Atheism

@layman,

What difference does that make? Whiner. The entire time you've been in this thread, you've been sneering at everyone else, using your puerile, playground sarcasm. Then you complain about how i speak to you. What a pathetic crybaby. Your phony remark about "low opinions" is meaningless. As is the case with your snide remarks about free thinkers, you just define your interlocutors in a manner convenient to your sneers and then jump up on your high horse. You're pathetic.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

http://www.acidpulse.net/images/smilies/apcopper.png

Blowhole.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Well, you have your opinions, and I have mine. I do realize that, for some, it is a virtual crime for another to have a different opinion than their own. That didn't seem to bother guys like Nietzsche, though:

Quote:

“The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.”

1 Reply

@layman,

Quote:

Another general observation I will share. A lot of people don't have a particularly high opinion of atheists, and that includes a lot of people who define themselves as "agnostic."

Hmmm.... The feeling is often requited. This is precisely why these discussions on what is an atheist vs an agnostic tend to draw blood, and why some posters are nervous about them and want to shut these discussions up. They are seen as divisive for the non-theist ranks.

E.g. I was told that Frank once left this board (to come back a few years later) precisely because of these debates. I am also new here.

In the end, it's about the agnostics deriding the atheists for believing in something (as if that was a crime) and the atheists deriding the agnostics for sitting on the fence (as if that was a crime). So after the "religious wars" between Catholics and Protestants, or between Shiite and Sunni, we now have the "non-religious wars" between atheists and agnostics... That'd be progress if it wasn't so repetitive. ;-)

2 Replies

@layman,

Oh yeah, you really understand and appreciate Nietzsche . . . ah-hahahahahahahahaha . . .

It's also hilarious to see you complain about someone else not valuing the opinions of others. You've done nothing but sneer at and insult everyone else in this thread who doesn't agree with you. Then you come out with that bullshit psychology of yours to explain why anyone would disagree with you, or hold a low opinion of you. As is have now said more than once, you are pathetic.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

This is precisely why these discussions on what is an atheist vs an agnostic tend to draw blood, and why some posters are nervous about them and want to shut these discussions up. They are seen as divisive for the non-theist ranks.

Yeah, I suspect there's some truth to that, Ollie. But of course that kinda presupposes that there is some actual "unity" to "divide." Many don't accept this premise. To repeat a post I made about 8 pages back, here's the way one website puts it:

Quote:

An atheist lacks faith in God, believes there is no god, or lacks awareness of gods. An agnostic either believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a god or is noncommittal on the issue. The difference may seem small, but atheism and agnosticism are actually vastly different worldviews. To claim there is no point in trying to prove or disprove God’s existence (as many philosophers have done) is to acknowledge the limits of human perception. To take the bold stance that there definitely is no god (as a few philosophers have done) implies that human perception is not so limited and that we can make such claims about the universe. These positions (as well as the position that God does exist) give rise to fundamentally ]disparate philosophies.

1 Reply

Olivier wrote:

we now have the "non-religious wars" between atheists and agnostics

You can't help coming up with some crap.

Where have you seen those wars?

1 Reply

As this thread is about atheists, but that term is routinely perverted for the rhetorical purposes of loud-mouthed bullies, who display little intelligence and less tolerance, the following is from Religious Tolerance dot org, just about the best broadly-based descriptive site for religions . . . and the lack of religion.

Quote:

Atheism is a difficult topic about which to write:

Some reasons are:

Most people, at least in the U.S., appear to define "Atheist" as a person who absolutely rejects the existence of a God.

Most Atheists appear to describe themselves as persons who have no knowledge of a God and/or a Goddess.

Some people define Atheism as a religion because it refers to beliefs concerning deities, humanity and the rest of the universe, and because most Atheists have developed a moral code to accompany their Atheism.

Others reject classification of Atheism as a religion because they tie the term "religion" to a belief in at least one deity.

People have used terms like strong Atheism, negative Atheism, soft Atheism, implicit Atheism, Apatheism, etc. to refer to sub-groups among Atheists.

Some consider Agnostics as being within the Atheism fold, because the former have no solid belief in the existence of God.

It is doubtful that the terminology involving the term Atheist will be clarified any time soon.

And . . .

Quote:

Among the general North American population, the most common meaning of the word "Atheist" refers to a person who firmly asserts that none of the many thousands of supernatural beings: gods, goddesses, ghosts, demons, Satans, angels, etc., who have been recognized by various humans in the present and past, actually exist. In reality, all are regarded as imaginary beings created by humans. This belief is often called "strong Atheism."

In contrast, the most common meaning given to "Atheist" by North American Atheists themselves probably refers to a person who simply lacks a belief, in and knowledge of, any supernatural entities whatsoever. This belief is often called "weak Atheism," negative Atheism, soft Atheism, or implicit Atheism. The policy of this web site is to use the same definition as is used by the group that we are describing, so this is the group to which we refer when we use the term "Atheist." (emphasis added)

It is also doubtful that the loud-mouthed bullies will stop trying to browbeat those who don't agree with them any time soon.

2 Replies

@timur,

Quote:

Where have you seen those wars?

Uhh, right here, maybe?

Quote:

Timur said: That quote by David Hume applies perfectly to the load of crap you don't cease to utter.

Frank has been vomiting the same crap for years.

As far as I'm concerned, atheism is not a belief but instead an absence of beliefs.

How revealing that Christians tend to think atheism is a belief, they cannot think outside the box.

Sounds a little belligerent, ya know?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Interesting observations, Olivier...and pretty much on the mark. I do have a few comments.

I’d like to set the record straight for why I left for a while.

It had nothing whatever to do with the agnostic/atheist interplay…which will always be in play. As atheist activist Madalyn Murray O’Hair used to say, “An atheist is just an agnostic without the guts to acknowledge his agnosticism.” (Or something along those lines.)

I left after a discussion where I was trying to second something Spendius said was rejected as illogical and inappropriate. The topic was evolution and intelligent design.

The thing I said was, in effect, another tautology.

Here is what I said:

If there is the possibility of a GOD…then there is the possibility of intelligent design of some kind.

I went further and said…I am not saying there is a GOD…I am not even saying there is the possibility of a GOD…I am merely stating a hypothetical…IF there is the possibility of a GOD.

And it seems perfectly clear that IF a GOD exists and IF it designed where we are now…the way it did it is through the means that science is now disclosing…through the evolutionary processes we are uncovering.

Ya woulda thunk I had said apple pie sucks.

People went nuts…because I was not toeing the party line exactly the way the atheists in the thread were toeing it. They went nuts because I would not join them and say, "There is no possibility of intelligent design of any kind."

The conclusion I offered was that the ONLY way to assert there is no possibility of some sort of intelligent design (the evolutionary process)…is to first assert there is no possibility of a god.

People went batshit crazy…and I decided to take a vacation from what I was beginning to see as a bunch of close-minded automatons. I think I stayed away for a year or so…but I decided I want to come back…and I did.

On the question of gods…I see nothing wrong with guessing one way or the other. One is correct…which one, I do not know. I have no problem with atheists or theists...I just prefer the agnostic position that I have set out in detail.

I have no idea why the atheists here are so anxious to call themselves atheists…but who insist they do not “believe” there are no gods. Kinda funny to me.

4 Replies

@layman,

You see belligerence were there is none.

Typical of the close minded.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

That's all very interesting and informative, but how the concepts are "defined" is ultimately meaningless for all substantive purposes.

Now, for propagandistic purposes, that might be a different story.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Well, thanks for the clarification. Everything is possible, Frank, even you being right once in a while.. :-)

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Oh yeah, you really understand and appreciate Nietzsche . . . ah-

This seems appropriate.

0 Replies

@layman,

This is typical of your bullshit. You define as meaningless or non-existent anything subject your are unable or unwilling to address.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

People went nuts…because I was not toeing the party line exactly the way the atheists in the thread were toeing it....and I decided to take a vacation from what I was beginning to see as a bunch of close-minded automatons

.

Yeah, Frank, it is that kind of attempt to enforce conformity (often via insult and personal attack) that also tends to give "atheism" a reputation that is less than stellar. This M.O. is not confined to religious issues, of course. In fact it has become virtually omnipresent in every conceivable subject matter which generates differences in social/political opinion.

0 Replies

Ah-hahahahaha . . .

This place has morphed into Fantasy Land . . . all the heroic types, it's bewildering . . .

Ah-hahahahahahahahahahaha . . .

Woooooo . . . .

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

This is typical of your bullshit. You define as meaningless or non-existent anything subject your are unable or unwilling to address.

Once again you display your penchants for selective reading, insult, misconstruction, and outright distortion of a person's clearly stated position.

Quote:

That's all very interesting and informative, but how the concepts are "defined" is ultimately meaningless for all substantive purposes

.

1 Reply

@layman,

Quote:

These positions (as well as the position that God does exist) give rise to fundamentally ]disparate philosophies.

Not sure about that. I often agree or disagree with believers and non-believers alike on some matters of philosophy. IOW it's not so simple.

(my own self-tag is "hard agnostic" aka "soft atheist", i.e. in between agnosticism and atheism: if the gods won't show up in our world, then they might as well not exist, or go to hell, for all I care)

I think the real reason behind these debates is that people just loooooove calling one another "idiot" based on their respective theology, or lack thereof... This sectarian drive seems to apply to all, god-botherers or not.

0 Replies

@layman,

Bullshit . . . how it is defined is very crucial for substantive purpose, and more so in a thread in which loud-mouthed bullies are trying to dominate the conversation. You, specifically, have attempted to belittle and dismiss atheists based on your narrow, idiosyncratic and intolerant definition. Definitions are very much to the point. You also continue to rage and insult, after all your whining and your phony baloney psychological assessment. I do hate to repeat myself, but . . . you're pathetic.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know