Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 244740 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#221848 Mar 27, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Firstly, let me disabuse you of the fallacy that humans only use 10% of our brains-- that is simply not true, and has been long debunked by neural scientists.
However, many humans don't pay attention to their senses, that much is true.
And with the advent of electronic escapism, even less so than before.
One circumstantial proof of this, is looking at people who've lost one of their senses-- and how they learn to pay attention to the remaining ones as compensation.
It all boils down, I think, to the ability to focus and pay attention.
More neural studies prove that humans can **only** pay attention to a single thing at one moment in time.
The people who try to do multiple things? Actually do only one thing at a time, then switch to another, then switch again, and switch again.
With each switch, some of the focus is lost-- the more you switch? The less effective your focus becomes.
Studies have shown this to be quite true, and a single-taker is much-much better at that single task, than the multi-tasker could ever hope to be.
It's better to take tasks in sequence, finishing one, then going on to the next task and so on.
----------
As for "sixth sense"? That remains an unproven idea, and must be dismissed at present.
Coincidence and confirmation bias, coupled with selective memory, easily explains the various "sixth sense" phenomena.
As for the senses I don't if we disagree more on a semantic or fundamental level. Maybe both. Maybe neither.

Let me explain what I believe a "sixth" sense to be. I agree our senses are sharper when we are not distracted. But I also believe we have the ability but not the knowledge on how to use out senses to do much more with them then we do now.

It doesn't even necessarily have to be a "sense". Is perception or intuition a "sense"? I don't know how you would define either. But I believe there exists a disconnect between man and his perceptions due to the lack of developing the ability to use it or learning how to be more in tune with it.

Maybe that is what you would define as a sixth sense. If so then we would disagree. But I believe some people has the ability to perceive things most people never have and probably never will be able to as they don't even know its something they are lacking. That is why I mentioned even small things we take for granted like animals knowing when someone is sick or when danger is around. It's a perception that transcends just normal observation. Or I should say what we know to observe. I think out perceptions have the ability to be so much greater than they are, but we just don't know how.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#221849 Mar 27, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
His opinion carries more weight than yours, given his position.
So far, you are losing the argument badly.
How much weight does his "all people are atheists" argument carry?

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#221850 Mar 27, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
His opinion carries more weight than yours, given his position.
So far, you are losing the argument badly.
Thanks for sharing Buck. I'll try to bravely soldier on regardless. I must admit though, it's cold and lonely knowing that no scientists share my view.

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#221851 Mar 27, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
How much weight does his "all people are atheists" argument carry?
How about your opinion that I'm not an atheist at all?

“The Bible is no science book”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#221852 Mar 27, 2014
waaasssuuup wrote:
<quoted text>
here's food for thought: how many african-american justin beiber-like 'artists' are there in the market who don't get nearly any of the bad press he does???
justin is a beautiful white prince brother and racist haters just won't reckognize his greatness;-)
He is a stupid kid with a lot of money who thinks he can do as he pleases and everybody else can kiss his a**. His neighbors in Atlanta have tried to get a petition to keep him out. He races his cars, him high on drugs, up and down in the communities of Atlanta not caring if he runs over kids. He has no concern but for himself.

He earned every bit of bad press that he got.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#221853 Mar 27, 2014
wilderide wrote:
How about your opinion that I'm not an atheist at all?
I don't have that opinion.

You have the opinion that all people are atheists.

Except Stalin and Hitler, of course.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#221854 Mar 27, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
By that 'logic', socks are shoes too.
You atheists are so fucking stupid, it's unreal.
Socks are shoes.
People collect asteroids.
Everyone is homosexual.
Everyone is homicidal.
The Pope is atheist.
Dinosaurs had no DNA.
Science corrects itself.
It's a fact that God doesn't exist.
You believe in sky daddy.
You masturbate to the Bible.
Religion is responsible for all wars.
Religion poisons everything.
It takes I intelligence to believe in God.
Some beliefs are so dangerous that it may be ethical to kill people for believing them.
And my personal favorite: Everyone is an atheist.
LOL

I guess if someone ever needs a cast on their foot they can just go up to FootLocker and buy one. After all, anything you wear on your feet is a shoe:)

So what are socks now I wonder? Really soft shoes?

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#221855 Mar 27, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have that opinion.
You have the opinion that all people are atheists.
Except Stalin and Hitler, of course.
Wrong.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#221856 Mar 27, 2014
IPSEC wrote:
<quoted text>Yes. Clearly you missed the links. Clearly you didn't read that link.
Here:
http://www.generationsoflight.com
http://www.thelegacyinstitute.com/purityball2...
http://goldenislespurityball.com
http://www.purityball.com
"The Christian Center is once again thrilled to host the Father-Daughter Purity Ball."
Need more, idjit?
o.O

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#221857 Mar 27, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
How does faith lead to truth? How does faith lead anywhere if you can have faith in any idea or its opposite?
He was speaking in absolutes. Also it isn't about methodology or process. The question simply was can faith lead to truth. Of course it could

Someone has faith God exists. Somewhere down the road somehow this is proven to be true. Perhaps God appears before the world. Then something they believed to be true on faith was indeed true. And it was faith that led them to that belief

If the question was can faith prove truth I would have said no

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#221858 Mar 27, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You can also buy socks, shoelaces, flip flops, watches, ties and pads in the shoe department.
I guess socks, shoelaces, flip flops, watches, ties and pads are shoes, too.
I didn't know.
LOL

I should have kept reading. So now its based on department?

I was in Meijers the other day and at the end of one of the food isles in the food department there was a sunglasses display. Probably because its near the front of the store by the registers and is a much higher traffic area. I made the mistake of thinking everything in the food department must be food and tried to eat a pair!

I also are the baggies you put your fruits and vegetables in and chewed on a shopping cart. If its in the food department, it must be food!

The only thing funnier than some of the posts to you has been the condescension that came with it considering how dumb the comment was!

All that circling the wagons gets some people dizzy and they can't think straight:)

“Rising”

Since: Dec 10

Milky Way

#221859 Mar 27, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
I though you meant for a moment, Diana the Roman goddess of the hunt – I was flattered
But not sure I like the idea of being a Diana princess of Wales, it seems she was a very troubles woman.
And definitely not a Thatcher
I was in Soerento in Italy, A yacht anchored off shore. My hotel balcony overlooked the bay and the yacht . A young couple flirted and frolicked on deck. It was not some weeks until after my holiday that it came out that the couple were Diana and Dodi
Well then we have it! Christine of the woodland realm!:)

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#221860 Mar 27, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have that opinion.
You have the opinion that all people are atheists.
Except Stalin and Hitler, of course.


Christine and Wilderice, of the atheist team, traded Stalin to the Christians for the Pope and 2 future draft picks.

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#221861 Mar 27, 2014
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>He was speaking in absolutes. Also it isn't about methodology or process. The question simply was can faith lead to truth. Of course it could
Someone has faith God exists. Somewhere down the road somehow this is proven to be true. Perhaps God appears before the world. Then something they believed to be true on faith was indeed true. And it was faith that led them to that belief
If the question was can faith prove truth I would have said no
And if someone has faith that Ganesha exists? Or Zeus? Or Xenu? Or that Joseph Smith was a prophet of the Judeo-Christian God who could read holy tablets delivered by an angel using stone glasses? Using faith alone, how does one determine which, if any, of those scenarios are the truth?

See what I'm saying? Faith is not a valid epistemology.

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#221862 Mar 27, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Christine and Wilderice, of the atheist team, traded Stalin to the Christians for the Pope and 2 future draft picks.
I'm an atheist again?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#221863 Mar 27, 2014
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
You left out the possibility-the most likely probability, actually-that ALL of the religions are wrong.
And science, for the most part, makes no effort to prove or disprove god or religion. It just turns out that, so far, every path science has taken in search of truth and knowledge has done that.
And that leads back to the probability-the HIGH probability-that ALL religions got it wrong and are just ancient man's attempts to explain a world they had no way of comprehending the way we do today.
I thought it went without saying that it was based on the assumption of ownership being right in the case of a specific religion's claim

Which I actually pretty much did say on top of it

"Well with all the religions out there and almost all claiming sole ownership of the creator, everyone but one would have to be wrong anyway."

I really needed to add "if one is right"?

I thought you guys were the smarter group

And you are kidding yourself if you think the goal of some scientists isn't to disprove God. I never claimed all scientists share the same brain or motives

And again, look a little deeper in the context for the point. It was their only personal belief that the supernatural can't exist could hinder someone from truly exploring all possibilities. And without proof the supernatural doesn't exist, which is basically impossible to prove a negative so I'd be talking more as it relates to a specific scenario as a possible explanation, it shouldn't be taken off the table. Particularly when it doesn't even contradict science but some people are so terrified of even opening the door to the possibility in any area

For example, science believes energy can't be destroyed. So why should the idea of 'Ghosts' be ruled out as irrational when it could be the energy that was behind the life that once existed in a body? But the bias brought to the table will cause some scientists to consider every possibility other than "ghost". Why? Why would that be such an irrational belief? Energy has to go somewhere right?

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#221864 Mar 27, 2014
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>
If anyone is pushing an Anti-Christ agenda on these threads it's you. You regularly ignore and contradict most of what Jesus is quoted as saying.
wait just a minute here: you can't be both an expert on gaytheistic 'science' so-called AND and expert on Jesus too!

pick your discipline and stick to it or you'll loose my respect for all of them.....

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#221865 Mar 27, 2014
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>
And if someone has faith that Ganesha exists? Or Zeus? Or Xenu? Or that Joseph Smith was a prophet of the Judeo-Christian God who could read holy tablets delivered by an angel using stone glasses? Using faith alone, how does one determine which, if any, of those scenarios are the truth?
See what I'm saying? Faith is not a valid epistemology.
All you did is change the word "prove" to "determine" and restated the exact same idea. Which had nothing to do with the original claim that faith can't lead to truth. Of course it can. But I never said it could prove it or determine it to be true on its own. Then again, I never espoused it as an epistemology either. I simply disputed the claim that faith can't lead to truth because it can

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#221866 Mar 27, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
You people are so abused, and so unfairly maligned despite being so loveable. Crying about how others don't respect your religion any more than it respects anything else is a particularly endearing trait.
Somebody call the waaaaaaahmbulance
i love my successful and multi-talented white prince bro beiber - you gotta prob w/dat, rascist?

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#221867 Mar 27, 2014
sweets2360 wrote:
<quoted text>
He is a stupid kid with a lot of money who thinks he can do as he pleases and everybody else can kiss his a**. His neighbors in Atlanta have tried to get a petition to keep him out. He races his cars, him high on drugs, up and down in the communities of Atlanta not caring if he runs over kids. He has no concern but for himself.
He earned every bit of bad press that he got.
and you're a PC insane rascist!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 1 min ChristineM 10,675
Santa vs. God: logic? 1 min geezerjock 1
Atheists should stop feeding the stereotypes 1 hr Shizle 11
Is the Christian god good? 1 hr Shizle 4
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Paul Porter1 20,514
Atheist believe, they are just hiding!!! 19 hr Richardfs 18
There is no meaning without God 23 hr Shizle 3
More from around the web