I cringe more when someone says they're an Atheist

Schuhart

the_syco wrote: »

Prefer the term "pagan" myself.

Already taken.

"Heathen" might have potential, but does not seem to exclude theists.

Zillah

Húrin wrote: »

Why would you demand that someone else to agree with you that faeries exist?

Er, this is assuming we're having a discussion on who is correct. Y'know, along the lines of "I think God exists because x y and z" and "No x y and z are flawed for this reason".

Atheists generally believe that there is no God, due to lack of perceived sensual evidence.

Perceived sensual evidence lol. 'Lack of evidence' is a far less clumsy and...well wrong way of phrasing it.

In other words, that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

You're falling for a couple of different fallacies here. First of all, yes, absence of evidence is evidence of absence. It's not proof of absence, but it's a damn good reason for a rational person to remain extremely sceptical.

The position of denying that such higher knowledge is either way possible is commonly known as Agnosticism, not atheism.

In a strict philosophical sense we should all be agnostic about absolutely everything. I could be a brain in a jar having a false reality fed to me for all I know. But when we accept certain basic propositions such as "The world can be known" and "Logic and evidence are good means by which to understand the world" we must conclude that claims as to the existence of God should be dismissed until evidence is presented, just as we would dismiss any one of the infinite amount of evidence-less claims that can, and frequently are, made.

I feel that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is getting a little tired at this stage but I'm afraid I have to trot him out again. There is no evidence for his existence, this is a very good reason to dismiss claims as to his existence until evidence is presented. You can manage to apply this logic to such examples, but Jehovah gets a Get Out of Jail Free Card because you have faith. It'd be sweet if you could just admit that instead of pretending you're taking a rational position.

Flamed Diving

Schuhart wrote: »

These are not light things to contend, but I think we've a tendency to step around them.You'll notice I said "recently popular". Indeed, atheism has been around for ages. The Bible wouldn't say 'the fool says in his heart that there is no god' unless there were folk saying 'there is no god'. However, despite atheism existing as a concept, theism thrived instead. That's, to my mind, the point of interest. Presented with an alternative, people got behind theism.

Given how little humanity understood of the natural world at the time, that is hardly surprising, is it? I mean, people didn't even have the telescopes necessary to check for their magic sky-friend. Let alone the volume of knowledge we now have about our world and universe. Perhaps that is why Atheism is, as you say, becoming recently popular. It would appear that there is an inverse relationship between human knowledge and belief in god/s.

Dades

Schuhart wrote: »

It sort of struck me again reading that Humanist Association advert about there being 250,000 non-believers in Ireland. Presumably that means there's 3,750,000 who believe in some kind of a deity.

I assume the HAI had their hands tied on the stats by the last census - which I'd strongly contend underestimates the number of non-believers. Think of any poll on After Hours about religion - and then think of how many of their mammys filled in their details on the census form!

Húrin wrote: »

Atheists generally believe that there is no God, due to lack of perceived sensual evidence. In other words, that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. The position of denying that such higher knowledge is either way possible is commonly known as Agnosticism, not atheism.

Might I suggest you have a look at this thread. Atheism and agnosticism are not two sides to a coin. Belief and knowledge are not the same thing.

Suggesting the absence of evidence is being seen by atheists as "evidence" itself is just a verbal trick. In reality there's simply no reason to believe something exists if no evidence exists. You need evidence to believe something, not to not believe it.

hobochris

I just tell people who ask that im open to the concept of religon providing it can be proved by facts.

Goduznt Xzst

Húrin wrote: »

"Actual truth" - what a rickety ship that one is!

You're a curious character. On one hand you expose a sense of nihilistic gray, yet on the other, you believe the Christian God exists and the tales of the bible and the dogmas it contains should be followed. Explain this dichotomy please. Is it a case that you are really a nihilist at heart but are falling back on good ol' Pascal's wager to hedge your bets?

stevejazzx

Húrin wrote: »

The position of denying that such higher knowledge is either way possible is commonly known as Agnosticism, not atheism.

I don't agree. This 'higher knowledge' doesn't necessarily have to take the form of a God, biblical or even 'other worldly'. In that sense anti theism or atheism holds as a valid description of ones belief. The open ended speculation that their may exist somewhere a higher knowledge hardly contradicts a simple term used to describe ones outlook on charted deities. Take Dawkins for example, he's a confirmed atheist who frequently speculates that there may well be intelligent life elsewhere in the universe.
Also I tend to look at agnosticism as automatically leaning toward atheism unless expressly stated by the agnostic that he/she is trying to be religious but that they are having problems getting past certain concepts of the religious dogma at hand, whatever that may be.
The very act of doubting leads to questioning leads to the ruling out of certain answers. Answers like 'god did it' are the first to go and I think atheism is really only a way of someone describing what they are not prepared to accept as an answer.

Schuhart

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Given how little humanity understood of the natural world at the time, that is hardly surprising, is it? I mean, people didn't even have the telescopes necessary to check for their magic sky-friend. Let alone the volume of knowledge we now have about our world and universe. Perhaps that is why Atheism is, as you say, becoming recently popular. It would appear that there is an inverse relationship between human knowledge and belief in god/s.

That's a fair point. I mean, its really only since Darwin that we've had some kind of a decent explanation for the origin of the human species.

I think its far to say that advance in human knowledge actually changes the nature of religious belief. A few hundred years ago it probably was fair enough to say, "look, there's no reasonable alternative explanation for why all this stuff is here". It would probably also be possible to go through life without ever coming across any kind of reasonable alternative to whatever religious creation myth was to be found in your society.

But now religious belief really has to be a lifestyle choice. That, in and of itself, doesn't make religious faith right or wrong. But the 'faith of our fathers' cannot really exist any more. So, indeed, I think its a fair point that advances in knowledge is what makes atheism an accessible alternative.

Dades wrote: »

I assume the HAI had their hands tied on the stats by the last census - which I'd strongly contend underestimates the number of non-believers. Think of any poll on After Hours about religion - and then think of how many of their mammys filled in their details on the census form!

You could well be right, but I'm happy to accept such evidence as we have.

I mean, even the figure of 250,000 is significant. On the one hand, It's far more than (I expect) would have been the case fifty years ago, and maybe even thirty years ago.

On the other hand, the fact that the majority of census form-fillers are undeniably theist similarly alerts us that, even now, religion is tremendously popular.

Goduznt Xzst

Schuhart wrote: »

But now religious belief really has to be a lifestyle choice. That, in and of itself, doesn't make religious faith right or wrong. But the 'faith of our fathers' cannot really exist any more. So, indeed, I think its a fair point that advances in knowledge is what makes atheism an accessible alternative.You could well be right, but I'm happy to accept such evidence as we have.

I'd peg the internet as the single largest contributor to the increase in Atheism worldwide. It puts so much information and opinions readily at everyones fingertips. It makes it a lot easier for a questioning teen to break out of the religious bubble their parents have raised them in. I mean think back to the early 90's, how easy would it of been for a teenager to find a group of Atheists to pose questions to, what influences in their lives would of even got them to ask these questions?

gaynorvader

I always thought as follows, speaking on generalities and applying labels(which is never all that accurate):

Atheists: Religion is wrong and I'm right about them being wrong, there can be no such thing as a god. Agnostics take the easy way out/are too lazy to take one side or the other.

Agnostics: Man has no way of knowing whether religion is right or wrong, so let's get on with our lives.

Theists: God (or gods) exists and I know how he did it all because he told some people thousands of years ago and s/he wrote it all down. Therefore Atheists are wrong and Agnostics will go to hell.

Creationists: People living in the past were much smarter than we are now. They KNEW man, they knew....

Looking at this thread though, clearly these labels have been severely muddied since I drew these conclusions!:D

Soul Winner

achtungbarry wrote: »

Atheists must be the only group of people that are have a word to describe what they don't believe in. Weird really.

It's not as big a deal to not believe in fairies or unicorns as it is to not believe in God for some reason. If they (God and fairies etc) really are on a par with each other then why draw a distinction just for God? I don't believe in Santa but I don't consider myself an Asantaist.

ynotdu

guy jumps from a plane,his parachute and reserve parachute fail.

Repeatedly he screams "help me god,help me god"
nothing happens,as a last resort he pleads "help me allah,help me allah"

a non white hugh hand gently saves him and lowers
him to the ground,once he is back safely on terra firma he in elation exclaims "thank god"!

a hugh non white foot stomps on him!

as Bob dylan sang:did Judaes Iscariot have god on his side?

contemplating religion too much can be dangerous to one,s(mental) health

ynotdu

Hi fanny for some strange,perhaps supernatural reason? i received your email message before it was posted here: you said "What utter tosh,have I any evidence that studying religion can be bad for one,s mental health"

I sure have! for I studied religion!

ynotdu

show details 3:22 AM (1 hour ago) Reply
Hey if it was a p.m,it should have been said,if It was removed from the thread why was it?

Freedom of speech rocks!

Dear ynotdu,
Fanny Cradock has just replied to a thread you have subscribed to entitled - I cringe more when someone says they're an Atheist - in the Atheism & Agnosticism forum of boards.ie.

This thread is located at:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055536211&goto=newpost
Here is the message that has just been posted:
***************
What utter tosh! Have you any evidence to support the notion that too much contemplation of religion is bad for your health?
- Show quoted text -
***************

There may also be other replies, but you will not receive any more notifications until you visit the forum again.
All the best,
boards.ie
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unsubscription information:
To unsubscribe from this thread, please visit this page:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/subscription.php?do=removesubscription&type=thread&subscriptionid=2096052&auth=dbdcbc04173d1010a97ea02aed44e49e
To unsubscribe from ALL threads, please visit this page:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/subscription.php?do=viewsubscription&folderid=all

Zillah

ynotdu wrote: »

Freedom of speech rocks!

Hi! Welcome to boards.ie, where you have no free speech.

Tar.Aldarion

Pointless term imo, it entertains the question.
People do need terms for functional use though.

ynotdu

Zillah wrote: »

Hi! Welcome to boards.ie, where you have no free speech.

Dont mean I wanted his/her message to either be not posted or to be deleted!Who was it that did delete or decide not to post it?

I was accused of talking tosh(I,ve been acused of worse:))as(insults)go it was a mild one,certainly no major crime&nothing I could not have dealt with,who knows may,be i was talking tosh?I like to know when i am disagreed with,even if i dont like it.

I dont like strong offensive language on what is a discussion board though.

Dades

Fanny Cradock deleted his own message after writing it, as he obviously thought (correctly) it would a waste of time going down that road with you. Unfortunately he didn't reckon on the thread subscription email that had already e-mailed his response to you.

Anyhow, as the offending (hardly) post is now gone, let's all forget this ever happened, sober up, and move along.

actuallylike

Some people believe atheism is a belief in nothing, to me that's a bit too nihilistic and definite for me. To believe in nothing and not believe are very different things, therefore I declare myself a weak atheist, open to the possibility of something but not accepting towards whatever has been set forward.

ynotdu

Dades wrote: »

Fanny Cradock deleted his own message after writing it, as he obviously thought (correctly) it would a waste of time going down that road with you. Unfortunately he didn't reckon on the thread subscription email that had already e-mailed his response to you.

Anyhow, as the offending (hardly) post is now gone, let's all forget this ever happened, sober up, and move along.

Dades thanks for clearing that up,nice that you bothered to do so.

I dont know about fannyc but drink had nothing to do with it.

I genuinely believe trying to figure out the meaning of our existance too much can crack some people up.
cheers

Goduznt Xzst

ynotdu wrote: »

I genuinely believe trying to figure out the meaning of our existance too much can crack some people up.

define "too much"

Soul Winner wrote: »

I don't believe in Santa but I don't consider myself an Asantaist.

well thats because the majority accept it would be silly to believe in Santa. Sadly Santa only gives us things money can also which is why he is so easily kicked to the curb once we discover money and how to use it. Your God promises us things no amount of money can which is why he is still in such high demand.

If Santa promised people that when they died his final present to them would be eternal existence, you'd have plenty of reasons now to call yourself an Asantaist.

ynotdu

define too much?ok!
when the thought process on a topic becomes a source of distress to any individual.

Soul Winner

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

Your God promises us things no amount of money can which is why he is still in such high demand.

If Santa promised people that when they died his final present to them would be eternal existence, you'd have plenty of reasons now to call yourself an Asantaist.

But in order for God to promise things no amount of money can as you put it, then He must exist. Therefore if He exists to promise something then there is no valid basis for atheism. Because atheism is the belief that He doesn't exist or the non-belief in His existence, whichever one floats your boat, either way both are wrong if God exists.

stevejazzx

Soul Winner wrote: »

But in order for God to promise things no amount of money can as you put it, then He must exist.

2+2=?

sw wrote:

Therefore if He exists to promise something then there is no valid basis for atheism.

People say he exists. People recorded his promises and threats. Saying 'therefore he exists' because he is recorded as saying something is not proof, evidence or anything even approaching a logical progression.
By your way of thinking there is nothing to separate your God;s existence from the existence of any other sky god.

sw wrote:

Because atheism is the belief that He doesn't exist or the non-belief in His existence, whichever one floats your boat, either way both are wrong if God exists.

What on earth are you on about here, I'm sorry but I really do not follow?

Naz_st

Soul Winner wrote: »

Because atheism is the belief that He doesn't exist or the non-belief in His existence, whichever one floats your boat, either way both are wrong if God exists.

Wow, I think you're really on to something here:
"Atheism is wrong if God exists"

Stop the presses! "Fatal flaw found in Atheism!" Someone alert Richard Dawkins!

The power of your deductive reason is awe-inspiring... in fact it leaves me speechless.

Soul Winner

To Steevjazzx and Naz st. My post was in reply to Goduznt Xzst, so re-read it in the right context and it will make more sense. I think :pac:

Zillah

Dades wrote: »

Anyhow, as the offending (hardly) post is now gone, let's all forget this ever happened, sober up, and move along.

You can ask anything you want of me, except, if you ever ask me to sober up again you'll get a whiskey bottle to the head, just like all the others.

Fighting Irish

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

hmm... ok perhaps you could expand further on why you are of the opinion that someone calling themselves Atheist is cringe worthy. Is it connotations that you tie to people who would be confident enough to call themselves such?

I can't explain it, i don't believe in any type of religion but i still don't want to go around saying i'm an atheist, and its not because i care what people think. I don't know, its just one of them things

the_syco

stevejazzx wrote: »

2+2=?

13,541,564,654,564,151

So God must exist!

Kipperhell

Fighting Irish wrote: »

I can't explain it, i don't believe in any type of religion but i still don't want to go around saying i'm an atheist, and its not because i care what people think. I don't know, its just one of them things

You started fundamentally saying you care what people think as you don't like people to think of themselves as atheist. ;)It sounds like you have an ingrained belief and find it hard to let go because it is hard to go from believing you have a future after death to not having one. Effectively you are going to loose something you never had but thought you did.

A good way to look at it is in the Wizard of Oz never gave the Tin Man a heart or the Lion courage they always had it.

It really doesn't matter which is right or wrong just to move from one to the other is a hard transition.