| emailestthoume |
| Posted 08/10/12 at 12:18 AM | Reply with quote #1 |
|
I thought the title of this post would be more epic with caps  Anyway, we will probably all accept that words only signify things… sort of as signs are pointers to things rather than the things themselves. For example, my name is not Bob, but if everyone starts calling me Bob, I do not change one bit. Likewise, if we measure something in centimeters and measure the same thing in inches, the measurement is equivalent no matter what we call it.
So really, if we call someone an atheist, a weak-agnostic, or a agnostic, it only changes the title with which we label them, and not what they believe or do not believe.
And so, to the people who self-identify as atheists, I would like to say that defining atheism as lacking belief, and yourself as an atheist, is only to give yourself a nice pretty title. In reality, we all know there is much more to you than lacking a belief in God.
If you only lacked a belief about God, your lack of belief in itself would not motivate you to vigoursly debate God and Christianity as if it were the devil incarnate… or perhaps some lower demon… even a little mouse-demon… you would do something else.
In reality, you believe lots of things about God, and dressing yourself up with a nice title will not shield you from the glaringly obvious actions you take against Christianity and other faiths. Not that I am whining about this… just doing some calling dudes out. |
| Loading... | |
| CrashTestAuto |
| Posted 08/10/12 at 04:13 AM | Reply with quote #2 |
|
Lacking belief in God = no motivation.
Lacking belief in God + people who believe in God having a powerful political influence over your life = motivation.
Also, this goes both ways. Theists calling people agnostics when they don't self-identify with the term doesn't do anything but cause confusion. If someone tells you they lack belief, why not accept it and engage with them on that? |
| Loading... | |
| Ivaj |
| Posted 08/10/12 at 05:03 AM | Reply with quote #3 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by emailestthoume
If you only lacked a belief about God, your lack of belief in itself would not motivate you to vigoursly debate God and Christianity as if it were the devil incarnate… or perhaps some lower demon… even a little mouse-demon… you would do something else.
If people are using their religion to cause great harm only the chance that it isn't true is motivation enough to raise opposition. |
| Loading... | |
| Noraaron |
| Posted 08/10/12 at 08:10 AM | Reply with quote #4 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by emailestthoume
Likewise, if we measure something in centimeters and measure the same thing in inches, the measurement is equivalent no matter what we call it.
Being a metric man myself, i lack belief in anything "Imperial"
Imperial is stupid and people who believe in it are so backwards and 15th century.
I mean the units of measurement dont even stack up with each other like under my metric belief...well i dont believe in metric...i simply reject imperial and lack a belief in imperial, but it is stupid anyway.
And i have no obligation to show why metric is better than imperial either, as imperial was first, they have to show why it is so great. idiots.
Anyone know what this 16" on my car wheel? i cant make sense of it?
|
| Loading... | |
| emailestthoume |
| Posted 08/10/12 at 08:47 AM | Reply with quote #5 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by CrashTestAuto
Lacking belief in God = no motivation.
Lacking belief in God + people who believe in God having a powerful political influence over your life = motivation.
Also, this goes both ways. Theists calling people agnostics when they don't self-identify with the term doesn't do anything but cause confusion. If someone tells you they lack belief, why not accept it and engage with them on that?
I'm just not buying that you guys have no beliefs about the existence of God. We both know you do. It seems to me to simply be a way to evade any burden of proof (or burden of having justified reasons for what you believe) for your own atheism so that it may be justified by faith alone. And the point of the post was to say that whatever you call yourself is just like placing a sign that points at yourself. No matter what the title, the sign still points at the same thing, and it is evident that it is pointing at a group of people with strong views on the existence of God. |
| Loading... | |
| jonahbear |
| Posted 08/11/12 at 01:31 PM | Reply with quote #6 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by emailestthoumeQuote: Originally Posted by CrashTestAuto
Lacking belief in God = no motivation.
Lacking belief in God + people who believe in God having a powerful political influence over your life = motivation.
Also, this goes both ways. Theists calling people agnostics when they don't self-identify with the term doesn't do anything but cause confusion. If someone tells you they lack belief, why not accept it and engage with them on that? After over a decade on forums such as this, I am still baffled at the lengths that some atheists/agnostics, etc. will go to in order to define their unbelief. It is unparallelled and very strange. I have started threads similar to this in the past and, as a rule, receive the same response that we see above; namely "God belief of others influences my life, ergo, I object to it". Let us grant this for a moment (God belief of others influence my life). If that is the case, then why is it that God belief seems to always contradict your own lifestyle? We can see this happening in some cases where worldviews conflict but it is pretty much unanimous that the atheist finds the social/moral structure of God belief objectionable. If it is a mere passive disbelief of a flying spaghetti monster, you would think that there would be some symmetry on social or moral issues but this does not seem to be the case. In that event, there is obviously something more than passive disbelief going on. Vocal atheism is an opposing worldview that not only disbelieves but passionately objects to Christian theism. Many new atheists will readily admit this but it has taken a long time to get this honesty out there. Quote: I'm just not buying that you guys have no beliefs about the existence of God. We both know you do. It seems to me to simply be a way to evade any burden of proof (or burden of having justified reasons for what you believe) for your own atheism so that it may be justified by faith alone. And the point of the post was to say that whatever you call yourself is just like placing a sign that points at yourself. No matter what the title, the sign still points at the same thing, and it is evident that it is pointing at a group of people with strong views on the existence of God. Yes, this is blatantly obvious and I think that there are more atheists coming out of the closet on this. I have noticed a trend where some atheists are calling out others on their "lack of belief" definition saying that it is disingenuous. I would expect that this line of reasoning (lack of belief) will end up on the shelf of fallacious arguments soon. |
| Loading... | |
| CrashTestAuto |
| Posted 08/11/12 at 02:41 PM | Reply with quote #7 |
|
We spend so much time having to define it because of threads like this. I'm not even a weak atheist and I find them annoying. If people who believed in Santa were basing political opinions on this belief, then I'd have issue with that. If a person couldn't attain a political position because they didn't believe in Santa then I'd have issue with it.
The fact that you don't understand why people who lack belief in God would get annoyed at the idea of restrictions on who could get married, or what their children were taught in schools, or whatever else based on belief in God seems to indicate a lack of empathy. The whole 'lack of belief' thing stems from theists trying to place the burden of proof on atheists in the first place. You never have to defend a lack of belief in something unless it is something so blindingly obvious as to be irrefutable. God, as an invisible, silent, undetectable, and apparently ineffectual being, does not qualify. |
| Loading... | |
| jonahbear |
| Posted 08/11/12 at 03:12 PM | Reply with quote #8 |
|
Quote: We spend so much time having to define it because of threads like this. I'm not even a weak atheist and I find them annoying. If people who believed in Santa were basing political opinions on this belief, then I'd have issue with that. If a person couldn't attain a political position because they didn't believe in Santa then I'd have issue with it.
Snippet from my post above:
Quote: Let us grant this for a moment (God belief of others influence my life). If that is the case, then why is it that God belief seems to always contradict your own lifestyle? We can see this happening in some cases where worldviews conflict but it is pretty much unanimous that the atheist finds the social/moral structure of God belief objectionable. If it is a mere passive disbelief of a flying spaghetti monster, you would think that there would be some symmetry on social or moral issues but this does not seem to be the case. In that event, there is obviously something more than passive disbelief going on. Vocal atheism is an opposing worldview that not only disbelieves but passionately objects to Christian theism. Many new atheists will readily admit this but it has taken a long time to get this honesty out there.
Essentially, why such a hard polarity between the 2 positions if one is really a...well...non-position?
|
| Loading... | |
| CrashTestAuto |
| Posted 08/11/12 at 04:42 PM | Reply with quote #9 |
|
There is symmetry. Plenty of atheists oppose gay marriage, they're called homophobes. Plenty of atheists object to abortion, they have pretty good reasons for it. Almost all atheists object to murder, and theft, and even respecting one's parents (though less with the stoning of people who don't).
Unless you're talking about the morality of giving to churches, and praying, and not using God's name in vain, I don't see what you're getting at. |
| Loading... | |
| Archsage |
| Posted 08/12/12 at 12:15 AM | Reply with quote #10 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by CrashTestAuto
If someone tells you they lack belief, why not accept it and engage with them on that?
Very good point, Crash.
Which is why I've been proposing that we deal with the issue on a person-by-person basis. All we need to do is the examine the individual's mindset to see what premises that it does and does not contain. From there we can assess the practicality of their theological stance, be it strong or weak, atheist or theist, "gnostic" or agnostic, etc..
Quote: Originally Posted by CrashTestAuto
Plenty of atheists oppose gay marriage, they're called homophobes.
This is an off-topic aside but, that term "homophobe" is not only denotatively erroneous but is intentionally inflammatory and derogatory. Let's refrain from using that term here? |
| Loading... | |
| jonahbear |
| Posted 08/13/12 at 07:58 PM | Reply with quote #11 |
|
Quote: There is symmetry. Plenty of atheists oppose gay marriage, they're called homophobes.
Hey there strawman! 
I would be interested to hear how many atheists on this forum oppose gay marriage or abortion. Perhaps they could chime in here so any false notion I have is dispelled. I used to post on a forum a few years back and there was a proudly gay atheist who opposed abortion vehemently. He was the only chap that I have encountered from this camp on the internet. However, it is possible that there are some silent atheists on this matter. Would be interested in hearing from them.
Quote: Almost all atheists object to murder, and theft, and even respecting one's parents (though less with the stoning of people who don't).
Sure, there is some symmetry but the bottom line is that most vocal atheists object to the overall morality in Christianity which is why they want anything to do with the belief kept out of the social scene. They find it offensive. Am I wrong about this?
Quote: Unless you're talking about the morality of giving to churches, and praying, and not using God's name in vain, I don't see what you're getting at.
As mentioned above, the desire to keep faith in its corner (or behind closed doors) is because there is an overall objection to the worldview it proposes.
Do you disagree that there is a hard polarity between Christianity and atheism? To me, it seems very obvious. |
| Loading... | |
| KeithS |
| Posted 08/14/12 at 08:43 AM | Reply with quote #12 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by CrashTestAuto
Lacking belief in God = no motivation.
Lacking belief in God + people who believe in God having a powerful political influence over your life = motivation.
Crash, would you mind terribly describing what the political influence believers in God have that causes this concern? I'm not meaning to politicize this debate, and I'm not even asking about you personally. I'd just like to understand where you think the specific points of disagreement comes from. As an apologist, I'd find this information interesting.
I have heard plenty from the late Christopher Hitchens and Peter7, but wrongs of the past are not what I'm interested in. I'm more interested in current views and in understanding why believers in God, or more specifically Christians, are seen as the embodiment of the opposition. |
| Loading... | |
| KeithS |
| Posted 08/14/12 at 09:03 AM | Reply with quote #13 |
|
Quote: Quote: Originally Posted by CrashTestAuto
Plenty of atheists oppose gay marriage, they're called homophobes.
This is an off-topic aside but, that term "homophobe" is not only denotatively erroneous but is intentionally inflammatory and derogatory. Let's refrain from using that term here?
This term is one of those I refer to when I call people out for making negative stereotypes. It is a clearly pejorative term and its use is commonly offered, very hypocritically, by people who favor the cause of tolerance. The term is seriously dysfunctional to the cause: a hand of friendship is rarely accepted while offering jabs from a stick with the other.
|
| Loading... | |
| GRWelsh |
| Posted 08/14/12 at 10:09 AM | Reply with quote #14 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by emailestthoume
I'm just not buying that you guys have no beliefs about the existence of God. We both know you do. It seems to me to simply be a way to evade any burden of proof <snip>
If someone doesn't have a positive belief in God, then that person is an atheist -- it can range from not having an opinion on the subject all the way to being positive God doesn't exist. It's a range. Atheism is just theism with the negating 'a' in front of it, which can just as easily denote 'lack of' or 'not' theism as easily as the theist's preferred definition of "the belief that God doesn't exist." Is this really that difficult to get?
It's not just atheists that spend so much time on the definition of atheism -- it is theists that do this as well, and your OP is just one example. If theists didn't keep insisting things such as "atheists need to prove atheism" and give positive arguments in support of atheism, and that atheism is worldview, etc. then atheists probably wouldn't spend so much time clarifying their position.
I agree with you that it is an absurd tangent for us to spend so much time on, but I think it is absurd for a different reason. If you think of someone claiming the existence of any fantastic thing other than your own God and you ask them to prove it's true and provide the evidence -- imagine them responding by saying, "Well, prove it doesn't exist! What's your evidence?" That just seems strident and defensive, doesn't it? You might be taken aback. After all, you might not necessarily be committed to debunking their claim, you might just be trying to evaluate the other person's reasons and evidence.
That's kind of how I look at my own position as an atheist. I'm not committed to proving God doesn't exist. I'm not certain He doesn't exist. I'd like to think I'm open-minded enough to consider evidence. It's just that right now, from where I'm standing, the evidence looks quite questionable. I'm not convinced. |
| Loading... | |
| stephenmills1000 |
| Posted 08/14/12 at 10:47 AM | Reply with quote #15 |
|
This idea of "burden of proof" and being "committed to providing positive proof" is being overblown. Surely the atheist has reasons for not believing.
GR, you cite: Quote: the evidence looks quite questionable
But do I believe the atheists' reasons and/or arguments are necessarily good or convincing? No. But that's me. So at worst, I feel your reasons justify your belief, I just don't think they're very convincing; I imagine atheists share this sentiment about theists as well generally.
So if I ever claim you have a "burden of proof," it means I want to know why you believe something. Atheism is a belief, a position making an assertion, with reasons behind it. I don't buy any atheist here or anywhere has no reason for not believing in God whatsoever.
Similarly, what can't anyone claim "a-atheism"- lack of belief that God does not exist? Of course this is absurd, for they would have reasons for believing that, too. |
| Loading... | |
