When/ how did you become an atheist?

I think that now it has been established that the term would not apply to an infant.
Wrong. You have merely claimed this and, by your own "reasoning" (posts 52 & 53) it has been shown that it does indeed apply to infants.

I believe how you got there is implied by the term.
Nope.

If no one ever believed in God and no concept of God ever existed. The terms Theist and Atheist would not exist. Both those concepts are very dependent on each other. There is no such thing as an atheist without a theist. Nor would there be a requirement for any word to describe a lack of belief in a God.
Agreed.
If no one ever came up with the idea of god we would all, by definition, be atheists. But without the name.
This has been highlighted earlier in another thread.
 
You cant make a determination like that with an infant though. You can but it would be rather meaningless. Some form of agnosticism can creep in around 2 years old and even without indoctrination.

That term can be used the same way people use “He/She was born a Christian” with the understanding that both parents believe one way or the other. It's one of those things that must be in context with the belief of the parents and it's clearly understood by all that hear it. So why are you making a big deal out of it?
 
I believe how you got there is implied by the term. If no one ever believed in God and no concept of God ever existed. The terms Theist and Atheist would not exist. Both those concepts are very dependent on each other. There is no such thing as an atheist without a theist. Nor would there be a requirement for any word to describe a lack of belief in a God.

You are outlining a major flaw in the discussion where many responding here go from Atheist to some form of established belief system. We may as well go down the road of Agnostic or Atheist and which one would is more optimistic? Which the pessimist?
 
We may as go down the road of Agnostic and Atheist and which one would is more optimistic? Which the pessimist?
Do try to learn what the terms "agnostic" and "atheist" mean before posting again.
 
So. . . it's safe to assume that atheists have no belief in alternate dimensions and realities that our senses and scientific instruments cannot penetrate, to which we are effectively "blind" to?

I believe there are an unlimited number of possibilities, but if you try to pin me down to believing in something with no supporting evidence, well that's a losing battle. Also, what we are blind to today may not be so tomorrow. I'm willing to wait and find out as our instrumentation gets better.
 
So. . . it's safe to assume that atheists have no belief in alternate dimensions and realities that our senses and scientific instruments cannot penetrate, to which we are effectively "blind" to?
No, it's not "safe" to assume that at all.
Atheism is a stance with regard to belief in god(s). It says nothing whatsoever about belief in anything else.
There are plenty of atheists who will happily subscribe to a belief in UFOs, ghosts, crystal healing etc (without seeing the dichotomy), but the one does not follow from the other.
 
There are plenty of atheists who will happily subscribe to a belief in UFOs, ghosts, crystal healing etc (without seeing the dichotomy), but the one does not follow from the other.

More like the exception. Just not in the personality type. If they did believe in UFO's they may be classified as possessing theistic tendencies.
 
More like the exception. Just not in the personality type. If they did believe in UFO's they may be classified as possessing theistic tendencies.

:D Theistic tendencies, what a concept! I once made an effort to become a Christian for the love of a woman I liked. It was like swimming upstream, very tiring. I couldn't believe and faking it all the time was very stressful. I don't recommend it.

However I could believe that a theist might have atheistic tendencies. Not to hard a concept when you know the theist's beliefs are based on BS.
 
So. . . it's safe to assume that atheists have no belief in alternate dimensions and realities that our senses and scientific instruments cannot penetrate, to which we are effectively "blind" to?

"alternate dimensions"? No. I don't. Not until it can be demonstrated by science.

~String
 
Okay so there are 2 outcomes.
There is a god or there isnt. Neither have any premise that we can infer from. An athiests position on this 50/50 'Belief' is "I dont know" ... some more bold athiests will supposite that we came about "naturally"(if that can be applied to something having no premise) so......

the supposition that god cant exist is BS??
 
Easy: he's clueless.
@ 420Joey:
No, the supposition that god can't exist is NOT BS.
And no, an athiest's position on this belief is NOT "I dont know": it varies from a simple "I don't believe" to a hard "I actually believe you are wrong and that the available evidence indicates this".

Nor is it 50/ 50.
 
1. There is a god.
2. There isnt one.

How many choices are there? It's a 50/50% chance, think pascals wager except minus the bullshit heaven factor. Who cares anyways why do you inflame your ignorance with ad homen attacks on religious beliefs??? You are reserving your opinion arent you?

Dyw you have no evidence on the premise of origin, stop it.....
 
lol... ok... and it's in the middle why? Because there is two options?

You know what else has two options? Whether a six sided die rolls 6 or it doesn't.
 
1. There is a god.
2. There isnt one.
How many choices are there? It's a 50/50% chance
False.
You're assuming that the likelihood of each has equal grounding.
Is it 50/ 50 that I have an elephant in my bathroom?
Is it 50/ 50 that I'm exactly 34 years 11 months and 3 days old?
 
Back
Top