The Ego of the Atheist

[phlogistician]

but phlogistician, you said that you believe in a reality behind your perception. That is your god

No it's not. Reality is not a god. Stop being a metaphysical bullshitter long enough to see that you are merely twisting words please.

 

[ronan]

Unfortunately most God believers that tend to get in athiests faces are the ones from the Abrahamic faiths who do not subscribe to the as you mentioned above "one from the original mystic in the past" version of God.They consider this version New Age'ish or false,evil,whatever,too sweet and it is not confrontational enough like Abrahamism (for the most part,a very black and white idealogy..no in between). So, even as a believer in god I can see where many athiests come from when people with nothing more than a set of scriptures and varying idealogies about God and their personal feelings agressively attempt to convert someone.

Right, I understand and I think we can thanks science to save us from the dark age of religious stupidity.

But now things get circle. science is getting too powerfull in our society taking the place religion had before in shaping our minds.

And because in the past we learn than humility can transform in stupidity, we should not make the same mistake by going back to humility in a more mature way.

 

[ronan]

No it's not. Reality is not a god. Stop being a metaphysical bullshitter long enough to see that you are merely twisting words please.

But you are a believer , that was the point.

Because as you said god has multiple meaning, what you say is reality can be considered as a kind of god for someone coming from another civilization with different beliefs.

I agree that in everyday language I will address you as an "atheist" because this word has got a different meaning that it should have, it refers to people that believe in what science tell them usualoly, or who are upset of the past religion...

Lety me ask one thing: do you think that the reality behind your perception is unconscious?

it could be the properties that makes atheist different than theist:

theist: belief in a conscious god
atheist: belief in an unconscious god (unconscious reality for using the "correct" word)

Would you agree?

 

[phlogistician]

But you are a believer , that was the point.

I believe on a lot of things. None of which are relevant to my status as an atheist.

Because as you said god has multiple meaning,

Liar. I said there were as many gods as people claim to exist. Don't put words into my mouth. Debate honestly.

what you say is reality can be considered as a kind of god for someone coming from another civilization with different beliefs.

I did not say that at all. Stop telling lies, and debate honestly.

 

[Pinocchio's Hoof]

for some god is consciousness, the stance I take,
if you take this stance, you are a theist, period.

So once you explain your claim for the existance of 'God' its if I believe it or not that makes me atheist

 

[S.A.M.]

OK here's my spin on why atheists continue to denounce God and will argue vehemently against the possibility and existance of God.

Quite simply they are seeking to inflate their ego thereby making themselves the centre of their universe which inadvertantly is a blasphemous stance by default. By denouncing something so superior to themselves they are inflating their ego, giving themselves a false sense of superiority.
.

Thats generally the opinion of atheists in Indian society. That they have convinced themselves they have all the answers and lack humility. However, like most things in our society, its not an offence to be an arrogant git so long as you extend the same courtesy to others.

 

[Enmos]

OK I won't but I just wanted to thrash this issue out becasue from my perspective it does seem egotistical to deny (noticed I changed it from denounce) a deity.

How is it egoistical ?
It seems more egoistical of the theist to expect believe in his/her deity from atheists.

What if I told you that the planet Mercury is actually entirely made of mercury ?
Would it be egoistical of you not to believe me ?

 

[ronan]

I believe on a lot of things. None of which are relevant to my status as an atheist.

You believe in a reality behind your perception, that was the point at issue, not the belief in the existence of a banana, don't hide your belief

Liar. I said there were as many gods as people claim to exist. Don't put words into my mouth. Debate honestly.

Many gods, imply many meaning to the word god!
because of that, we don't have really an objective way to decide what is a god or what is not, especially when there is description such as "behind my perception"

I did not say that at all. Stop telling lies, and debate honestly.

You told me:

Do you believe in a reality behind your perception?

Yes. To think otherwise smacks of metaphysical bullshit.

In this case my last post stand, and I ll repeat the questions:

do you think that the reality behind your perception is unconscious?

this unconsciousness of reality could thus be the properties that makes atheist different than theist (knowing that you consider yourself an atheist):

theist: belief in a conscious god
atheist: belief in an unconscious god (unconscious reality by using the "correct" word if the distinction is agreed)

Would you agree?

 

[S.A.M.]

Is there any atheist who argues that perception is not reality? And yet, they constantly define perception as reality.

 

[Enmos]

Is there any atheist who argues that perception is not reality? And yet, they constantly define perception as reality.

Over here.. and I don't define perception as reality.

 

[ronan]

So once you explain your claim for the existance of 'God' its if I believe it or not that makes me atheist

not exactly,
if you believe in it, then you are a theist, see below ,
but if you do not believe in it, you can still believe in other kind of god and thus it does not establish your atheism.

for me god is consciousness and there is only one god, so one consciousness, it is beyond our perception, it is what makes them possible.

this is a description of god that is not mine but one used a long time ago in Advaita philosophy and others as well as in the case of many mystic.

if you believe in that, I think we can call you a theist.

for 3 reasons:
1) all self proclaimed atheist I met disagree with this view (I agree it is a weak reason based on induction)
2) Atheist contains the letter A signifing absence so because here there is a belief in a thing beyond yourself, the letter A is not appropriate
3) This kind of god has been established a long time ago by people considering themselves believer in god

 

[S.A.M.]

Enmos:

Yes you do, you even base your assumptions on evidence.

 

[Enmos]

Enmos:

Yes you do, you even base your assumptions on evidence.

Who doesn't ? lol
If one wouldn't base assumptions on at least some evidence, the world would be a pretty weird place.
Imagine assuming something without ANY evidence at all.
Maybe evidence isn't the best word for it though, how about verifiable knowledge ?

I was chased last night, I didn't see who or what it was, but I assume it was a blue dandelion with three eyes.. :shrug:

 

[S.A.M.]

Yup, thats an assumption.

I assume of course, that you are not lying.

 

[Enmos]

Yup, thats an assumption.

That's not how I used the word assumption.
An assumption, to me, is a thought or a statement about something based on high probability but without sufficient evidence to be completely certain.

 

[S.A.M.]

Ah, this must be from the new atheist dictionary of redefined words.

 

[Enmos]

Ah, this must be from the new atheist dictionary of redefined words.

No, it's all me.
You don't agree ?

 

[S.A.M.]

No, I still follow the standard English definition and meaning of words.

 

[Enmos]

No, I still follow the standard English definition and meaning of words.

The word I use for what you define as 'assumption' is lunacy.
Even assumptions have at least some credibility.

 

[Pinocchio's Hoof]

In the OP you bash Atheist's for thinking that possibly Jc was not what you percieve him to be

Instead of investing in faith they choose to invest in themselves, ask them about Jesus Christ and they will fob you off with comments like he was a con man or that he plainly didn't exist, some even saying he was just some poor deluded man.
.

then you state..

And where did I say you have to accept the bible. Just the message is enough. I don't know the bible yet I believe in God based on my own study of the mind.

I would have thought taking a stance like in the OP and criticising other people's belief or non-belief in what you may believe in you would keep some consistancy....
To bring up Jc (imo) automaticaly means reference to the bible be it christian/catholic/evangelical/protestant or church of zion and the seven angels, so you after bringing this character that is refered to in 'The Bible' (and whose faith some religions are based on),you say the message is enough to believe but you don't know the bible .....if you don't know the bible how can you know the 'message' or enough about Jc to say what he was.............?

In all fairness though I would be more worried about the ego of the theist compared to the atheist. Ramming religion down someones throat when they may not need religion (ie they have surpassed the need for someone or something to hold their hand ) is not productive and can 'fix' a persons outlook on life ?

doesn't this defeat your own OP with the bash at 'the ego of the atheist'...?