Is there an "atheist perspective"?

[Sledge]

People have responded to your OP, Christian. Your inability to engage with those people is highly suspicious. The simple point you refuse to acknowledge is that atheists are not a group of people, but the term applied to people who aren't members of a group. The one thing they have in common is they answer "no" to the question "Do you believe in any gods?"

 

[ideogram]

I don't think it is the same thing. A more appropriate analogy would be left-handed people. The category is people who are left-handed. I might hypothesize that because they are left-handed and the world being how it is, it is possible that they might have other traits in common.

I'm not going to argue analogies with you. The purpose of an analogy is to make clear to someone something they don't understand. You can't actually convince someone of something they refuse to believe with an analogy.

 

[ideogram]

This time, I'm not asking a question. There is no hidden agenda. I think it is a valid exercise. I don't commit to any position in this matter, just think it is something to consider. Further, I think that if the hypothesis is correct, it is useful.

This is clearly a strawman. Nowhere have I stated what I believe and I have not stated that anybody is wrong.

And yet you are now telling me that I am wrong. When the discussion leads to a conclusion you don't believe, you start arguing with the premises.

I think you truly believe what you say. But you are lying to yourself. Your actions speak louder than your words.

 

[Christian]

I'm not fighting anything. Nobody taught me that I needed to believe in any gods, and I never saw a reason to. I know plenty of people who were taught to believe in gods, and they never saw a reason to question those beliefs. Our perspectives seem pretty similar.

I think you are missing the way the brain works. It tends to naturally do weird things. Things that are not rational or objective. It has been put forth that the brain is predisposed to the supernatural, to blend reality with fantasy. I can speculate that a person who is more skeptical will have to fight this natural tendency to believe in deities.

For somebody who doesn't want to commit to a position, you sure don't seem to be accepting of what any actual atheists have to say, or to change your position from "I think I'm right and you're wrong but I won't say why."

But not once have I said I'm right. I don't understand this insistence to attribute to me a position I do no hold. I have acknowledge that I don't know if the hypothesis is correct. But I have stated that I don't believe that just reasoning can prove there is no atheist perspective.

Yet, you've given no actual reasons that you disagree with others' positions, other than the fact that you think there's something more to atheism than what actual atheists are telling you.

Let me be emphatic and once again state my position in this matter. I don't think it is correct to, a priori, via logical reasoning alone (without testing the hypothesis) one can reasonably discard the idea that there is an atheist perspective.

If you want to know about how Christians feel about a given topic, would you ask atheists or Christians? How would you feel about an atheist telling a group of Christians that even though they're all saying similar things, the atheist feels that the atheist hypothesis on Christianity has more value?

I think that a particular groups opinion is not relevant because it is not statistically relevant. We need to make our survey on a random sample, and this sample must not know it is being queried on this. (aside from other considerations)

You need to start discussing more and not just throwing theories out there, that can't be refuted because you think you're right.

I have been discussing plenty and giving out my views with full explanations.

 

[Marduk]

That's not what Wikipedia says.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_China

It seems most chinese are theist, just not the western brand of it.

It seems the majority aren't

 

[lionking]

Once again, I missed the question. Sorry you feel this way. As soon as I understood I answered your question.

Edit

 

[ideogram]

Let me be emphatic and once again state my position in this matter. I don't think it is correct to, a priori, via logical reasoning alone (without testing the hypothesis) one can reasonably discard the idea that there is an atheist perspective.

I told you I agreed with this. Why are you trying to argue with me?

 

[Christian]

I gave you my perspctive on life, and you now say rhat it is ony marginally relative, and "outside your bounds of knowledge", and you say it is only marginal to your header which stated specifically:
Is there an "atheist perspective"?

I stated this because clearly you chose what information to share. I'm sure you can appreciate the idea that if you are the judge of what is relevant to share, it probably will be biased to your point of view.

I didn't ask what is a particular atheist perspective. I know you can see the difference.

So, I answered your header, and what did I get? You don't want to know what I think, or do, or believe, because as in your thread on ego, you have pre conceived ideas, and if people do not answer in the way you wiah them to, you simply throw out terms such as "strawman" whixh lets you stay all warm and fuzzy, and in no way advances the discussion.

I was being factual, please refer to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

So, please respond to what I posted, not with a one liner, but with how I fit into some sort of atheist "standard" which is what you seem to be trying to do, or actually make a point. Since you have deserted (run away) from your "ego" thread, because nobody fitted what certainly is beginning to appear to be your pre conceived opinion of what you think atheists are, please have a point.

Norm

I want you to consider that it is not an easy thing to respond to multiple posters who have each a particular point or points to refute. On both threads, I think I'm accurate to state, I am the one who has posted the most responses. I am here addressing the idea that caused the bigger discussion and will continue until I believe I have no more to contribute.

 

[Christian]

I think you are correct in this supposition, but nonetheless, it would be interesting to see if there were any characteristics that held across cultural barriers. There's no reason not to ask the question and look at the evidence.

This has been one of my points all along. I'm glad you can see this.

Actually, it doesn't have to be just a mental exercise and pure speculation. There are surveys out there. If you (or anyone else reading) can find the data, I can run the analysis and see what the data says.

I'm glad that a statistician has entered the discussion. This is my general train of thought

The null hypothesis doesn't need to be accepted on logic. It's chosen and assumed true because when you reject it, you do so at a specified level of confidence and the alternative is deemed the better fit to the data.

Yes, in this case I say it should not be accepted by logic alone. And your general understanding of my point of view is giving me hope.

 

[Sun Countess]

I think you are missing the way the brain works. It tends to naturally do weird things. Things that are not rational or objective. It has been put forth that the brain is predisposed to the supernatural, to blend reality with fantasy. I can speculate that a person who is more skeptical will have to fight this natural tendency to believe in deities.

My mistake then. I thought I was just living a normal childhood, bugging my brothers and looking forward to library Tuesdays. I didn't realize I was having such a huge internal struggle, fighting my natural tendencies to believe in deities. Of course the first deity I learned about was Zeus. Was it wrong for my parents to tell me he was imaginary?

But not once have I said I'm right. I don't understand this insistence to attribute to me a position I do no hold. I have acknowledge that I don't know if the hypothesis is correct. But I have stated that I don't believe that just reasoning can prove there is no atheist perspective.

First, you haven't stated any hypothesis clearly, other than: There's something a bit "odd" about atheists that causes them to see the world differently. I can't say what it is, and all these atheists telling me that they have nothing in common beyond a lack of belief in deities aren't going to make me budge from my position.

It's obvious that nothing anybody says will shake you from your position. Obviously you can't interview every atheist in the world (and remember, there are plenty of atheists who would never admit so in public), but the small sample here should be enough to at least consider that we're a varied bunch. We have different view on politics, education, spirituality, child-rearing, sex, volunteerism, and any every other topic.

I have been discussing plenty and giving out my views with full explanations.

Okay, then. Here's a question: Do you think that an atheist like me, raised in a secular home in a primarily Jewish neighborhood, would have different views than an atheist who was raised in a fundamentalist christian home?

 

[Christian]

People have responded to your OP, Christian. Your inability to engage with those people is highly suspicious.

I have answered all pertinent questions with full responses. I really don't know what else I need to do. I have given you direct and unequivocal answers.

The simple point you refuse to acknowledge is that atheists are not a group of people, but the term applied to people who aren't members of a group. The one thing they have in common is they answer "no" to the question "Do you believe in any gods?"

I can't acknowledge something I believe it's not true. I believe atheist are a group of people. And I have pointed out specifics statistics based the label. I can even cite a population statistic on atheists. Atheists are 2-3% of the world population.

I accept that the null hypothes is that the label is all they have in common but can't accept that solely via logical reasoning it is proven.

I don't know how to be more clear than this. I hope you can appreciate the fact that we don't have to agree and that my reasoning might be at a lower level than yours (and I can't grasp your correct level of reasoning) What I will not accept is you, questioning my sincerity. I think that should not be a part of any discussing in the Forum. But that is just my opinion.

 

[lionking]

Atheists are 2-3% of the world population.

Where's your evidence of this? You have already seen here that over 50% of Chinese are atheist. This alone constitutes far, far more than 3% of the world's population.

 

[Christian]

My mistake then. I thought I was just living a normal childhood, bugging my brothers and looking forward to library Tuesdays. I didn't realize I was having such a huge internal struggle, fighting my natural tendencies to believe in deities. Of course the first deity I learned about was Zeus. Was it wrong for my parents to tell me he was imaginary?

From the way you write, I think I can explain my position. (this does not mean we will agree on any level but at least we will understand the other's position.

No, I didn't say there is a huge internal struggle or that this tendencies have major effects. What I'm saying is that whatever adjusments an atheist has to make, might produce the unintended consequences of common traits.

First, you haven't stated any hypothesis clearly, other than: There's something a bit "odd" about atheists that causes them to see the world differently. I can't say what it is, and all these atheists telling me that they have nothing in common beyond a lack of belief in deities aren't going to make me budge from my position.

This is not fair. I have stated my position clearly again and again and it is not the one above. Maybe, if you quote where you get this from, I can try to clarify or correct my wording.

It's obvious that nothing anybody says will shake you from your position. Obviously you can't interview every atheist in the world (and remember, there are plenty of atheists who would never admit so in public), but the small sample here should be enough to at least consider that we're a varied bunch. We have different view on politics, education, spirituality, child-rearing, sex, volunteerism, and any every other topic.

We don't need to survey every atheist to be almost 100% certain of an atheist perspective (it exists, it does not) No, the small sample here should not lead me to conclude anything. The sample would not be statistically relevant.

Okay, then. Here's a question: Do you think that an atheist like me, raised in a secular home in a primarily Jewish neighborhood, would have different views than an atheist who was raised in a fundamentalist christian home?

Yes, of course.

 

[Christian]

Where's your evidence of this? You have already seen here that over 50% of Chinese are atheist. This alone constitutes far, far more than 3% of the world's population.

First, thats not what the statistics says. Non-religioius is not the same as atheist. I think the chinese are primarily theists.

From this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
I quote:

"A 2005 survey published in Encyclopædia Britannica found that the non-religious made up about 11.9% of the world's population, and atheists about 2.3%."

 

[Sledge]

I have answered all pertinent questions with full responses. I really don't know what else I need to do. I have given you direct and unequivocal answers.

So you claim. Everyone else disagrees. What does this suggest to you?

I can't acknowledge something I believe it's not true. I believe atheist are a group of people.

Your belief is irrelevant, and wrong.

And I have pointed out specifics statistics based the label. I can even cite a population statistic on atheists. Atheists are 2-3% of the world population.

Even if true, so what?

I accept that the null hypothes is that the label is all they have in common but can't accept that solely via logical reasoning it is proven.

And now we come to the nub of the matter. You can't accept something proven by logical reasoning. What will you accept? Something written on gold tablets presented by an angel? God speaking to you from a burning bush? A snake whispering in your ear?

I don't know how to be more clear than this.

This appears to be sadly true.

I hope you can appreciate the fact that we don't have to agree

We kinda do. See, you're trying to tell me something about myself. I think we very much need to agree on this, or you need to shut up about it.

and that my reasoning might be at a lower level than yours (and I can't grasp your correct level of reasoning)

There is no "might" about it.

What I will not accept is you, questioning my sincerity. I think that should not be a part of any discussing in the Forum. But that is just my opinion.

Your opinion is, again, wrong.

 

[Skeeve]

The simple point you refuse to acknowledge is that atheists are not a group of people, but the term applied to people who aren't members of a group.

Christian is 2/2 for threads with this concept.

I can't wait for the next one.

 

[Sun Countess]

From the way you write, I think I can explain my position. (this does not mean we will agree on any level but at least we will understand the other's position.

I'm honestly trying to understand yours. You seem to think that atheists have something more in common than a lack of belief in something. Do all the people who don't collect stamps have a common perspective?

No, I didn't say there is a huge internal struggle or that this tendencies have major effects. What I'm saying is that whatever adjusments an atheist has to make, might produce the unintended consequences of common traits.

What adjustments have I had to make? I was just a kid living my life. Some of my friends went to temple on Saturday, others went to church on Sunday, and I ate cereal and read the comics. I'm now living in an area where 38% of the population doesn't practice any religion.

This is not fair. I have stated my position clearly again and again and it is not the one above. Maybe, if you quote where you get this from, I can try to clarify or correct my wording.

Because you want to know how atheists see the world, and when they tell you, you ignore it. You think that we see things differently, but you can't say how. You've mentioned fighting natural tendencies and making adjustments, but it's all speculation. If an atheist tells you that's not the case at all, you won't shift your hypothesis, which isn't even clear to begin with.

I'm just seeing shades of yrreg telling atheists that they're angry at god, and not listening to what actual atheists have to say.

We don't need to survey every atheist to be almost 100% certain of an atheist perspective (it exists, it does not) No, the small sample here should not lead me to conclude anything. The sample would not be statistically relevant.

But if you ask ten atheists what their perspective is on something, and get ten different answers, what do you think will change with a larger sample size? You can't think that if you ask 100 atheists, you'll lock in on a commonality.

Yes, of course.

So which of us has the correct atheist perspective?

 

[Christian]

I'm not going to argue analogies with you. The purpose of an analogy is to make clear to someone something they don't understand. You can't actually convince someone of something they refuse to believe with an analogy.

Ok, let me use an analogy. Let's substitute the category. It would look like this:

Is there a "left-handed perspective"?

Another way to put this would be to ask if left-handed have other common traits where one could predict their perspective.

My hypothesis would read like this:

left-handed have other traits in common that allows to predict their perspective on a variety of topics or situations

Where do I come up with this idea? I speculate that left-handed is a trait that comes from a gene. This particular trait molds the brain to think and react in certain ways in specific situations. This molding affects the way individuals think, thus creating a distinct left-handed perspective.

There are several ways to test this hypothesis, but I think a survey is a good start. We could survey 1,000 people (randomly picked around the world. We would survey more than 1,000 but would only consider the answers of those who are atheist, to mask the survey). We would have our same size control group where the common trait be something else. Then we would look for common traits.

It's important to point out that the most we could conclude is that the average left-handed is more likely to be more of this or that. For example, the findings could be:

left-handed are more likely to be more cautious than the general population, on average.
left-handed are more likely to be more ambidextrous than the general population, on average.
left-handed are more likely to be smarter than the general population, on average.

And so forth.

From this, one can guess the general left-handed perspective on specific topics, issues, etc.

This is only a mental exercise and pure speculation (on my part). I do think it is an interesting topic to consider.

 

[lionking]

First, thats not what the statistics says. Non-religioius is not the same as atheist. I think the chinese are primarily theists.

From this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
I quote:

"A 2005 survey published in Encyclopædia Britannica found that the non-religious made up about 11.9% of the world's population, and atheists about 2.3%."

You know what they say about statistics. So of the 50% of non-religious Chinese, only a very small proportion don't believe in god? This stretches credibility.

The corollary applies as well. Buddhists follow a religion but are atheists.

 

[fromdownunder]

I stated this because clearly you chose what information to share. I'm sure you can appreciate the idea that if you are the judge of what is relevant to share, it probably will be biased to your point of view.

I didn't ask what is a particular atheist perspective. I know you can see the difference.

I am sorry, but I actually thought that it was data that you were after. After all, if you wish to perform an analysis of your question as to what the atheist perspective is, I would have thought that actual data was relevent.

I am not really sure what you mean by "relevant" data, since despite your disclaimer. you seem to insist that there is an atheist perspective viz:

I can't acknowledge something I believe it's not true.

So, when people come along and provide information that your pre-conception is not true, then you simply refuse to look at the data provided, and say "it probably will be biased "

OK, in one way fair enough. Tell us the specific data you are looking for rather than trying to run people through a maze of your own making.

Getting any information as to what you actually want to know is like pulling teeth from a chicken. And the "just asking questions" thing does not really cut it.

Norm