Is Atheist becoming just an other religion?

General discussions
happynewyear
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:45 pm

Re: Is Atheist becoming just an other religion?

Post by happynewyear » Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:48 am

You'll never hear an atheist say those words. Because we haven't got any beliefs to be called into question or offended about.

J[/quote]

Inedifix,

Good to know that you still believe that you are an Atheist.
You had me worried for a second.
inedifix
Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:57 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Is Atheist becoming just an other religion?

Post by inedifix » Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:52 am

happynewyear wrote:Inedifix,

Good to know that you still believe that you are an Atheist.
You had me worried for a second.
Erm... but I don't 'believe' I'm an atheist.

I just am one.

J
“What we call chaos is just patterns we haven't recognized. What we call random is just patterns we can't decipher. What we can't understand we call nonsense. There is no free will. There are no variables. There is only the inevitable.” Chuck Palahniuk
happynewyear
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:45 pm

Re: Is Atheist becoming just an other religion?

Post by happynewyear » Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:00 am

inedifix wrote:
happynewyear wrote:What I am simply saying is that a belief in God(Goddess/gods etc) and a belief in no God(Goddess/gods) is still a belief.
We know what you're saying.


I just am one

You could have fooled me :(
inedifix
Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:57 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Is Atheist becoming just an other religion?

Post by inedifix » Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:12 am

happynewyear wrote:You could have fooled me :(
Sorry. Don't understand any of that last post. What do you mean?

J
“What we call chaos is just patterns we haven't recognized. What we call random is just patterns we can't decipher. What we can't understand we call nonsense. There is no free will. There are no variables. There is only the inevitable.” Chuck Palahniuk
anadub25
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:11 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Is Atheist becoming just an other religion?

Post by anadub25 » Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:58 am

Whether it is a religion doesn't really make sense via the definition of religion but whether the 'new atheists' have inclined towards a kind of fundamentalism is a topic which Dawkins and Grayling debates recently, its on youtube if you're interested.

I do think its important to maintain a position whereby we can think critically about our own organisation.
"Religion is comparable to a childhood neurosis."

- Sigmund Freud -
Logorrhea
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:26 pm

Re: Is Atheist becoming just an other religion?

Post by Logorrhea » Thu Jan 21, 2010 11:00 am

anadub25 wrote:I do think its important to maintain a position whereby we can think critically about our own organisation.
Eh ............... what organisation?
"Being correct is what makes me correct"

Atheist.ie member
bipedalhumanoid
Posts: 2675
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 1:55 pm

Re: Is Atheist becoming just an other religion?

Post by bipedalhumanoid » Thu Jan 21, 2010 11:16 am

Logorrhea wrote:
anadub25 wrote:I do think its important to maintain a position whereby we can think critically about our own organisation.
Eh ............... what organisation?
That would be Atheist Ireland.
"The fact of your own existence is the most astonishing fact you will ever have to face. Don’t you ever get used to it." - Richard Dawkins... being shrill and offensive again I suppose.
nozzferrahhtoo
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1140
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:17 am

Re: Is Atheist becoming just an other religion?

Post by nozzferrahhtoo » Thu Jan 21, 2010 11:28 am

HappyNewYear,

I think your issue here is in thinking that the vast majority here hold some belief that there is no god. This is simply something we can not know. It is only theists that think that we are somehow admonished to hold a firm stand on it either way. However if we were required to hold a firm stand on any pointless notion that pops into someone’s head, our minds would be so chock full of things that we would likely go insane.

Atheism is not a word we give ourselves. It is essentially just a word that was invented by one group to identify another as “Not one of us”. After all if you joined a golf club you wouldn’t go around calling tennis players or couch potatoes “Agolfists”.

Remember a-theism just means “Without” a theism. We simply do not have a theist view of the world here. That is all.

The vast majority of people here merely see the idea of god as being one that is easily dismissed and one which we can and should proceed without. We have no problem with other people believing it of course. However Atheist Ireland exists to counter areas in the social and political sphere which require not that they believe it, but that we believe it too.

Given there is no evidence for this entity being offered, nor have you offered any either I note (nor do I expect you to be capable of it to be honest), we merely dismiss the idea and proceed without it.

You could invent any old notion today, such as Elvis is still alive and lives in Turkey, and provide NO evidence for this idea whatsoever. You could then define us, who do not believe your idea, as A-elvis-lives-ists if you like. It does not mean we have to provide evidence that he is actually dead or that we are required to think he is or is not either way. We merely dismiss your idea wholesale as it comes devoid of any evidence whatsoever. We simply proceed without it until such time as you can give a reason to grant it credence.

In short: An idea presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

If, however, you find yourself willing to deign to present some actual reasons to think this entity actually exists, this would be entirely different.
funkyderek
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 373
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Contact:

Re: Is Atheist becoming just an other religion?

Post by funkyderek » Thu Jan 21, 2010 11:51 am

happynewyear:

A pity you didn't respond substantially to any of the responses to your post. A productive discussion could have ensued. But never mind. I'll try again.
What I am simply saying is that a belief in God(Goddess/gods etc) and a belief in no God(Goddess/gods) is still a belief.
Why? Is it possible to not believe in God but also not believe in no God? If not, why not?
Even if it were true that someone must hold one of these two beliefs, does that make them in any way equivalent? Is the belief that every other person on the planet is controlled by a little green alien in their head equivalent to the belief that this is not the case?
The existence or non existence of God is unprovable.
Why? Is either belief provable in principle? God could make himself manifest, no? Many (most?) believers would argue that there is proof for his existence. While it's probably impossible to disprove the existence of anything that could be called a god, it's certainly possible to disprove the existence of certain categories of god. For example, an honest god who created the universe 6,012 years ago cannot exist as multiple lines of irrefutable evidence show the universe to be far older. Similarly, an omniscient omnibenevolent god cannot exist given the existence of evil and of natural disasters. Gods who don't interfere or occasionally appear in potato chips are of course more difficult to disprove.
God exists as a pyshic reality for some people and not for others.
What does that mean, other than that some people believe in God and others don't?
But the similarities between atheists and theists are stickingly obvious.
Like what? I would agree that people are generally very similar despite their very different beliefs. There are funny atheists and funny Christians. There are greedy agnostics and greedy Muslims. There are hairy communists and hairy Buddhists. But what exactly are the similarities between theism and it's opposite? And what does "stickingly" mean?
The difference(which is really another similarity) is the lack of understanding.
Methinks you may be projecting.
There are literal Christians,Muslims and atheists and fundamentalists as well as liberists in all these groups.
I can accept that there are Christians who believe that God made heaven and Earth in six days and there are those who think Genesis is allegorical, that there are Muslims who believe adulterous women should be stoned and those who believe that such behaviour belongs to a different time and place, but what exactly is the difference between a literal and "liberist" (liberal perhaps?) atheist. The first doesn't believe there are any gods, no problem there. But the second? Does he believe that the non-existence of gods is only true in an allegorical sense?
My intent is not to create barriers but to bring people together.
A noble intent, but may I suggest that arriving on a forum, insulting its members and then ignoring their responses is not the best way to go about this.
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead

Image

Image Image Image Image
Rev j.jones
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 4:00 pm

Re: Is Atheist becoming just an other religion?

Post by Rev j.jones » Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:45 pm

a belief in something that could be wrong is different to a belief in something that is definetly right.

We all believe in the chairs we are sitting in and this belief will not reasonably be challanged.

When a person states that they believe in a god they should expect to be challanged because their belief in a god requires faith that the impossible has occured.

an all loving, all powerfull, all knowing God is impossible
untill proof that the impossible has occured is supplied it is reasonable to believe

that the impossible is indeed impossible, and that this is definetly right and requires no faith.



a theists belief in their divine entity requires faith an atheist rejection a theists belief in a divine entity is only possible in terms of the theists belief. I cannot demonstrate my reasons for rejection of a theisim without engageing the theisim.

we have all seen Theists using this engagement to validate a belief systems before, it is tired it is misleading an it is immoral and it does not serve to advance human understanding it only serves to hinder it which has of course always been the refuge of theists as they understand theisims cannot be preserved they can only be prolonged this has been demonstrated time and time again down through the ages.

Its like saying a bomb victim is as bad as the bomber because the bomb victim exploded aswell.
"The Meek a'int gonna inherit shit"
"I've got a hell of a lot of weapons to fight! I got my claws, I got cutlasses, I got guns, I got dynamite, I got a hell of a lot of fight! I will fight!" Rev Jones cured religion for 950 americans.
Post Reply