Woppit must be spent by now. Surely?
molgrips,
I know you're an atheist (with an apparent interest in the anthropology of believers 🙂 So I was using "you" in the sense of "someone who believes those things" not necessarily talking about you in particular.
I do prefer "materialist" to "atheist" as a description of how I feel about this stuff, but I'm quit prepared to say that "I believe in no gods" (as a statement of atheism) requires no faith.
Its a statement about my opinion based on the available evidence. And it would change if the evidence changed.
Are you saying that an opinion based on the available evidence, and prepared to change if the evidence changes, is a "faith" position?
Doesn't sound like it to me 🙂
colournoise
"not stamp collecting" is not a hobby.
“not stamp collecting” is not a hobby
Awww well that’s crap.
I’m bloody awesome at it too 🙁
“not stamp collecting” is not a hobby
I tried it. Couldn't not get into it.
Dunno what I'm gonna do with all these stamps.
Hypothesis – ” God exists”
Evidence – zero
Thus the hypothesis is null. there is no god
Nonsense. Because evidence could appear. Something which has been neither proven nor disproven is 'unproven', meaning that you don't know.
Is there a marble under this cup? Well, you cannot see any evidence of it, can you? But that doesn't prove it's not there, clearly. Until the cup is lifted, the hypothesis is unproven.
Are you saying that an opinion based on the available evidence, and prepared to change if the evidence changes, is a “faith” position?
No, quite the opposite. That position you describe is agnosticism. Atheism is being absolutely sure there's no God. And since it's unproven and even unprovable (in my view) then you can only have faith in that position.
It's only a semantic argument, I admit. But I find it interesting to unpick the things people think. Mainly because I don't like the way that so many atheists feel so superior. And yes, if this forum were full of superior-sounding Christians being dicks, I definitely would be arguing on the atheist side.
if this forum were full of superior-sounding Christians being dicks,
Rule Number two of "Jesus says don't be a dick" club......
Atheism is being absolutely sure there’s no God.
You keep asserting this position. It’s incorrect. Given the effort that you put into trying to understand the position of theists, you’d think you could spend a bit more time trying to understand atheism.
There is no common ‘belief system’ amongst atheists. Atheism is NOT a belief system. It is simply a label for ‘everyone else’. I’m an atheist; I’m not ‘absolutely sure’ that there is no God. I’m just sure I’ve seen no evidence for any supernatural deities, and I’ve not been convinced by any theists argument. It’s just an irrelevant but sometimes interesting subject.
The ‘sureness’ that you speak of is not to to with the existence or otherwise of a deity. I couldn’t care less, in the nicest possible way. It’s to do with the special privileges granted the religious on the grounds of their beliefs, and how theism impacts upon those who don’t want it to. I’m SURE that that is unjust, and I will always position myself against it, whether it be State sponsored homophobia, repression of women’s rights in the name of Christianity in Northern Ireland, or indoctrination in State schools, etc etc.
That shit is not okay, I’m sure of that.
nealglover,
don't listen to me , keep being awesome!
perchy,
you're doing it wrong
molgrips
Your definition of "atheist" us a bit strong
You say "Atheism is being absolutely sure there’s no God."
google says "a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods."
Thats me (the second one) I lack belief. I am a belief lacker. I dis-belief 🙂
And if the evidence changed so would I.
Definition wise I also like the description from diskworld of (paraphrasing);
"A man who would stand on the top of a mountain, in wet copper armour, in a thunderstorm, shouting "All gods are bastards!""
Molgrips - I am certain there is no god given the lack of evidence - thats atheism. I know there is no god any type, I have looked all over for him
In your playing with semantics you have lost the meaning of the words.
By your interpretation science is faith!
I know there is no god any type, I have looked all over for him
Perhaps he saw you looking for him and was hiding until you went away?
By your interpretation science is faith!
No because science is never certain, science is built on doubt.
Atheism is NOT a belief system.
No, but it is a belief. You cannot prove there is no God, therefore, you can only believe there is no God. Therefore atheism is a belief. QED.
🤩
Great thread.
molgrips,
I don't "believe there are no gods",
I "lack belief that there are any". I live my life as if they don't exist (except on internet forums and when they push their random improbabilities and into politics or society.
To put it another way if someone had been raised in a place that had no concept of religion, they would be an atheist, or "one who lacks belief". You seem to think that atheism requires a positive effort of will, or a series of philosophical assumptions, but it doesn't, its the default.
Your definition of atheist is wrong.
Molgrips - if nothing in science is certain then its faith based! YOu cannot have it both ways. My belief in science and my belief in the lack of gods are based on the same things - the evidence or lack of.
In your own words
You cannot prove that evolution is true, therefore, you can only believe that evolution is trues. Therefore evolution is a belief. QED
Or - you cannot prove many accepted things in science. However you can weigh the evidence.
To answer Ton’s question, with a quote from Wiki..
The ceremony was marred in 2002 when a disagreement between the Armenian and Greek bishops over who should emerge first with the Holy Fire led to a struggle between the factions. In the course of the scuffle the Armenian's candle was blown out, forcing him to reignite his "Holy Fire" using a cigarette lighter, while the Greek Patriarch was despoiled of one of his shoes. In the end the Israeli Police entered the premises to restore order
So, yes. A cigarette lighter was used to re-light the flame.
The quote doesn’t however go on to explain whether there has always been a method of ignition, or subsequent quote to prove whether a cigarette lighter is always carried into the “tomb”
However, due to the importance of the “event” and the fact that billions of believers wait with baited breath on this particular incident/event that who ever entered the tomb would be foolish to not take in ... and maybe use ... a method of re-ignition should it be required.
Which makes me now wonder what would happen if this flame were not to ignite, ever. And the subsequent consequences thereafter ...
Woppit is getting his second wind now.....
perchypanther
I know there is no god any type, I have looked all over for him
Perhaps he saw you looking for him and was hiding until you went away?
A revelation! Thats the answer! I believe!
Brought up RC Catholic, but not been to church for many years. It's about being a decent person, that's all, and it's what any religion is about, but not taking it to extremes. It's about respecting yourself and respecting other folk. Simple.
“No, but it is a belief. You cannot prove there is no God, therefore, you can only believe there is no God. Therefore atheism is a belief. QED.“
As an atheist, I do not believe there is sufficient evidence which proves the existence of a god or gods. This is not a belief in something. I do not believe there is sufficient evidence which proves the existence of the Loch Ness monster either. This is not a belief. The starting point is not believing in everything and then slowly disprove things. The starting point is , there is not god or gods, as there is not any evidence, if a believer thinks there is, then it’s up to them to prove.
It’s about being a decent person, that’s all, and it’s what any religion is about, but not taking it to extremes. It’s about respecting yourself and respecting other folk.
That’s a lovely sentiment, but you can do all of that without religion or a belief in an all powerful deity; Wheaton’s law has it pretty much covered. Some religious types (not the lovely ones on STW, obviously) seem to assume that morality originates from religion, when actually morality probably predates religion, and CERTAINLY predates the Abrahamic big three.
v8ninety
Subscriber
There is no common ‘belief system’ amongst atheists. Atheism is NOT a belief system.
Yup. Atheism is not a belief, it's the absence of belief. There's not a religion-shaped hole in the head that has to be filled with faith in something- the absence of belief is just nothing at all.
It's like insisting that everyone is a cyclist, and it's just that some people have an unbike.
Brought up RC Catholic
Sweet! Is the R for remote or radio?
I don’t believe in god or gods of any kind. I also don’t consider myself to be an atheist or agnostic. Putting specific terms on just not getting involved in something is just silly. Why does religion seem to differ in this respect?
I don’t like football, is there a term for that? Soap operas? Deep sea diving? I’m just somebody that thinks religion or deity worship is a bit silly. Pretty much how I view football and love island too. Does that make me an atheist? I don’t have faith that a god of any kind doesn’t exist, I just assume it doesn’t. Might be wrong, but I don’t really care either way.
Molgrips – if nothing in science is certain then its faith based!
But science is a completely different concept. The scientific method has theories and evidence. That's it. You can't 'believe' in it because it is a demonstrably real thing. You can 'believe' that it will solve humanity's problems, because that's in the future and it's not yet known. Having faith in science means that you think one day it will solve problems.
Faith is about things that are un-knowable. And as I've shown, the existence of some kind of God is actually un-knowable, which is why it's a matter of faith [i]either way[/i]. Wether or not you call that atheism is up to you. I'm just trying to point out your conceit.
funkmasterp
Subscriber
I don’t believe in god or gods of any kind. I also don’t consider myself to be an atheist or agnostic. Putting specific terms on just not getting involved in something is just silly. Why does religion seem to differ in this respect?
I think more and more that's becoming true. It did make sense to have a word for the nonreligious, in the days when religion was presumed, where most people were indoctrinated into a faith as a matter of course, and where lacking faith could actually be quite a big deal. If 90% of people were deep see divers, you probably would want a word for the Dry. But as time has passed and religion has declined that's really stopped being the case.
Is it important? Well, it probably encourages people to think things like "atheism is a faith", or "atheism is the rejection of the knowledge of god" because it makes it into a thing you do, rather than the absence of a thing you do. Words do matter, and all of these words came into use in a different, religious world and carry with them the assumptions and implications of that world. The entire reason that Huxley invented the term was that he was dissatisfied with the wrongheaded way the world talked about lack of faith, and thought that people loaded "atheist" with too many false assumptions for him to be happy considering himself one.
(yes, I know some people will claim that most people here are still religious, and point to the census or similar... so before that happens I'll just respond that if you ask the census question, then follow it with “Do you believe in Christ”, only 48% of all the “Christians” do. And just over half believe in God.)
Atheism means, quite simply, "without god". It doesn't imply anything more. Agnosticism is the more complex concept, it means "without the knowledge of god", and includes concepts like the truth of god being fundamentally unknowable.
But Ingersoll summed it up very well, "The Agnostic is an Atheist. The Atheist is an Agnostic. The Agnostic says, ‘I do not know, but I do not believe there is any God.’ The Atheist says the same. " What's changed isn't words or definitions, it's the assumptions that sit along with the words. As religion declines, so does the assumption that you must believe in something.
And as I’ve shown, the existence of some kind of God is actually un-knowable, which is why it’s a matter of faith either way.
No. Things that are non falsifiable can be dismissed out of hand. See Russell’s teapot or any number of similar analogies.
