Wesa and I have had somewhat of a conversation in the mix concerning religion, and I suppose what you'd call the nature thereof. She recently pointed me at an article
( Read more... )
Saying "I don't believe in God" is a fact statement and NOT a belief. I know what thoughts spin in my head, thank you very much.
Saying "there is no God" is a belief- which is why there is a distinction between strong and weak atheism.
As for "Everything came from somewhere"... Occum's Razor. http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/Occam.html In short, God is an addition figure- if we have an uncaused object, it is simpler to have the universe.
And for atheists being as fanatical... when is the last time there was an atheist crusade? An atheist jihad? An atheist book burning? Yes- we are militant because we criticize people. According to you words kill!
Let me be blunt- you are one of the SO many people who just wants people to "get along", views the atheists and theists on equal standings and believes there are forms of religion that are not intolerant or dangerous.
In short, you are in the phase were you think everything would be better if people stopped fighting. You forget something important, something people like you have to relearn- people actually believe what they say they believe!
Think it through. Look back on WW2- nobody believed Hitler was seriously. Sure they had his book, where he called for genocide, but noone believed it.
Look at believers and there book. Talk about a "third way" all you like, the fact is that over 3 billion people are Muslim or Christian and believe their books. Books which explicatly call for holy war.
And, finally "proving atheism"? You can't prove a negative! The burden of proof is on the one making the assertion.
You are correct, it is a statement of fact; the fact that the individual does not believe in god. Nothing more.
I will reiterate (repeat myself): Do you believe in god? : No Do you believe that there is not god? : Yes These two statements are, for all practical purposes, exactly the same. Trying to say other wise is little more than semantic quibbling, and pointless.
I am not a theist. To pull from the article you so kindly provided:
1.The universe exists. It has natural laws that govern the behaviour of the world.
2.God exists, and created the universe, which has natural laws that govern the behaviour of the world. God is inscrutable.
You are assuming that, in moving from one statement to another, the addition of god is inherent. How?
Quite simply, if the universe exists, WHERE DID IT COME FROM? Not once have I said anything about the universe being "uncaused."
Fanaticism does not, in my mind, inherently indicate violence. It TENDS to, historically, but a tendency is not the same as a necessity.
Not once have a said anything about atheists being militant (though I expect a few do exist, just like I expect there are enlightened, tolerant Catholics somewhere).
fa·nat·ic /fəˈnætɪk -noun 1. a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics.
Now let ME be blunt:
Thus far you've added nothing to the conversation that hasn't been mentioned (if in different words) previously. What you HAVE done is put words in my mouth, such as claiming that I have indicated that atheists are militant or violent. You have assumed that I am some kind of peacenik, when in fact I've said nothing at all about people getting along and holding hands. I simply said that it is possible for religion in general not to inherently be a reason to attempt to exterminate the "other." Violence and competition are INHERENT to all biology. World peace is a pipe dream I fail to see what your statement about people believing what they believe has to do with any of this. In all actuality, part of my point is PRECISELY that people believe what they profess to believe, whatever it may be. My POINT is that all faith-based beliefs are equally as relevant, being equally unprovable. WWII . . . .if you seriously think that no one bought in to the story Hitler was telling, you need to watch some videos of the Nazi rallies . . . .if that isn't belief I don't know what is . . .and I really can't think of anything else worth saying on the subject. This has nothing to do with a third way, or indeed even a fourth or a fifth. The fact that 3 billion fanatics happen to believe in the Sky-Daddy is completely irrelevant. The fact that they are willing to kill for that belief is irrelevant. It's unfortunate, but it's irrelevant. Your statement has nothing to do with the discussion.
Proving atheism? The whole point is that it CAN'T be proven. I am in no way trying to prove or disprove the existence of the Sky-Daddy or the Spaghetti Monster or the Ultimate Equation or the Universal Theory. I am simply pointing out that certain sections of the population BELIEVE in these things, lacking ANY final basis for proof, which therefore NECESSARILY means they have some degree of faith in that world-view. My statement is simply that ANY belief which relies at ANY POINT on faith is a religion. I understand that atheists don't like this term. It's understandable. Religion has meant book-beating violent psychopaths for so long that people have a hard time picturing religion as anything else. That doesn't mean the term religion is INHERENTLY tied to these types of behavior.
-Catholics cannot prove the existence of god. They have faith in his existence. It's a religion. -Atheists cannot prove the lack of existence of a deity. They have faith in the lack of a deity. It's a religion (or type of religion, specifically).
Realizing that has nothing to do with violence or peace. It has nothing to do with WWII.
(addendum to circumvent LJ's retarded comment length restrictions):
To wrap it up: I've responded to this post out of a general sense of fairness, despite the fact that you've made few points at all, much less supported them, along with being somewhat insulting (or at least attempting to be so) while remaining anonymous. If you'd like to continue this conversation, I'd be more than happy to oblige you. I'm not so set in my ways that I can't concede when necessary (as, indeed, I did at the beginning of my post). What I will NOT do is carry on a conversation at a high school level, which means any further anonymous replies, or replies containing little more than insults, will not only be ignored but deleted.
Saying "there is no God" is a belief- which is why there is a distinction between strong and weak atheism.
As for "Everything came from somewhere"...
Occum's Razor.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/Occam.html
In short, God is an addition figure- if we have an uncaused object, it is simpler to have the universe.
And for atheists being as fanatical... when is the last time there was an atheist crusade? An atheist jihad? An atheist book burning? Yes- we are militant because we criticize people. According to you words kill!
Let me be blunt- you are one of the SO many people who just wants people to "get along", views the atheists and theists on equal standings and believes there are forms of religion that are not intolerant or dangerous.
In short, you are in the phase were you think everything would be better if people stopped fighting. You forget something important, something people like you have to relearn- people actually believe what they say they believe!
Think it through. Look back on WW2- nobody believed Hitler was seriously. Sure they had his book, where he called for genocide, but noone believed it.
Look at believers and there book. Talk about a "third way" all you like, the fact is that over 3 billion people are Muslim or Christian and believe their books. Books which explicatly call for holy war.
And, finally "proving atheism"? You can't prove a negative! The burden of proof is on the one making the assertion.
Reply
I will reiterate (repeat myself):
Do you believe in god? : No
Do you believe that there is not god? : Yes
These two statements are, for all practical purposes,
exactly the same. Trying to say other wise is little
more than semantic quibbling, and pointless.
I am not a theist. To pull from the article you so kindly provided:
1.The universe exists. It has natural laws that govern the behaviour of the world.
2.God exists, and created the universe, which has natural laws that govern the behaviour of the world. God is inscrutable.
You are assuming that, in moving from one statement to another, the addition of god is inherent. How?
Quite simply, if the universe exists, WHERE DID IT COME FROM? Not once have I said anything about the universe being "uncaused."
Fanaticism does not, in my mind, inherently indicate violence. It TENDS to, historically, but a tendency is not the same as a necessity.
Not once have a said anything about atheists being militant (though I expect a few do exist, just like I expect there are enlightened, tolerant Catholics somewhere).
fa·nat·ic /fəˈnætɪk
-noun
1. a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics.
Now let ME be blunt:
Thus far you've added nothing to the conversation that hasn't been mentioned (if in different words) previously. What you HAVE done is put words in my mouth, such as claiming that I have indicated that atheists are militant or violent. You have assumed that I am some kind of peacenik, when in fact I've said nothing at all about people getting along and holding hands. I simply said that it is possible for religion in general not to inherently be a reason to attempt to exterminate the "other." Violence and competition are INHERENT to all biology. World peace is a pipe dream
I fail to see what your statement about people believing what they believe has to do with any of this. In all actuality, part of my point is PRECISELY that people believe what they profess to believe, whatever it may be. My POINT is that all faith-based beliefs are equally as relevant, being equally unprovable.
WWII . . . .if you seriously think that no one bought in to the story Hitler was telling, you need to watch some videos of the Nazi rallies . . . .if that isn't belief I don't know what is . . .and I really can't think of anything else worth saying on the subject.
This has nothing to do with a third way, or indeed even a fourth or a fifth.
The fact that 3 billion fanatics happen to believe in the Sky-Daddy is completely irrelevant. The fact that they are willing to kill for that belief is irrelevant. It's unfortunate, but it's irrelevant. Your statement has nothing to do with the discussion.
Proving atheism? The whole point is that it CAN'T be proven. I am in no way trying to prove or disprove the existence of the Sky-Daddy or the Spaghetti Monster or the Ultimate Equation or the Universal Theory. I am simply pointing out that certain sections of the population BELIEVE in these things, lacking ANY final basis for proof, which therefore NECESSARILY means they have some degree of faith in that world-view. My statement is simply that ANY belief which relies at ANY POINT on faith is a religion.
I understand that atheists don't like this term. It's understandable. Religion has meant book-beating violent psychopaths for so long that people have a hard time picturing religion as anything else. That doesn't mean the term religion is INHERENTLY tied to these types of behavior.
-Catholics cannot prove the existence of god. They have faith in his existence. It's a religion.
-Atheists cannot prove the lack of existence of a deity. They have faith in the lack of a deity. It's a religion (or type of religion, specifically).
Realizing that has nothing to do with violence or peace. It has nothing to do with WWII.
Reply
To wrap it up: I've responded to this post out of a general sense of fairness, despite the fact that you've made few points at all, much less supported them, along with being somewhat insulting (or at least attempting to be so) while remaining anonymous. If you'd like to continue this conversation, I'd be more than happy to oblige you. I'm not so set in my ways that I can't concede when necessary (as, indeed, I did at the beginning of my post). What I will NOT do is carry on a conversation at a high school level, which means any further anonymous replies, or replies containing little more than insults, will not only be ignored but deleted.
Reply
Leave a comment