Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258461 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: Jan 13

Location hidden

#148631 Jan 17, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
A new spin on an old canard. Lack of belief in something is just that, a lack of belief. Belief does not dictate morals, it excuses poor judgment.
Of course belief dictates morals...

Your presuppositions define your morality.

Arguing there is no God, argues there is no ultimate standard for morality...

“e pluribus unum”

Since: Dec 10

primus inter pares

#148632 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
The statement:
"nothing in the universe is absolute"
Is an absolute statement.
You have just refuted yourself and shown your own illogical inconsistencies.
So why would anyone rational accept your position?


Because she is correct, It's called The uncertainty principle.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-uncertai...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#148634 Jan 17, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Because she is correct, It's called The uncertainty principle.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-uncertai...
If you cannnot know anything, then you cannot know there is an uncertainty principle.

Self refuting and illogical.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#148635 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course belief dictates morals...
Your presuppositions define your morality.
Arguing there is no God, argues there is no ultimate standard for morality...
Wrong on both counts. Belief does not dictate anything, it makes excuses for things and nothing more. No one intelligent says that there is no god, just that yours is an unsupported assertion based on frightened and primitive minds. End of story.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#148636 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
If you cannnot know anything, then you cannot know there is an uncertainty principle.
Self refuting and illogical.
Um, a principle is not an assertion, it's not an object, it's an idea, often an aspect of existence we simply observe repeated many times. Since the principle is merely making a statement of observation, it cannot be "known," it's just a description.

You are so clueless about anything scientific, even the basics, I almost pity you.

“e pluribus unum”

Since: Dec 10

primus inter pares

#148637 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
If you cannnot know anything, then you cannot know there is an uncertainty principle.
Self refuting and illogical.
Doesn't say you can't know anything.
It says, you can't know everything , there is an uncertainty factor.
Therefore nothing is absolute. Perfectly logical , and understood in that in the real world , as described by the discipline of quantum mechanics. The dynamics of all things are variable and probabilistic.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#148638 Jan 17, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong on both counts. Belief does not dictate anything, it makes excuses for things and nothing more. No one intelligent says that there is no god, just that yours is an unsupported assertion based on frightened and primitive minds. End of story.
Everyone operates on presuppositions.

Those presuppositions drive beliefs.

Would you say that it would be primitive to worship rocks as the source of life, logic and reason?

As you have stated that you have faith that a rock did it, how does the above quotation from you fit your own worldview?

After all it is an unsupported assertion that would seem to lack much intelligent use of empirical evidence...
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#148639 Jan 17, 2013
Correct, but most of us have decided that priests f**king kids is wrong, the church covering up for that is wrong and people lying in support of religion is wrong.
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
...there is no ultimate standard for morality...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#148640 Jan 17, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, a principle is not an assertion, it's not an object, it's an idea, often an aspect of existence we simply observe repeated many times. Since the principle is merely making a statement of observation, it cannot be "known," it's just a description.
You are so clueless about anything scientific, even the basics, I almost pity you.
I am clueless how a rock did it, so you are right there...

So now you are appealing to transcendental arguments to prove your points.

How do you account for transcendental laws?

Did the laws of logic "evolve"?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#148641 Jan 17, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Doesn't say you can't know anything.
It says, you can't know everything , there is an uncertainty factor.
Therefore nothing is absolute. Perfectly logical , and understood in that in the real world , as described by the discipline of quantum mechanics. The dynamics of all things are variable and probabilistic.
That is true, you cannot know everything, so how is it that atheists are so big on knowledge claims, like nothing is absolute?

Which is an absollute by the way, therefore self refuting.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#148642 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
You did not answer the question, why is genocide wrong in an atheistic worldview?
Do you not believe that the fittest should survive?
There is no universal atheist world view, rather a huge range of possible ones. But atheism seems to encourage thought about personal ethics. Most atheists that I've talked to have developed comprehensive ethical standards, none of which have included any rationale for harming others except in the defense of oneself and others.

In evolution, "survival of the best adapted" is a better description of natural selection than "survival of the fittest." Natural selection applies to populations, not individuals. Natural selection is not about what should happen, but what is observed to occur. Human interference in the process can only distort if, favoring less adapted populations by artificially altering the criteria for adaptation. Genocide is the ultimate perversion in that respect.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#148643 Jan 17, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Correct, but most of us have decided that priests f**king kids is wrong, the church covering up for that is wrong and people lying in support of religion is wrong.
<quoted text>
Why is sexual intercourse with children wrong to an atheist?

What is wrong with one chemical accident interacting with another chemical accident?

As a Christian, I know that is wrong, because of Gods absolute moral standards..

But as an atheist, one animal copulating with another animal is wrong why?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#148644 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Everyone operates on presuppositions.
Those presuppositions drive beliefs.
Would you say that it would be primitive to worship rocks as the source of life, logic and reason?
As you have stated that you have faith that a rock did it, how does the above quotation from you fit your own worldview?
After all it is an unsupported assertion that would seem to lack much intelligent use of empirical evidence...
You are projecting again.

I make no presuppositions, I have no need to.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#148645 Jan 17, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
That is true, you cannot know everything, so how is it that atheists are so big on knowledge claims, like nothing is absolute?
Which is an absollute by the way, therefore self refuting.
Provide evidence of something that is absolute, anything that is actually evidence and not from a bunch of unsupported assertions in a book of myths and legends.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#148647 Jan 17, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no universal atheist world view, rather a huge range of possible ones. But atheism seems to encourage thought about personal ethics. Most atheists that I've talked to have developed comprehensive ethical standards, none of which have included any rationale for harming others except in the defense of oneself and others.
In evolution, "survival of the best adapted" is a better description of natural selection than "survival of the fittest." Natural selection applies to populations, not individuals. Natural selection is not about what should happen, but what is observed to occur. Human interference in the process can only distort if, favoring less adapted populations by artificially altering the criteria for adaptation. Genocide is the ultimate perversion in that respect.
If the process of evolution is merely a function of life, a "perversion" is neither wrong or right.

And if atheists are free to develope their own moral standard, then nothing is absolutely wrong, just a matter of personal choice.

Very few atheists are willing to be honest about the implications of their worldview, and most are ignorant of them, throwing stones at others houses, not realising they are throwing them through their own glass windows when they do...

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#148648 Jan 17, 2013
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>
Yh, that's what Hitler would've said too!
I wish Jesus was here right now in the flesh, to tell u how wrong u people are.
So....

You're saying I'm wrong that my words show I'm an atheist?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#148649 Jan 17, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You are projecting again.
I make no presuppositions, I have no need to.
Yes you do.

Everyone has an ultimate standard of truth that is circular in nature.

Here is one of yours;

A rock did it.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#148650 Jan 17, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Provide evidence of something that is absolute, anything that is actually evidence and not from a bunch of unsupported assertions in a book of myths and legends.
The fact you are asking for evidence, means that you inherently strive to ascertain absolutes...

You only deny them because deep down you know where they come from, you are just denying the obvious because the truth is not something you can face up to.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#148651 Jan 17, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Most of the illiterate people are not atheists, but the ones that are trolls do tend to be illiterate. You should check out some more of the threads/topics, they would embarrass you.
Of what I've seen, it's about a 50/50 ratio of illiterate theists/atheists...

The arrogant atheist notion of "We're the smart ones" is noticeably an opinion.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#148652 Jan 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Of what I've seen, it's about a 50/50 ratio of illiterate theists/atheists...
The arrogant atheist notion of "We're the smart ones" is noticeably an opinion.
I think you probably mean semi-literate. An illiterate would not be able to read the posts or to compose responses at all, so by definition, there are no illiterates in this forum. I could also point out that there are different standards by which writing skills can be evaluated. Most people are limited to seeing flaws in grammar, spelling, or punctuation, and not well at that. But good writing is so much more than correctness.

Good writing tends to be easy to read because the words chosen correlate well to the ideas being expressed. Sentences are well constructed, and ideas are presented in a natural sequence. The flow of words, of sentences, and of paragraphs is smooth and natural and reflects an intuitive understanding of poetic technique. I find it ironic that the writers who harp the most about writing focus on such trivial aspects as spelling and punctuation while there own writing tends to be jumbled, stilted, and awkward, while some of the posts they criticize are smooth and seem less when I look past the typos and other minor flaws.

It's easy to recognize those who take pleasure in the writing process as opposed to those who regard it as a necessary but secondary task. The former are a pleasure to read even if there are errors, the latter a chore even when the grammar is perfect.

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why Australians should fear Muslims? (Feb '15) 53 min AussieBobby 59
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 1 hr Thinking 92,637
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr AussieBobby 286,041
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 hr AussieBobby 46,038
Israel End is Near (Feb '15) 2 hr Jake999 1,095
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 3 hr CasinoJoe 445,570
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 6 hr Gabriel 979,423
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 hr LAWEST100 667,843
More from around the web