Famous atheists

MrJoeSoap

estebancambias wrote: »

Che Guevara was an Atheist.

Now you're getting the gist of it!

stereoroid

SubjectSean wrote: »

I wonder if any Athiests have ever made an important scientific discovery?

Well, you got that website, with names like Watson & Crick on it. People are a product of their times, so it's possible to read too much in to what beliefs scientists publicly professed, or not, throughout history. Atheism was always possible, but before Darwin is wasn't very respectable.

Oh, and learn to spell "atheist", will you? If you're trying to make some kind of point with that misspelling, it's not getting through. :rolleyes:

estebancambias wrote: »

Che Guevara was an Atheist.

Che Guevara was a dilettante playboy with revolutionary fervour, who got lucky in Cuba, and unlucky in Bolivia.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

pythagoras worshipped whole numbers and was terrified of irrational numbers. tbqfh. he can go sod himself.

SubjectSean

Son Goku wrote: »

Gottfried Leibniz - Athiest

I know for a fact that Leibniz wasn't an Atheist, far from it, so I'm doubting your list.

SubjectSean

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Why should anybody care about what anybody in the past thought, regarding this?

It's OK you don't have to.

SubjectSean

stereoroid wrote: »

Oh, and learn to spell "atheist", will you? If you're trying to make some kind of point with that misspelling, it's not getting through. :rolleyes:

But you're obviously communicating with me about the point I was making:rolleyes:

Tar.Aldarion

SubjectSean wrote: »

It's OK you don't have to.

That's not answering anything.

pH

PDN wrote: »

Edison was probably more of an agnostic, or possibly a deist.
A couple of Edison quotes:
"I do not believe in the God of the theologians; but that there is a Supreme Intelligence I do not doubt."
(concerning whether there was an afterlife) "It does not matter. No one knows."

So he sounds like a Deist:
=> he's not a theist
=> atheist

Is this what this thread comes down to? who claims the deists and agnostics as their own?

Now's probably a good time to have an argument over the terms theist, atheist, deist and agnostic again!

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Mother Theresa

5uspect

PDN wrote: »

It's usually around this point of the discussion that someone pipes up with the Pythonesque line of "If they were alive today then they would probably be atheists".

Also if they were alive today they mightn't be great scientists either since many of the great discoveries of the past become the elementary basics of todays science.

SubjectSean

PDN you are uncannily prescient.

Despite the bit of python the fact remains that these were all men of logic and reason. They reasoned that a God existed and given that even to this day men of reason are doing the same thing, then there is no valid reason to posthumously alter peoples beliefs.

The few great humans by which the species has advanced itself would have most likely been great thinkers in any era I feel but all speculation along the lines of "if they were alive today...." is somewhat futile.

The fact remains that apparently all the greatest minds in the history of humanty have been blessed by the God they placed their faith in

pH

A pity then your holy books are quiet on the subject of Scientific discovery, if only we saw this in Matthew or Luke:

"And Jesus entered the library and said unto them, cease this senseless study of old texts and in its stead look to the natural world, throw away your superstitions and use logic and experimentation, repeatability and peer review, for with them you will cure and alleviate more of the world's ills you can imagine."

God has been strangely silent on scientific knowledge, you'd think that as well as bringing back a couple of people from the dead Jesus would have at least give humankind the germ theory of disease.

In fact God's scientific knowledge and understanding of the universe he created seems to be eerily the exact same (or less) as the society that produced his message.

When our knowledge of the world is improved through prayer, or through the study of your religious books then come here and crow, until then all that can be done is marvel how these brilliant men produced so much labouring under their God Delusion and wonder how much more they could have achieved if they'd been free of it.

Son Goku

SubjectSean wrote: »

I know for a fact that Leibniz wasn't an Atheist, far from it, so I'm doubting your list.

Sorry, I was pasting in the double athiest for Lagrange and Poisson and hit on Leibniz by mistake. I did put a bit of effort into it so please don't dismiss it because of a slip of the finger. I read the list again and believe it is free from error. Is there anybody else you think I might be mistaken on?

SubjectSean wrote: »

The fact remains that apparently all the greatest minds in the history of humanty have been blessed by the God they placed their faith in

Paul Dirac was an athiest and his discoveries lead to most of the technology we use today, same with Alan Turing.

SubjectSean

pH wrote: »

A pity then your holy books are quiet on the subject of Scientific discovery, if only we saw this in Matthew or Luke:

"And Jesus entered the library and said unto them, cease this senseless study of old texts and in its stead look to the natural world, throw away your superstitions and use logic and experimentation, repeatability and peer review, for with them you will cure and alleviate more of the world's ills you can imagine."

Jesus said, "Know what is in front of your face, and what is hidden from you will be disclosed to you. For there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed"

OK so it's from the Gospel of Thomas but I believe there are paralells in the synoptics.

pH wrote: »

When our knowledge of the world is improved through prayer, or through the study of your religious books then come here and crow, until then all that can be done is marvel how these brilliant men produced so much labouring under their God Delusion and wonder how much more they could have achieved if they'd been free of it.

On the contrary many of them claimed divine inspiration in their work and so lacking the belief in God may have done nothing.

SubjectSean

Son Goku wrote: »

Sorry, I was pasting in the double athiest for Lagrange and Poisson and hit on Leibniz by mistake. I did put a bit of effort into it so please don't dismiss it because of a slip of the finger. I read the list again and believe it is free from error. Is there anybody else you think I might be mistaken on?

I don't know about some of the names but I trust your explanation and so won't go checking. I just find Leibniz interesting bacause of his metaphysical arguments and I knew that he strongly believed in God

MoominPapa

Mostly scienticians mentioned so far. So to open it up a little

From the arts: Frank "Reality is what it is. Not what you want it to be" Zappa

From business: Alan "I'm not atoning for anything" Sugar

From politics: Peter "Balls of steel" Stark

Scofflaw

SubjectSean wrote: »

Jesus said, "Know what is in front of your face, and what is hidden from you will be disclosed to you. For there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed"

OK so it's from the Gospel of Thomas but I believe there are paralells in the synoptics.

On the contrary many of them claimed divine inspiration in their work and so lacking the belief in God may have done nothing.

Not sure about that. Christians tend to claim divine inspiration for exactly the same things that atheists don't.

cordially,
Scofflaw

robindch

Terry Pratchett released a statement earlier this evening saying that he'd been diagnosed with a rare form of early-onset Alzheimer's disease. Here's the BBC news report:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7141458.stm

Terry Pratchett wrote:

We are taking it fairly philosophically down here and possibly with a mild optimism. [...] I know it's a very human thing to say 'is there anything I can do', but in this case I would only entertain offers from very high-end experts in brain chemistry.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

i think I'm going to convert to christianity just so I can be angry at god for this

pH

Nick Clegg (new UK Lib Dem leader)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7151346.stm

Talon1977

Sorry to back track here, but just found this thread. Wanted to comment on this...

pH wrote:

A pity then your holy books are quiet on the subject of Scientific discovery, if only we saw this in Matthew or Luke:

"And Jesus entered the library and said unto them, cease this senseless study of old texts and in its stead look to the natural world, throw away your superstitions and use logic and experimentation, repeatability and peer review, for with them you will cure and alleviate more of the world's ills you can imagine."

He sort of did say something like this. Once, he said "Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?"

There are several other instances where Jesus used the natural world to make his points. I think the natural world makes a perfect backdrop to the storyline of the Bible. Just my humble opinion.

God has been strangely silent on scientific knowledge, you'd think that as well as bringing back a couple of people from the dead Jesus would have at least give humankind the germ theory of disease.

In fact God's scientific knowledge and understanding of the universe he created seems to be eerily the exact same (or less) as the society that produced his message.

I disagree. Just look at the Old Testament instructions on food preparations and cleanliness. The instructions come centuries before modern understanding of proper food preparation and yet most of the instructions that would have seemed pointless and whimsical to the average Jew of the day, turn out to be good practice to avoid sickness.

Zombrex

Talon1977 wrote: »

There are several other instances where Jesus used the natural world to make his points.

That wasn't pH's point. Jesus and the Bible are largely silent on science, or scientific discovery.

Talon1977 wrote: »

I think the natural world makes a perfect backdrop to the storyline of the Bible. Just my humble opinion.

Not sure what you mean. If taken literally nearly everything in the Bible is contradicted by study of the natural world.

Talon1977 wrote: »

I disagree. Just look at the Old Testament instructions on food preparations and cleanliness. The instructions come centuries before modern understanding of proper food preparation and yet most of the instructions that would have seemed pointless and whimsical to the average Jew of the day, turn out to be good practice to avoid sickness.

So why were they wrapped in nonsense explanations, largely based around if an animal chews cud?

Its almost as if God himself didn't understand why it was not a good idea .... strange

Talon1977

The fact that the animal chewed cud wasn't meant to be an explanation, it was meant to give the people a further way of identifying which animals were being referred to.

Not sure what you mean. If taken literally nearly everything in the Bible is contradicted by study of the natural world.

No it doesn't. Not if you believe that there is a super-natural force apart from the natural world.

That wasn't pH's point. Jesus and the Bible are largely silent on science, or scientific discovery.

PDN's book on motorcycle maintenance also silent on underwater basket weaving. Does that mean it's a bogus motorcycle book??

pH

AC Grayling on Nick Clegg
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ac_grayling/2007/12/i_dont_believe_it.html.printer.friendly

As to Mr Clegg: apparently, he clarifies that he is "towards the agnostic end of the spectrum" or some such. If he does not believe in the Norse or *******n or any other supposed divine beings, let him say so frankly and clearly, and not equivocate. Agnosticism is a rubbish position: the prior probability that there are fairies at the bottom of the garden is not 50%; it is 0% - and so for all supernaturalistic beliefs.

And it is absolutely risible that the director of Theos, the religious "faith tank", should say of Mr Clegg, "If he is saying that he is agnostic, obviously that is probably not quite so serious politically as saying you are an atheist." Amazing. For I think it is considerably more serious to say, "I believe in God and he told me to go to war in Iraq", which is what a soon-to-be-Catholic recent prime minister of somewhere practically said (as, even more practically, did his born-again big friend across the water). How happy can anyone be about that?

edit : boards.ie apparently do not like the word Olympian

Cactus Col

From now on everytime somebody talks about atheism ... it's gonna hard for me not to think of Chumbawumba ...

He drinks a whisky drink
He drinks a vodka drink
He drinks a lager drink
He drinks a Cider drink

Dave!

Joe Higgins?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0608/breaking2.htm

A native of Co Kerry, Mr Higgins, aged 60, once studied for the priesthood but later became an atheist. His incisive contributions in the Dail made him a thorn in the side of former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern from 1997-2007


Didn't know about that

Goduznt Xzst

Good thread (please don't let it be locked due to its age, don't know what the big deal with thread necros around boards is)

Anyway. I'd say a better title might be "Famous free-thinkers", seems more appropriate and opens up the scope to include deists, agnostics and even Christian free-thinkers (they exist although you might as well say Thomas Aquinas and be done with it)

Lately, I've been reading about George Jacob Holyoake.

A bullet point synopsis of his wiki:

• Last person convicted for blasphemy in a public lecture
• Coined the term "Secularism" as an inoffensive way to describe his opinions
• Coined the term "Jingoism" also

pts

Dave! wrote: »

Joe Higgins?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0608/breaking2.htm

A native of Co Kerry, Mr Higgins, aged 60, once studied for the priesthood but later became an atheist. His incisive contributions in the Dail made him a thorn in the side of former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern from 1997-2007


Didn't know about that

That one surprised me too. Posted that info in the "Religion in Irish politics" thread before I saw your post. Apologies for the cross-posting.

legologic

It's becoming annoying that in the Atheism & Agnosticism board you cant start a single thread without it turning into a massive debate with a bunch of people trying to argue the merits of theism.

If we went into the christianity board and told them in every single thread how wrong they are we'd be banned. I've no objection to them starting threads here if they want to ask questions but this board has become a chore to enter. You cant have a rational discussion of a topic of interest to secularists without having to defend your non-theist beliefs.

On an on-topic note: Heisenberg & Woddy Allen QED

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

Dades

legologic wrote: »

If we went into the christianity board and told them in every single thread how wrong they are we'd be banned

Different forum... different rules.

legologic wrote: »

I've no objection to them starting threads here if they want to ask questions but this board has become a chore to enter. You cant have a rational discussion of a topic of interest to secularists without having to defend your non-theist beliefs

In a nutshell, we welcome challenges wholeheartedly. This place would be awful boring if it was just a bunch of non-believers agreeing with each other. The busiest or most interesting threads nearly always have Christian input. Yes, stuff gets derailed here a lot, but if it didn't, most threads wouldn't get beyond two pages.