Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 20 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.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#158246 Mar 3, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Damn you and your logic!
Ok. I now stand damned.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#158247 Mar 3, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Your definition of indoctrination fits the teaching of religion to children.
I teach evolution and I teach my students to be critical of the scientists we read - there's lots of BS put out with the claim of evolution (like that only men "should" cheat and that women should be monogamous).
Do public school evolution teachers tell junior high students to be critical of the scientists they read? No. They just teach it. The children aren't old enough or experienced enough to be critical. Default indoctrination.

As the twig is bent.

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#158248 Mar 3, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
.... talking about computers as if they have cognition and emotions, etc.
This is correct, I have often found that if I tell a computer that I am going reprogram it with a very large axe then it will work.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#158249 Mar 3, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I have a piece of glass from a beer bottle embedded in my head.
Also, a link out of a motorcycle chain.
I would get them removed, but it's a hoot to peck on them with a spoon in time with the music in clubs.
Ouch! Buck...I really think you want those removed!

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#158250 Mar 3, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Will you please hold your breath?
For like 10 minutes?
Why, don't you like to be shown up?

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#158251 Mar 3, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
If I was an atheist, I'd agree with your friends. I'm not an atheist and I've spend all of maybe 5 minutes of my life on atheist websites - usually just to get a laugh.
I know...what's wrong with me?

Wait...why do you spend a lot of time bickering with atheists?
Do they try to stop any and all Buddhist or Shinto rituals? Especially those in public? Atheists do that in America a lot. They claim to be tolerant, but most of them only seem to be tolerant of people that agrees with their opinions.
Uhm...you missed my point about them actually carrying out the Buddhist and Shinto rituals. So, no, they don't.

We have a very different understanding of responsibility than you do - ours is shared, not individual. That generally leads to less outright acts of intolerance and greater social punishment for difference (with a few people, like in America, snapping).
We have a big white cross here, on Mt Rubidoux. An atheist complained about it because it sits on city property. The FFRC filed a lawsuit against Riverside to have it removed, even though the majority of Riversidians wanted the cross to stay - even one atheist friend of mine. He said the cross is meaningless to him except for bring a city landmark (it's been there since 1907). The city is selling the property to a private owner to shut up the FFRC.
Wow. You see, that's an American thing. You guys are very individualistic, with individual rights held in the highest of esteem. That lets people think "hey, that cross breaks the rules by being on government property. I want it down! My want is more important than anyone else's want!"

That just couldn't happen here. We also have a different notion of history - that historical monuments are either extremely important and must be maintained or worthless, to be destroyed in the face of modernity. I suspect the cross would stay and people would ignore, ridicule or placate the loan complainer, depending on how charismatic they were.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#158252 Mar 3, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Sounds like being married.
What's being married like?

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#158253 Mar 3, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No, no, no and another no.
Well then. Damn the people doing the actual investigating, I want their research budgets to go to you! Clearly you are an authority on the subject, let's get you some money!

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#158254 Mar 3, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You sound insincere.
Not so.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#158255 Mar 3, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
BTW Have you seen this:-
http://isohunt.com/torrents/...
I think you might enjoy it.
Thanks! Will check it out.

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#158256 Mar 3, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
CHA-CHING!
Damn you.
But hey, that explanation makes a lot of sense to Redneck.
Yaaaaaaaaaaay!

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#158257 Mar 3, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
What's Christmas like in Japan?
Annoying :)

First, the music starts as early as November, sometimes right at the beginning. It mostly signals a change in fashion seasons.

Then it gets better. The day itself is for couples. The boy takes the girl out to a really expensive restaurant, and then hotel where she returns the favor.

Ah, Christmas!

“Why does my ignorance”

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#158258 Mar 3, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Do public school evolution teachers tell junior high students to be critical of the scientists they read? No. They just teach it. The children aren't old enough or experienced enough to be critical. Default indoctrination.
As the twig is bent.
What do you want children to learn? You want them to be not be told what the consensus of scientists is and what the state of the discipline is?

Evolution is the framework theory for all biological sciences. It the only scientific theory that unifies all disparate biological phenomena under one explanatory umbrella.

So...what should we tell them? Should we just lie to them and talk about magic?

Should we have Muslim biology after Creationist Biology? Alchemy after Chemistry? Astrology after Astronomy?

Should we teach them "yeah, scientists have these ideas about how planets orbit the sun, but there are competing theories about solar evolution that include God doing it 6000 years ago. Sure, it's a 17th century idea that is officially removed from Catholic doctrine, but we're going to teach it to you anyways. Equal time for all ideas! And now, class, on to the validity of Mayan human sacrifice instead of Easter."

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#158259 Mar 3, 2013
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2478299

Seed imbibition producing heat.

Think process, not materials. It is mainstream science that came up with the big bang singularity, expansion, and cooling, not me.

Add the way matter and energy is distributed. Filamentous, web like, and the 99% of matter EM active plasma that does the primary combining and shaping of matter.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#158260 Mar 3, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Not so.
Not true.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#158261 Mar 3, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you want children to learn? You want them to be not be told what the consensus of scientists is and what the state of the discipline is?
Evolution is the framework theory for all biological sciences. It the only scientific theory that unifies all disparate biological phenomena under one explanatory umbrella.
So...what should we tell them? Should we just lie to them and talk about magic?
Should we have Muslim biology after Creationist Biology? Alchemy after Chemistry? Astrology after Astronomy?
Should we teach them "yeah, scientists have these ideas about how planets orbit the sun, but there are competing theories about solar evolution that include God doing it 6000 years ago. Sure, it's a 17th century idea that is officially removed from Catholic doctrine, but we're going to teach it to you anyways. Equal time for all ideas! And now, class, on to the validity of Mayan human sacrifice instead of Easter."
What if they learned about evolution, and then read a book by a evolutionary scientist about how those mean and women should be?

If you teach life began only as a chance combo of chemicals you shaped their brains. Teach they don't know if it was done by design or chance. Leave it open until they grow and do their own study. It is default teaching atheism if you don't do that.

PERIOD

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#158262 Mar 3, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
The "sensations" are not even "nearly identicle" to and NDE.
"NDE'S" have happened in many cultures. They are different for the Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Jaguar, Frog or Earth worshiping Animist. Culture plays heavily in the experience. People who talk about "core" experiences, are basing that on thousands of cases, and every case doesn't include all of the core experiences. You'd think if there was a reality to the NDE, there would be a set of, say, five experiences that always happen.

A "core" experience just needs to have, for instance, one out of a possible ten of those "core" experiences. This is never really mentioned. I'll add sometimes a person may experience "7" of the core events.'Core experiences", gives the impression all of them happen, always. That isn't the case.

Not all NDE's incorporate a deity experience. Not all NDE's indicate(as related by the person experiencing it) that there is a perceived expectation of 'afterlife".

Many NDE survivors(they never actually died), mention that its an entirely non religious experience.

It seems for some people it might be religious, for others, not "religious" at all. That seems odd to me.

It could be just that, the person was near to death, and they didn't die. The brain(proven to do a similar thing in traumatic injuries), provided a comfortable environment, instead of replaying the last thing a person saw before coming close to death, such as a 60 ft plunge off a cliff, or a 100 mph car crash into a Big Rig traveling at 60 mph....over, and over, and over, and over, till consciousness is resumed.

And when you do, you might be insane from watching Aunt Jenny's head vaporize on impact with the CD player. Repeatedly.

While you are close to death it isn't unreasonable to think the mind places you in a waiting room, filled with numerous things drawn from the subconscious mind and memory. Either chemically induced, or chemically and subconsciously initiated, like a deep dream state. I wouldn't assert that's what happens, however.

We can't even begin to know the effects of all the drugs that are given to heart attack patients(a high #% of NDE reports), and what that does to the mind. Info like that isn't collected in the emergency rooms and may never be. Saving the life is the priority in that setting. Stick'em, drug'em, shock'em, beat on'em, repeat as needed.

Here's the thing, you'd have to die to know if it's actual experience or precursor to some sort of after life, and it isn't a NDE then. Is it?

Its a "DE" (death experience) at that point.

No one survives death, and by death, I mean life>death>rigor mortis.

NDE's and the books written about them and the musings offered are nothing more than speculation. That's all that can be said or asserted about NDE's. Much like deities, they can be neither proven or disproved.

It's a futile debate in thinking you'll prove whatever it is you think they are. It doesn't matter if you're the most brilliant mind on the face of the earth, that you think you've had a NDE, and that others believe your observations must be given more weight than a Wino that says he had one too is an error in reasoning.

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#158263 Mar 3, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/24 78299
Seed imbibition producing heat.
Think process, not materials. It is mainstream science that came up with the big bang singularity, expansion, and cooling, not me.
Add the way matter and energy is distributed. Filamentous, web like, and the 99% of matter EM active plasma that does the primary combining and shaping of matter.
Vol. 25, No. 5, May, 1898

Nice to see you are keeping up to date.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#158264 Mar 3, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's assume I take your word for that.
Do you know if the universe, at its inception, contained properties designed with the propensity to produce life?
This would require, of course, some intelligence independent of the universe in space and time.
And if the elements and properties present in the exploding birth of our universe had this built-in propensity for life, how would the present picture differ, scientifically, from what we observe today?
I submit it would not necessarily differ at all. The possible exception might be the signs indicative of intelligent design.
But wait! Is that even an exception? Some conclude it is there.

What makes you think it would have to be independent of itself?
The time it took to produce this biosphere is suggesting the universe itself an evolutionary entity, and us it's eyes and ears to see itself. If no life is found throughout the universe.

It now has us to engineer life to spread throughout the universe.
You imply the universe itself as great and grand as it is need something else to be old and wise, but it is simply the oldest thing we know of. But maybe you cannot see it's wisdom being right in front of your eyes and all?

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#158265 Mar 3, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
"NDE'S" have happened in many cultures. They are different for the Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Jaguar, Frog or Earth worshiping Animist. Culture plays heavily in the experience. People who talk about "core" experiences, are basing that on thousands of cases, and every case doesn't include all of the core experiences. You'd think if there was a reality to the NDE, there would be a set of, say, five experiences that always happen.
A "core" experience just needs to have, for instance, one out of a possible ten of those "core" experiences. This is never really mentioned. I'll add sometimes a person may experience "7" of the core events.'Core experiences", gives the impression all of them happen, always. That isn't the case.
Not all NDE's incorporate a deity experience. Not all NDE's indicate(as related by the person experiencing it) that there is a perceived expectation of 'afterlife".
Many NDE survivors(they never actually died), mention that its an entirely non religious experience.
It seems for some people it might be religious, for others, not "religious" at all. That seems odd to me.
It could be just that, the person was near to death, and they didn't die. The brain(proven to do a similar thing in traumatic injuries), provided a comfortable environment, instead of replaying the last thing a person saw before coming close to death, such as a 60 ft plunge off a cliff, or a 100 mph car crash into a Big Rig traveling at 60 mph....over, and over, and over, and over, till consciousness is resumed.
And when you do, you might be insane from watching Aunt Jenny's head vaporize on impact with the CD player. Repeatedly.
While you are close to death it isn't unreasonable to think the mind places you in a waiting room, filled with numerous things drawn from the subconscious mind and memory. Either chemically induced, or chemically and subconsciously initiated, like a deep dream state. I wouldn't assert that's what happens, however.
We can't even begin to know the effects of all the drugs that are given to heart attack patients(a high #% of NDE reports), and what that does to the mind. Info like that isn't collected in the emergency rooms and may never be. Saving the life is the priority in that setting. Stick'em, drug'em, shock'em, beat on'em, repeat as needed.
Here's the thing, you'd have to die to know if it's actual experience or precursor to some sort of after life, and it isn't a NDE then. Is it?
Its a "DE" (death experience) at that point.
No one survives death, and by death, I mean life>death>rigor mortis.
NDE's and the books written about them and the musings offered are nothing more than speculation. That's all that can be said or asserted about NDE's. Much like deities, they can be neither proven or disproved.
It's a futile debate in thinking you'll prove whatever it is you think they are. It doesn't matter if you're the most brilliant mind on the face of the earth, that you think you've had a NDE, and that others believe your observations must be given more weight than a Wino that says he had one too is an error in reasoning.
You wouldn't look at the remembered experiences, you look at the personality changes. The memories are strictly physical, and will be made to fit the culture. When you are in that extreme of a situation, you are deep in the subconscious. Your memories later will be a result of the event translated where you can understand them. Somewhat, anyhow. Those translated physical memories are what let you reintegrate back into this physically conscious world. But the curtain is closed on the subconscious. You are left with nothing more substantial than emotions and perceptions you can't put a finger on.

Look at those personality changes, and you seek impressions they had, not the actual "memory". There is a commonality across cultures on that.

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
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 4 min Rick in Kansas 99,298
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 5 min Darwins Stepchild 830,689
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min KayMarie 585,962
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 24 min Al Capone 5,823
is it wrong i like to wear womens underwear (Nov '12) 1 hr Mr_FX 238
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr Freebird USA 176,577
Is Joel Osteen a HYPOCRITE CHRISTIAN?? 2 hr Brother James 4
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr Remnant of 144000 611,950
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 6 hr lovewithin 40,230
More from around the web