Common Bad Beliefs Among Atheists?

[phiwum]

This isn't Nihilism. Socrates said 'I know that I know nothing'. Nihilism is that life is meaningless. Totally different.

To be frank, Socrates never said that.

Socrates knew a few things. Among the things that Socrates knew were the principles of good reasoning. This is how Socrates pursued his task: by showing that certain well-respected and reputedly wise folk were off their nut when pressed on certain issues.

I know a few things too. Not too many, not as many as Socrates, surely, but I know that for instance, from P & Q, P surely follows. This is an absolute truth, no matter what propositions P and Q stand for. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[acbytesla]

To be frank, Socrates never said that.

Socrates knew a few things. Among the things that Socrates knew were the principles of good reasoning. This is how Socrates pursued his task: by showing that certain well-respected and reputedly wise folk were off their nut when pressed on certain issues.

I know a few things too. Not too many, not as many as Socrates, surely, but I know that for instance, from P & Q, P surely follows. This is an absolute truth, no matter what propositions P and Q stand for. Wouldn't you agree?

I doubt that Socrates was a real person. He might have been, but I think he was more a literary device that Plato employed.

And while I believe there are absolute truths or facts, I don't believe in absolute certainties. By that I mean that I cannot be absolutely certain about anything. But what is real is real whether I perceive it to be real or not. However, I can only interact with what I perceive. Am I making sense to you?

 

[phiwum]

I doubt that Socrates was a real person. He might have been, but I think he was more a literary device that Plato employed.

And while I believe there are absolute truths or facts, I don't believe in absolute certainties. By that I mean that I cannot be absolutely certain about anything. What is real is real whether I perceive it to be real or not. But I can only interact with what I perceive. Am I making sense to you?

Delete.Will think about it more clearly tomorrow. My first answer was too dismissive.

 

[David Mo]

I doubt that Socrates was a real person. He might have been, but I think he was more a literary device that Plato employed.

And Aristophanes' Clouds and Xenophon's Apology?
Of course, Plato's "Socrates" is a literary representation of his own ideas, but this doesn't mean that Socrates never existed. We have three primary sources. More than usual in ancient history.
I think the Socrates of Plato's Apology is an evidence of Socrate's existence because he contradicts the idealism of Plato's "Socrates" in the Dialogues. "I only know that I know nothing" is the antithesis of Plato.

 

[David Mo]

There is no dogma among unbelievers except believing would mean that you are not an unbeliever.

This is an ideal, not the reality of the real unbelievers.
If "dogma" means a statement without evidence, everybody has some dogmas or starting points that he cannot verify for himself. Many atheists have their own dogmas. But it is difficult to find a "common" dogma for atheists. Even more if you seek for an "exclusive" dogma only for atheists.

NOTE: I prefer to speak of "beliefs" instead of "dogma", because the latter is pejorative. Belief and knowledge is the traditional differentiation since ancient Greece. I like it.

 

[acbytesla]

This is an ideal, not the reality of the real unbelievers.
If "dogma" means a statement without evidence, everybody has some dogmas or starting points that he cannot verify for himself. Many atheists have their own dogmas. But it is difficult to find a "common" dogma for atheists. Even more if you seek for an "exclusive" dogma only for atheists.

NOTE: I prefer to speak of "beliefs" instead of "dogma", because the latter is pejorative. Belief and knowledge is the traditional differentiation since ancient Greece. I like it.

Now you're playing games with words. 'Dogma is defined in pretty much every dictionary as ' 'a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.'

There are no shared principles beyond not believing in a god and no recognized authority. There are no ancient or modern text that guide our lives.. You can argue that everyone has set of principles they think is true making the word meaningless.

 

[Tommy Jeppesen]

Now you're playing games with words. 'Dogma is defined in pretty much every dictionary as ' 'a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.'

There are no shared principles beyond not believing in a god and no recognized authority. There are no ancient or modern text that guide our lives.. You can argue that everyone has set of principles they think is true making the word meaningless.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/dogma

1.
...

2.
...

3.
prescribed doctrine proclaimed as unquestionably true by a particular group:
the difficulty of resisting political dogma.

4.
a settled or established opinion, belief, or principle:
the classic dogma of objectivity in scientific observation.
Synonyms: conviction, certainty.

Origin of dogma

Latin
1590-1600; < Latin < Greek, equivalent to dok (eîn) to seem, think, seem good + -ma noun suffix

Word story
At the turn of the 17th century, dogma entered English from the Latin term meaning “philosophical tenet.” The Greek word from which it is borrowed means “that which one thinks is true,” and comes ultimately from the Greek dokeîn, which means “to seem good” or “think.”

 

[phiwum]

I doubt that Socrates was a real person. He might have been, but I think he was more a literary device that Plato employed.

A beautifully novel theory, unencumbered by evidence, but we needn't divert our attention here.

And while I believe there are absolute truths or facts, I don't believe in absolute certainties. By that I mean that I cannot be absolutely certain about anything. But what is real is real whether I perceive it to be real or not. However, I can only interact with what I perceive. Am I making sense to you?

I'm afraid that I don't understand what you mean. Tain't no doubt in my mind that two is the only even prime. This is plainly the case. Of course, there are many, many truths of which I am less certain, but this is a plain certainty. I am "absolutely certain" about this somewhat dull fact.

 

[David Mo]

“A principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true:
Ex.: ‘the dogmas of faith’”

Yes, according to the Oxford dictionary, but also:

3. prescribed doctrine proclaimed as unquestionably true by a particular group: Ex.: the difficulty of resisting political dogma.
4. a settled or established opinion, belief, or principle.
Ex.: the classic dogma of objectivity in scientific observation.
Synonyms: conviction, certainty. (Dictionary.com)​

And…
“A fixed, especially religious, belief or set of beliefs that people are expected to accept without any doubts”. (Cambridge English Dictionary).

And your expression:

There is no dogma among unbelievers except believing would mean that you are not an unbeliever.

(Underlined is mine)
This is at odds with the Oxford dictionary definition that you quote because in atheism the “belief that you are not a believer” is not sustained (ideally) by any authority. Then, it is neither a dogma.

I was thinking in a meaning similar to the used in the Cambridge dictionary or #4 of Dictionary.com, but if you want to stay in the Oxford definition I have no problem: Yes, the atheism is not supported by any dogma without exception – ideally speaking at least.

But this doesn't exclude that some theists maintain their belief without any dogma (in the Oxford sense). This is not exclusive of atheists. Even, some atheists can maintain their belief as a dogma.

 

[Delvo]

Here's one I've seen around here in various other threads: the belief that everything in the Bible must have the stupidest, craziest, or most offensive explanation/implication that a Bible-hater can imagine.

• Object 10 units wide and 30 units around? Can't be in the range of numbers for which that's perfectly true when measured to the nearest whole unit (or even half-unit or third-unit); can't involve diameter measurement across the convex side of a not-quite-flat plate; it must be because they literally seriously thought π was precisely 3.00000! LOLOLOLOL they're so stoooopid!
• Light before sun & moon & stars? Can't mean the light just wasn't sunlight or moonlight or starlight; it must be because they forgot what they wrote just a couple of sentences earlier! LOLOLOLOL they're so stoooopid!
• Adam-&-Eve's named kids meet some previously unnamed other people out there? Can't be because of off-screen independent creation of some more human families the Bible just wasn't concerned with, or even natural evolution; must be incest! LOLOLOLOL they'd be so offended if they knew that!
• Sea level over the mountains? They'd all freeze & asphyxiate at that altitude! Nevermind that the rising surface would have pushed the atmosphere up with it and made atmospheric conditions indistinguishable from current conditions at sea level. LOLOLOLOL they're so stoooopid!
• Bats are birds? LOLOLOLOL they're so craaaazy! Oh, wait, it doesn't actually say that, and it couldn't possibly even have done so because the language had one word including both animals? Well what kind of language would do that? LOLOLOLOL they're so craaaazy!

Seriously, folks, there's more than enough real wackiness in the Bible and Christianity; there's no need to go inventing transparently fake ones. Just because it's your favorite bogeyman doesn't mean every single little thing about it in every single obscure little corner nobody reads or cares about must all be uniformly bad.

 

[acbytesla]

I'm afraid that I don't understand what you mean. Tain't no doubt in my mind that two is the only even prime. This is plainly the case. Of course, there are many, many truths of which I am less certain, but this is a plain certainty. I am "absolutely certain" about this somewhat dull fact.

Let's try again. The Grand Canyon exists whether I perceive it's existence or not. It's an absolute truth or fact. But if I never saw pictures of it or been to it or heard about it or have no perception of it, to me, it doesn't exist. But that doesn't change the absolute truth that it does.

I worked years ago for a few months at a mental institution. Some of the patients would carry on conversations with people that weren't there. They operated as if those people were there and I operated as if they weren't. One of us was right, but I have no absolute certainty which.

 

[acbytesla]

“A principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true:
Ex.: ‘the dogmas of faith’”

Yes, according to the Oxford dictionary, but also:

3. prescribed doctrine proclaimed as unquestionably true by a particular group: Ex.: the difficulty of resisting political dogma.
4. a settled or established opinion, belief, or principle.
Ex.: the classic dogma of objectivity in scientific observation.
Synonyms: conviction, certainty. (Dictionary.com)​

And…
“A fixed, especially religious, belief or set of beliefs that people are expected to accept without any doubts”. (Cambridge English Dictionary).

And your expression:

(Underlined is mine)
This is at odds with the Oxford dictionary definition that you quote because in atheism the “belief that you are not a believer” is not sustained (ideally) by any authority. Then, it is neither a dogma.

I was thinking in a meaning similar to the used in the Cambridge dictionary or #4 of Dictionary.com, but if you want to stay in the Oxford definition I have no problem: Yes, the atheism is not supported by any dogma without exception – ideally speaking at least.

But this doesn't exclude that some theists maintain their belief without any dogma (in the Oxford sense). This is not exclusive of atheists. Even, some atheists can maintain their belief as a dogma.

I'm not going to get in a circle jerk over dictionary definitions. Words don't have meanings, they have usages. The definition I used is a common usage. The question is do you understand my usage? The rest is irrelevant.

 

[David Mo]

I'm not going to get in a circle jerk over dictionary definitions. Words don't have meanings, they have usages. The definition I used is a common usage. The question is do you understand my usage? The rest is irrelevant.

I don't question that the meaning of a word is its use by a linguistic community. "Common", you said. I agree.
However, I don't understand why the Oxford dictionary definition is "common" and the definition of the Cambridge dictionary is not. How do you know this?

Apart of this semantic discussion I said: But this doesn't exclude that some theists maintain their belief without any dogma (in the Oxford sense). This is not exclusive of atheists. Even, some atheists can maintain their belief as a dogma.
Do you agree?

 

[phiwum]

Let's try again. The Grand Canyon exists whether I perceive it's existence or not. It's an absolute truth or fact. But if I never saw pictures of it or been to it or heard about it or have no perception of it, to me, it doesn't exist. But that doesn't change the absolute truth that it does.

I worked years ago for a few months at a mental institution. Some of the patients would carry on conversations with people that weren't there. They operated as if those people were there and I operated as if they weren't. One of us was right, but I have no absolute certainty which.

I'm totally with you on the existence of the Grand Canyon.I've seen it too.

 

[Beady]

I'm totally with you on the existence of the Grand Canyon.I've seen it too.

Anecdotal evidence. Not worth crap.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk