A question to atheists.

[Atreus21]

What do atheists believe?

I would assume that atheists believe in atheism, simply that there is no god.

It follows that any religion that worships a god is erroneous.

If you agree with that premise, please read on.

But it's not enough to simply say what does not exist. What do atheists truly believe in? What do they propose gives order to the universe? I would expect science and reason. I wouldn't expect an atheist to say he or she believes in nothing, because atheists tend not to be nihilists, and nihilism doesn't really exist anyway.

Assuming atheists do believe that rational, scientific reasoning is the only way to discern truth, then it follows that atheism must be a religion unto its own, simply with a different god. When I think about it, people engage in a religion generally out of a search for the truth, and they find God. An atheist engages in the same thing for the same reason, and finds reason and logic.

That's my point. If atheists are atheists because they seek the truth about order to the universe, then they're behaving just as religions behave, although atheism has no organization like the Papacy or such.

I'll put in another way that's not as convoluted.

In my opinion, religions don't worship God. They worship Truth, and to them, that truth is God. How are atheists any different, except that they name their God something else?

I hope not to ignite any tempers.

 

[daveymark]

lawn chair ready. who wants a beer?

 

[bl4ckfl4g]

Originally posted by: Atreus21
But it's not enough to simply say what does not exist.

Actually for me that is enough. I don't believe in god and he doesn't exist.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: Atreus21
But it's not enough to simply say what does not exist.

Actually for me that is enough. I don't believe in god he doesn't exist.

Well, once you define why you don't believe in god, you must define what you do believe.

That's the contradiction, to me.

 

[bl4ckfl4g]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: Atreus21
But it's not enough to simply say what does not exist.

Actually for me that is enough. I don't believe in god he doesn't exist.

Well, once you define why you don't believe in god, you must define what you do believe.

That's the contradiction, to me.

To you maybe...I just don't believe in him.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: Atreus21
But it's not enough to simply say what does not exist.

Actually for me that is enough. I don't believe in god he doesn't exist.

Well, once you define why you don't believe in god, you must define what you do believe.

That's the contradiction, to me.

To you maybe...I just don't believe in him.

Fair enough. Why not?

 

[bl4ckfl4g]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: Atreus21
But it's not enough to simply say what does not exist.

Actually for me that is enough. I don't believe in god he doesn't exist.

Well, once you define why you don't believe in god, you must define what you do believe.

That's the contradiction, to me.

To you maybe...I just don't believe in him.

Fair enough. Why not?

Why should I?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours - Stephen Roberts

That is pretty much my stance, an incredible story, way wackier than that of Red riding hood and you believe in it without any kind of proof what so ever, yeah, the bible has one or two historical facts right but the magical stuff, there is no evidence of any of it.

I would say that there is a grandma and a hungry wolf and that would make red riding hood a true story? Of course not, but when it comes to religion, people become all defensive and daft, doesn't matter WHAT religion, it's always the same.

So debating this is pointless.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Uh...I think that you are going about this with false presumptions and a serious logical fallacy.

Me: I don't believe in the Tooth Fairy
Atreus21: What do you believe in then?
Me: Nothing
Atreus21: If you don't believe in the Tooth Fairy, surely you must believe in an alternate "thing".
Me: Actually, no I don't have to believe in anything else. I just don't believe that there is a Tooth Fairy.
Atreus21: Why not?
Me: Because you are insane. A lack of belief in one thing does not necessitate a belief in something in place of that thing.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: Atreus21
But it's not enough to simply say what does not exist.

Actually for me that is enough. I don't believe in god he doesn't exist.

Well, once you define why you don't believe in god, you must define what you do believe.

That's the contradiction, to me.

To you maybe...I just don't believe in him.

Fair enough. Why not?

Why should I?

Because it's possible that he does exist. I'm not saying it's up to you to disprove the existence of God.

The fact that you ask "Why should I" implies that you have no reason even to consider it.

But that means you believe in reasoning.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Uh...I think that you are going about this with false presumptions and a serious logical fallacy.

Me: I don't believe in the Tooth Fairy
Atreus21: What do you believe in then?
Me: Nothing
Atreus21: If you don't believe in the Tooth Fairy, surely you must believe in an alternate "thing".
Me: Actually, no I don't have to believe in anything else. I just don't believe that there is a Tooth Fairy.
Atreus21: Why not?
Me: Because you are insane. A lack of belief in one thing does not necessitate a belief in something in place of that thing.

It's impossible to believe in nothing. Otherwise why do you do anything? Why do you even argue against me if you don't believe that I'm wrong?

You're using reasoning to argue that I'm wrong.

So you must believe in reason too.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours - Stephen Roberts.

I would like you, Atreus21 to respond to that.

 

[bl4ckfl4g]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g

Originally posted by: Atreus21
But it's not enough to simply say what does not exist.

Actually for me that is enough. I don't believe in god he doesn't exist.

Well, once you define why you don't believe in god, you must define what you do believe.

That's the contradiction, to me.

To you maybe...I just don't believe in him.

Fair enough. Why not?

Why should I?

Because it's possible that he does exist. I'm not saying it's up to you to disprove the existence of God.

The fact that you ask "Why should I" implies that you have no reason even to consider it.

But that means you believe in reasoning.

Your philosophy or whatever doesn't really mean anything when put to practical use. The simple fact is that I don't believe. I even tried to believe once and it didn't work. I couldn't fool myself. If someone doesn't believe in God, it is really no deeper than that.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Uh...I think that you are going about this with false presumptions and a serious logical fallacy.

Me: I don't believe in the Tooth Fairy
Atreus21: What do you believe in then?
Me: Nothing
Atreus21: If you don't believe in the Tooth Fairy, surely you must believe in an alternate "thing".
Me: Actually, no I don't have to believe in anything else. I just don't believe that there is a Tooth Fairy.
Atreus21: Why not?
Me: Because you are insane. A lack of belief in one thing does not necessitate a belief in something in place of that thing.

It's impossible to believe in nothing. Otherwise why do you do anything? Why do you even argue against me if you don't believe that I'm wrong?

You're using reasoning to argue that I'm wrong.

So you must believe in reason too.

Well there are things that are just not known, so we don't know how, so what? Eventually this god of the gaps that has been supported for so long will be diminished to nothing, as the gaps close.

I don't need an explanation for what we don't know, it will probably not be presented in my lifetime and i'm ok with that.

And i am perfectly fine with dying and becoming absolutely nothing, not going anywhere, not doing anything, just dead, that is fine by me.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours - Stephen Roberts.

I would like you, Atreus21 to respond to that.

Actually I agree very much with that. We both believe in truth, but we disagree with each other in how we've found it, and the proof.

Just like religions do.

 

[Robor]

This is going to go round and round in circles - as it always does.

 

[Lemon law]

I disagree totally.

Its possible to be an athiest and then note there are basic scientific laws. And these laws are verifiable and duplicable.

But to believe in God one must make an assumed leap in faith. To take the Christian dogma as an example, you believe one and only one GOD exists. And there is no way to verify that. Then one must believe in Jesus Christ who was born to a virgin mother. And the son later lose from the dead which is today unverifiable. And then somehow is separate from God but does not violate the one and only one God rule. And its all written down in this big book that can't square with scientific fact.

But then we get to that other religious gotcha. Namely the scientific type can explain much of what happens but is clueless about how energy and matter is created in the first place. So the religious raise there hand, shrug their shoulder, and say God done it. Which is still a cop out because then we have to ask what created God?

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Uh...I think that you are going about this with false presumptions and a serious logical fallacy.

Me: I don't believe in the Tooth Fairy
Atreus21: What do you believe in then?
Me: Nothing
Atreus21: If you don't believe in the Tooth Fairy, surely you must believe in an alternate "thing".
Me: Actually, no I don't have to believe in anything else. I just don't believe that there is a Tooth Fairy.
Atreus21: Why not?
Me: Because you are insane. A lack of belief in one thing does not necessitate a belief in something in place of that thing.

It's impossible to believe in nothing. Otherwise why do you do anything? Why do you even argue against me if you don't believe that I'm wrong?

You're using reasoning to argue that I'm wrong.

So you must believe in reason too.

Well there are things that are just not known, so we don't know how, so what? Eventually this god of the gaps that has been supported for so long will be diminished to nothing, as the gaps close.

I don't need an explanation for what we don't know, it will probably not be presented in my lifetime and i'm ok with that.

And i am perfectly fine with dying and becoming absolutely nothing, not going anywhere, not doing anything, just dead, that is fine by me.

I would think that humankind is driven by the thirst for answers. The existence of religion and science is testament to that, I think.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Uh...I think that you are going about this with false presumptions and a serious logical fallacy.

Me: I don't believe in the Tooth Fairy
Atreus21: What do you believe in then?
Me: Nothing
Atreus21: If you don't believe in the Tooth Fairy, surely you must believe in an alternate "thing".
Me: Actually, no I don't have to believe in anything else. I just don't believe that there is a Tooth Fairy.
Atreus21: Why not?
Me: Because you are insane. A lack of belief in one thing does not necessitate a belief in something in place of that thing.

It's impossible to believe in nothing. Otherwise why do you do anything? Why do you even argue against me if you don't believe that I'm wrong?

You're using reasoning to argue that I'm wrong.

So you must believe in reason too.

My first reaction when reading your response was literally a verbal "Oh geez, oh whiz!"

I will take the bait and "argue that you are wrong" that belief in one thing (or a lack of belief as it may be) necessitates a belief in something else.

I absolutely believe in logic and reason. I can openly and readily admit that because it is true. Now here is where you are blurring the lines. Because I believe in logic and reason does not define that my belief or disbelief in a god is based on my belief in logic and reason. I could simply just choose to believe or not believe based on any number of alternate reasons.

It reminds me of a joke that I heard a short while back:

Q: Why are the youth today so ignorant and apathetic?
A: I don't know and don't care!

Basically, I could choose not to believe out of laziness or out of pure apathy towards religion in general. Either of which would define my lack of belief as non-existent yet neither would require me to have an alternate belief.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
I disagree totally.

Its possible to be an athiest and then note there are basic scientific laws. And these laws are verifiable and duplicable.

But to believe in God one must make an assumed leap in faith. To take the Christian dogma as an example, you believe one and only one GOD exists. And there is no way to verify that. Then one must believe in Jesus Christ who was born to a virgin mother. And the son later lose from the dead which is today unverifiable. And then somehow is separate from God but does not violate the one and only one God rule. And its all written down in this big book that can't square with scientific fact.

But then we get to that other religious gotcha. Namely the scientific type can explain much of what happens but is clueless about how energy and matter is created in the first place. So the religious raise there hand, shrug their shoulder, and say God done it. Which is still a cop out because then we have to ask what created God?

I'm not arguing that God exists.

I'm saying that if atheists believe in Reason, logic, and science to the exclusion of all other possibilites, like Jehovah or Allah, as you clearly do, then they've simply given god a different name.

 

[judasmachine]

There is nothing to believe. The Earth is here, we are here, and that's that. Morality comes from a sense of compassion, and a foreknowledge of the consequences of ones behavior, not from a long storied guy in the sky. There is no organization, there is no anything but the reality that we exist, and knowing where we come from is a fruitless endevour.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Uh...I think that you are going about this with false presumptions and a serious logical fallacy.

Me: I don't believe in the Tooth Fairy
Atreus21: What do you believe in then?
Me: Nothing
Atreus21: If you don't believe in the Tooth Fairy, surely you must believe in an alternate "thing".
Me: Actually, no I don't have to believe in anything else. I just don't believe that there is a Tooth Fairy.
Atreus21: Why not?
Me: Because you are insane. A lack of belief in one thing does not necessitate a belief in something in place of that thing.

It's impossible to believe in nothing. Otherwise why do you do anything? Why do you even argue against me if you don't believe that I'm wrong?

You're using reasoning to argue that I'm wrong.

So you must believe in reason too.

My first reaction when reading your response was literally a verbal "Oh geez, oh whiz!"

I will take the bait and "argue that you are wrong" that belief in one thing (or a lack of belief as it may be) necessitates a belief in something else.

I absolutely believe in logic and reason. I can openly and readily admit that because it is true. Now here is where you are blurring the lines. Because I believe in logic and reason does not define that my belief or disbelief in a god is based on my belief in logic and reason. I could simply just choose to believe or not believe based on any number of alternate reasons.

It reminds me of a joke that I heard a short while back:

Q: Why are the youth today so ignorant and apathetic?
A: I don't know and don't care!

Basically, I could choose not to believe out of laziness or out of pure apathy towards religion in general. Either of which would define my lack of belief as non-existent yet neither would require me to have an alternate belief.

Okay then we have no argument. You say that you believe in logic and reason out of a search for truth. Christians believe in God out of a search for truth. Christians call Atheists deluded, and Atheists call Christians deluded.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours - Stephen Roberts.

I would like you, Atreus21 to respond to that.

Actually I agree very much with that. We both believe in truth, but we disagree with each other in how we've found it, and the proof.

Just like religions do.

No, i believe in known truth, where you can observe the truth, like evolutin which is observable, falsifiable and to the best of our knowledge at all times, if proven wrong, it's still to the best of our knowledge, it doesn't have a basis and it doesn't draw a conclusion, it is just what it is.

That is what i like about science, it's never done, the more facts the better, as opposed to religion where the facts are known and then everyone is looking for evidence that points to the already drawn conclusion.

So while i believe in truth to the best of my knowledge, you believe in something completely different, you found your truth without a shred of evidence, in fact there are so much evidence to the contrary that it makes you make up shit to justify your own beliefs.

Now it may seem like i am attacking you but you definently have the right to your own religion whatever it may be, i defend that, but don't debate religion based on evidence, don't ever do that, it just doesn't work, at all.

If you don't believe me ask the ID people, i mean anyone who has taken a biology class can dismiss them with one sentence.

It's good advice to keep your beliefs to yourself, i keep mine to myself unless someone asks me, and i haven't even mentioned them in this thread either.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: judasmachine
There is nothing to believe. The Earth is here, we are here, and that's that. Morality comes from a sense of compassion, and a foreknowledge of the consequences of ones behavior, not from a long storied guy in the sky.

Okay, but you contradict yourself. You say there is nothing to believe, then you tell me what IS. You've told me what you do believe in. You're using reasoning, and that means you believe in reasoning.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours - Stephen Roberts.

I would like you, Atreus21 to respond to that.

Actually I agree very much with that. We both believe in truth, but we disagree with each other in how we've found it, and the proof.

Just like religions do.

No, i believe in known truth, where you can observe the truth, like evolutin which is observable, falsifiable and to the best of our knowledge at all times, if proven wrong, it's still to the best of our knowledge, it doesn't have a basis and it doesn't draw a conclusion, it is just what it is.

That is what i like about science, it's never done, the more facts the better, as opposed to religion where the facts are known and then everyone is looking for evidence that points to the already drawn conclusion.

So while i believe in truth to the best of my knowledge, you believe in something completely different, you found your truth without a shred of evidence, in fact there are so much evidence to the contrary that it makes you make up shit to justify your own beliefs.

Now it may seem like i am attacking you but you definently have the right to your own religion whatever it may be, i defend that, but don't debate religion based on evidence, don't ever do that, it just doesn't work, at all.

If you don't believe me ask the ID people, i mean anyone who has taken a biology class can dismiss them with one sentence.

It's good advice to keep your beliefs to yourself, i keep mine to myself unless someone asks me, and i haven't even mentioned them in this thread either.

Atheists use reasoning to debunk Christians. Christians use God to disprove atheists.

I didn't get the impression you were attacking me. This is a very abstract argument, so I understand some miscommunication.

Still, tho. You're say you believe in evidence, logic, and scientific reasoning. Once again, I have to say I'm not trying to prove the existence of God. I'm trying to prove that if Atheists believe ANYTHING, then they're no different than a religion with a different name for their god. Atheists simply believe that their god offers the most proof.