senior Member
majed-
What!?!?!?!....it looks like you expect scientists to be God. Since no one can give life back to a person(after a considerable time of death) this means there is a God?????
You are not making good points.
What!?!?!?!....it looks like you expect scientists to be God. Since no one can give life back to a person(after a considerable time of death) this means there is a God?????
You are not making good points.
Exactly. Also, whereas belief may not imply certitude in the believer, faith almost always does. Atheists do not have "faith" that God doesn't exist. No faith is required to believe this because there is no evidence to suggest that God does exist.
Hmm. That's actually quite a good point. *thinks*
I do believe that it is highly unlikely I will be killed tomorrow. My belief is based on evidence.
1. I live in a safe and free country (I'm patriotic, I know
)2. I have no enemies.
3. My area is relatively crime free.
4. I am healthy.
I could produce more evidence, but I couldn't be bothered. Thinking about my death is very depressing.
Let's think about someone elses death!
Let's say you are living in Iraq. That persons chances of dying are much higher than a person living in Australia. Evidence:
1. The country is in chaos.
2. No one enforcing the law.
3. Still fighting going in.
4. Supplies are limited. Not much food, water or medicine.
5. You are probably a fruit loop who is trying to resist some of the most powerful nations on Earth.
Thus, I would conclude that you would have a rather good chance of dying if you live in Iraq.
Another thought. Let's say that I have been diagnosed with cancer. It has eaten away most of my lungs and stomach. I would say that my chances of dying are elevated.
*sighs* sorry, i'm ranting. I'll stop now.
Yes but theres still certainly a chance youll get run over by some nutcase who decides to talk on his mobile phone while driving and runs you over,or maybe some large brick falls off the top of a building and lands square on your head.
You cannot possibly KNOW youll live tommorow,so you have to have FAITH that youll live tommorow,cos you do not know anything about tommorow or even the next couple of hours,perhaps a planes engine falls off and lands on your house,
just cos something is unlikely dont mean it WONT happen.
You cannot possibly KNOW youll live tommorow,so you have to have FAITH that youll live tommorow,cos you do not know anything about tommorow or even the next couple of hours,perhaps a planes engine falls off and lands on your house,
just cos something is unlikely dont mean it WONT happen.
No faith is faith,the definition i gave is dictionary definition,dipshit.
Why are there so many idiots,so the guy's who made the dictionary are wrong are they?
dictionary definition of faith:
1.Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2.Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.
3.Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
4.often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
A set of principles or beliefs.
The problem is that there is not just one dictionary. If you look in Merriam-Webster, you will find a slightly different definition than what's in Oxford (which IMO is the most credible source). And even in the same dictionary you are dealing with multiple definitions. For example, Oxford defines faith as follows:
1) Complete trust or confidence.
2) Firm belief, especially without logical proof.
3) A system of religious belief.
These definitions all have a high level of certitude of the belief in question. While atheists believe that God doesn't exist, they usually do not have the complete confidence that is required for faith. This also applies to whether one will be killed on the next day. As ConsequentAtheist said, I have no reason or evidence warranting the belief that I will be killed tomorrow. But I am not so certain of this belief as to label it faith.
Faith is faith? What an enlightening tidbit of genius!
I was merely pointing out that in the context of this thread (ie. religion), when people speak of faith they usually mean the definition jade alluded to.
It would be nice for once if someone would counter my arguments instead of argue definitions and semantics...
Firm belief without logical proof,
thats how i see there faith,i dont actually believe they are 100%
sure,they act like it,but i dont think its so,its not absolute shall we say psychologically.
And atheism is kinda like firm belief without logical proof,cos both ways there is no proof,and as you say an atheist is not absolute 100%,but they are like the believers in that its close to that absolute and may act like there 100%.
Look at it in this analogy:
say you were 99.999% sure of something,would you act like you do not believe?
or would you act 99.999% sure?
i think its the latter,hence they are an opposite of atheists and vice versa,but two sides of the same coin in that what they believe is firm without logical proof of either.
Thats what i was trying to get at some time back.
thats how i see there faith,i dont actually believe they are 100%
sure,they act like it,but i dont think its so,its not absolute shall we say psychologically.
And atheism is kinda like firm belief without logical proof,cos both ways there is no proof,and as you say an atheist is not absolute 100%,but they are like the believers in that its close to that absolute and may act like there 100%.
Look at it in this analogy:
say you were 99.999% sure of something,would you act like you do not believe?
or would you act 99.999% sure?
i think its the latter,hence they are an opposite of atheists and vice versa,but two sides of the same coin in that what they believe is firm without logical proof of either.
Thats what i was trying to get at some time back.
I see the point you are making. It seems like you are referring to strong atheism, which is belief that there is no God. Weak atheism, on the other hand, is simply lack of belief that God exists. Note that there is a significant difference between the two. I can see how you would think that strong atheists have faith that God doesn't exist. Since I prefer weak atheism, I feel no need to argue for or against that point.
Whats to say theres not such a thing a weak religous?
You could be uncertain of gods existence,still overall believe in god,not necesarily go to church,but maybe you do cos of family,maybe you do confession or go in time of need,but mostly your not a STRONG believer,you own the bible,maybe you really really believed once,something happens and you lose the grip,or the grip loses you depending on which way you look at it.
Then there morals,your morals are that of a christian or to whatever religion you belonged to,generally speaking this is your average joe good guy through and through,minding his own business,something though has brought down the curtain that blinded him/her.
An agnostic IS basically a weak atheist,thats non commited to a certain answer,or one who does not believe it ever possible the existence of god could be proven,skeptical overall about the whole notion and is unlikely to be religous at all,but youll still probably have high morals.
People denote agnostic= some aggresive form of anti-religous heavy atheism.
Nope,its exactly what it says on the tin,agnostic=non committal,skepticism,dont just relate to religion,thats what the word means.
You could be uncertain of gods existence,still overall believe in god,not necesarily go to church,but maybe you do cos of family,maybe you do confession or go in time of need,but mostly your not a STRONG believer,you own the bible,maybe you really really believed once,something happens and you lose the grip,or the grip loses you depending on which way you look at it.
Then there morals,your morals are that of a christian or to whatever religion you belonged to,generally speaking this is your average joe good guy through and through,minding his own business,something though has brought down the curtain that blinded him/her.
An agnostic IS basically a weak atheist,thats non commited to a certain answer,or one who does not believe it ever possible the existence of god could be proven,skeptical overall about the whole notion and is unlikely to be religous at all,but youll still probably have high morals.
People denote agnostic= some aggresive form of anti-religous heavy atheism.
Nope,its exactly what it says on the tin,agnostic=non committal,skepticism,dont just relate to religion,thats what the word means.
When speaking of strong or weak atheism, one is not referring to the certitude of belief, but the nature of the belief or disbelief. As I said, weak atheism is simply disbelief. Strong atheism is belief that God does not exist. Therefore terms such as weak religious and strong religious are meaningless.
Agnosticism deals with the realm of knowledge, while atheism/theism deals with the realm of belief. Agnosticism is not in the middle of atheism and theism; it overlaps the two. A weak atheist is indeed agnostic. But an agnostic is not always a weak atheist. For example, a theist can believe that God exists but also think that his existence is unknowable (agnostic theist). I don't believe God exists but I think that this cannot be scientifically proven (agnostic atheist).
ConsequentAtheist
Registered Senior Member
Bullpuckie. I'm 100% sure that I know of no body of evidence warranting a belief in God(s). That this leads me to presume the absence of God(s) is not a matter of faith but a matter of methodology - many, if not most, solid atheists are also agnostics.
There is no equivalency between this position and theism. The former is grounded in methodological naturalism, while the latter is reliant upon revelation. The former draws tentative conclusions based on the methods of science, while the latter simply proclaims:
- My revelation says that my revelation is better than your revelation.
of course there's no body of evidence. but that doesn't mean there couldn't be any...the evidence may not have been discovered yet.
ConsequentAtheist
Registered Senior Member
As is equally true of the Daoine Sidhe, the Leprechaun, the Unicorn, Nessie, Alien Abduction, Past Life Regression, Kali, Mitra, Ba'al, and any number of pantheons. So?