Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 255176 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.

Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#184934 Nov 16, 2013
albtraum wrote:
<quoted text>
God gets tired, god gets cranky, got it. Some god you got there, maybe he needs a nap and a diaper change???
It’s not just the incontinent that wear diapers.

Astronauts do too.

It all depends.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184935 Nov 16, 2013
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
RiversideRedneck wrote:
If you don't wanna be mocked for your silly beliefs, don't shove them down out throats.
You didn't actually understand the post, did you? Your comment is unrelated to it.

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#184936 Nov 16, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry. Respect must be earned. Eternal torture for failing to worship is a deal killer.
.. for me, respect is a human entitlement and should be freely given otherwise disrespect reigns supreme ..

.. does each individual establish a standard for respect? Do we then expect people to measure up to our individual standard without telling them what it is? That sounds unfair ..

.. to avoid conflict, it is my contention that we must all respect each other ..

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184937 Nov 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
Atheism, from the Greek a-theos ("no-god"), is the philosophical position that God doesn't exist. It is distinguished from agnosticism, the argument that it is impossible to know whether God exists or not (Academic American Encyclopedia).
Atheism, system of thought developed around the denial of God's existence. Atheism, so defined, first appeared during the Enlightenment, the age of reason (Random House Encyclopedia).
Atheism is the doctrine that there is no God.(Oxford Companion to Philosophy).
Atheism (Greek, a-[private prefix]+ theos, god) is the view that there is no divine being, no God (Dictionary of Philosophy, Thomas Mautner, Editor).
LOL. You remind me of my buddy Henry's doberman that will chase after the same ball for at least three hours if you'll keep throwing it for him. Nobody knows the dog's tiring point, or yours.
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#184938 Nov 16, 2013
Keepitreal1 wrote:
<quoted text>
So god needed to create us. Whas god lonely? God is higher up on the food chain? What proof do you have that god exist?
God was the first designer, engineer, architect, builder, creator. He loves his garage projects. It keeps him busy.

What would you do if you were God. Set in a rocking chair with a blank stare and your mouth open?

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#184939 Nov 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
No he doesn't.
Dawkins disagrees with you about himself.
Dawkins prefers to call himself an agnostic, as he says on this public forum.
He shies away from "atheist", since he is not sure God does not exist.
So Dawkins agrees with my definition, not yours.
You blithering goof.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9102...
Nobody is "sure" that God does not exist, Buck, because that is something that is impossible. We cannot prove something does not exist. Dawkins has explained that many times, and I am sure that he, like I, would be the first to become a believer, if someone could come up with some good solid proof, but both he and I (but he is more astute since he is a well educated scientist and speaker) know that there is no evidence to support any beliefs in a God which makes it a very strong possibility that a God does not, in fact, exist. The knowledge that the source from which believers draw their information about God is greatly flawed by proven lies, tends to throw a lot of suspicion on all of that information, for which there is still no information that has been proved to be true.

Kind of like a fishing hole where humans have thrown in their fishing lines for 4000 years, and to today not one of them has had a single nibble to suggest there might be fish there. They haven't proved there are no fish, but the total absence of any fish being caught or even nibbling on the bait, in all that time, does make it highly unlikely that any fish will be caught in the next 4000 years. That does not prove it though; just offers a very strong suggestion. Man has believed in the Abrahamic God for 4000 years give or take a thousand or two, and up to today not one has ever proved this existence. Insanity is when you keep doing the same thing and keep getting the same results.

Perhaps it is time for the fishermen to stop fishing at that spot, and time for humans to stop looking for a God that has never been known to exist.

I wonder what this world would be like to day, if humans based all of their actions and interactions of known facts, rather than on believed myths.

Can you imagine the impact it might have made to society today if all people in the past 4000 years, had worked with strictly what they knew, or if they didn't know, they discovered, and spent no time at all following things that were only mythical in nature.

Since it didn't happen that way, and we do know some of the horrors that the negative parts of these beliefs have brought to many, we can only imagine what might have happened.

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#184940 Nov 16, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
I do fiddle around occasionally.
:-)
.. yes, I know ..

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184941 Nov 16, 2013
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
Dave Nelson wrote:
You are saying you can't proceed unless you have more dancing room?
I'm saying that I don't take you seriously. You broach subjects, but have no answers to questions asked of you and can't follow through. That's fine. As I said, what I needed was a gauge to judge what you were capable of, and how to answer you.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184942 Nov 16, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. a cat lover! Most excellent ..
.. do you believe your cat loves you or do you have faith that your cat loves you because (s)he's a mammal ??..
No, and no. But I like to think-- within the limits of his brain-- he shows great affection.

In a human, his actions would be associated with love. But he's a cat, and will always be framed by his cat instincts, which are stronger than his intellect.

That's one of the principle differences between humans and other mammals-- yes, humans have instincts, but they are very, very low-key, most are subconscious urges.

And any human has the capacity to go against his or her instinctive drives, if given sufficient motivation.

What is interesting with humans, though-- is that they also possess many subconscious urges that are *not* instinctive, but are instilled by the very culture they were raised in as a child.

It is very difficult to separate the actual, DNA-created instincts, and the culturally generated ones (if the latter can even be called such).

But, no matter how much my cat may wish to, he cannot overcome his instinctive behaviors. Many similar animal studies have confirmed this, in cats and other animals.

Humans appear to be singular in this ability-- to overcome our own innate natures.
Happy Lesbo wrote:
.. we really don't know if our pets love us, we just enjoy thinking they do ..
Well, yes-- it's much easier to use the same adjective to describe the similar behaviors in humans and their close animal companions.
Happy Lesbo wrote:
.. you may say the same concept applies to someone who believes in God ..
.. so, is it faith or belief ??..
Faith/belief, what's the difference? I see none. Both are irrational, if based on nothing (i.e all religious faith/belief).

But I do not excuse people who choose the lazy way out, "goddidit" to "explain" the inexplicable.

That's just a lazy dodge-- and explains exactly nothing.

I would much rather go and **see** rather than mind-numbingly accept "goddidit".

People who discovered how the universe worked? Were **never** content to blindly accept "goddidit".

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184943 Nov 16, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
It is cute how OCD you are about all my posts.

Thanks for all the negative Jugits.

It shows how **deeply** you care!

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184944 Nov 16, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
HFY changed her mind and gave up on you.
Yep.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184945 Nov 16, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Oh, are we having an intellectual discussion?
No. Don't panic.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184946 Nov 16, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
My goodness Bob,
You have that hate fireplace white hot. Slow down on the fuel source buddy. You’re going to burn the place down!
I'm laughing whenever I post to you, bigot.

You are one ugly man-- seriously.

I bet you kick dogs and cats-- don't you?

I bet you are that man-- that man on the street all the neighborhood kids are **terrified** of-- because you are always yelling "GIT OFFA MAH LAWNS, YOU IDJITS!"

Admit it--you are **that** man.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184947 Nov 16, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have an opinion as to why some of these people want to tell us that we are not atheists? I can't imagine how that serves them. Perhaps they think it's offensive or annoying and are trying to nettle unbelievers. Surely there would be better ways to do that, so perhaps it is something else.
Anybody? Any speculations about what sustains this very prevalent meme?
I have a couple of ideas.

One is that they are narcissistic personalities, coupled with severe low self-image issues.

As such, they cannot **stand** to be wrong about **anything**.

There is that ludicrous definition [atheism] in Websters, who was a True Believer™ and was well known for changing the meaning of words in his dictionaries to fit his godbot worldview.

I think that lie has contributed to the whole mess over the years.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184948 Nov 16, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
You love to mock my EM, IANS, but the forces and interactions I describe are hard facts. It is just that I have a different perspective of how to view them that varies from how you were trained to view them, which means you can't understand the logic that is actually in them. I am the freethinker. You are the one that thinks they are one.
You are indeed a freethinker.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184949 Nov 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
Tell me, do you believe any element of you survives beyond physical death? There is abundant evidence that it does.
No kidding. "We are billion year old carbon."

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184950 Nov 16, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
There's more evidence that Jesus the man existed than Plato the man.
I don't agree.

Since: Sep 10

Redondo Beach, CA

#184951 Nov 16, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. for me, respect is a human entitlement and should be freely given otherwise disrespect reigns supreme ..
.. does each individual establish a standard for respect? Do we then expect people to measure up to our individual standard without telling them what it is? That sounds unfair ..
.. to avoid conflict, it is my contention that we must all respect each other ..
I disagree.

I believe respect must be earned.

Of course, respect is the default position, absent any reason to withhold it.

But I don't see respect as an entitlement; each person has the responsibility to demonstrate that s/he deserves others' respect.

Avoidance of conflict is not the highest value.

Integrity, compassion, empathy, respect for human dignity, are requirements. Absent these values, a person does not deserve respect. They trump a desire to avoid conflict.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184952 Nov 16, 2013
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
Dave Nelson wrote:
I would follow neither group. If I am in that bad a shape and they are, too, then I will not be a further burden on them.
This is why I don't take discussion with you seriously. It's a waste of time.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184953 Nov 16, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Being open-minded implies a willingness to consider all sides of an argument
That is correct.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I'll admit that being open-minded means that I HAVE to admit that the Bible may be wrong, which I have.
Openmindedness only means the willingness to consider the evidence impartially, and to be willing to be convinced by a compelling argument. You are not required to come to any particular conclusion unless the evidence supports it.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
You agnostic/atheists wait for evidence to become available that makes God a fact
Not so. I'd be interested in evidence that makes your god 20% likely.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
most of you say you'd accept His existence, but still consider Him evil.
That's an separate issue involving separate evidence. I can judge you god whether it is a fictional character or not, and the evidence I use is the description of it. Your bible describes an evil character.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
You're minds seem to be closed, not to anything, just to God. I've seen a lot of atheists that have spiritual experiences, believe in luck, ego or karma, believe in ghosts or aliens, etc. your minds are closed to God.
You can't judge that by my conclusions, but by the way I arrive at them. If you offer me evidence that I won't consider fairly, then you can call me that.

Please note that I am not required to read every book that you recommend, or do other time consuming or expensive things you insist upon in order to be open minded. Part of evaluating the evidence is judging its source - your knowledge, your habits of thought, your expected motives. If I lose confidence in you, I am free to ignore you without being considered close minded. I may require you to give me a capsule summary of your source to evaluate first, or review en excerpt and decide whether I'm looking at something worth more of my time or not.

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr Brian_G 13,098
Atheism is not a belief 1 hr Brian_G 269
News How God Messed Up My Happy Atheist Life 2 hr emperorjohn 11
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 4 hr Chimney1 30,877
There are no such things as gods or fairies 5 hr JustASkeptic 10
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 6 hr karl44 4,335
News Your atheism isn&#x27;t going to keep your... (Apr '14) 14 hr Amused 8
More from around the web