What is going on?

Valmont

I'm new on the forum and would anyone like to explain the working of the Athiesm/agnosticism viewpoint?

I am an athiest true and true but I don't really understand what you represent when you say you are an athiest.

Any unwritten rules I should be aware of?

(i deleted my original post, in retrospect in was slightly impetuous and spontaneous, I freak out a lot)

edited blank

-fair enough o.o

Valmont

sorry bluewolf, I had to delete my original thread. It was a bit intense for a first post!

Thomas_S_Hunterson

You can have Christmas, Honnukah and whatever other nice parties you want, and don't have to give of your time to some organised meeting every week. WHat more could you want.

Scofflaw

The Atheist is the "fool who has said in his heart - there is no God".

Atheism denies the existence of God(s). Agnosticism doubts the existence of God(s). Monotheism, of course, denies the existence of all Gods except one.

A lot of agnostics are effectively atheists but consider actual denial to be logically untenable.

There are a lot of pseudo-atheists who pretend to deny God the better to rebel against religious parents, but those are usually weeded out at the first major (indeed, minor) traumatic life event.

What makes you ask? After all, if you don't "really understand what you represent when you say you are an atheist" then (no offence is meant!) how do you know you are one?


cordially,
Scofflaw

Valmont

Scofflaw wrote:

What makes you ask? After all, if you don't "really understand what you represent when you say you are an atheist" then (no offence is meant!) how do you know you are one?


cordially,
Scofflaw

None taken, I know that athiests deny the existence of God and that agnostics say that you just can't know. When I say I don't know what they represent, is it teenage angst? rebellion? pomousness? another reason to call yourself an intellectuual? Because any 'athiest/agnostic' I have had the displeasure of encountering fall into the above categories. I would like to represent common sense and the greater good but it seems a lot of people get caught up in the act of being an athiest and forget what it is they represent!

So, to correct my statement, what do the athiest/agnostic group on boards represent?

Beruthiel

Valmont wrote:

When I say I don't know what they represent, is it teenage angst? rebellion? pomousness? another reason to call yourself an intellectuual? Because any 'athiest/agnostic' I have had the displeasure of encountering fall into the above categories.

Perhaps if you are a teenager then some of the above maybe true.
For us 'grown ups' personally speaking, the decision came after a long and thoughtful process.
I am agnostic, ie - I don't believe in any god but nor do I think myself so all knowing that I can just dismiss the fact that maybe there is something greater out there. I will of course require solid proof that 'he' exists, until then I shall remain ever the doubter and don't believe in anything other than being as good a person as I can and living by my own moral code.

So, to correct my statement, what do the athiest/agnostic group on boards represent?

we represent ourselves, in all our different and wonderful ways.

Dades

Welcome Valmont.

Valmont wrote:

any 'athiest/agnostic' I have had the displeasure of encountering fall into the above categories. what do the athiest/agnostic group on boards represent?

It think the first point you have to note here is that atheists/agnostics do not represent something in the way that theists do. There is no shared meaning "way of life" or secret handshake. The only thing they have in common is a lack of belief in declared gods.

As Scoff mentions there are plenty of psuedo-atheists about that no doubt cloud the water. The point is that a genuine atheist does not "declare" themselves due to teenage angst or rebellion, but because they do not, and cannot believe in the existence of manmade gods. True belief should never an issue of choice.

In short, how somebody acts as an atheist/agnostic, is purely their business.

robindch

> I don't really understand what you represent when you say you are an athiest.

Well, as an atheist, you don't really represent anything other than yourself, since (unlike religion) atheism is not an identity issue, despite what some religious people would have you believe. Many atheists will also hold humanist beliefs, so that might be worth checking that out if you want to pin down more about what's a typical worldview for atheists. The Irish Humanists live at:

http://www.irish-humanists.org/

Asiaprod

[QUOTE=Valmont
]When I say I don't know what they represent, is it teenage angst? rebellion? pomousness? another reason to call yourself an intellectuual? Because any 'athiest/agnostic' I have had the displeasure of encountering fall into the above categories. [/QUOTE]

Hi Valmont. Just to confuse the issue even further for you:)
I am a Buddhist, yet I am an Atheist as I do not believe any God, and an Agnostic as I do believe that there is a higher purpose for man(women)kind which has nothing to do with any God. I would like to think that I, along with all the other members here, do exhibit common sense and represent good. And, as Beruthiel pointed out so eloquently, We represent ourselves in all our different and wonderful ways.

Zombrex

Asiaprod wrote:

We represent ourselves in all our different and wonderful ways.

And we all own swords apparently ...

Asiaprod

Wicknight wrote:

And we all own swords apparently ...

How very true, and some of us have more than one! That has got to mean something, but damned if I know what.

Scofflaw

Asiaprod wrote:

How very true, and some of us have more than one! That has got to mean something, but damned if I know what.

Good point! Valmont, do you own a sword? If not, you're probably an agnostic.


cordially,
Scofflaw

I think swords are pretty and want one, can I play too

Valmont

Beruthiel wrote:

we represent ourselves, in all our different and wonderful ways.

thats good to hear. I would like to represent the greater good for mankind, towards which I strongly believe that religion has made no useful contributions.

I think that while we don't believe in religion (maybe some people do) it is important to respect the opinions and beliefs of those who do, especially if our arguments are to hold any sway.

Thanks for your comments everyone, I'm sure I will learn a lot from this forum in the future. You have given me much to think about already!

Zombrex

Scofflaw wrote:

Good point! Valmont, do you own a sword? If not, you're probably an agnostic.

LOL

Asiaprod

bluewolf wrote:

I think swords are pretty and want one, can I play too

Glad to have you. A big kitchen knife will also do in a pinch:)

Excellent, now I just have to decide if I am even agnostic or not

Zillah

How can you say that you're an atheist through and through, but then say you don't really know what an Atheist is...?

Valmont

Zillah wrote:

How can you say that you're an atheist through and through, but then say you don't really know what an Atheist is...?

I didn't say that.

I know what an Athiest is, I am one. I didn't really know what they represented in the bigger picture. For example are the majority of Athiests accepting of the practice of religion despite their beliefs or do they vehemently oppose it for a greater good? They are not necessarily my beliefs but you get the idea.

lostexpectation

Valmont wrote:

When I say I don't know what they represent, is it teenage angst? rebellion? pomousness? another reason to call yourself an intellectuual? Because any 'athiest/agnostic' I have had the displeasure of encountering fall into the above categories.

which category are you in?

Valmont

lostexpectation wrote:

which category are you in?

None of the aforementioned categories if that is what you were implying.

Well what other categories are there? Would you care to enlighten me? Then maybe I could answer your question.

Beruthiel

Valmont wrote:

Well what other categories are there?

how long is a piece of string?

may I be so bold as to ask what age you are?

Valmont

I don't really want to bother with categories to be honest, it's not really important.

I'm 18 years old, judge me from that alone if you will, but I know where I stand.

Beruthiel

Valmont wrote:

I don't really want to bother with categories to be honest, it's not really important.

indeed it's not, there is no requirement to be boxed

I'm 18 years old, judge me from that alone if you will, but I know where I stand.

I only asked because of your comments so far, it's clear you are starting out on the road, it's a long one and your mind will chance lots of times along the way. That's good as you grow more each time. Get yourself some books and start reading

Zombrex

Valmont wrote:

For example are the majority of Athiests accepting of the practice of religion despite their beliefs or do they vehemently oppose it for a greater good? They are not necessarily my beliefs but you get the idea.

You can believe what ever you want. Nothing you believe will break the description of "atheist" (unless of course you start believing in God, at which point I doubt you would want to call yourself an atheist anyway)

There is no belief system or belief structure as that comes with being an Atheist. "Atheist" is a description, not a religion.

If you think religion is the route of all evil thats cool. If you love the structure and morals of religion and want to be part of it thats cool too.

All atheist means is that you don't believe in any supernatural "gods". It has very little reflection on what you actually do believe in.

Zombrex

Valmont wrote:

So, to correct my statement, what do the athiest/agnostic group on boards represent?

Atheism doesn't represent anything. Saying that a lot of atheists subscribe to the ideas of sceular movements that attempt to challange the influence that certain religions (*cough* catholic *cough*) have over society.

This forum was set up in responce to the number of religious forums. We mainly discuss definitions of atheism, answer questions from people who don't know what atheism is, discuss matters of a secular society. And once and a while have a good old laught at the latest "Creationist" theory doing the rounds.

And yes, we are all pompous intellectuals

Scofflaw

To put it yet another way - atheism is a starting point.

That you don't believe in God does not require you to oppose religion (many atheists respect religion, but do not wish to be part of it).

That you don't believe in an afterlife (although this is not a requirement of atheism, it is commonly held) does rather require you to do as much with this life as you can, but does not lay down what you should do with it.

Atheism is a matter of personal conviction rather than a specific group or creed - by declaring yourself an atheist, you free yourself from allegiance to commonly held superstitions, but do not acquire any other allegiances.


cordially,
Scofflaw

Yossie

Just to give Valmont another slightly different perspective from some of those here:

I use “Atheism” as shorthand for believing in naturalism i.e. that there is nothing supernatural. To me, calling yourself “atheist” (although I wouldn’t try stop anybody!) and believing in ghosts, souls, reincarnation, etc is a contradiction in terms. It’s my experience that atheists tend to hold to naturalism. In fact, to my mind the strongest arguments in favour of atheism are the ones that originate from arguments for naturalism.

If you are going to take Beruthiels advice on reading then as a good solid intro I would suggest Julian Baggini’s - Atheism: A Very Short Introduction

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0192804243/026-0128318-8979662

Or there is the more “wanky” - An Intelligent Person's Guide to Atheism; Daniel Harbour.

PS I don't own a sword, so what am I (apart from in need of improved home protection)? I'd say sword ownership correlates more with the "computer orientated" than with atheism;)

Zillah

Valmont wrote:

I didn't say that.

I know what an Athiest is, I am one. I didn't really know what they represented in the bigger picture. For example are the majority of Athiests accepting of the practice of religion despite their beliefs or do they vehemently oppose it for a greater good? They are not necessarily my beliefs but you get the idea.

Then Im very confused, because your very first post was:

I am an athiest true and true but I don't really understand what you represent when you say you are an athiest.

Zombrex

Scofflaw wrote:

To put it yet another way - atheism is a starting point...

Yossie wrote:

Just to give Valmont another slightly different perspective from some of those here...

As demonstrated by the posts above, to me one of the most important things about being an atheist is the realisation that ideas come from us, from humanity, not a more powerful, infalable, super being.

As such there are no universal right or wrong ideas, just different points to be debated, argued and agreed over.

Trying not to sound too much like John Lennon, If the whole world was like that it would be a much better place

Valmont

Zillah wrote:

Then Im very confused, because your very first post was:

I said I didn't know what it *represented* not what it *is*

But I do realise that I was being quite unclear, sorry for the confusion!

Valmont

Beruthiel wrote:

indeed it's not, there is no requirement to be boxed

I'm 18 years old, judge me from that alone if you will, but I know where I stand.

I only asked because of your comments so far, it's clear you are starting out on the road, it's a long one and your mind will chance lots of times along the way. That's good as you grow more each time. Get yourself some books and start reading

Cheers, I was expecting to be steamrolled! It's clear now, that while everyone on the forum is an athiest/agnostic, they all put their individual touches and opinions to their standpoint, which is good because it shows a respect for everyone's convictions.

I have been dipping in and out Nietzsche for the last two years, that is what got me into questioning religion and god in the first place, before that I couldn't comprehend anyone defying religion as I was always being told not to blaspheme by my parents! I also read Bertrand Russell's collection of essays 'why I am not a christian'. I wouldn't agree with them on all points but their general line of thought was interesting.

Thanks for the positive and constructive feedback guys

Nevyn

Valmont wrote:

It's clear now, that while everyone on the forum is an athiest/agnostic, they all put their individual touches and opinions to their standpoint, which is good because it shows a respect for everyone's convictions.

Ah um not everyone who post here is athiest/agnostic, some of us just like to join in the disscussion.

Thaedydal

Thaedydal wrote:

Ah um not everyone who post here is athiest/agnostic, some of us just like to join in the disscussion.

But we all know thaedy is the biggest atheist ever, eh

lostexpectation

Valmont wrote:

I have been dipping in and out Nietzsche for the last two years, that is what got me into questioning religion and god in the first place, before that I couldn't comprehend anyone defying religion as I was always being told not to blaspheme by my parents! I also read Bertrand Russell's collection of essays 'why I am not a christian'. I wouldn't agree with them on all points but their general line of thought was interesting.

Which leads us back to this

When I say I don't know what they represent, is it teenage angst? rebellion? pomousness? another reason to call yourself an intellectuual? Because any 'athiest/agnostic' I have had the displeasure of encountering fall into the above categories.

Valmont

I see what you are thinking. My parents have nothing against me not believing in God, I don't even go to Christmas mass anymore:eek: but believe me, my beliefs are not a 'rebellion'. I've been there and done that in other ways:p

I was genuinely surprised when I happened across 'Beyond Good and Evil' and 'Why I am not a Christian'. When I read the aforementioned books, they clicked with me because I felt I shared some of the same frustrations with the authors, I just lacked the wordiness to express those ideas in arguments and writing, thus my athiestic standpoint stemmed from reading some philosophy books a few years ago.

I see was being unclear but don't judge me on a dialectical error, I'd like to think I'm above categorisation. I'd like to just be an athiest.

Valmont

Thaedydal wrote:

Ah um not everyone who post here is athiest/agnostic, some of us just like to join in the disscussion.

Sorry, obviously 'everyone' isn't necessarily an athiest/agnostic, I was just generalising.

lostexpectation

Valmont wrote:

I see what you are thinking. My parents have nothing against me not believing in God, I don't even go to Christmas mass anymore:eek: but believe me, my beliefs are not a 'rebellion'. I've been there and done that in other ways:p

I was genuinely surprised when I happened across 'Beyond Good and Evil' and 'Why I am not a Christian'. When I read the aforementioned books, they clicked with me because I felt I shared some of the same frustrations with the authors, I just lacked the wordiness to express those ideas in arguments and writing, thus my athiestic standpoint stemmed from reading some philosophy books a few years ago.

I see was being unclear but don't judge me on a dialectical error, I'd like to think I'm above categorisation. I'd like to just be an athiest.

LOL seriously I can't let it go, I don't know how you can't see that your posts could be viewed in the same manner that you characterised 'most atheist you've encountered'

*wonders what happened to deltablaze*

Valmont

All you pointed out was a small indication that I was a 'rebeling' athiest. That doesn't necessarily make it so. I gave my reasons and told you how I became interested in athiesm, if you choose to ignore them in favour of an assumption, go right ahead.

My posts could be viewed in that way, just as your overt cynicism could be viewed as pompous.

lostexpectation

Valmont wrote:

All you pointed out was a small indication that I was a 'rebeling' athiest. That doesn't necessarily make it so. I gave my reasons and told you how I became interested in athiesm, if you choose to ignore them in favour of an assumption, go right ahead.

My posts could be viewed in that way, just as your overt cynicism could be viewed as pompous.

your posts could ,if one wanted to be direct, be in the pompous category too, so what does that say?

you were very close to assumption too in how you described most atheists you've encountered that have displeased you.

Im quite sure people have seen me as intellectualist, pompous and rebellious (in reference to my athieism and other things) so maybe it is intellectualism or maybe its something else aswell...

what do you think it is

Dades

I don't really think Valmont gave us enough info on his bad experiences with atheists to label him as no different than those he talks of.

"Rebellion" is subjective. Many parents would view a childs rejection of religion as an act of rebellion, even where said rejection has come from genuine feeling. Of course there is rebellion for rebellion's sake, but this doesn't seem to me to be the case with Valmont.

lostexpectation

The Atheist wrote:

I don't really think Valmont gave us enough info on his bad experiences with atheists to label him as no different than those he talks of.

"Rebellion" is subjective. Many parents would view a childs rejection of religion as an act of rebellion, even where said rejection has come from genuine feeling. Of course there is rebellion for rebellion's sake, but this doesn't seem to me to be the case with Valmont.

I don't think valmont is being rebellious

anyway he said what do we represent, well cos its so absurd that majority of people literally believe in god then in that absurd world we need seemingly equally absurd fora for athiests

Zombrex

lostexpectation wrote:

I don't think valmont is being rebellious

anyway he said what do we represent, well cos its so absurd that majority of people literally believe in god then in that absurd world we need seemingly equally absurd fora for athiests

Which is absurd ...

Valmont

lostexpectation wrote:

you were very close to assumption too in how you described most atheists you've encountered that have displeased you.

It was an assumption and slightly exaggerated. I became interested in athiesm while I was still in school and the majority of any conversation on the topic of athiesm never went further than 'God sucks...yeh...religion is, like, wrong and stuff' much to my frustration. So I assumed that they had alterior motives to their limited opinions

You can be a rebel or an intellectual and an athiest, what I meant was that some people become athiests solely for the purpose of becoming a rebel or an intellectual, a slight contradiction.

But they don't actually bother me as much as I'm making out. I'm just interested in lively discussions! I'm surprised this thread has gone on this long!:D

Pocari Sweat

Valmont wrote:

But they don't actually bother me as much as I'm making out. I'm just interested in lively discussions! I'm surprised this thread has gone on this long!:D

Well here's a bit more to drag it out. I was an athiest for as long as I could remember from a young age, 5 or 10?, but by late teens became a provisional agnostic.

I learned out of the 2 agnostics (dogmatic agnostic and provisional agnostic) it seemed dogmatic agnostics just thought, right, there is a chance of a god, but it can't be proven, right I am an agnostic.

But with the provisional agnostic route, it means weighing up all the arguments of theology and seeing what is said and weighing up all the usual stuff by athiests and then deciding right, god or no god can't be sure so at least I have listened, so - provisional agnostic.

This stance is also close humanist beliefs. There are also a lot of proper religious types, like buddists, quakers, hindus etc. But to have a dogmatic stance on anything like most of the organised religions and even atheist viewpoint, is a bit narrow minded, and the whole thing about provisional agnosticism is to be open minded.

Scofflaw

Pocari Sweat wrote:

But to have a dogmatic stance on anything like most of the organised religions and even atheist viewpoint, is a bit narrow minded, and the whole thing about provisional agnosticism is to be open minded.

You're assuming "dogmatic atheists" there. It's quite possible to be agnostic about the existence of God, but to be atheist in one's rejection of God. I reject God, but that doesn't mean he may not exist, merely that there's no evidence whatsoever for him, and an awful lot of circumstantial evidence that suggests he either doesn't exist or doesn't give a toss.


cordially,
Scofflaw

Dades

Pocari Sweat wrote:

But to have a dogmatic stance on anything like most of the organised religions and even atheist viewpoint, is a bit narrow minded, and the whole thing about provisional agnosticism is to be open minded.

You can be open minded to a point where nothing is certain.
Or for practical purposes you can draw a line and say "well this is what I believe".

As an atheist you can still be open to the possibility of your belief being shown to be wrong.

Pocari Sweat

The Atheist wrote:

You can be open minded to a point where nothing is certain.
Or for practical purposes you can draw a line and say "well this is what I believe".

As an atheist you can still be open to the possibility of your belief being shown to be wrong.

Was it socrates that said something like, .. True wisdom is knowing that we truly know nothing.

Scofflaw

Pocari Sweat wrote:

Was it socrates that said something like, .. True wisdom is knowing that we truly know nothing.

Don't know why you'd quote him. He was very wise - so presumably he knew sod-all, the ignorant fecker.


cordially,
Scofflaw

hairyheretic

Pocari Sweat wrote:

Was it socrates that said something like, .. True wisdom is knowing that we truly know nothing.

Yep, he did. I remember it from Bill and Teds Excellent Adventure