This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Why Your Religion?
Return to board index
Post by
Monday
I thought agnostics were people who thought that God was real but imperfect.
Although it appears I am incorrect in this assumption. Anyone know what it is called then?
Post by
Squishalot
Most rational people who are atheists are not of the position "I know there is no God". I have never met someone who holds this position. Dawkins doesn't. Most people mean atheist as "there is probably no God".
Atheism is commonly described as the position that there are no deities. It can also mean the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. A broader meaning is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.
someone who denies the existence of god
The broader, and more common, understanding of atheism among atheists is quite simply "not believing in any gods." No claims or denials are made — an atheist is just a person who does not happen to be a theist. Sometimes this broader understanding is called "weak" or "implicit" atheism. Most good, complete dictionaries readily support this.
There also exists a narrower sort of atheism, sometimes called "strong" or "explicit" atheism. With this type, the atheist explicitly denies the existence of any gods — making a strong claim which will deserve support at some point.
Two out of three of the top Google results for "definition atheist" says that you're wrong about the definition.
The latter reference is as close as you're going to get to what you're calling yourself. But, as far as I'm concerned, that's still fence sitting - you have no core beliefs. And if you have no core beliefs, then it's not for you to question other people's beliefs.
I think we're just arguing over semantics at this point.
Most people who I know that are "agnostic," basically say "there's a fair chance that god could exist, but I don't know."
See my reply to DoctorLore. You could argue that there are shades of grey between 'weak atheist' and 'agnostic'. Likewise, you could possibly argue that there are 'weak agnostics' who say that there's a fair chance that god could exist, and 'strong agnostics' who believe that a god does exist, but not one linked to a religion.
So the people you're referring to are 'weak agnostics', who believe that there is a >50% chance that a god exists, whereas you are a 'weak atheist', who believes that there is a <50% chance that a god exists.
The thing is, I don't believe that weak agnostics or atheists are in any position to question another person's belief, since they don't have a core belief themselves. Consider the following conversation:
Weak atheist: I want you to prove that God exists.
Religious person: Why? Prove that he doesn't.
Weak atheist: I can't, but I don't need to, because you're the one who believes there's a God.
Religious person: Well if you don't believe in anything, then it shouldn't matter to you whether God exists or not.
In my opinion, questioning God's existance can only be done from a position of belief that God doesn't exist, otherwise, the responder has no obligation to respond to your interrogation.
I thought agnostics were people who thought that God was real but imperfect.
Agnostics are people who believe that a deity exists, but that religions are incorrect (eg, Christianity, Judaism, Mormonism, etc). So someone who believes in karma, for example, is technically agnostic.
Post by
Monday
Agnostics are people who believe that a deity exists, but that religions are incorrect (eg, Christianity, Judaism, Mormonism, etc). So someone who believes in karma, for example, is technically agnostic.
Ah, that clears things up. Thanks =D
Post by
TheMediator
The latter reference is as close as you're going to get to what you're calling yourself. But, as far as I'm concerned, that's still fence sitting - you have no core beliefs. And if you have no core beliefs, then it's not for you to question other people's beliefs.
Your logic is seriously flawed. Unless you mean to imply that the only people capable of passing judgment on murders, theifs, etc. are other criminals, simply because they're the only ones who have actually acted in illegal and immoral ways.
I don't have to have an absolute belief (and shouldn't have an absolute belief) one way or the other to say that someone who has an absolute belief has a questionable stance.
Post by
374287
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
212003
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
The latter reference is as close as you're going to get to what you're calling yourself. But, as far as I'm concerned, that's still fence sitting - you have no core beliefs. And if you have no core beliefs, then it's not for you to question other people's beliefs.
Your logic is seriously flawed. Unless you mean to imply that the only people capable of passing judgment on murders, theifs, etc. are other criminals, simply because they're the only ones who have actually acted in illegal and immoral ways.
I don't have to have an absolute belief (and shouldn't have an absolute belief) one way or the other to say that someone who has an absolute belief has a questionable stance.
That's not quite the comparison. I mean to imply that the only people capable of passing judgment on murderers, thieves etc are people who have a strong moral view on the matter. People who are don't have a view on whether murder is morally right or morally wrong aren't really in a position to question whether the act is right or wrong.
If I killed someone, and you questioned my moral decision to do so, without having a moral view on the issue, I'd tell you to go work out for yourself whether you think it's right or wrong, before coming to me and questioning what I think.
@Squitalot: I'll respond to your post above about how you believe weak-agnostics and -athiests shouldn't be able to judge others' beliefs, later on. I think it's very incorrect; I just have to go to work first.
No worries, looking forward to it. I think it's fair to question for the sake of learning and information gathering, or even perhaps question for the sake of convincing them otherwise. I don't think it's fair to judge. Some people's burden of proof are lower than others.
Post by
Skreeran
Here's my point. I don't beleive that there is a god. I don't believe that I can prove there is no god.
However, I still think it rather ignorant and foolish to believe in magic, mermaids, astrology, phrenology, a flat earth, geocentrism, spirits, or deities, when all of said beliefs are dated back to a time when we did not have a very good understanding of the universe, and of which evidence for is incredibly unreliable and sketchy at best.
I do not like religion, and take a strong standpoint against it because I believe that no only is it holding civilization back by causing people to make decisions based on things that probably don't exist, but it also has caused a huge amount of damage to the world as a whole, historically. The Inquisition, Muslim extremist terrorism, the Crusades, and thousands of other conflicts have been caused by belief in things that most likely don't exist.
It's not that "don't care" whether or not god exists. I'm not a fence sitter. I'm simply frusterated at the guys over on the other side of the fence because they fight about whether its leprechauns or elves that actually exist, and so I argue that neither does and that there is no evidence for either.
When they say "Well, prove that magical creatures don't exist then!" I cannot actually prove that they don't, but I ask them to look at their own beliefs and look at what reasons they actually have to believe what they do.
"Faith!" they answer. That's blind faith. You have no evience to beleive what you do, but your parents told you it was true, and so you believe it no matter how little evidence there actually is.
I do not think a god exists. I have no reason to. In fact, from my observations, I might find it more likely that there is no god. There is a possiblity, just as there might be elves, mermaids, brownies and leprechauns, but I do not think it's a reasonable possiblity. I cannot prove that any of those things are wrong, but that doesn't mean that any of them are reasonable things to actually believe in. And since religion is a hindrance to progression of the human race, I work to eliminate it.
Post by
Adamsm
"Faith!" they answer. That's blind faith. You have no evience to beleive what you do, but your parents told you it was true, and so you believe it no matter how little evidence there actually is.I don't think that's true; there are many out there like myself who choose their own religions after growing up in a non-religious household.
And since religion is a hindrance to progression of the human race, I work to eliminate it.And many people disagree on that point, but it's your opinion.
Post by
Monday
And since religion is a hindrance to progression of the human race, I work to eliminate it.
Is it though? Give me evidence that religion holds us back.
Post by
Skreeran
"Faith!" they answer. That's blind faith. You have no evience to beleive what you do, but your parents told you it was true, and so you believe it no matter how little evidence there actually is.I don't think that's true; there are many out there like myself who choose their own religions after growing up in a non-religious household.And I don't really understand that at all.
Most people, however, simply believe because of what their parents told them. I'm the oldest of 7 siblings, and I can see the indoctirnation at work on a daily basis.
And since religion is a hindrance to progression of the human race, I work to eliminate it.And many people disagree on that point, but it's your opinion.Well obviously religious people disagree with me. They see what they believe as absolute truth, and they want more people to know the truth.
However, as I see it, this "truth," is a lie taught to children at a young and psychologically vulnerable age, which causes them to make imporant decisions based on it, later in life. George Dubya has stated that was God who helped him make the decision to invade Iraq. It was right wing christians that put him in power. It it religion that impedes gay rights. Religion was used to justify slavery.
And as far as I can see it, all of these things were done because people beleive in something that probably doesn't exist.
Post by
Monday
And since religion is a hindrance to progression of the human race, I work to eliminate it.
Is it though? Give me evidence that religion holds us back.
http://commonsenseatheism.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/timeline.png
My web protection program won't let me in...
Post by
TheMediator
And since religion is a hindrance to progression of the human race, I work to eliminate it.
Is it though? Give me evidence that religion holds us back.
http://commonsenseatheism.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/timeline.png
My web protection program won't let me in...
Its one of those graphs where it shows how our scientific development was following a exponential growth model and then it dropped down during the Dark Ages. Deleted my post though because I'm not sure what's going on on the far right hand side of the graph though - I guess that those of that website are speculating that we're going into another dark age or something.
Post by
Monday
Its one of those graphs where it shows how our scientific development was following a exponential growth model and then it dropped down during the Dark Ages. Deleted my post though because I'm not sure what's going on on the far right hand side of the graph though - I guess that those of that website are speculating that we're going into another dark age or something.
Hmm...
Well, to me that doesn't really show too much. Seeing as how the Dark Ages came when the Roman Empire fell (and the withdrawal of religion I might add.)
Well, you still had the Catholic Church and all that, but still. I never really liked the Catholic Church so...
Edit: And I'm off to work, so I won't be able to continue the discussion for a few hours.
Post by
Adamsm
"Faith!" they answer. That's blind faith. You have no evience to beleive what you do, but your parents told you it was true, and so you believe it no matter how little evidence there actually is.I don't think that's true; there are many out there like myself who choose their own religions after growing up in a non-religious household.And I don't really understand that at all.
Most people, however, simply believe because of what their parents told them. I'm the oldest of 7 siblings, and I can see the indoctirnation at work on a daily basis.And that happens; but what's to not understand? They either don't grow up in a religious household like I did, and found something lacking, which lead them to find a faith, or they disagreed with what their parents were preaching and wanted to find their own path. I know a few people like that, even those who just joined something as a rebellion against their parents... then they realized that the religion they picked fit them.
Post by
Skreeran
"Faith!" they answer. That's blind faith. You have no evience to beleive what you do, but your parents told you it was true, and so you believe it no matter how little evidence there actually is.I don't think that's true; there are many out there like myself who choose their own religions after growing up in a non-religious household.And I don't really understand that at all.
Most people, however, simply believe because of what their parents told them. I'm the oldest of 7 siblings, and I can see the indoctirnation at work on a daily basis.And that happens; but what's to not understand? They either don't grow up in a religious household like I did, and found something lacking, which lead them to find a faith, or they disagreed with what their parents were preaching and wanted to find their own path. I know a few people like that, even those who just joined something as a rebellion against their parents... then they realized that the religion they picked fit them.I don't understand how anyone can say "Hmm... This looks like it might be true, I think I'll believe it as absolute truth," without any substantial evidence.
I disagreed with my parents were peraching, and came to the conclusion that all of it was a lie, not just the parts I didn't like.
Post by
Adamsm
I don't understand how anyone can say "Hmm... This looks like it might be true, I think I'll believe it as absolute truth," without any substantial evidence.
I disagreed with my parents were peraching, and came to the conclusion that all of it was a lie, not just the parts I didn't like.
And that is your absolute right; everyone has a right to believe in whatever they want; from the Christians to the Scientologists to the Atheists. But while you might see a lie, others don't; as I've said, the main creed of Wicca that just hit a cord with me 'Do what you will, but harm none'; where is the massive lie in that after all? Just live your life as best you can without hurting anyone.
The same with Buddhism and Hinduism, there are parts of the religions that just struck a cord inside of me, and I knew that was what I had been looking for. Do I believe that if I pray to Buddha, Ganesh or the Hunter and the Goddess what I pray for will be answered... yes in all honesty; more then likely it's all in my head, but it's not hurting anyone, so it shouldn't matter to others what I believe.
Post by
Skreeran
I don't understand how anyone can say "Hmm... This looks like it might be true, I think I'll believe it as absolute truth," without any substantial evidence.
I disagreed with my parents were peraching, and came to the conclusion that all of it was a lie, not just the parts I didn't like.
And that is your absolute right; everyone has a right to believe in whatever they want; from the Christians to the Scientologists to the Atheists. But while you might see a lie, others don't; as I've said, the main creed of Wicca that just hit a cord with me 'Do what you will, but harm none'; where is the massive lie in that after all? Just live your life as best you can without hurting anyone.
The same with Buddhism and Hinduism, there are parts of the religions that just struck a cord inside of me, and I knew that was what I had been looking for. Do I believe that if I pray to Buddha, Ganesh or the Hunter and the Goddess what I pray for will be answered... yes in all honesty; more then likely it's all in my head, but it's not hurting anyone, so it shouldn't matter to others what I believe."Do what you will, but harm none" is a philosophy, and I can understand philosophy.
Believing in a mother Goddess and magic and things of that nature is something entirely different, and I don't understand how any adult person can decide to beleive in it without anything to back it up.
Not saying
you're
hurting anyone (although religion in general has hurt many, many people), but I simply do not understand the reasoning there at all.
Post by
Adamsm
"Do what you will, but harm none" is a philosophy, and I can understand philosophy.
Believing in a mother Goddess and magic and things of that nature is something entirely different, and I don't understand how any adult person can decide to beleive in it without anything to back it up.
Not saying
you're
hurting anyone (although religion in general has hurt many, many people), but I simply do not understand the reasoning there at all.
And unfortunately, the only real answer there I can think of is Faith heh.
Post Reply
This topic is locked. You cannot post a reply.