Atheism is a faith.

[Jimbo07]

Sweet Cracker Sandwich, this thread moves fast!!

How can something be said to exist and yet be incomprehensible? Not just that we don't actually understand it but that we never could. What does that mean, what kind of a thing are we talking about here and why should I take its existence seriously?

I used the word incomprehensible as a placeholder for, "I have no idea what sort of thing I might be talking about here." The existence or non-existence of such a thing would be quite independent of whether or not we could understand it, or if we had made up any fairy tales about it. I don't take thoughts about its existence seriously, and consideration of it whatever it might or might not be has no practical consequence on how I live my daily life.

Santa Claus's ability to visit every child in the Western world in one night (and never be seen) is also incomprehensible. This is a strong argument for his non-existence.

No. This isn't incomprehensible, it's implausible. There's a difference. Claims about Santa are so specific that they can be judged and (in the case of the whole photographing the pole thing), tested. If you claim that his factory is magic, then you can also claim that he gets around the world by magic. There's no analogy here.

In a sense it is, what's your point? (all my remarks here are about hard-atheism).

No it doesn't. And...

T'ai Chi actually answered it well enough...

Strong atheism (no god(s) exists) is a faith.

However, even if atheism is not a faith, it is obviously a 'substitute good' for faith- it functions in exactly the same way in terms of providing a worldview for its user.

Yes. Perhaps I've been incorrect in stating that atheism is a 'faith.' Rather it is a placeholder for faith. It holds the same position that a faith would in forming a person's world view.

The further and deeper we look into the Universe the same we see no need to postulate the supernatural to explain what we find. Nobody knows with certainty why the Universe exists at all - there are hypotheses galore - but it has nothing to with anything supernatural. I ain't confident, I'm convinced, and if you look into your heart ... aren't you convinced too?

Hmmm... nope. That's too weak. It's the atheist's response to 'God of the gaps.' "Every time we discover something new about the natural world, we declare it to be not God's fingerprint." If we could ultimately test for 'God,' even God would become part of the natural world. It leaves a floating goal post for what's natural.

Agnosticism is more practical in a universe attempted to be understood by people on the basis of evidence that supports probability rather than certainty, more practical than either Theism or Atheism because both are presumptious and certain that there is/isn't a God.

Well, some people will complain that only strong (or hard) atheists assert the non-existence of God with certainty, and that you are creating a strawman.

Rather... I've said it before...

I've been playing with some ideas in my head and I'm now advocating something like apathetic agnosticism. I've always enjoyed these discussions too much to give them up entirely, but what I am convinced of, CD, is that the whole question of God/no-God has little to no practical bearing on my life. Nor does it have any practical bearing on anyone else's, religious or otherwise. I am convinced that the world's religions, as they stand, are based on fairy tales, so it is the fairy tales which have consequences on whether people squabble or not. They have no impact on the Truth of the existence or non-existence of some uber-being.

** ETA: (Ooh I love this) - "An expanding universe does not preclude a creator, but it does place limits on when he might have carried out his job!" [Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam, 1988), pp. 8-9.]

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
Yet again, please cite where I claimed that nobody made such a claim. (Please excuse the highlighting, but please see it, and please respond to it.)

Originally Posted by Huntster
Originally Posted by me
The silliness was completely intended, to show that not all opinions are faith.

All opinions aren't a matter of faith, and nobody is saying such:

I used red because you had already abused the bold.

Thanks for the highlighting. It does work, after all (at least for some folks).

Didn't hammegk admit that?:

Other than "Thought Exists", which does not require faith, that's 100% correct.

Thus, all opinions aren't a matter of faith?

This is becoming tiresome. I realize you are extremely unwilling to admit any mistakes or misunderstanding.

That isn't accurate. I've admitted (and apologized) for mistakes on this very thread.

You have not.

You’ve already said that you haven’t read all the posts. (I hope I don’t have to quote that too.) So you can’t make any claims about what nobody has said until you do so. Somewhere during the course of this conversation you have made a mistake, whether you’re willing to admit it or not.

Again, I admit I have.

You have not.

Nor will you.

So?

 

[Tricky]

And the opposite of the positive is?...

The opposite of positive is negative. If you had a scale of positive and negative, atheism would be zero. Let us use this to try to rattle the bb again.

Why is atheism not a faith? Because it is not the opposite of religion. Using Christianity as an example, you might call it "positive faith" and the opposite, "negative faith" would be Satanism. Atheism would be right in the middle, believing neither.

It is a method used throughout the primary education system throughout the world.

Yes, it works well with students with little knowledge and little experience in learning. The reason it is not used on upper-level children is because other things usually work better.

I'm not a professional teacher. Mrs. Huntster is. She works special ed. She works with people like yourself - who have special needs. Repetition is even more necessary in such environments.

Ms. Tricky also teaches special ed. In addition, she tutors for college exams like SAT and ACT. Repetition and routine are very important for autistic and ADD kids. It is hard to find people with the patience and dedication to work with such tragic cases. Give Mrs. Huntster a big thanks for me. She obviously has the patience of a saint. (Yes, it's a religious reference, but also a common idiom).

But when Ms. Tricky tutors kids taking exams for college, she rarely if ever uses those methods. She uses key ideas, mnemonics, reasoning, logic and similar tools. Repetition may be needed to remember Avogadro's number, but not the concept of molarity.

Your woefully weak insults aside, most people here are not in the catagory of the kinds of kids your wife teaches. To convince them, you must use your reasoning skills. You have a few moments where you show that you do have some, but they are far too rare. Pity.

 

[I less than three logic]

Thus, all opinions aren't a matter of faith?

You are correct; no one has said all opinions are faith, so I apologize.

However, all but one is close enough of a sweeping statement to still be wrong. When I used the word all, that one you quoted me saying, since I was reply to hammegk’s statement of all but one, I assumed it would be taken in such context. So I apologize for this incorrect assumption as well.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
And the opposite of the positive is?...

The opposite of positive is negative. If you had a scale of positive and negative, atheism would be zero.

That is incorrect. Zero is agnosticism. Atheism is some degree of the negative. Zero requires no faith. The positive and negative do, because it cannot be known. Zero is the default.

Why is atheism not a faith? Because it is not the opposite of religion.

Partially correct. Atheism is a religion.

Using Christianity as an example, you might call it "positive faith" and the opposite, "negative faith" would be Satanism. Atheism would be right in the middle, believing neither.

That is incorrect. Using Christianity as an example, positive faith recognizes both God and Satan. Atheism regards both (as well as all other religious faiths) as false, which requires a measure of faith itself.

Agnosticism recognizes that it is unknowable, does not exercise any in any direction, thus requiring no faith whatsoever.

Originally Posted by Huntster
It is a method used throughout the primary education system throughout the world.

Yes, it works well with students with little knowledge and little experience in learning. The reason it is not used on upper-level children is because other things usually work better.

Such as......................?

Originally Posted by Huntster
I'm not a professional teacher. Mrs. Huntster is. She works special ed. She works with people like yourself - who have special needs. Repetition is even more necessary in such environments.

Ms. Tricky also teaches special ed. In addition, she tutors for college exams like SAT and ACT. Repetition and routine are very important for autistic and ADD kids. It is hard to find people with the patience and dedication to work with such tragic cases. Give Mrs. Huntster a big thanks for me. She obviously has the patience of a saint. (Yes, it's a religious reference, but also a common idiom).

My similar regards for Mrs. Tricky.

Interesting, isn't it? We may have lots in common.

Any activity in such activities as Special Olympics on your part? I'm deep into it.

But when Ms. Tricky tutors kids taking exams for college, she rarely if ever uses those methods. She uses key ideas, mnemonics, reasoning, logic and similar tools. Repetition may be needed to remember Avogadro's number, but not the concept of molarity.

Your woefully weak insults aside, most people here are not in the catagory of the kinds of kids your wife teaches. To convince them, you must use your reasoning skills. You have a few moments where you show that you do have some, but they are far too rare. Pity.

Unfortunately, we are dealing with an issue which is far beyond subjects taught to students of any caliber, whether of special needs or not. These subjects are taboo in our primary education system, and it shows. While I agree that repetition isn't the best method of instruction for students, it's the best method of dealing with opponents in an internet forum. That way, other participants who peruse the thread are punished with repetitive presentations on both sides of the issue.

Since I'm of such a strategy, I invite and encourage a continued dialogue that falls along those lines.

Please continue...................

 

[Foster Zygote]

She works special ed. She works with people like yourself - who have special needs.

What's so special about beer and pizza?

 

[Huntster]

You are correct; no one has said all opinions are faith, so I apologize......

There is no need for apologies. We can rejoice together that we have risen above this obstacle and can move forward!

So, do you see what hammegk and I have suggested?:

Faith is necessary for decisions (even if it is a small measure of faith), thus atheism (as the dictionary suggests) is a faith itself?

 

[Foster Zygote]

I would imagine it to be like kissing Ann Coulter.

The only human being who might survive that would be Leona Helmsley. Ironically, that image is also about as far from "hot" as it is physically possible to get.

 

[I less than three logic]

That is incorrect. Zero is agnosticism. Atheism is some degree of the negative. Zero requires no faith. The positive and negative do, because it cannot be known. Zero is the default.

You are not being consistent. Refer to post #209, you've already said that agnosticism requires faith, and that it is atheism.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
She works special ed. She works with people like yourself - who have special needs.

What's so special about beer and pizza?

Both are popular, they compliment each other, and of the two, I think beer is more special (because I got too much pizza.............during that time of the month.......and rarely get too much beer)

 

[CFLarsen]

Atheism is a religion.

What kind of supernatural beliefs do atheists have?

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Atheism is a religion.

[sigh]

Since you love the dictionary so much...

Atheism

noun 1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Religion

–noun 1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7. religions, Archaic. religious rites.
8. Archaic. strict faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow.
—Idiom
9. get religion, Informal. a. to acquire a deep conviction of the validity of religious beliefs and practices.
b. to resolve to mend one's errant ways: The company got religion and stopped making dangerous products.

And, just for good measure...

Is

verb (used without object) 1. to exist or live: Shakespeare's “To be or not to be” is the ultimate question.
2. to take place; happen; occur: The wedding was last week.
3. to occupy a place or position: The book is on the table.
4. to continue or remain as before: Let things be.
5. to belong; attend; befall: May good fortune be with you.
6. (used as a copula to connect the subject with its predicate adjective, or predicate nominative, in order to describe, identify, or amplify the subject): Martha is tall. John is president. This is she.
7. (used as a copula to introduce or form interrogative or imperative sentences): Is that right? Be quiet! Don't be facetious.
–auxiliary verb 8. (used with the present participle of another verb to form the progressive tense): I am waiting.
9. (used with the present participle or infinitive of the principal verb to indicate future action): She is visiting there next week. He is to see me today.
10. (used with the past participle of another verb to form the passive voice): The date was fixed. It must be done.
11. (used in archaic or literary constructions with some intransitive verbs to form the perfect tense): He is come. Agamemnon to the wars is gone.

Now, show how to combine those definitions in such a way that your quote above is not absolute rubbish.

 

[I less than three logic]

There is no need for apologies. We can rejoice together that we have risen above this obstacle and can move forward!

So, do you see what hammegk and I have suggested?:

Faith is necessary for decisions (even if it is a small measure of faith), thus atheism (as the dictionary suggests) is a faith itself?

Yes, I see what you're saying, but I do not agree. It is not faith I'm basing my opinion on, but doubt. I do not hold faith that the negative is true, I do not hold faith that the positive is true, what I do is hold doubt that either of them are true until shown otherwise. I do not think agnosticism is correct, because I feel that if god(s) want to prove their existence they most likely could, so I don't believe it is absolutely unknowable as agnosticism means.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
That is incorrect. Zero is agnosticism. Atheism is some degree of the negative. Zero requires no faith. The positive and negative do, because it cannot be known. Zero is the default.

You are not being consistent. Refer to post #209, you've already said that agnosticism requires faith, and that it is atheism.

Post #209:

Originally Posted by Jimbo07
I'm confident that there is little evidence of most of the Gods that people espouse in this universe.
There's none at all that is objective. Squat. Nada.

Quote:
Now... from whence this universe? I don't know.
The further and deeper we look into the Universe the same we see no need to postulate the supernatural to explain what we find. Nobody knows with certainty why the Universe exists at all - there are hypotheses galore - but it has nothing to with anything supernatural. I ain't confident, I'm convinced, and if you look into your heart ... aren't you convinced too?

Sorry, I'm not even there. Try again.

 

[I less than three logic]

Post #209:



Sorry, I'm not even there. Try again.

Sorry. Typo. I meant Post #290. My bad.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
Atheism is a religion.

What kind of supernatural beliefs do atheists have?

They have the belief that the supernatural (God) does not exist.

 

[Jimbo07]

You are not being consistent. Refer to post #209, you've already said that agnosticism requires faith, and that it is atheism.

You sure about that post number? Post #209 is one of those rare responses to one of my posts...

As to the practical application of faith... It's been addressed before that we all have to have 'faith' that if we eat toast in the morning it won't suddenly poison us, unlike all other times.

If that's the only argument that people have that atheism is a 'faith,' then it is a weak argument to the point of meaninglessness.

When I'm asserting that atheism is a placeholder for faith, I'm referring to the God question in particular. If you claim to have knowledge, with any kind of certainty, what's 'out there,' beyond what we can physically observe/measure, then I echo RAW in suggesting that you are probably full of [rule8].

 

[I less than three logic]

You sure about that post number? Post #209 is one of those rare responses to one of my posts...

As to the practical application of faith... It's been addressed before that we all have to have 'faith' that if we eat toast in the morning it won't suddenly poison us, unlike all other times.

If that's the only argument that people have that atheism is a 'faith,' then it is a weak argument to the point of meaninglessness.

When I'm asserting that atheism is a placeholder for faith, I'm referring to the God question in particular. If you claim to have knowledge, with any kind of certainty, what's 'out there,' beyond what we can physically observe/measure, then I echo RAW in suggesting that you are probably full of [rule8].

Sorry, as I said, it was 290.

 

[CFLarsen]

They have the belief that the supernatural (God) does not exist.

No, you make the same basic mistake as T'ai Chi.

If they base their atheism on the evidence, then they don't have a belief.

But, let's go with your misconception for a while:

1) Atheists have the belief that the supernatural (God) does not exist.

2) Religious people have the belief that the supernatural (God) does not exist.

Are both parties belief of equal value? Do they carry the same weight?

 

[Huntster]

Since you love the dictionary so much...

Atheism

Quote:
noun 1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Religion

Quote:
–noun
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7. religions, Archaic. religious rites.
8. Archaic. strict faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow.
—Idiom
9. get religion, Informal. a. to acquire a deep conviction of the validity of religious beliefs and practices.
b. to resolve to mend one's errant ways: The company got religion and stopped making dangerous products.

Thanks for that. I should have included that in my set of definitions, too, but nobody was pushing the fact that atheism was also a religion. We were debating faith and belief.

I'm sure this will only fan the flames............

And, just for good measure...

Is

Quote:
verb (used without object) 1. to exist or live: Shakespeare's “To be or not to be” is the ultimate question.
2. to take place; happen; occur: The wedding was last week.
3. to occupy a place or position: The book is on the table.
4. to continue or remain as before: Let things be.
5. to belong; attend; befall: May good fortune be with you.
6. (used as a copula to connect the subject with its predicate adjective, or predicate nominative, in order to describe, identify, or amplify the subject): Martha is tall. John is president. This is she.
7. (used as a copula to introduce or form interrogative or imperative sentences): Is that right? Be quiet! Don't be facetious.
–auxiliary verb 8. (used with the present participle of another verb to form the progressive tense): I am waiting.
9. (used with the present participle or infinitive of the principal verb to indicate future action): She is visiting there next week. He is to see me today.
10. (used with the past participle of another verb to form the passive voice): The date was fixed. It must be done.
11. (used in archaic or literary constructions with some intransitive verbs to form the perfect tense): He is come. Agamemnon to the wars is gone.[/

I'm not sure how this helps, but I'll forward it on to former President Clinton.

Now, show how to combine those definitions in such a way that your quote above is not absolute rubbish.

I've highlighted the appropriate portions of the definition of religion.

Please note that nowhere in that definition is the word "God". Nowhere.

Again, thanks.

Prepare for heavy seas.............