Atheists, full of it?

GWolf

I'm an agnostic so I hang around the atheist forum a bit. And I gotta say they're confirming an idea I've had for a long time. Atheists really are a pain in the arse. They spend alot of time belittling everyone's religous beliefs. And I've seen this in real life. My sister laughs at religous people. But she gets incredibly defensive if you challenge her on anything. Atheists are just like any other bunch of zealots, anyone I've met tryst to force me to say their right. Hasn't happned yet. The only difference between atheism and organised religon, is that it's not organised, imo. It even has a deity, in science.

Anyway, just my opinion

Richard W

Dictionary wrote:

deity
1. a god or goddess.
2. divine character or nature, esp. that of the Supreme Being; divinity.
3. the estate or rank of a god: The king attained deity after his death.
4. a person or thing revered as a god or goddess: a society in which money is the only deity.
5. the Deity, God; Supreme Being.

Just saying is all.

coffee_cake

How exactly would science be a deity?

They spend alot of time belittling everyone's religous beliefs.

So do a lot of theists, they just belittle one religion less

walt0r

I believe

Nevyn

That certainly is one way of looking at it.

You also have the anti christain athiest who is not really an atheist but they have recjected christainity and there for to thier mind rejected all religion and all contact or aspects of deity.

Given the fact that boards.ie is an online disscussion forum you tend to get more techie athiests.

I would ask what makes you then an agnostic rather then a deity denying athiest ?

Son Goku

GWolf wrote:

It even has a deity, in science.

That is the laziest, most oft repeated sentence whenever anybody talks about atheism. How could science function as a deity may I ask?

They spend alot of time belittling everyone's religous beliefs. And I've seen this in real life. My sister laughs at religous people. But she gets incredibly defensive if you challenge her on anything. Atheists are just like any other bunch of zealots, anyone I've met tryst to force me to say their right. Hasn't happned yet.

The underlined part is the part that people most get confused about when speaking with atheists. We rarely belittle people's belief, rather we question them and people always see that as insulting religion because religion has long had a societal shield of "Ah no, come on now. You can't question his/her faith, it's special to him/her."

Dave!

Full of logic and rationality, yes

5uspect

Atheists are generally passionate about their disbelief and the irrationality of others who refuse to acknowledge facts about the way the world is. If that makes them zealous then I suppose you're right about that.

GWolf wrote:

My sister laughs at religous people. But she gets incredibly defensive if you challenge her on anything.

I suppose atheists see themselves as protectors of rational thought and hence the defensiveness. Bear in mind every atheist was once a believer and as a result has had to justify this position to himself at least once. This can be a difficult and lonely thing to do in a religious society and as a result you want to defend your minority stance. Things are somewhat different in more secular countries, my German girlfriend cannot understand all the fuss about religion, she and a lot of Germans are completely disinterested.

GWolf

Thaedydal wrote:

That certainly is one way of looking at it.

You also have the anti christain athiest who is not really an atheist but they have recjected christainity and there for to thier mind rejected all religion and all contact or aspects of deity.

Given the fact that boards.ie is an online disscussion forum you tend to get more techie athiests.

I would ask what makes you then an agnostic rather then a deity denying athiest ?

Well catholic family, so that's a factor, although none of us were ver religous. I'm not sure really. But I think there's enough strange stuff, and we know so little about the universe. Plus no one has ever been able to explain how the big bang could have happened(I know the theory, but it never explains where the source could have come from). We live in a world where we think we understand it all, when we haven't even scratched the surface. So I believe it's entirly possible there is something else, a God or gods(although my dad once asked an annoying catholic "what if god died years ago ). Nope, I'm definetly open to a deity of some kind. I'm far from convinced, but I'm far from convinced when it comes to atheism either

5uspect

GWolf wrote:

Nope, I'm definetly open to a deity of some kind. I'm far from convinced, but I'm far from convinced when it comes to atheism either

Yes but there are absolutely millions of things that we could imagine to explain such questions, and until there is evidential support for one then they are all equally valid (and invalid). My anti-theism comes from the "abuse" of one particular idea by building dogma upon it forcing it onto others as unquestioned fact. If you believe there could be a god, fine, there is certainly a chance that you are right, but no more than the idea that everything just popped into existence out of nothing. My problem is with religion not in a personal belief you may have.

GWolf

Ah but there's a difference between spirituality and religion. Quote from Kingdom of Heaven, from the monk. "I've no time for religon" and neitehr do I. Anything I belief I decided on myself.


Plus, technically the universe has to have strated from nothing at one point of another.

5uspect

GWolf wrote:

Anything I belief I decided on myself.

But surely all of these things are based on some sort of verification from the world and others? Sam Harris mentions in The End of Faith something along the lines the more educated one becomes the more you rely on the beliefs of strangers. Isn't the qualification of these beliefs the verification of them through evidence? The belief may still be completely wrong but at least you've attempted to find the truth by means other than personal feelings.

GWolf wrote:

Plus, technically the universe has to have strated from nothing at one point of another.

Why? Does the universe need to start? A better question is when did time start and how is this tied to the universe in some way? These are all questions that may be answerable (hopefully by humans) and our existence (or non-existence) has (or should have) nothing whatsoever to do with the answer.

So effectively spirituality only resides in the human mind so far as we currently know. Atheists do often belittle religious belief and spiritual beliefs simply because they are nearly always based unscientific ideas. This is perhaps your problem with science, since you refer to it as the atheist deity.
The problem here is that science requires continued questioning to continue the evolution of ideas and often the complete rejection of ideas for new ones to better explain the world as it is. This conflicts with religious and spiritual ideas because they demand respect for their ideas but never stop and actually admit that they may be completely wrong.

There was a similar thread awhile ago here. There was plenty of not so nice sarcasm etc but other than that was there anything unreasonable about the atheist argument?

Sorry if I rambled a bit here, tis getting late.

18AD

5uspect wrote:

The problem here is that science requires continued questioning to continue the evolution of ideas and often the complete rejection of ideas for new ones to better explain the world as it is. This conflicts with religious and spiritual ideas because they demand respect for their ideas but never stop and actually admit that they may be completely wrong.

That sounds like a better argument for agnosticism rather than atheism.

5uspect

18AD wrote:

That sounds like a better argument for agnosticism rather than atheism.

Atheism isn't an absolute statement that god doesn't exist, end of discussion, get over it etc. Rather it is a rejection of the idea as impotent and no more worthy of consideration than any other idea. As has been said many times we are all atheists about Thor, Zeus, orbital chinaware and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. This argument is usually rebuked with the response that god is not some simplistic anthropomorphic skygod. The problem with this is that be defining god in such broad strokes renders god meaningless.

I suspect most people believe in an idea of god as the patriarchal santa clause figure who works the doors to heaven and brings miracles to the good people. Atheists reject this concept of god and pay no credence to the grandiose statements that academic theologians may wish to make in order to attempt to lift god beyond rational criticism since they have defined god out of existence altogether.

Granted there are some fundamental atheists who turn disbelief into a religion of its own but they're generally easy to spot. I will fully accept that a god or gods may exist but only when the idea of a god has been clearly defined. However I do not see that the idea carries any weight to declare myself agnostic about it no more than you may not wish to declare yourself agnostic about the existence of Zeus.

GWolf

5uspect wrote:

But surely all of these things are based on some sort of verification from the world and others? Sam Harris mentions in The End of Faith something along the lines the more educated one becomes the more you rely on the beliefs of strangers. Isn't the qualification of these beliefs the verification of them through evidence? The belief may still be completely wrong but at least you've attempted to find the truth by means other than personal feelings.




Why? Does the universe need to start? A better question is when did time start and how is this tied to the universe in some way? These are all questions that may be answerable (hopefully by humans) and our existence (or non-existence) has (or should have) nothing whatsoever to do with the answer.

So effectively spirituality only resides in the human mind so far as we currently know. Atheists do often belittle religious belief and spiritual beliefs simply because they are nearly always based unscientific ideas. This is perhaps your problem with science, since you refer to it as the atheist deity.
The problem here is that science requires continued questioning to continue the evolution of ideas and often the complete rejection of ideas for new ones to better explain the world as it is. This conflicts with religious and spiritual ideas because they demand respect for their ideas but never stop and actually admit that they may be completely wrong.

There was a similar thread awhile ago here. There was plenty of not so nice sarcasm etc but other than that was there anything unreasonable about the atheist argument?

Sorry if I rambled a bit here, tis getting late.

Simple, because if the universe didn't start it's existed for infinity. And they don;t think it did.

As for verification, it's honestly very hard for me to explain

5uspect

They? You mean scientists? Its safe to say they don't know how the universe began or if it began at all. Like I said its a a question about time itself.
This is where people usually stick in god to answer the question but this only off loads the problem and answers nothing. Science is progressing, more and more is being learned, in particle accelerators for example, about the interaction of the states of matter that theory tells us existed just after the big bang. Hopefully this will help us learn more about the origin of the universe it may well be completely wrong but so far such theory seems quite good at making predictions about the world.

God neither predicts or explains anything, it is a cosmic scapegoat we like to use to blame for those things we do not understand or maybe cannot understand.

I don't understand how anyone can correlate the idea that universe had to begin with the idea of an intelligent designer being in another realm outside this universe (especially with the prayer answering christian god) as an idea worth being agnostic about. Of course its possible and must be considered but then you must be agnostic about the creator of that god too and so on.

pH

5uspect wrote:

I suppose atheists see themselves as protectors of rational thought and hence the defensiveness. Bear in mind every atheist was once a believer and as a result has had to justify this position to himself at least once.

Not true, I myself was raised by atheist parents, I was not baptised nor have I ever worshipped a God.

5uspect

pH wrote:

Not true, I myself was raised by atheist parents, I was not baptised nor have I ever worshipped a God.

Sorry, I should have said the majority and not all. Surly you don't come from a long line of atheists tho? There must have been a time when someone had to abandon their parents religion.

Did you ever consider religions or beliefs, you probably had to understand your disbelief yourself rather than just take your parents word for it. That the process what I was trying to get across, apologies for generalising too much.

Crucifix

GWolf wrote:

Simple, because if the universe didn't start it's existed for infinity. And they don;t think it did.

Many people do. The big bang is only the effective start of the universe because it is impossible for us to observe or extrapolate anything before it (from anything that came from it at least, which at this point in time is commonly accepted to be everything).
And I have no problem with the concept of minus infinity.

Dave!

5uspect wrote:

God neither predicts or explains anything, it is a cosmic scapegoat we like to use to blame for those things we do not understand or maybe cannot understand.

Exactly. That's the crux of the matter. That's why god exists in some people's minds.

Odaise Gaelach

I've got a few friends who are atheists. And they are really, really full of it. It sickens me (and I'm agnostic).

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

i know people on boards that are agnostic. They seem to be really, really full of it.
It sickens me. (and I'm a cabbage)

5uspect

Odaise Gaelach wrote:

I've got a few friends who are atheists. And they are really, really full of it. It sickens me (and I'm agnostic).

Is it just because they refuse to respect any religious belief no matter how pious someone may be? Is the fact that they mock and laugh at religion the problem?

Thomas_S_Hunterson

They're no more full of it than the religious types

GWolf

Actually, I've never been preached too by religous people nearly as much as the atheists I've met. And I know born again christians

5uspect

Why do you think that is? The religious are concerned about saving your imortal soul, atheists couldn't care less. There is an icreasingly vocal godless element in society, people are starting t say no to religion, I suppose you're seeing that in action. Many of these people (except pH! ) grew up being told things they now don't believe and are annoyed that they were led to believe these things in what seems an underhanded way. If this removes the special position of religious belief in society which grants it protection from criticism then that fine by me.

Scofflaw

Certainly when one is newly an atheist, often in one's teens, there's the usual urge to tell the world, exacerbated by the fact that atheism is counter-cultural. Much of this is just loud-mouthed posturing, and most of these 'atheists' will drop back to the fuzzy borderland between agnosticism and weak deism.

As for this board, well, it's a religion discusion board - what can you expect? We come here for a discussion, and we discuss religion. Mostly, that is going to mean that we put forward the atheist viewpoint, and it does get heated...but, again, what can you expect? Do we come across as arrogant? I think most long-term atheists probably are arrogant - it's a character trait that predisposes one to atheism.

cordially,
Scofflaw