RE: The Problem With Atheists

RE: The Problem With Atheists (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

JonnieBoy -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 1:05:49 AM)
In my opinion ... Athiests tend not to be being "superior", you seem to be falling into the trap of assuming that outspoken Athiests might represent the views of the majority ... I think most Atheists simply couldn't give a shit what anyone judgmental wants to think about their non interest in god type stuff and don't go around trying to convert anyone or being superior (thats what god believing types do and surely must have contributed to many a persons Atheism) I firmly believe that you would pigeonhole me as an Athiest given me discussing my actual belief system. I'm not, but it's not worth the hassle explaining here, far too many godbonkers types hovering and waiting to make me "see the light" Pirate

Elisabella -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 5:34:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JonnieBoy In my opinion ... Athiests tend not to be being "superior", you seem to be falling into the trap of assuming that outspoken Athiests might represent the views of the majority ... I think most Atheists simply couldn't give a shit what anyone judgmental wants to think about their non interest in god type stuff and don't go around trying to convert anyone or being superior (thats what god believing types do and surely must have contributed to many a persons Atheism) I firmly believe that you would pigeonhole me as an Athiest given me discussing my actual belief system. I'm not, but it's not worth the hassle explaining here, far too many godbonkers types hovering and waiting to make me "see the light" Pirate I think you're right that the majority of atheists aren't the loud preachy ones but I think you're a complete hypocrite for then turning around and painting "god believing types" as "judgmental" and "godbonkers" when the majority of people who follow a religion aren't the loud preachy ones.

GotSteel -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 6:13:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Your "opinion" is a belief. You have no empirical evidence for your opinion anymore than I have it for mine. I actually asked you what your position was when you claimed to have one that wasn't a belief and thought we might have an interesting conversation about Gnostic Theism. I guess you've abandoned that position... Anyway, the thing is you haven't done the same, you've just assumed that you know the thought process behind my position. That doesn't seem very academic of you.

vincentML -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 6:20:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: I have the impression that juliaoceania relies upon the common belief and experience of multitudes over the millennia as if (a) we really know what all of those humans understood, believed or experienced when I think we really mainly have reports only from a small fraction who were literate, and (b) as if shear numbers of believers made that belief valid. Through the 19th Century learned people believed that illness and health depended upon a balance of the four humours or four major body fluids - blood, phlegm, black bile and yellow bile. Apparently they were wrong despite the numbers who held the idea. Others believed the sick were possessed of demons. Their numbers doesn't lessen that fallacy. I study this academically. I can state that in most of the populations that anthropologists study atheism isn't the norm, it is the exception... if you have other data that would show me to be incorrect I would welcome it. A great deal of the study of anthropologists centers on the artifacts of ancient civilizations and upon living primatives. I suspect the study of artifacts does not tweek out the numbers of villagers who believe in some god nor the nature of the gods in which they believed nor whether the belief was mandated by authorities in power. I have read that studies among primatives have found an abundance of ancestor worship which solved the problem of what happened to the "person" after the body became lifeless, and an abundance of fear and dread of evil spirits in the forest. You may call it spiritual but it is questionable if those studies represent belief in a transendental god or a survival "gene" that made primatives afraid of the jungle and little children fear monsters under the bed at night. I concede that anthropological studies reveal religious activity but it still does not answer my second assertion that just because multitudes believe in a concept it is correct and true. I refer you back to my remarks about demons or body fluids as the basis for human wellness. Reality is not decided by counting believers. It is irrelevent to the reality of origins or afterlife to say atheists were/are the exception and not the norm. It is a fallacy to maintain that the validity of any idea can be judged by the number of adherents to it. Thank you for taking the time to respond. I would welcome any further comment from you.

juliaoceania -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 6:33:41 AM)
quote: In my opinion ... Athiests tend not to be being "superior", you seem to be falling into the trap of assuming that outspoken Athiests might represent the views of the majority ... I think most Atheists simply couldn't give a shit what anyone judgmental wants to think about their non interest in god type stuff and don't go around trying to convert anyone or being superior (thats what god believing types do and surely must have contributed to many a persons Atheism) This thread is about problems with atheists. I know a lot of atheists that do not behave as though they think they are superior. quote: I firmly believe that you would pigeonhole me as an Athiest given me discussing my actual belief system. I'm not, but it's not worth the hassle explaining here, far too many godbonkers types hovering and waiting to make me "see the light" I haven't pigeonholed you. It is very ironic that you have assumed that I am going to... keep on firmly believing whatever you like. I do not belong to a religion and I do not necessarily believe in a personified higher power that I need to anthropomorphize. Did you think I did? Have you actually been pigeonholing me?

Moonhead -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 6:40:54 AM)
If nothing else this thread has established that the biggest problem with atheism is the one a lot of people with religious convictions have with atheists...

juliaoceania -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 6:42:57 AM)
quote: A great deal of the study of anthropologists centers on the artifacts of ancient civilizations and upon living primatives. I suspect the study of artifacts does not tweek out the numbers of villagers who believe in some god nor the nature of the gods in which they believed nor whether the belief was mandated by authorities in power. I have read that studies among primatives have found an abundance of ancestor worship which solved the problem of what happened to the "person" after the body became lifeless, and an abundance of fear and dread of evil spirits in the forest. You may call it spiritual but it is questionable if those studies represent belief in a transendental god or a survival "gene" that made primatives afraid of the jungle and little children fear monsters under the bed at night. I am a cultural anthropologist with an emphasis on the study of religion. I do not call people who engage in ancestor work "primitive". Your theory about why people believe what they believe is called the "intellectualist" theory of religion... which was proposed by people who did not actually live amongst these people. So basically by labeling these people "primitive" you have put yourself into a position of superiority over them.. this is something I do not do. We call the above description "ethnocentric", anthropologists are somewhat ashamed of ethnographies that call people "primitive"... so I am assuming that whatever you read about why people believe what they believe in the context of being "primitive" is EXTREMELY outdated. I would suggest reading current ethnographies. I feel honor bound to stick up for those who systems of belief that differ from my own. I feel honor bound to respect different beliefs. It is called anthropological ethics. Instead of trying to debunk beliefs I attempt to understand how people find them meaningful to their lives... Atheists cannot debunk the meaning of faith to those who have it....when they do they become assholes in my opinion. No different from those who call other people "primitive" which is also something that assholes do

juliaoceania -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 6:50:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Your "opinion" is a belief. You have no empirical evidence for your opinion anymore than I have it for mine. I actually asked you what your position was when you claimed to have one that wasn't a belief and thought we might have an interesting conversation about Gnostic Theism. I guess you've abandoned that position... Anyway, the thing is you haven't done the same, you've just assumed that you know the thought process behind my position. That doesn't seem very academic of you. I never assumed I know your position. I quoted you and responded to you. Did you mean "agnostic theism"?' As far as my beliefs? I do not have beliefs concerning the nature of God per se. I am not unbelieving. I would call myself spiritual. I point toward thinking that humans are spiritual beings which seek meaning in their lives, we are creators, we may in fact be the god we worship... I know inside I am connected to something larger than myself, although I cannot answer to what that larger thing is... Sinergy is agnostic. I never assume I know what other people believe, nor do I judge it, unless they are using it to hurt others (Pat Robertson for example)

juliaoceania -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 6:52:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead If nothing else this thread has established that the biggest problem with atheism is the one a lot of people with religious convictions have with atheists... Has it? Funny.. I have seen people who engage in religious practices even called "primitive" on this thread and yet you focus only on those who disagree with you... typical.

juliaoceania -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 7:03:54 AM)
quote: It is irrelevent to the reality of origins or afterlife to say atheists were/are the exception and not the norm. It is a fallacy to maintain that the validity of any idea can be judged by the number of adherents to it. My point is that it is human nature to believe in some sort of spiritual system. You may find that illogical, but it is no different than love, either you have felt it or you have not, and if you haven't felt it then it is something that you might dismiss... My point is that to dismiss those who have real feelings as being primitive, somehow lacking in rational thought, or in some other way intellectually deficient, is not only ethnocentric, it is putting yourself in the position of superiority because you lack the ability to feel those things. You can do that as much as you like, it is nothing new to do so. I have had to read more than one book by some intellectualist atheist who thought he was a "rational" person, that rationality was the next step in human evolution. You see the fundamental flaw in this thought process is that human evolution is a linear line in time marching forward toward "progress". Of course your worldview is the "progressive" one, and the rest of us lower sorts need to get with the rational world. We would be happier if we just dismissed our primitive ways and became "Enlightened"... and isn't it funny how that is the valued paradigm we should all adapt to? Man=Rational Woman=hysterical Religion=primitive atheism=modern Brown People=living in the dark white=enlightened By this worldview you are superior... White man without religion...

GotSteel -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 7:30:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Your "opinion" is a belief. I never assumed I know your position. [sm=idea.gif] Huh.... quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Did you mean "agnostic theism"?' No I meant what I said. Not agnostic the opposite kind, the one where a theist claims knowledge like you do here: quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I know inside I am connected to something larger than myself, although I cannot answer to what that larger thing is...

GotSteel -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 7:57:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Man=Rational Woman=hysterical Religion=primitive atheism=modern Brown People=living in the dark white=enlightened By this worldview you are superior... White man without religion... Wow.....was that a red herring a straw man or both? Incidentally there are a number of concepts that can be claimed as "human nature" with the exact same argument and evidence you've given, for instance racism. Can we agree that overcoming racism (to the extent we've managed to do it) has been beneficial to our species?

juliaoceania -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 8:38:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Man=Rational Woman=hysterical Religion=primitive atheism=modern Brown People=living in the dark white=enlightened By this worldview you are superior... White man without religion... Wow.....was that a red herring a straw man or both? Incidentally there are a number of concepts that can be claimed as "human nature" with the exact same argument and evidence you've given, for instance racism. Can we agree that overcoming racism (to the extent we've managed to do it) has been beneficial to our species? Who argues that racism is "human nature"? Race as a cultural construct is rather new to the human experience Edited to add, when I see someone that calls people "primitive" I think about racists that subscribed to the idea that the white man was endowed with a certain natural superiority that made it only right that they colonize the Brown people and split up their lands... "Primitive" is code for "less than White Man"...just sayin

juliaoceania -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 8:40:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Your "opinion" is a belief. I never assumed I know your position. [sm=idea.gif] Huh.... quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Did you mean "agnostic theism"?' No I meant what I said. Not agnostic the opposite kind, the one where a theist claims knowledge like you do here: quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I know inside I am connected to something larger than myself, although I cannot answer to what that larger thing is... So are you saying that you are a Gnostic? I am familiar with some varieties of Gnosticism. I have never seen it referred to as Gnostic Theism... just Gnosticism

vincentML -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 8:41:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: It is irrelevent to the reality of origins or afterlife to say atheists were/are the exception and not the norm. It is a fallacy to maintain that the validity of any idea can be judged by the number of adherents to it. My point is that it is human nature to believe in some sort of spiritual system. You may find that illogical, but it is no different than love, either you have felt it or you have not, and if you haven't felt it then it is something that you might dismiss... My point is that to dismiss those who have real feelings as being primitive, somehow lacking in rational thought, or in some other way intellectually deficient, is not only ethnocentric, it is putting yourself in the position of superiority because you lack the ability to feel those things. You can do that as much as you like, it is nothing new to do so. I have had to read more than one book by some intellectualist atheist who thought he was a "rational" person, that rationality was the next step in human evolution. You see the fundamental flaw in this thought process is that human evolution is a linear line in time marching forward toward "progress". Of course your worldview is the "progressive" one, and the rest of us lower sorts need to get with the rational world. We would be happier if we just dismissed our primitive ways and became "Enlightened"... and isn't it funny how that is the valued paradigm we should all adapt to? Man=Rational Woman=hysterical Religion=primitive atheism=modern Brown People=living in the dark white=enlightened By this worldview you are superior... White man without religion... Well, you put a lot of words and ideas in my mouth that I did not offer. As a matter of fact I do agree it is human nature to believe in some sort of spiritual system. I think it comes down to us as a survival mechanism through evolution whether linear or zig zag. The point is we are decendents of the survivors so we had some helpful inborn mechanisms along the way. I have no idea where you came up with all that other crap of my being racist, superior white man, etc. I am not that at all. I did not dismiss anyone as lacking rational thought. Your accusations are reckless and petty. Very mean-spirited. Obvious to me you are slinging mud because you cannot cope with my central thesis which is that just because a bunch of people believe something is true doesn't make it true. Evidently it is not a proposition you can deal with and from which you feel threatened judging from your immature response and attempt to deflect my comment. Pretty low form of discourse from you, julia. Not what I would have expected.

juliaoceania -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 8:44:17 AM)
quote: Well, you put a lot of words and ideas in my mouth that I did not offer. As a matter of fact I do agree it is human nature to believe in some sort of spiritual system. I think it comes down to us as a survival mechanism through evolution whether linear or zig zag. The point is we are decendents of the survivors so we had some helpful inborn mechanisms along the way. I have no idea where you came up with all that other crap of my being racist, superior white man, etc. I am not that at all. I did not dismiss anyone as lacking rational thought. Your accusations are reckless and petty. Very mean-spirited. Obvious to me you are slinging mud because you cannot cope with my central thesis which is that just because a bunch of people believe something is true doesn't make it true. Evidently it is not a proposition you can deal with and from which you feel threatened judging from your immature response and attempt to deflect my comment. Pretty low form of discourse from you, julia. Not what I would have expected. You called people who believe in ancestor worship "primitive"... own your words

vincentML -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 8:51:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: Well, you put a lot of words and ideas in my mouth that I did not offer. As a matter of fact I do agree it is human nature to believe in some sort of spiritual system. I think it comes down to us as a survival mechanism through evolution whether linear or zig zag. The point is we are decendents of the survivors so we had some helpful inborn mechanisms along the way. I have no idea where you came up with all that other crap of my being racist, superior white man, etc. I am not that at all. I did not dismiss anyone as lacking rational thought. Your accusations are reckless and petty. Very mean-spirited. Obvious to me you are slinging mud because you cannot cope with my central thesis which is that just because a bunch of people believe something is true doesn't make it true. Evidently it is not a proposition you can deal with and from which you feel threatened judging from your immature response and attempt to deflect my comment. Pretty low form of discourse from you, julia. Not what I would have expected. You called people who believe in ancestor worship "primitive"... own your words Obvious you cannot reply to my main issue and so you try to deflect or obfuscate with personal accusations. How pathetic.

juliaoceania -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 9:28:50 AM)
quote: which is that just because a bunch of people believe something is true doesn't make it true. Evidently it is not a proposition you can deal with and from which you feel threatened judging from your immature response and attempt to deflect my comment. Pretty low form of discourse from you, julia. Not what I would have expected. I am saying that the fact that so many people believe in sacred things supports that there is something internal to human beings that causes them to feel a connection to the sacred (funny I never even defined that as being an anthropomorphized Being). I am saying that since this connection to the sacred is so ubiquitous that it should not be dismissed as being "primitive" "backwards" "ignorant" "or "stupid". Those who describe feelings connected with meditation, prayer, ritual as being such usually subscribe to a particular religion and label all others as "wrong" OR they are White Atheists who have their own so-called enlightened view of the world based on the scientific method (something that they think makes them "rational" and therefore "superior" to the rest of the believers of various belief systems) It is not that I think that these feelings prove anything, just like I cannot prove "love" is real I cannot prove that what happens in the brain when people meditate and pray is "real". I do not care to prove it is real. I have no "god" in this fight. I trend toward agnosticism, and as someone that meditates I have felt a connection to something larger than myself... I have no desire to own it or label it. I do take exception to the language I read from Atheists that think they have the One True Way and that every other way is like believing in Santa Claus. I do have a problem with reducing the human experience of relating to the sacred as if people who believe in things like ancestor worship are nothing but a bunch of ignorant primitives that are just waiting for science to describe the world and then they would quit believing in "childish" things and join the "rational" world... it is ethnocentric. This is something I have given a great deal of thought to and reading upon the subject. I could direct you to those White men who wrote books that denigrated people in other parts of the world... even to the point they labeled Animism as being the least evolved religion, they labeled pantheon-ism as being the next step in religious evolution, and then monotheism as the most advanced religion.,... of course atheism was the next step, because of course what White male scientists believed had much more merit than all those ignorant believers...

urineme -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 9:40:44 AM)
Folks, can we agree that we live, and interpret life, experientially? Each of us will, and do, experience things in our own unique way. That there may be some commonalities of experience, and interpretation thereof, is unavoidable, given our commonalities as members of a species and culture. If none of us had ever been exposed to the idea of diety-concepts, would we, in our tecnologically-advanced society, develope them? What experiences, given our current scientific understandings, would cause us to develope them? Take some of our daily experiences, step back a millenia or so, and without our understanding of the scientific cause-and-effect relationships, and given the human need FOR knowing the cause, I daresay we WOULD (And therefore, as a species, DID) attribute causality to a diety-concept, and base that concept on our observations of our physical and cultural environment, and our experiences therein. Mankind developed diety-concepts out of a need. That some no longer feel the need is unavoidable, given our current social reality, since we've replaced the diety-concepts with scientific understanding. Some still feel the need for diety-concepts, and that is fine, each according to their own need. If each side could accept the other, we'd be far better-off as a society and species. It ISN'T "The problem with atheists", it is "The problem with human intolerance". William

juliaoceania -> RE: The Problem With Atheists (3/26/2010 9:50:19 AM)
quote: Mankind developed diety-concepts out of a need. That some no longer feel the need is unavoidable, given our current social reality, since we've replaced the diety-concepts with scientific understanding. Some still feel the need for diety-concepts, and that is fine, each according to their own need. If each side could accept the other, we'd be far better-off as a society and species Some have never had the "need". This argument always has been and always will be teleological. We are not marching forward on some destined path of betterment to the human species. Atheism is not the next "logical" step forward. If anything there has been new and unexpected ways that people exhibit their belief in something larger than themselves. Some embrace New Age religions, some cling to their traditions, some reject everything they were taught... this is not new at all either.

Page: << < prev 7 8 9 [10] 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125