The Spiritual and/or Religious beliefs of an Atheist

Okay, the point Frank is that "knowledge" is "fashion". In medieval times they "knew" that there were "four elements". By the way there were also "four" colours of the rainbow, because there were four gospels !

I wont labour the point but there is no distinction between "knowledge" and "belief" except in confidence levels, and these are affected by the prevailing consensus/fashion/paradigm.

0 Replies

I think Frank that they are trying to explain that you only believe that you don't know.You can't choose between the No God position and the God position because you are worried about your past sinning record and you would really like there to be a God that eternally rewards virtue but you are worried that He might eternally punish transgressions to His revealed code such as "Thou shalt not commit adultery".

Thus you comfort yourself with equivocation,vacillation and fence wobbling.

After all Frank-if there is no God all those virtuous decisions you made in the past were pointless.

0 Replies

Re: The Spiritual and/or Religious beliefs of an Atheist

Bartikus wrote:

The Spiritual and/or Religious beliefs of an Atheist

Bartikus wrote:

What are they?

I assume you mean me as an Atheist? I cannot speak for any other Atheist. I would argue one cannot be an Atheist and be religious and I confirm that for myself.

I would argue an Atheist could be spiritual as long as existence of God or gods is disbelieved or denied, but I am not spiritual.

Both spiritual and religious claims are extraordinary in nature, and would require extraordinary evidence to be convincing let alone the fact that there is no evidence whatsoever to support such spiritual, immaterial, supernatural and religious claims.

- Atheist:
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.

- Spiritual:
Of, relating to, consisting of, or having the nature of spirit; not tangible or material. See Synonyms at immaterial.
Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul.
Of, from, or relating to God; deific.
Of or belonging to a church or religion; sacred.
Relating to or having the nature of spirits or a spirit; supernatural.

- Religious:
Having or showing belief in and reverence for God or a deity.
Of, concerned with, or teaching religion: a religious text.
Extremely scrupulous or conscientious: religious devotion to duty.

0 Replies

Spendius....you are keeping me up !

Frank claims he does not sit on fences and has no "knowledge" of any reward/punishment contingencies associated with gods etc because such contingencies are "beliefs". His main argument is that no-one "knows" the nature of reality, but he is not prepared to analyse the word "know".

0 Replies

Chumly,

I agree with your concession to "spirituality" for atheists. Sam Harris makes similar remarks in "The End of Faith".

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

I think Frank that they are trying to explain that you only believe that you don't know.You can't choose between the No God position and the God position because you are worried about your past sinning record and you would really like there to be a God that eternally rewards virtue but you are worried that He might eternally punish transgressions to His revealed code such as "Thou shalt not commit adultery".

Thus you comfort yourself with equivocation,vacillation and fence wobbling.

After all Frank-if there is no God all those virtuous decisions you made in the past were pointless.

You are saying virtue is pointless without reward?

I say virtue is not virtue if it only exists for the purpose of reward...it is just selfishness.

What's that old platitude...virtue is it's own reward? Not enough for you though Spendius.

Your point also carries the implication that atheists are without virtue, or at least have no reasons to be? You gotta get out and see more of the world.

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

Chumly,

I agree with your concession to "spirituality" for atheists. Sam Harris makes similar remarks in "The End of Faith".

I 'cheated' and used the dictionary Smile

I have not read "The End of Faith" (being the Science Fiction nut that I am) perhaps I should, although Science Fiction does pick up on many themes.

0 Replies

I find it amusing those committed to a theistic belief system, whether pro or con, have such monumental difficulty understanding and accepting that some folks have no such belief system, pro or con. I suspect Frank joins me in this.

0 Replies

timber,

As an atheist I would like not to give two hoots about religion, but since it underlies much tribalism we all deal with its consequences on a daily basis. By the way "nationhood" is another "belief system". Do you also reject that ?

0 Replies

*If* nationhood is a people who share common customs, origins, history, and frequently language then it can't totally be an artifice or subjective construct can it?

0 Replies

Chumly...indeed !....insert "religion" in place of "nationhood"....see what I mean ? Note "Iraq" was invented by outsiders !

(The full thesis is that all "reality" is socially constructed. "Subjectivity" in essence relies on shared language and shifting norms like everything else).

The key issue here is that "belief" , "knowledge" and "reality" are not separable. Even in the "physical sciences" where consensus tends to be overwhelming we have paradigm shifts which alter our relationship with "the world".

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

timber,

As an atheist I would like not to give two hoots about religion, but since it underlies much tribalism we all deal with its consequences on a daily basis. By the way "nationhood" is another "belief system". Do you also reject that ?

And as an agnostic, I must admit empirical evidence FOR neither proposition exists, nor does there exist any empirical evidence AGAINST, thus rendering any conclusion regarding either a pure and simple, afoundational, preference-based guess. Espousing either proposition amounts to superstition - comforting to the holder but entirely without merit.

I'm honest, and humble, enough to say, and accept, "I dunno yet, may never know". I simply haven't the need, haven't the arrogance, to claim otherwise. I can deal with uncertainty. I'm comfortable with that. I'll admit I'm skeptical of any deist proposition of which I'm aware, but at the same time I remain thoroughly unconvinced by any atheist propostion of which I am aware.

"Nationhood", an entirely human construct, a social convention, an evolution of clan affinity concept and tribalism, well might be termed a "belief system" - what's your point?

0 Replies

Chumly wrote-

Quote:

*If* nationhood is a people who share common customs, origins, history, and frequently language then it can't totally be an artifice or subjective construct can it?

Chum-if you strip off and stand in front of a mirror what you see is just a male animal of a particular species.Full stop.If you see a Canadian or a Barry Manilow fan you are basically off your rocker.I suppose your hairstyle or tattoos might confuse you
but they can be ignored for experimental purposes.
Anything leading to another conclusion is a belief.

Even a name is a belief.A name is just an identification tag like all the numbers you might have for the convenience of others.

Is that right fresco?

0 Replies

timberlandko,

You might find Asimov's rationalizations for choosing Atheism over Agnosticism to have merit.

Kurtz: Isaac, how would you describe your own position? Agnostic, atheist, rationalist, humanist?

Asimov: I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time.

Kurtz: But the burden of proof is on the person who claims God exists. You don't believe in Santa Claus, but you can't disprove his existence. The burden of proof is upon those who maintain the claim.

Asimov: Yes. In any case, I am an atheist.

Kurtz: You have no doubt reflected a good deal on this. Can people live without the God myth, without religion? You don't need it presumably. Does man need it?

Asimov: Well, individual human beings may. There's a certain comfort, I suppose, in thinking that you will be with all of your loved ones again after death, that death is not the end, that you'll live again in some kind of never-never land with great happiness. Maybe some people even get a great deal of comfort out of knowing that all the people they they don't like are going to go straight to hell. These are all comforts. Personally, they don't comfort me. I'm not interested in having anyone suffer eternally in hell, because I don't believe that any crime is so nearly infinite in magnitude as to deserve infinite punishment. I feel that I couldn't bring myself to condemn anyone to eternal punishment. I am opposed to punishment.

Kurtz: The height of wickedness, is it not?

Asimov: Yes. I feel if I can't do it, then God, who presumably is a much more noble being than I am, could certainly not do it. Furthermore..........
http://www.sullivan-county.com/id3/asimov2.htm

0 Replies

Hi Spendius,

All I am saying is that due to common customs, origins, history, and frequently language it can be argued that nationhood has an existence of sorts.

0 Replies

Obviously Chum-nationality has a very powerful existence but it does involve a suspension of a fundamental reality.It is also intermittent.In moments of high excitation it disappears.

0 Replies

Chumistan, nobody gets out alive!

0 Replies

I'm quite familiar with Asimov's position, and his discussion of same. His rationalization of his belief amounts to rationalization of belief - nothing more, nothing less, nothing other, having no more merit than any other belief-based, otherwise afoundational, essentially superstitional rationalization of any other belief set. He finds, and almost so much as states he finds, his position comforting. Personally, I'm untroubled by the uncertainty, and feel no need to construct an artificial comfort zone in one camp or the other.

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

Okay, the point Frank is that "knowledge" is "fashion". In medieval times they "knew" that there were "four elements". By the way there were also "four" colours of the rainbow, because there were four gospels !

I wont labour the point but there is no distinction between "knowledge" and "belief" except in confidence levels, and these are affected by the prevailing consensus/fashion/paradigm.

That is baloney...but I doubt you will be able to acknowledge that.

TO KNOW something...is to truly know it. To suppose you know it...or to think you know it...or to "believe" you know it...is quite different.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

I think Frank that they are trying to explain that you only believe that you don't know.You can't choose between the No God position and the God position because you are worried about your past sinning record and you would really like there to be a God that eternally rewards virtue but you are worried that He might eternally punish transgressions to His revealed code such as "Thou shalt not commit adultery".

Thus you comfort yourself with equivocation,vacillation and fence wobbling.

After all Frank-if there is no God all those virtuous decisions you made in the past were pointless.

Go back into your rat hole and continue playing with yourself. Perhaps some day you will actually have a life.

0 Replies

The Spiritual and/or Religious beliefs of an Atheist

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know