Is Atheism a religion?

εxoendo;571867 said:
only if you are a retarded simpleton. Yes we could say not believing in something is the belief of not believing. We could also say that most religions is a non-belief of not believing in the believing of something.

Don't you see how fucking stupid that is? Rent a brain.
Click to expand...

here is your error....atheism isn't "not believing in something".....atheism is "believing something is not"........
 
Superfreak said:
Actually, it IS most certainly a FAITH. For people who do not care one way or another... they are agnostic.

For people who insist that God(s) exists or does not exist, they are all taking that on FAITH. None of them can prove it one way or another.

So the question I have for atheists is this.....

Why do you fucking care if someone believes in God or not? or puts up signs with the commandments on them or not? As long as they are not forcing you to believe in their religion or God.... then why the fuck do you care?
Click to expand...

I just read this week that the state constitutions of both North Carolina and Texas prohibit atheists (which is nothing more than an absence of belief in a god) from holding public office. These laws are currently being challenged, but it is situations such as these that presumably make atheists more concerned about the imposition of religion on their own lives. Proselytizing in any direction, either for or against beliefs, is equally offensive.
 
Saying "I don't believe in God" requires no more faith than saying "I don't believe in fairies". People who don't understand atheism believe they're being clever in misrepresenting atheism as "I believe there is no God". Although that's true in the case of some very strong atheists, most atheists wouldn't both say both "I don't believe in God" and "I believer there is no God" anymore than they would say the like about fairies.

Damo offers a very broad scope of agnosticism in its place, on which I fall. But again, the only reason he does this is because he doesn't understand atheism. Almost all atheists are really agnostic atheists, but no one is going to call themselves "Agnostic" alone because agnostics generally believe there's a high probability of god and agnostic atheists usually believer there's almost no probablity of God. It's usually safe to drop the "agnostic" label when you're an "agnostic atheist", just as safe as it is to do so when you're talking about how agnostic you are towards fairies.
 
Superfreak said:
Actually, it IS most certainly a FAITH. For people who do not care one way or another... they are agnostic.

For people who insist that Fairies(s) exists or does not exist, they are all taking that on FAITH. None of them can prove it one way or another.

So the question I have for atheists is this.....

Why do you fucking care if someone believes in Fairies or not? Or forces your children to listen to long arguments in favor of fairies existence? As long as they are not forcing you to believe in their religion or Fairies.... then why the fuck do you care?
Click to expand...


I fixed your argument.
 
Thorn said:
I just read this week that the state constitutions of both North Carolina and Texas prohibit atheists (which is nothing more than an absence of belief in a god) from holding public office. These laws are currently being challenged, but it is situations such as these that presumably make atheists more concerned about the imposition of religion on their own lives. Proselytizing in any direction, either for or against beliefs, is equally offensive.
Click to expand...

I am a skeptic. I often mock silly beliefs. If people don't want to listen they don't have to, but there's nothing wrong or offensive about mocking people who believe in weird, stupid things at all.
 
especially when that belief systems supports child molestation and denying political rights to non mythical believers.
 
εxoendo;571874 said:
Faith is the confident belief or trust in the truth or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.[1][2] The word "faith" can refer to a religion itself or to religion in general. As with "trust", faith involves a concept of future events or outcomes, and is used conversely for a belief "not resting on logical proof or material evidence."[3][4
Click to expand...

ok grind....show me material evidence or logical proof that atheism is the truth
 
Watermark said:
Saying "I don't believe in God" requires no more faith than saying "I don't believe in fairies". People who don't understand atheism believe they're being clever in misrepresenting atheism as "I believe there is no God". Although that's true in the case of some very strong atheists, most atheists wouldn't both say both "I don't believe in God" and "I believer there is no God" anymore than they would say the like about fairies.

Damo offers a very broad scope of agnosticism in its place, on which I fall. But again, the only reason he does this is because he doesn't understand atheism. Almost all atheists are really agnostic atheists, but no one is going to call themselves "Agnostic" alone because agnostics generally believe there's a high probability of god and agnostic atheists usually believer there's almost no probablity of God. It's usually safe to drop the "agnostic" label when you're an "agnostic atheist", just as safe as it is to do so when you're talking about how agnostic you are towards fairies.
Click to expand...

:palm:

a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ATHEISM
 
Damocles said:
It isn't the same thing to all people.

Again. In order to be so certain that you think it is so relevant that you have to convince me of it makes it something you don't want it to be. Agnostics reject dogma, they are not "atheist". One can make even agnosticism a religion, they can certainly make atheism a religion. If Theravada Buddhism (no deity at all) can be considered a religion, so can this, when it acts like it.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck... it's probably a duck.

Your eagerness to convince me itself becomes an urge for evangelism that is the first danger sign of making this into a religion. You may want to use that rented brain for a bit.
Click to expand...

But I do not believe there is not woman in a shoe, I just don't happen to believe in it. If presented with a woman in a large shoe, I would see her and be like "Gollly gee, how strange!" and be on my way. If a Christian were presented with Allah, they would not act similarly.

And if someone starts to preach to everyone that there IS a woman in a large shoe, that would be fine to, it would just be very silly and I would hope they'd keep it to themselves. If they, like religion, demanded everyone else listen to their arguments in favor or their belief, demanded the government erect monuments in favor of their shoe-belief, demanded that everyone show the utmost respect for their belief in a the woman in the shoe, then they wold be a very silly person, worthy of mocking and derision. We would all question their sanity, and if they ever ran for higher office, I'd point out there stupid belief and silly demands to everyone and ask "do you think this sort of person can really represent you rationally?"

But when you label that kind of thinking "religion"...
 
εxoendo;571879 said:
"A faith" (I am not going to let you weasel out of using the article 'a') is the belief in something that does not depend on logical proof or material evidence. THIS IS NOT what atheism is. Atheism is the rejection of religious theist dogma AND NOTHING MORE.

Often people will wish to discuss the many tenants and beliefs that atheists share (such as evolution) because often those beliefs go hand in hand. But that distracts from the debate. There is no system to atheism. There is no list of "The top 5 things all atheists must believe" One could be an atheist and believe we are in the matrix. Such a belief wouldn't change the fact they dont believe in god.

I think we have to remind ourselves, when discussing atheism, the only thing atheism concerns itself with is the REJECTION OF theist supernatural gods. And THAT is not faith.
Click to expand...

sure it is, you believe there is no god or other dieties....since you have no logical proof or material evidence....it is faith....
 
Yurt said:
ok grind....show me material evidence or logical proof that atheism is the truth
Click to expand...

Ridiculous. I do not have to present evidence against God to say "I do not believe in God". All I have to do is point out the lack of evidence IN THE OTHER DIRECTION.

This is nothing more than an annoying philosophical error. If you aren't even going to listen to what I'm saying and are just going to repeat this point that's already been debunked quite thoroughly over and over and over again I see no reason to even argue with you. I'll just let it settle in that you're wrong.
 
Yurt said:
sure it is, you believe there is no god or other dieties....since you have no logical proof or material evidence....it is faith....
Click to expand...

I do not believe in God. I do not believe in other deities. I do not believe in fairies.

I do not believe there is no God. I do not believe there are no other dieties. I do not believe there are no fairies.
 
εxoendo;571888 said:
I am now going to address your asinine assertion that not believing in god "to a 100% certainty" is a leap of faith. In any practical stretch of the imagination, it is not.

Technically, in the real sense of the word, atheists are agnostic, almost all would admit this if you unnecessarily backed them into a corner and wasted their time with such a stupid question. I am an agnostic, watermark even, is an agnostic.

The problem is, we can be agnostic about an infinite number of possibilities concerning the universe. We technically have to be an agnostic for ANY non-falsifiable claim.

You can't PROVE that there isn't invisible teacups orbiting our moon.
You can't PROVE there isn't a giant unicorn in the center of the galaxy that reads your thoughts.

You can't disprove EITHER of those things to a 100% certainty. Do you go around calling yourself a teacup agnostic? A unicorn agnostic?

No. Because the question is SO RIDICULOUS on it's face. Are you taking a leap of faith each time you reject the infinite amount of non-falsifiable possibilities in the universe?

In terms of real world application it's an irrelevant question to even consider.

The debate itself is worthless.

Teacups. Unicorn. God. All of the same cloth.

Leap of faith? Hardly. More like a tiny step of faith that traverses millionths of nanometers to the point of it being statistically insignificant.
Click to expand...

not the same at all....the only misconceptions on this site are by you and watermark claiming that unicorn's and god are the same.....last i checked unicorns do not have books written about them and in the books people claim to have actually seen, spoke etc with a unicorn.....

there is vastly more evidence for god than unicorns....it is also illogical to compare stories that people purposefully write and state are fiction to stories that people claim are real.....

but its nice of you to admit you have no logical proof or material evidence for you disbelief in a deity.....your post above proves your belief in atheism is faith
 
Watermark said:
I do not believe in God. I do not believe in other deities. I do not believe in fairies.

I do not believe there is no God. I do not believe there are no other dieties. I do not believe there are no fairies.
Click to expand...

then you really don't believe one way or the other....you do not firmly believe god does not exist

the above is agnostic

one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agnostic
 
Damocles said:
One doesn't have to believe in something to be using faith. It is the certainty factor. To pretend that you are certain of something, so certain that you HAVE to convince others of the "rightness" of your belief, and that something cannot be proven or disproven then you are a faith practitioner.
Click to expand...

LOL. Now you are merely redefining words to fit your purposes.

Stupid beliefs are mocked all the time. I am no more an atheist evangelist than I am a fairy evangelist. If someone demands respect for their beilef in fairies, I am rightly going to consider them an idiot. If 99% of America does the same, I'm going to form groups on the internet and mock them. If they come up to me demanding I believe in fairies, I am going to explain why I don't.

You are just demanding that I don't share my ideas because you don't like them, because you're religious and believe in silly things. But sharing ideas is what makes us human.

I can accept the idea that fairies might exist, but wanting to tell others that I don't believe in them does not change that fact, and it's silly and trivial to state so.

Damocles said:
Logic tells us one can doubt, even cynically and heavily, the existence of God logically from evidence or the lack thereof, but one cannot be certain without taking that leap of faith.

Thankfully I already own a high-functioning brain. Only the mentally poor need to rent. You can tell they are renting because they speak mostly in quotes...

Anyway, Atheism only becomes a religion when people start to "merge" and then become evangelists for their new faith. They begin to start threads and work terribly hard at convincing other people how "right" they are. Once they start acting like a religion, then they are religiously Atheist... it actually doesn't happen all that often, but it is my opinion that Atheism can be, and sometimes is, a religion.
Click to expand...

LOL. No, that's not when atheism becomes a religion. I've made all kinds of threads mocking silly beliefs like conservatism, homeopathy, and Christianity. It's not a religion.
 
Yurt said:
then you really don't believe one way or the other....you do not firmly believe god does not exist

the above is agnostic

one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agnostic
Click to expand...

It's agnostic atheism, maybe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_of_theistic_probability

Dawkins posits that "the existence of God is a scientific hypothesis like any other." He goes on to propose a continuous "spectrum of probabilities" between two extremes of opposite certainty, which can be represented by seven "milestones". Dawkins suggests definitive statements to summarize one's place along the spectrum of theistic probability. These "milestones" are:[2]

  1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung, 'I do not believe, I know.'
  2. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. 'I cannot know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there.'
  3. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. Technically agnostic but leaning towards theism. 'I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.'
  4. Exactly 50 per cent. Completely impartial agnostic. 'God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.'
  5. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. Technically agnostic but leaning towards atheism. 'I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be sceptical.'
  6. Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. 'I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.'
  7. Strong atheist. 'I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung "knows" there is one.'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top