Atheism is a faith.

Well, if you believe there is no god, then yes it is a faith. If you don't believe there is a god, then it isn't. :D

/semantics
 
Jimbo07 said:
How can 'no God' be the default position for something we just don't know anything about.

I would have thought that 'meh' was the default position...
Click to expand...

In the same way that "no geoplitzdrim" is the default position on whether or not geoplitzdrim exist.
 
drkitten said:
In the same way that "no geoplitzdrim" is the default position on whether or not geoplitzdrim exist.
Click to expand...

That would seem to be a practical consideration, rather than addressing any sort of TRUTH of existence.

I've often been a fan of practicality trumping TRUTH - woooOOOOOooo, but that doesn't mean I have a handle on Truth.

Oh yeah, and I guess my above statement about "Truth" (equating it to, well...) lands me in what, the apathetic agnostic camp?
 
Last edited:
Ooo, yet another opportunity for a thread to degrade into an argument about whether there is a useful distinction between "I do not believe X" and "I believe X is untrue".

:popcorn1
 
Jimbo07 said:
That would seem to be a practical consideration, rather than addressing any sort of TRUTH of existence.
Click to expand...

How can you address the TRUTH of something that isn't even well-defined enough for you to understand?
 
Jeez, one at a time people.

Rufo said:
No belief that there is a God is the default position. Belief that there is no God is not.
Click to expand...
Ok, I get the default position arguement. this goes inline with capel dodger's post.

Consider this : if nobody had ever thought up a religion, there would be no concept of religion for philosophers to knaw over, yet there would still be atheism. If atheism can exist in a world without the concept of religion, how is it a religion?
Click to expand...

Atheism can exist in the realm where not concept of a god exists. Yet, that is not the world we live in. It is, in a similar fashion, like the notion of a vacuum. A vacuum is where no matter exists. yet a vacuum doesn't truly exist in our universe. Even in deep space, it's just an area of extremely low pressure. So is atheism. You may reject the notion of a god. You may find it wholey illogical with your world view based upon the self consistent notions of the world we live in. But to claim that there is no faith in that view can not be true.
 
There is the very instant evidence shows up that such a thing is in fact true, and the person who "believes" it is untrue (in the religious sense) refuses to accept the evidence, but the person who thinks it is not true due to the lack of evidence changes their mind due to the incoming evidence. There's the difference.

That said, has anyone actually ever met any atheists who actually have a religious faith in "no god" as I described? Not in the circles I travel in, but then again there are plenty of people with blind faith in lots of silly stuff that have nothing to do with god. It's likely a dedicated astrologer might have faith in no god and only not believe in god for irrational reasons rather than rational ones. I just don't hang out with such people. Atheism just means one doesn't believe in a god, it doesn't say anything about reaching such a conclusion rationally :D.
 
joobz said:
Jeez, one at a time people.


Ok, I get the default position arguement. this goes inline with capel dodger's post.



Atheism can exist in the realm where not concept of a god exists. Yet, that is not the world we live in. It is, in a similar fashion, like the notion of a vacuum. A vacuum is where no matter exists. yet a vacuum doesn't truly exist in our universe. Even in deep space, it's just an area of extremely low pressure. So is atheism. You may reject the notion of a god. You may find it wholey illogical with your world view based upon the self consistent notions of the world we live in. But to claim that there is no faith in that view can not be true.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Faith is believing in the absence of evidence. One who is an atheist due to the total lack of evidence in a supernatural entity like god is not having "faith". It's just that simple. Show where one must make a leap of faith without appealing to something as meaningless as other people thinking it's true.
 
drkitten said:
And not collecting stamps is still a hobby.

And not living in Louisiana is still an address.

And not being a pharmacist is still a job.

And not-biology is still a college major.

And not pitching is still playing baseball.

And not drinking Scotch is still a form of alcoholism.
Click to expand...

again, these analogies are not similar. I'm stating that faith creeps in. It always does. to presume that you are devoid of faith is still a faith in your self. To think that there isn't more than what is known takes a faith. to think that we couldn't learn something, discover something completely astounding is a belief.
 
Ugh, I hate this argument.

Lack of a religion is as much of a "faith" as being naked is a style of fashion.
 
Dark Jaguar said:
Incorrect. Faith is believing in the absence of evidence. One who is an atheist due to the total lack of evidence in a supernatural entity like god is not having "faith". It's just that simple. Show where one must make a leap of faith without appealing to something as meaningless as other people thinking it's true.
Click to expand...
Good point. But then it seems that atheism relishes in ignorance. A willfull determination to not consider more because we can't detect more.
 
Hagrok said:
He's not saying it's a religion, he's saying it "takes faith"; whatever that's supposed to mean.
Click to expand...
Check the wording I responded to : "... compared to other religions." Then tell me joobz didn't beg the question. That's the second sentence. If joobz wanted to express your exegesis he should have done it more sequentially.
 
joobz said:
I've made this contention now in multiple threads and I wish to centralize it. The issue is a view on what atheism is compared to other religions.

the primary issue I have is the notion that atheism is some how not bogged down by ideologies like other religions. That some how, atheists are not encumbered with faith.

My primary conjecture is this: A belief that there is no god or to have no belief in god is still a faith.

To presume nothing else is out there requires faith.
The primary argument against this point is the Russell's Teapot analogy. However, I feel that it simply explains the absurdity of specific examples of god but fails to demonstrate why thinking there is nothing more (god like) isn't a faith.


well, this is my Forum opener. There were some quite good comments made in other forums against me and I'd like to address those when I get more time.
Thank you.
joobz
Click to expand...

well I am sure there will be hundreds of people willing to jump on this but ... oh well.

In order for your assertion to work it has to beg the question of whether the concept "god" has any validity.

I have been down this path many times in arguments with believers and it usually boils down to "something must have created it all". If yuo push hard enough the train of logic becomes

1) Everything that is created must be created by something.

2) At some point the thing doing the original creating has to be the original thing which was not created..

Of course - a moment's thought shows you that proposition 2 denies the validity of proposition 1. If uncaused creation is given as a possibility then they have obviated the need for a god.

But that aside. Unless someone can advance a credible argument that the concept of a mysterious, unknowable, invisible, all powerful entity that creates our world has some validity then there is no "faith" to be exercised. Faith would be believing that there is no god when one has been shown evidence there is.

Up to that point I just usually refer to it as sanity.

One other interesting thing I think you should rename the thread to "All faiths are atheist" after all - every faith denies at least one other god - several of them deny many gods...
 
Rufo said:
No belief that there is a God is the default position. Belief that there is no God is not.
Click to expand...
Deep. Care to have a crack at "How can atheism be a belief when it can exist in a Universe without the concept of belief?". Fitted to my previously supplied template.
 
Hagrok said:
However, I feel that it simply explains the absurdity of specific examples of god but fails to demonstrate why thinking there is nothing more (god like) isn't a faith.
Click to expand...
Please explain why it does, rather then just continuing to assert it.

Note: The answer "because I said so" does not count.
Click to expand...
Hagrok, you've made several post to this thread with a tone of condescension that is not appreciated.

As I see it, you can insert any desription of some belief and take it as your faith. Each example seems crazy except to those who believe.

What if we were to try the opposite and state, There isn't anything else out there. There isn't anything more. That nothing else greater that can a god is impossible. Why is that concept any different than the teapot?

But a generalized concept of something more, something coherent, something greater isn't any more foolish than to think that that is impossible.
 
CapelDodger said:
Check the wording I responded to : "... compared to other religions." Then tell me joobz didn't beg the question. That's the second sentence. If joobz wanted to express your exegesis he should have done it more sequentially.
Click to expand...


perhaps i wrote poorly there, and i apologize.
I do not wish to mean religion. I do not try to presume that there is a church of atheism. Although, i have, in other threads argued that some seem to wish for this to occur. (the calls for a symbol, the zealousness exhibited about the belief in nothing)
 
joobz said:
Good point. But then it seems that atheism relishes in ignorance. A willfull determination to not consider more because we can't detect more.
Click to expand...

If we cannot, even in theory, "detect more", then it is entirely meaningless to consider or even speculate about it.
 
Phrost said:
Ugh, I hate this argument.

Lack of a religion is as much of a "faith" as being naked is a style of fashion.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but your example is bad.

Naked is a fashion. look at the trend that existed with nudist camps.
 
joobz said:
But a generalized concept of something more, something coherent, something greater isn't any more foolish than to think that that is impossible.
Click to expand...

Having a concept of how it could be possible isn't foolish. Believing that it is so, because it could be so, is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom