Atheism is a faith.

Huntster said:
Yes, like the rules of physics but not the rules of a church.

Atheism isn't an organized church with documented rules. I thought we already established that.

Atheism is still bound by the most basic rules that many other entities are bound by.
Click to expand...
"Rule(s)"? Plural? Tell me what these are?

For the same reason you're trying to pin me with the word "rule."
Click to expand...
How am I trying to "pin" you?

Again, I've been serving on a grand jury for the past month or so. Definitions are huge in law.
Click to expand...
Yes, but we are not taking about the law, are we? I thought we were simply talking about the usage of the word "atheist". Please bring me up to speed on the importance of definitions outside of the law, medicine and other such profesional contexts?

No, I'm having the common usage pushed at me, and I provided the defined usage.
Click to expand...
Yes, but that IS JUST one organizations view. Why should that be so important?

They are as unethical as people who are not atheists.
Click to expand...
Based on statistics I would say that this is not true but it is not the basis for my question.

I don't know. You tell me.
Click to expand...
I can't for the life of me think why they should or would want to have an atheist code of ethics. I have freinds who are athiests and who are also professionals who must abide by professional codes of ethics. Most atheists that I know of are human secularists and abide by Secular and Humanist Ethics. I think this is a very good code to abide by so I'm happy if they choose that.
 
Huntster said:
Those words were not found defined, and I have no further comment on them.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why the lack of definition is important. That atheism is defined isn't to give atheism some undue importance it is to help people understand what the word means.
 
RandFan said:
I'm not sure why the lack of definition is important. That atheism is defined isn't to give atheism some undue importance it is to help people understand what the word means.
Click to expand...

Perhaps Hunster is trying to convince us that Dawkins, Dennett, and others are correct, and that we should call ourselves "Brights". ;)
 
Marquis de Carabas said:
Yes, and if I say "no vampires" I've put at least one constraint on the universe--that it was not created by vampires. Is avampirism my religion now, too?
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, I'm not asserting that atheism = religion. It is more clearly not a religion than it is not a faith. There are no practices or rituals which can be ascribed to a large enough group of atheists. In terms of political organization, that may be to their detriment ;) .

My last post got at my feelings best: that the position of atheism has more in common with faith, than with knowledge. Atheism is not faith, but it occupies the same place in one's world view and is an assertion without knowledge.

As to vampires, we do not know that some uber-vampire didn't create the universe in a fever dream. However, I don't think anybody has a credible, or useful or even interesting test for this theory. I hope nobody gets a grant to go lie in a field and wait for the 'universal vampire' to suck their blood... at least not without rigorous theory, prior experimental background and peer support. In a similar manner, I don't think anyone's come up with a test for God...

What they can test or do, for example, is use COBE to get data about the early stages of the universe.

In a superficial way, yes, atheism carries with it an underlying assumption about the universe. Every belief does; since the universe is defined as the entirety of existence, everything has to do with it.
Click to expand...

Well, there's been a lot of run-around regarding belief vs. faith. You'd be right saying that a belief that the sun will rise tomorrow is better supported than faith in something. However, faith carries with it (not only an assumption about the universe) political and social implications as well. I think these political and social implications also go into my assertion that atheism is more faith-like than knowledge-like.

I hope you will note that I never said it was.
Click to expand...

I don't think that you did say it was, but it was part of my thinking on what's going on. I think I'd have to read more about epistemology to get a good sense of where knowledge ends and belief has to take over. Presumably all knowledge is based on some set of beliefs, but I just don't know.

chris epic said:
"some people" that's a pretty vague response, and flashing the fallacy card was a little inappropriate. I'm wasn't diverting anyone's attention from faith and atheism by bringing up agnosticism, I was pointing out the irony of atheism, hard or soft, that its just as presumptious a notion....etc (I don't think I need to repeat myself)
Click to expand...

Oh, well I hope from my posts you'll recognize that I'm on your side. I don't want agnostics to get caught in some sort of trap where an atheist says, "Hah! That's not what atheism is all about. Strawman! Waaaah!" So my vagueness was more an uneasy caution than any slight against you. I hope you'll accept my apology if you thought it was.
 
Last edited:
13 pages, and I've got to ask:

What difference does it make to a theist if an atheist has faith or atheism is a belief of some sort? Does it make a theist feel more secure in his beliefs if he believes that non-believers have to believe in their non-belief?

I've come up with a new definition:

Apatheist def. One who does not care one way or another regarding supposed supernatural beings.

I am an Apatheist. I really don't care if there is a god or not. I live my life as if there is no god, because no god has given me a reason to care. So, even if there is one, I don't give a ().
 
joobz said:
If I was to assuming dorkiness, I'd guess it's a reference to Wolfram and Hart from the TV show Angel.
Click to expand...
Quality TV. I rather doubt Hunster has much time for such plebeian pursuits. You'll have twigged the "Higgs" allusion, of course. With Hunster I stick to spooky-interaction-at-a-distance, lest I gain inertia and lose the will to live. He's tricksy though; he questioned my use of "phaenomenon" - a perfectly acceptable alternative spelling, in fact the original one - and I was absently-mindedly about to correct him before I pulled myself up. Once engaged with the Hunster Field you never know freedom again.

It's true.

Has kurious_kathy looked in yet?
 
RandFan said:
How am I trying to "pin" you?......
Click to expand...

In a way I won't allow. How will I not allow it?

Disengagement.

I've been down the long path with you before. Not only was it tedious and pointless, it almost got scary.

Besides, I've got lots of other folks on this forum who I more enjoy engaging.

Bye, Randfan.
 
Region Rat said:
Apatheist def. One who does not care one way or another regarding supposed supernatural beings.

I am an Apatheist. I really don't care if there is a god or not. I live my life as if there is no god, because no god has given me a reason to care. So, even if there is one, I don't give a ().
Click to expand...

Hah!

I hijack your term and since I was already saying that I'm probably best described as an apathetic agnostic, I take

Apagnostic def. One who does not care one way or another regarding supposed supernatural beings... with the attached rider that for thousands of years of civilization, no human has satisfactorially answered the question, "Why something rather than nothing?"... and is not likely to soon.

In fact, your escape clause of "even if there is one, I don't give a ()" lands you in my camp!

:p

...

;)
 
Region Rat said:
13 pages, and I've got to ask:

What difference does it make to a theist if an atheist has faith or atheism is a belief of some sort? Does it make a theist feel more secure in his beliefs if he believes that non-believers have to believe in their non-belief?

I've come up with a new definition:

Apatheist def. One who does not care one way or another regarding supposed supernatural beings.

I am an Apatheist. I really don't care if there is a god or not. I live my life as if there is no god, because no god has given me a reason to care. So, even if there is one, I don't give a ().
Click to expand...
Not apathetic enough not to tell us so, I see. :)

Is this a JREF legend in the making? Everybody's dropping in, even if only to say they're not coming. Hey RandFan, lookin' good - M le Marquis, always a pleasure - thaiboxerken, still kickin'? - yo zaayrdragon, been too long y'old reptile you - Tricky, no party's complete, man ... I could schmooze all night.
 
CapelDodger said:
Not apathetic enough not to tell us so, I see. :)
Click to expand...

I've been wondering about that for myself...

I'm apathetic to the supernatural being thingy, but not to how people call themselves, or worse, point fingers and call each other.

Plus, this is a fun way to avoid the programming I'm supposed to be doing!

:D
 
CapelDodger said:
.....Is this a JREF legend in the making? Everybody's dropping in, even if only to say they're not coming. Hey RandFan, lookin' good - M le Marquis, always a pleasure - thaiboxerken, still kickin'? - yo zaayrdragon, been too long y'old reptile you - Tricky, no party's complete, man ... I could schmooze all night.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a real love-fest in the making.
 
Jimbo07 said:
I've been wondering about that for myself...

I'm apathetic to the supernatural being thingy, but not to how people call themselves, or worse, point fingers and call each other.

Plus, this is a fun way to avoid the programming I'm supposed to be doing!

:D
Click to expand...
Get back to work, skivvy! You programmers today, don't know you're born. Those methods won't get coded on their own, you know. In our day we didn't even have methods! Really, we made it up as we went along. Properties were things we bought with the proceeds.

To me the supernatural is just a subset of fiction. More specifically a subset of a subset, fiction that some people think is fact. Supernatural elements can slip out of that subset entirely when the last believer dies. Greek myths were supernatural once, for instance, now they're just fiction. (As an aside, all that cack that's spouted about the Bible having the "greatest stories ever told" puh-leeease, have these people not read of Jason? Sinbad? Beowolf? Sadly for them, probably not.) The Hollow Earth may follow one day.

My goat is still got when some Philosopher (and joobz is one, I'm not going to hide behind innuendo) claims to have me in its sophistic net. I will not have it. I will not have my recognition of obvious fiction classified with the ravings of those who don't recognise it. I will not wade through some Philosopher's lexical swamp or leap through its smoke-rings. I will call it smug and solipsistic and challenge it to prove different.

I do it for the children. Will nobody think of the children?


eta: Jimbo, some of us are getting together for a game of cards after the party, if you're up for it. :)
 
Last edited:
Huntster said:
In a way I won't allow. How will I not allow it?

Disengagement.

I've been down the long path with you before. Not only was it tedious and pointless, it almost got scary.

Besides, I've got lots of other folks on this forum who I more enjoy engaging.

Bye, Randfan.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: Was there an answer there?

RandFan: How am I trying to "pin" you?
Hutster: In a way I won't allow.

:D Bye Huntster. I don't want to scare you. Do yourself a favor. Don't read the Old Testament. It is full of genocide, the killing of siblings, children and barbarism that is beyond comprehension.

Huntster, don't read the story of Jephthah's daughter (Judges 11: 30-38). DON'T!

Don't be scared of folks like me Huntster. Be scared of any one that would subcribe to the notion that killing infant boys or one's own daughter to please god is moral. I'm not the one who wrote the Bible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom