Atheism is "cool"

pH

t-ha wrote: »

The same laziness may well cause people to switch over to atheism without properly researching why they should be. If the OP's assertion that alot of people are becoming ill-informed atheists is true, it's possible that they might be noting that alot of people who have researched it have become atheist and so that's good enough for them? In short, alot of people in my opinion (despite their objections when questioned) display sheep-type following mentalities.

I take your point that some folks may be atheists through a herd-like mentality, but there is another side to this.

It's been said that "atheism is a religion in the same way as not collecting stamps is a hobby", and much of what you say seems to be equivalent to complaining that:

"Many people aren't collecting stamps, and you know what? They haven't really thought about why they're not collecting stamps, and they're not collecting them for all the wrong reasons!"

studiorat

pH wrote: »

I take your point that some folks may be atheists through a herd-like mentality, but there is another side to this.

It's been said that "atheism is a religion in the same way as not collecting stamps is a hobby", and much of what you say seems to be equivalent to complaining that:

"Many people aren't collecting stamps, and you know what? They haven't really thought about why they're not collecting stamps, and they're not collecting them for all the wrong reasons!"

PH! There's way to many negatives there for me to comprehend. What the hell does that mean? There has to be a catch in there somewhere! Are we cool or not, wot?

Dades

studiorat wrote: »

PH! There's way to many negatives there for me to comprehend. What the hell does that mean? There has to be a catch in there somewhere! Are we cool or not, wot?

LOL!

:cool: = The official smilie of the A&A forum. *


* The above suggestion is a joke. That would be ridiculous.

philologos

Húrin wrote: »

That's because a lot of people have bought into the hype of Richard Dawkins' image as an irrefutible intellectual authority on the God question.

I think it would be more apt to put pseudo before intellectual if we are discussing the contents of the God Delusion. It's also far from irrefutable given the amount of theistic responses to it thus far.

Anyhow, just because something is "cool" doesn't ensure accuracy.

velocirafter

The Mustard wrote: »

Wouldn't it all be a bit pointless? If you are an atheist, why bother spreading the 'word' or lack thereof? What would it achieve? At best, possibly the speedier demise of organised religion? What atheist or agnostic would care? (I don't mean that in a dismissive sense.)

I just don't particularly like being claimed by the catholic church as one of theirs from the paper trail I've left and I figure there is a fairly significant amount of people who have defected who are in a similar boat. If Catholicism cant claim 90% (randomly made up stat) of the population well then the government would have to alter their policies instead of bowing down the religious conservatism.

I feel I'm getting more left wing as this comment goes on, so at the risk of turning communist I'll stop now!:P

apoch632

That 90% though comes down to regardless of belief most Irish people in the republic identify as Catholics. And they put it down on the census like that every time. Or whoever fills out the forms in the house does.

Until people stop doing this the church would be stupid not to claim them and take the clout that comes with the numbers.

velocirafter

apoch632 wrote: »

That 90% though comes down to regardless of belief most Irish people in the republic identify as Catholics. And they put it down on the census like that every time. Or whoever fills out the forms in the house does.

Until people stop doing this the church would be stupid not to claim them and take the clout that comes with the numbers.

fair point

Galvasean

Interesting I was at a comedy clunb last night and one of the comics was doing material on religion, he stopped at one point and said, "Everybody here is an atheist right"? A couple of people said "Yeah". He then said "So is everybody else religious?" No response at all.. until some drunk old guy in the back piped up yelling "Me, I'm an atheist and I'm fed up pretending to be Catholic". He got a small round of applause. The comic then urged people to speak out and started pointing at sections of the audience asking them what they are. Most people said atheist or "Don't know".

Not really sure where im going with this, just seemed kind of interesting.

Fanny Cradock

Galvasean wrote: »

Interesting I was at a comedy clunb last night and one of the comics was doing material on religion, he stopped at one point and said, "Everybody here is an atheist right"? A couple of people said "Yeah". He then said "So is everybody else religious?" No response at all.. until some drunk old guy in the back piped up yelling "Me, I'm an atheist and I'm fed up pretending to be Catholic". He got a small round of applause. The comic then urged people to speak out and started pointing at sections of the audience asking them what they are. Most people said atheist or "Don't know".

Not really sure where im going with this, just seemed kind of interesting.

Sounds odd.

Goduznt Xzst

I think most Atheists are atheist in a state of being and not in a state of mind.

It isn't really that difficult to come to an acceptance that the gods of your parents and grandparents don't exist. If you where to think about your day to day life there are plenty of decisions you make naturally about what is true and what is not, when to trust and believe and when to question and disregard. You've just been thought that in the area of your religious thought that you should ignore your natural ability to reason and accept a conclusion without a proof.

Youth also adds the inimitable sense of indestructibility, probably the only gap in your life where you are fully aware of death but completely complacent to it. It's a gap where if you are not hindered by the pressures of your peers or the respect of your parents and family that you will start to question the need for your Gods existence. The Multi ethnic society that Ireland is now becoming is an excellent breeding ground for Atheism because now your peer group will not necessarily be people of the same belief systems.

In my opinion, the greatest way to become an Atheist, is not to talk to one, but to sit down and talk to people who believe as strongly as you do, but are members of a religion that is a polar opposite to yours. An acceptance that your belief and God are only a drop in an ocean of other beliefs and Gods in this world can only bring a person to the conclusion that they have no reason to assume that the words of their holy people are of any greater importance or truth than the words of every other religions holy people.

robindch

Galvasean wrote: »

Not really sure where im going with this, just seemed kind of interesting.

Weird. Wouldn't have happened 20 years ago, I can tell you.

Speaking of which, the 1972 documentary Marjoe showed up in alt.binaries.documentaries and alt.binaries.multimedia.documentaries newsfroups last Sunday, and I watched the first twenty minutes of it last night. Scary stuff. It's about a kid named Marjoe Gortner whose parents made him into a revivalist, evangelical preacher at the age of four and who, just before hanging up his preaching hat and coming out as an atheist, invited a film crew around the place with him, gave them the lowdown on how the business of evangelism operated, then went out and did it for real in front of the cameras and the knowing film crew, and unknowning mobs.

Lots of speaking in tongues, falling over backwards, convulsing on the floor, squeezed-eyed fervent sweating, hail hosannas, pass the money-sack, and all the rest of it.

It won an Academy Award for best documentary in 1972, but was never shown in the bible belt and fell into obscurity soon after. It was re-released on DVD recently.

A fascinating story, if verging on the frankly voyeuristic.

Zamboni

Galvasean wrote: »

Interesting I was at a comedy clunb last night and one of the comics was doing material on religion, he stopped at one point and said, "Everybody here is an atheist right"? A couple of people said "Yeah". He then said "So is everybody else religious?" No response at all.. until some drunk old guy in the back piped up yelling "Me, I'm an atheist and I'm fed up pretending to be Catholic". He got a small round of applause. The comic then urged people to speak out and started pointing at sections of the audience asking them what they are. Most people said atheist or "Don't know".

Not really sure where im going with this, just seemed kind of interesting.

A lot of comedians are Atheist. O'Briain, Connolly, Byrne, Gervais... I think there is an interesting correlation there to be found between the way comedians look at the world and atheism.
Lets face it good comedy stems from critical observance of the human condition.
On topic though, yeah I would say it must be cool for teenagers to be atheist. I know when I was a teenager atheim was right at the cuff of outright disobedience in school except that I has some sound teachers.

Galvasean

When I was in school (5 years ago) it was still relatively taboo to be an 'out' atheist. Usually if you said so you'd have to explain to people why ("How can you not believe in ANY kind of God?") which I wasn't bothered doing every couple of days. It was much easier to be an 'agnostic', although looking back that just makes you look like a fence sitter.

Shacklebolt

Galvasean wrote: »

When I was in school (5 years ago) it was still relatively taboo to be an 'out' atheist. Usually if you said so you'd have to explain to people why ("How can you not believe in ANY kind of God?") which I wasn't bothered doing every couple of days. It was much easier to be an 'agnostic', although looking back that just makes you look like a fence sitter.

I remember telling my classmates shortly before my confirmation that I didnt believe in God and they were absolutely shocked-the idea that there was no such being had never crossed there minds at all even for a second. Most of them are the same today even though they arent religous at all they cant conceive God not existing.

Skadi

t-ha wrote: »

Unfortunately most people are lazy. They become theists because they're told to/their families are, without researching the background of their religion, seeing where it came from (which often highlights its ridiculousness) and so on. Many people will vehemently defend their religion without knowing almost anything about it. The same laziness may well cause people to switch over to atheism without properly researching why they should be. If the OP's assertion that alot of people are becoming ill-informed atheists is true, it's possible that they might be noting that alot of people who have researched it have become atheist and so that's good enough for them? In short, alot of people in my opinion (despite their objections when questioned) display sheep-type following mentalities.

Normally that's fine, but in the case of atheism I would find it a little disturbing since I tend to put atheism and scientific/rational thinking in the same box together, and would like to think that people who become atheists would also embrace the methods of thinking that require evidence-based conclusions and logical thought.

Couldn't agree more with you. I always find it interesting that many atheists are just as adamant as christian that you are not thinking clearly or logically in order to be able to accept their views. As for me I probably have forged my own beliefs but tend to think of myself as agnostic.

And I don't understand the idea that a religious person must be able to prove there is a god, while the atheist feels he/she needs no hard evidence to prove there is no god.

velocirafter

robindch wrote: »

Speaking of which, the 1972 documentary Marjoe showed up in alt.binaries.documentaries and alt.binaries.multimedia.documentaries newsfroups last Sunday, and I watched the first twenty minutes of it last night. Scary stuff. It's about a kid named Marjoe Gortner whose parents made him into a revivalist, evangelical preacher at the age of four and who, just before hanging up his preaching hat and coming out as an atheist, invited a film crew around the place with him, gave them the lowdown on how the business of evangelism operated, then went out and did it for real in front of the cameras and the knowing film crew, and unknowning mobs.

downloaded and watched it there, its pretty good definitely worth a watch, i wonder what he does now?

Húrin

Galvasean wrote: »

Interesting I was at a comedy clunb last night and one of the comics was doing material on religion, he stopped at one point and said, "Everybody here is an atheist right"? A couple of people said "Yeah". He then said "So is everybody else religious?" No response at all.. until some drunk old guy in the back piped up yelling "Me, I'm an atheist and I'm fed up pretending to be Catholic". He got a small round of applause. The comic then urged people to speak out and started pointing at sections of the audience asking them what they are. Most people said atheist or "Don't know".

Not really sure where im going with this, just seemed kind of interesting.

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

I think most Atheists are atheist in a state of being and not in a state of mind.

It isn't really that difficult to come to an acceptance that the gods of your parents and grandparents don't exist.

That's because our culture is in a very odd place where most people quietly claim to be religious (in surveys) but to actually admit it in public is to invite ridicule.

People have not abandoned God intellectually, but at the same time, believing in God has become unbelievable - as professed by Neitzsche.

Wacker

Skadi wrote: »

And I don't understand the idea that a religious person must be able to prove there is a god, while the atheist feels he/she needs no hard evidence to prove there is no god.

Well, to give a reallybrief answer (as my eyelids are getting heavy), it is impossible to disprove the existence of anything at all. One's default position should therefor be that things don't exist until proven otherwise.
The position I jusdescribed would be open to attack, as I did not sufficiently elaborate. I'm tired!

Húrin

Wacker wrote: »

Well, to give a reallybrief answer (as my eyelids are getting heavy), it is impossible to disprove the existence of anything at all. One's default position should therefor be that things don't exist until proven otherwise.
The position I jusdescribed would be open to attack, as I did not sufficiently elaborate. I'm tired!

Scientists disprove hypotheses all the time, but they do not often prove them.

velocirafter

I think what whacker is trying to say is that you cant just believe everything by default. Its back to the old celestial tea-pot argument. Until someone can prove a deity's existence then there should be no reason to believe it exists

Húrin

Húrin wrote: »

Scientists disprove hypotheses all the time, but they do not often prove them.

I doubt there have been many proven hypotheses. All hypotheses are taken to be true as there is experimental evidence to suggest so, and nothing contradicts there assumptions. The second something contradicts the hypotheses, the hypothese is no longer valid.

Demanding an atheist to prove there is no God is ridiculous. The onus is on the person who assumes something is true to prove it. An atheist doesn't have to disprove someone elses assumptions. If things worked like that, people could believe in anything they liked, and get away with calling it true.

Dades

Skadi wrote:

And I don't understand the idea that a religious person must be able to prove there is a god, while the atheist feels he/she needs no hard evidence to prove there is no god.

There is certainly circumstantial evidence that there is no God.

It's similar to the circumstantial evidence that a cleaner did not come and clean my house while I was at work. I can't prove they weren't there, but nothing about the house would indicate they were.

seanybiker

Ah i remember the old school days. The lads where atheists because mass was boring. There was also a load of lads who loved the IRA but could never give any reason why apart from , sure the english are fookers boy. Used to bust meself laughing at it. Ah memories.

robindch

velocirafter wrote: »

downloaded and watched it there, its pretty good definitely worth a watch, i wonder what he does now?

His wiki page says that he "sponsors charity golf tournaments and other events, as well as working as a public speaker." which sounds a reasonable enough career path. From the bit of the film I watched, I must say that he came across as an articulate and decent guy, completely camp, but going on stage, it was Jekyll and Hyde.

There's a great bit around ten minutes in, a perfect high-speed, pious texas riff:

Marjoe wrote:

For ten years, you know, I was a heroin addict, a pill dropper and LSD tripper, high rising and low sliding, busting heads and dropping reds, kicking in doors and banging whores, setting fires and slashing tires. Then I met a man who was hung-up for my hangups.

After which he enjoins the film crew to be like him and avoid shagging the christian groupies.

Weirdly enjoyable.

Húrin

Dades wrote: »

There is certainly circumstantial evidence that there is no God.

There is also circumstantial evidence that there is a God.

Húrin

Húrin wrote: »

There is also circumstantial evidence that there is a God.

From reading a few of your posts, do you just contradict what people say, just to cause a debate?

Húrin

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

I doubt there have been many proven hypotheses.

Indeed, I wanted to say that none had been proven, but plenty had been disproven, but then someone might think of one that had been.

Húrin

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

From reading a few of your posts, do you just contradict what people say, just to cause a debate?

No. If you look through my posts (hover mouse cursor over my name and click "find more posts by Húrin") you will see that I have plenty of much more explanatory posts.

However, it is a rather dishonest and one-sided cliche to say that there's no evidence for the existence of God. Most people who say it do not even recognise how one-sided it is, rather, assuming that it is agreed fact, and that blind faith is all that theists have.

Húrin

Húrin wrote: »

No. If you look through my posts (hover mouse cursor over my name and click "find more posts by Húrin") you will see that I have plenty of much more explanatory posts.

However, it is a rather dishonest and one-sided cliche to say that there's no evidence for the existence of God. Most people who say it do not even recognise how one-sided it is, rather, assuming that it is agreed fact, and that blind faith is all that theists have.

Oh I don't doubt that you have, I've just seen a few this morning that looked like they you were just trying to provoke an argument. But there's nothing wrong with that:pac:

Well I don't believe that there as any evidence for the existance of God. There are things which can't be explained, things which will perhaps never have an explanation, but there is nothing that I've personally seen that explicity implies there is a God. If you, or anybody else, can show me something that explicitly implies there is a God, something that could not be explained in any other way, then I'll count that as evidence. Until then, my stance is that there is none.

velocirafter

Húrin wrote: »

However, it is a rather dishonest and one-sided cliche to say that there's no evidence for the existence of God. Most people who say it do not even recognise how one-sided it is, rather, assuming that it is agreed fact, and that blind faith is all that theists have.

well there is some evidence but its pretty thin on the ground. Religious text are the main one and they are pretty easy to discredit. Other than its all personal accounts that cant be substantiated and anecdotal evidence, which isn't evidence its an anecdote. Is there something else major that I'm not thinking of?