Positive vs. Negative Atheism

[Navigator]

I have been thinking about what the difference may be between elves, vampires, Leprechauns and God, even if all those things are imaginary. Here's what I came up with as an analogy:

In mathematics we can have the concepts of really vast numbers, like a googleplex. We also have the concept of infinity. They are similar in that neither concept fits well in our heads - in the sense that they aren't "real" and are hard to manipulate. But although a googleplex is nearly/just as inconceivable as infinity, it's still limited. There's a googleplex plus one.

In that way, all the other mythical beings, while magical, are limited in some fashion. The slot reserved for "unlimited magic" goes to God. It's as if the element of mystery is an essential property. If you understand God, He's no longer God.

Which is why, I think, believers don't accept the "super-powerful alien" as equivalent to God. Give an alien all the powers of God we care to name, and it's still not God - because God isn't supposed to be captured in that way. God's a placeholder for "something beyond all the limits I can conceive." Which is a problem when we want to then say God exists, because everything we know that exists has some limit or other, the very property God is allergic to.

Well now I see what you mean when you are being specific about one idea of god(s) being the god of the Jews and Christians and Muslims. Although this seems to be a case where three different factions are proclaiming ownership of an idea of a god, specifically a god which is "something beyond all the limits I can conceive."

But the holes in this belief are that if this idea of god is "something beyond all the limits I can conceive." then anything attributed to it (including it being male) which I can conceive is thus something which has been conceived by human beings rather than directly told to them by this supposed god.

Thus, if this particular idea of god exists then it cannot be the same idea as the one presented and believed in by the Jews, Christians and Muslims through their perspective holy books.

It has similarities in that it shares similar descriptive qualities but wanders away from those when human beings are relating what it is (as an idea to believe in) ... it becomes owned, which means that the idea is not so god-like because it has become owned.

Then through the ownership, disagreement arises which in turn is given the green light in regards to what can be done to those who disagree with the owners interpretations and consequential beliefs formed and held re the idea. These acceptable methods of dealing with those who disagree/do not believe in, have been shown to be anything from expressions of derision all the way through to murder.

(Expressions of derision are but one rather small step away from expressions of murder.)

It is not the idea of god(s) which cause humans to behave hatefully toward each other. It is the idea that anyone should be in a position where they do not believe what you believe. Belief in itself is not solely confined to the notion of ideas of god(s). Theists beliefs are not the only beliefs which can and do have such affect on human behavior.

 

[Navigator]

What atheist group wants to kill people because of their lack of belief?

Apart from agreeing with what marplots answered I would answer that any atheist group which accepts any form of derision and hatefulness and belief in superiority of position in relation to other positions (theist or atheist) is potentially a group who will support the notion of killing those others in relation to those others lack of belief in what they believe in, in regard to their notion of superior position.

If you think that this is extreme, I do agree but it is a case of being matter of fact. Such behavior is easily able to devolve into murderous intent and then actual murder, given the right conditions.

One can hope that those conditions never actually eventuate, but history shows that belief systems can and do perpetuate such inhumanity. The problem is not only such type ideas of god(s) but the belief in those ideas. The same applies to those who believe in anything strongly enough that they would even argue with derogative expression against anything questioning their preciously held beliefs.

The problem, is belief. Dearly beloved belief. Belief which requires one to deride others who do not share said same belief. Even against others who hold no beliefs.

 

[Leumas]

Myths are not always about trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes. They are like metaphor.
Certainly I can take the biblical myth of creation and understand it as a way of trying to explain an irrational position.
Consciousness is trying to explain its position in relation to the universe.
I have big doubts that these stories were ever intended to become what they have become.
they became that way through how - as you say - 'charismatic' individuals used these stories, added to these stories and subjugated individual human consciousnesses through this process. However, by all accounts they were not charismatic. They were cold blooded killers. Bullies whom people feared to contradict.
To be sure, that is one use of organised religion. It is not to say that bullies have not used other things in order to control and direct the fearful.

Yep... there we go!

To theists it seems to be the ENTIRE DICTIONARY.

Especially when it suits their purposes in obfuscating while using casuistry to assuage their cognitive dissonance.

Any messy or embarrassingly stupid or vile or heinous bits in their scriptures become open to interpretation as metaphors to god knows what and allegories to no one knows what except of course the one who is claiming allegories and metaphors since he, as a theist who spoke to god in one of his sessions with god obviously knows how to interpret those metaphors and allegories and mistranslated bits that ought to be taken in the paleo-sociological and paleo-geographical and paleo-anthropological and paleo-theological context which he of course knows how to do better than any mere atheist could ever do.

 

[Leumas]

.....
So again. Ideas of god(s) are reflective of needs. In one sense they appeal to the conscience to protect and provide for the weaker of the community. due to the fact that everyone is free to do whatever they want to, such appeal does not always work. Therefore, something arises from the idea of god(s) which is more on hand because it is apparent that god(s) do not respond - at least in matters where humans are capable of accomplishing the same thing that god(s) are partitioned to do.

When such human help is not available, then too bad, the bullies get what they want free from the threat of some other human force which can stop them.

Thus, without that other force, weaker humans resort to belief in ideas of god(s) not because they refuse to be logical and discard such silly notions, but because that is all that is left to them. That gives them at least the illusion that their illogical existence is not happening in vain, and that something cares about them. Would you rather they simply got along with the business of understanding that nothing cares for them, because that is the truth, scientifically speaking.

Because the science of the matter shows us plainly that nothing in the universe actually gives a toss for them or their predicament.
.....

When people are in pain they take narcotic painkillers.

Usually on these drugs it has a warning label telling the users of the drug that they should not drive or operate complex machinery.

Maybe the god-narcotics should be handed out in packages that warn its consumers that due to the impairing effects they should not engage in logical discussions or try to do any complex reasoning.

Maybe Churches should have warning labels much like the ones required by the FDA listing all the side effects and consequences of consuming that particular make and model of the god-drug being sold in that church.

 

[tsig]

I have been thinking about what the difference may be between elves, vampires, Leprechauns and God, even if all those things are imaginary. Here's what I came up with as an analogy:

In mathematics we can have the concepts of really vast numbers, like a googleplex. We also have the concept of infinity. They are similar in that neither concept fits well in our heads - in the sense that they aren't "real" and are hard to manipulate. But although a googleplex is nearly/just as inconceivable as infinity, it's still limited. There's a googleplex plus one.

In that way, all the other mythical beings, while magical, are limited in some fashion. The slot reserved for "unlimited magic" goes to God. It's as if the element of mystery is an essential property. If you understand God, He's no longer God.

Which is why, I think, believers don't accept the "super-powerful alien" as equivalent to God. Give an alien all the powers of God we care to name, and it's still not God - because God isn't supposed to be captured in that way. God's a placeholder for "something beyond all the limits I can conceive." Which is a problem when we want to then say God exists, because everything we know that exists has some limit or other, the very property God is allergic to.

Now all you have to do is prove magic exists.

 

[Leumas]

Yes it is. You are saying that 5 billion people are being told to kill each other. The fact is that if this were the case, we would be living in a far more volent world than we actually are living in.

I did not say they were ALL doing it. Though certainly some are doing so and some may not be doing so only out of inability and history is a record of how many did so.

But that is not what we are talking about.... we are talking about the "ideas of god(s)" right?

Whether or not people follow through with all the details of the idea does not reflect on the idea as it is set down quite clearly for all to see and read.

The Abrahamic god idea in all three models of this type of a god idea have supposedly written books that tell the adherents to kill nonbelievers.

The fact remains that the "god idea" that these people adhere to is one who is supposed to have written down laws that tell people adhering to his idea to kill nonbelievers.... Jews, Christians and Muslims can read their books where it shows that their god orders the killing of the nonbeliever. And in the Christian and Muslim cases this god promises to consign the soles of those nonbelievers to eternal burning in hell just for not believing.

The degree of each individual adherent's obedience or adherence to those laws and promises of revenge on nonbelievers does not change the idea itself. It is too late to do that now since they are written down.

Why don't the people who are disgusted by the current Abrahamic God Idea just give up on this idea and look for a less repulsive one?

If one is handed a chocolate chip cookie in which one knows for sure that some of the chips are in fact fecal matter while others may or may not be chocolate, how insane would one have to be and how desperate so as to pick out the fecal matter and then proceed with consuming the remaining cookie?

So yes, It is generalization. Also, do you know why you never answered these questions from the same post?

Because they are irrelevant to the discussion at hand and they are therefore nothing but Red Herrings.

 

[phiwum]

Yes, certainly. I will entertain examples that contradict this of course.



But you demonstrate my case. The reason we alter our views and identify false perceptions is by way of other perceptions. The slow motion replay is an excellent example of just this. I believe one experience until another changes my mind. But they are both the same currency.

What I do not commonly do (if ever) is believe all my experiences are suspect because experience is bad evidence. In fact, experienced "evidence" is usually apodictic. "Show me" is quite a powerful thing.

It is silly to pretend that all perception is on an even footing. There is obviously far greater reliability in watching a slow motion replay than in watching the actual event in real time, I'm sure you agree.

Now, let's talk about the personal experiences of those who have felt the presence of God (or whatever). Are these more like the repeatable, measureable and analyzable perceptions of the slow motion replay? Or are they rather experiences unique to the observer, not verifiable or indeed shareable with those around him, the sort of experience which is surely of the least reliable kind?

For my part, I know that not all perceptions are equally reliable, and I find that perceptions which are fleeting, with strong emotional components and involving an inability to share with others and confirm a similar experience are among the least reliable kind, not something that any reasonable person calls "extraordinary evidence".

It's fine to play devil's advocate, really it is, but it shouldn't require pretending that all perceptions are equally reliable evidence, that there is no difference between taking careful measurements of a physical object, feeling the presence of God, or experiencing something in a dream. At that point, one has crossed from being a devil's advocate to being willfully ignorant.

 

[Leumas]

Christians in far east Asia killing people because of their religion.

It should have been


Christians in Africa killing people because of their religion.


And of course don't forget this one too.

 

[Brian-M]

What is this OP about? Simply pointing out the differences between one type of atheist and another?

Partially.

Looking back at the OP, it's trying to clarify the differences between one type of atheist and another, and presenting an argument about the comparative rational basis of those positions.

It seems to me that at most it's trying to "convert" one type of atheist to another.

Explicit atheists are trying to convert others because they have this belief that the world would be better off if ideas of god(s) were absent.

Even if I were to grant you that atheists are trying to convert others (some are, others aren't), I was responding to your question about how many theist I'd converted with that argument.

My point was that I'm not actively trying to convert any theists, and the other people in this thread aren't trying to convert theists by posting here either, because the topic under discussion isn't directed at theists.

 

[Leumas]

....

Part of the problem with your argument is that is is not recognizing that that was another time and place and peoples ideas of that god have also changed.
.....

Yes... so did people's ideas of Vampires.

Once they were abhorrent monstrous creatures... and now they are teenaged girls' sex idols.

So does that make the ugly vampire Nosferatu a myth but Edward Cullen the sexy vampire a reality?


[imgw=100]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/95/Nosferatu_Phantom_der_Nacht.jpg[/imgw] [IMGW=100]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b6/Twilight_%282008_film%29_poster.jpg[/IMGW]

 

[Brian-M]

Yes it is. You are saying that 5 billion people are being told to kill each other. The fact is that if this were the case, we would be living in a far more volent world than we actually are living in.

They're being told to kill each-other by their religious texts.

Fortunately, many religious people either don't bother to read their holy texts or ignore many of the instructions in their holy texts.

ETA: For example...

Exodus 22:20 "He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed"

Exodus 23:24 "Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images."

Deuteronomy 13:12-15 "If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which the LORD thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying, Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known; Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you; Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword."

 

[psionl0]

Maybe I could, but the important question is: Can you?

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

I'd get yellowcarded for spamming if I posted each time just Christianity told its followers to kill non-Christians. I've never seen any atheist organization say anything like that. "You will die in the non-name of not-god!"

John 8:7.

 

[Leumas]

...


Thus, if this particular idea of god exists then it cannot be the same idea as the one presented and believed in by the Jews, Christians and Muslims through their perspective holy books.

.....

It is not the idea of god(s) which cause humans to behave hatefully toward each other. It is the idea that anyone should be in a position where they do not believe what you believe. Belief in itself is not solely confined to the notion of ideas of god(s). Theists beliefs are not the only beliefs which can and do have such affect on human behavior.

Yes...yes... we heard this from numerous casuists for YHWH from all three camps and from the all but countless sub-camps over millennia of Casuistry and Apologetics and Hermeneutics and Theology by hundreds of squandered brilliant minds.

 

[Leumas]

Apart from agreeing with what marplots answered I would answer that any atheist group which accepts any form of derision and hatefulness and belief in superiority of position in relation to other positions (theist or atheist) is potentially a group who will support the notion of killing those others in relation to those others lack of belief in what they believe in, in regard to their notion of superior position.

If you think that this is extreme, I do agree but it is a case of being matter of fact. Such behavior is easily able to devolve into murderous intent and then actual murder, given the right conditions.

One can hope that those conditions never actually eventuate, but history shows that belief systems can and do perpetuate such inhumanity. The problem is not only such type ideas of god(s) but the belief in those ideas. The same applies to those who believe in anything strongly enough that they would even argue with derogative expression against anything questioning their preciously held beliefs.

The problem, is belief. Dearly beloved belief. Belief which requires one to deride others who do not share said same belief. Even against others who hold no beliefs.

• Slippery Slope
• Poisoning the Well

 

[Leumas]

It is silly to pretend that all perception is on an even footing. There is obviously far greater reliability in watching a slow motion replay than in watching the actual event in real time, I'm sure you agree.

Now, let's talk about the personal experiences of those who have felt the presence of God (or whatever). Are these more like the repeatable, measureable and analyzable perceptions of the slow motion replay? Or are they rather experiences unique to the observer, not verifiable or indeed shareable with those around him, the sort of experience which is surely of the least reliable kind?

For my part, I know that not all perceptions are equally reliable, and I find that perceptions which are fleeting, with strong emotional components and involving an inability to share with others and confirm a similar experience are among the least reliable kind, not something that any reasonable person calls "extraordinary evidence".

It's fine to play devil's advocate, really it is, but it shouldn't require pretending that all perceptions are equally reliable evidence, that there is no difference between taking careful measurements of a physical object, feeling the presence of God, or experiencing something in a dream. At that point, one has crossed from being a devil's advocate to being willfully ignorant.

Well said!

Yes, but we know that people often fall prey to illusions and delusions and chemically (added or removed) induced hallucinations.

We do know that perception can be affected by nutritional, biological, physiological and psychological states and that people can be and are all the time scammed and tricked and bamboozled and hoodwinked (often by their very own gullible selves) into thinking and believing all sorts of things.

We have numerous examples of this from millennia of human experience.


Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

......

 

[Navigator]

How can the universe be illogical exactly? That is like saying rocks are illogical or fire is illogical or tsunamis are illogical.

Tell me why the universe exists and you will tell me also why the existence of the universe is logical.

Some consciousness is illogical indeed.... other consciousness invented the concepts of logical and irrationality which other consciousness don't even fathom.

The existence of consciousness in an illogical universe is irrational.

Show me why consciousness existing in this universe is rational.

 

[Navigator]

When people are in pain they take narcotic painkillers.

Usually on these drugs it has a warning label telling the users of the drug that they should not drive or operate complex machinery.

Maybe the god-narcotics should be handed out in packages that warn its consumers that due to the impairing effects they should not engage in logical discussions or try to do any complex reasoning.

Maybe Churches should have warning labels much like the ones required by the FDA listing all the side effects and consequences of consuming that particular make and model of the god-drug being sold in that church.

What kind of a world we would live in if everyone was a positive atheist?

It would be helpful if the OPoster and other PAs could say what kind of a world it would be if everyone was a PA.

Come on and give it a go. Convince me why I should become a PA by telling me what kind of a world I would be helping to create.

 

[Leumas]

John 8:7.

John 8:37-44

I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.
....
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.​

1 Thessalonians 2:14-16

....the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:​

Luke 19:27

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.​

 

[Leumas]

What kind of a world we would live in if everyone was a positive atheist?

It would be helpful if the OPoster and other PAs could say what kind of a world it would be if everyone was a PA.

Come on and give it a go. Convince me why I should become a PA by telling me what kind of a world I would be helping to create.

One that is better than the one with people who believe or defend belief in a god (or idea of a god) that is on record commanding people to do this stuff:

Mark 16:16

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.​

Luke 19:27

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.​

Matthew 25:31-41

When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth [his] sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire , prepared for the devil and his angels:​

Matthew 13:49

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.​

Mathew 10:37

He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.​

Matthew 15:24-26

But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.​

Deuteronomy 21:18-21

21:18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
21:19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
21:20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
21:21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
​

Deuteronomy 13

13:1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
13:2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
13:3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
13:4 Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him.
13:5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.
13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
13:7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;
13:8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:
13:9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
13:10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
13:11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.
13:12 If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which the LORD thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying,
13:13 Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known;
13:14 Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you;
13:15 Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword.​

 

[ynot]

Navigator mark 1 - “No, I'm not a atheist, I'm a nice agnostic, I neither believe nor disbelieve, I'm non-confrontational, I'm open-minded, I'm a better person than a nasty atheist”.

Navigator mark 2 - “Okay, I'm an atheist, but I'm not a nasty positive atheist, I'm a nice negative atheist, I don't believe but I don't disbelieve either, I'm non-confrontational, I'm open-minded, I'm a better person than a nasty positive atheist”.