Atheism vs theism
Is it now intellectually dishonest not to be atheist?
shareDon't even waste your time trying to rationalize theist apologetics. It's a fool's errand.
share
MovieChat Forums > Politics > Atheism vs theism
Could you elaborate on that?
shareWell it just seems that all religions have been thoroughly debunked by Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Hitchens etc
shareAnd yet even they don't have all the answers. I wouldn't stake my spiritual future on a bunch of angry, bitter, arrogant, lonely, self-hating men; and honestly, they couldn't debunk any religion to save their lives. Dawkins pissed his pants the moment he tried attacking Islam and got pummeled by its supporters.
shareI’ve watched lots of their videos. There maybe a bit of arrogance here and there but “bitter”, “self-hating” and “lonely” are simply just rose-tinted accusations. And if there is any bitterness it seems it’s coming from you?
I’ve watched them demolish all religions with ease.
Have you a link for this Dawkins business you mention? I’d be interested to watch.
Any time I watch Dawkins he strikes me as a clear-headed, rational intellectual.
If you truly need some objectivity, watch some films debunking them and then form your opinions, because all you're getting is a one-sided view of how they see the world, not everyone else. And no, I am not bitter. I call it the way I see it.
An unusually large proportion of atheists tend to be white men between the ages of 30-50, are from free-world societies, and often are living lives where they don't have to work very hard (such as college professors and scientists who work on theoretical stuff). While there are women who are atheists, they tend to be smaller in number, and rarely does any country have a larger atheist population than 30%, save for places like China and North Korea. It might do you some good to look into the subject.
Keep in mind who is actually calling people who follow religions "anti-science." I've mostly been hearing it only from the talking heads on tv, and please remember that they are reading a script. They aren't actually thinking.
So... religious people are "thinking" by believing there is an invisible man in the sky judging everything we do?
He is supposedly compassionate and loves us, yet not afraid to destroy the planet if we don't do everything he says. He is jealous and will also destroy if we don't believe in him. He tells people to sacrifice their children to show their belief, then the last second shows up and says he is just kidding.
Shit, can we get a book actually written by the guy? I want to hear his version.
Well, they can’t all be right can they?
All atheists do is apply the same disbelief any *insert religion here* has against *insert another here*
The just believe one less religion that theists.
Come on, we’re talking Iron Age outdated social control works of fiction and it’s time to stop pretending they are the words of omniscience
It's not about putting faith in things that are finite and unreliable. It's putting faith in something larger than yourself. It's finding answers that no atheist can answer. It's learning your true place in the universe. It's human nature to seek out answers to life's questions when you're not just trying to survive from day to day.
And by the way, the lessons that are taught by certain religions apply to today. They are timeless. To dismiss them as something ancient, outdated, and not applicable to today's problems is the same mentality that caused people not to learn from history, and they repeated the exact same mistakes as their ancestors before. I know of several countries throughout history that did that, and they suffered greatly.
By why rely totally on faith when faith can lead you to whatever answer you want? How do you know who's faith is right? I mean I could have faith that the Flying Spaghetti Monster farted the universe out of it's anus when it had diarrhea and it would have just as much logic and justification behind it as the bible.
shareYou would have to decide for yourself on that. But again, I would not put my faith in the crap that Richhard Dick Dawkins spews out. There's a reason not many people know about him.
And for the record, not all Christians are creationists. Some are scientists, enjoy studying it, and it does not conflict with their religion. (Note: they're not the same as Christian Scientists, that's some weird sect of Christianity).
Don't know a thing about Dawkins, and I don't put my faith in anyone, faith is unreliable, faith is an excuse for believing an assertion without proper evidence. The stuff I believe I don't need faith, I have a reasonable expectation based upon evidence.
shareI'd say common sense and rationale is what is key. Those that believe in a fairy tale are only desperate to hold onto their delusion for fear of truth not being what they want to hear, or want it to be.
People want understanding and meaning for their lives, but trying to find it in a savior who will take the burden of proof away for them, just so they can live eternal life somewhere, (in what form?), is a cop-out delusion and rather convenient don't you think. Nobody said the majority of the masses were intelligent or sharp.
[deleted]
You couldn't debunk the existence of flying unicorns to save your life. See what I did there?
shareIntellectually ignorant is more like it. Theists are more interested in siding with their feelings. It's a right-wing mentality which is why they have the market cornered on religious belief and conspiracy theories.
Alex Jones, evangelicals, and flat-earthers all express the same non-scientific belief in something. As they gain a following, it reinforces their beliefs. It doesn't matter to them that their audiences are gullible right-wingers. The recognition (and usually money) is what pushes them to continue. Any scientific counterpoint gets ignored by theists simply because they don't like the way it feels.
Religous thought appears both in the left-wing and right-wing mentality.
Indeed modern left has quite a big amount of religious thought, particularly wokes, which are the most important and mainstream trend in modern left.
With regard to conspiracy theories, they are extremely common in modern left, going from mythical male conspiracies to supposedly dominate women (the famous 'heteropatriarchy' conspiracy theory), to fictional Russian conspiracies and collusions in modern politics, to fictional history where blacks and other 'diversity' races were common in medieval Europe, or fictional history where white are portrayed as evil oppressors and non-whites as pure oppressed noble savages.
Theists start with the conclusion that there is a God and then they work backwards, being an atheist was always the intellectually honest position as there was never any evidence for any God.
shareAnd atheists start with the position there isn’t a god and work backwards. What’s your point?
shareThat isn't what atheism is, you are confused with gnosticism. Atheism is the nonacceptance of theistic claims, if you don't believe theists when they say there is a God then you are an atheist. You don't need evidence to be an atheist as atheism is not an assertion:
- Gnostic Theist - I know there is a God
- Agnostic Theist - I believe there is a God but I don't know for sure
- Agnostic Atheist (what I am) - I don't accept there is a God but I don't know for a fact there isn't one
- Gnostic Atheist - I know there isn't a God
Theists believe there is a God, Atheists do not believe there is a God. Whether they claim to know or not is a matter of whether they are Gnostic or Agnostic.
Atheism is an assertion simply because their beliefs cannot be proven. They don’t believe in god because they don’t think god exists. That is an unprovable assertion.
Atheism requires faith in the unknown, just like theism. No matter how much that bothers you.
Atheism is not an assertion, it's just the position that we don't believe theists, again you are confused with gnosticism. It's like this, I show you a jar of coins, it must be odd or even, if I just look at it and say it's even you are fully justified in not believing me because I didn't count them, all I did was look at them. But if you don't believe that it's even doesn't mean you are asserting it's odd. Same thing here, you are saying there's a God, I don't believe there is a good reason to think there is so I don't accept your claim, that doesn't necessarily mean I'm asserting there isn't a God. Atheism requires no faith, as long as theists can't prove their God atheism is the logical answer. Some atheists say there isn't a God (I am not one of them) but that's not a result of atheism, that's a result of gnosticism.
Anyone who doesn't accept there is a God (or the jar has an even number of coins) is an atheist, some atheists claim they know there isn't a God, some don't. You need to edit your post and replace atheists with "gnostic atheists". (although I'd argue that even a gnostic atheist has at least some basis in their assertions but that position requires them to prove a negative which is next to impossible)
Atheism requires as much faith as theism. Any questions?
shareYes,
Can you explain your viewpoint please?
Yes. Neither can be proven. That’s why it’s called “faith”.
You’re welcome.
Faith is belief in something you cannot prove, atheism requires no such thing.
shareFaith gets you nowhere, faith is an excuse people give when they have unjustified beliefs. You could have faith in anything so how do we determine who's faith is right? Also atheism doesn't require faith, it doesn't require faith to not believe in Santa Claus and it doesn't require faith to not believe in God.
shareBut what I can’t figure out is why people automatically assume God has to fit in somewhere.
What God? What is a God? How many Gods are there? What is The nature of God. Who made God.
People chuck the word “god” about far too loosely without offering any back up.
Oh we don’t know what caused the Big Bang? Oh hold on, I know, it was God.
Aaaarrghh
no im believer myself just remember as I progressive believe in science(Not Evolutio or Big Bang) and I believe equality for everyone that whats the holy trinity supports as well
shareI take agnostic (hybrid of the two). A belief in a greater being in the universe one which we would identify as a 'godly' being but have never seen nor discovered. Not one made up by mankind, slapped into text books, and re-written many times throughout history to favor whatever religious power at the time.
PS: SPAGHETTI MONSTER