Support NeoGAF

[The Jazz Cabbage Master]

The position that there are no deities is just as much a belief system as the position that there are. Either sides has no data.

Lets create a situation.

Human 1: Raised in a religious environment with beliefs being passed onto them and impressed upon them to the point they take them to be TRUTHS. To maintain these beliefs there is effort required.

Human 2: Raised in an environment completely devoid of any religious beliefs. How in the world is this individual's lack of knowledge a "belief". They could literally go through life without ever considering a God, and that lack of consideration is in no way a Belief.

Simply paying no attention to religion is in no way, shape, or form, a belief.

 

[Dongs Macabre]

.

 

[Fhtagn]

Lets create a situation.

Human 1: Raised in a religious environment with beliefs being passed onto them and impressed upon them to the point they take them to be TRUTHS. To maintain these beliefs there is effort required.

Human 2: Raised in an environment completely devoid of any religious beliefs. How in the world is this individual's lack of knowledge a "belief". They could literally go through life without ever considering a God, and that lack of consideration is in no way a Belief.

Simply paying no attention to religion is in no way, shape, or form, a belief.

Eh, your scenario is hypothetical given that belief in the supernatural is consistent throughout human history. Without a belief system* that explains away all of the weird counterintuitive phenomena in life, supernatural ideas manifest as an explanation. Human beings are hard wired for pattern recognition to the extent that we invent patterns where there are none.

*in this case science, and not that calling it a belief system doesn't inherently mean it's not true.

 

[SamVimes]

And yet, that's the most strict definition of Atheism, and the reason Atheists and Theist clash. The unprovable aspect of supernatural is recognized by Agnosticism.

Oh god dude you're being crazy patronizing and showing that your 'research' didn't even go as far as reading the whole article you linked

 

[Nivash]

And yet, that's the most strict definition of Atheism, and the reason Atheists and Theist clash. The unprovable aspect of supernatural is recognized by Agnosticism.

Common misunderstanding, but incorrect. I'd challenge you to find any atheist that actually has a strong faith in the idea that there aren't any gods. Again, not believing in gods isn't the same thing as believing there are no gods.

Agnosticism simply is an absolute conviction in the idea that the entire question of whether there are or aren't gods is pointless because the answer is inherently unknowable. It's a philosophical doctrine, not a belief.

I thought people were making good money from Atheism? ; )

Grow up.

 

[sasliquid]

Militant Athiests are some of the most annoying people I know

And I'm unsurprised many have moved on to trying to give reasons they're "intellectually superior" to other groups

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

But I honestly don't find the statement that outrageous.

So it's not outrageous to says that only Islam is spawning violent movements ?
You don't consider blatant lies to be outrageous for an academician ? Especially when those lies are contributing to stigmatize muslims ?

 

[Aureon]

The common denominator is 4chan. You only ever hear the loudest (most obnoxious) voices of course. There's no shortage of Atheists who are extremely progressive in general but if your username is "SuperAtheist9000" then you are probably in a position where your Atheism is the most important issue in your life and you want to make sure everybody knows that.

Yeah, it's pretty much the same issue as vegetarians.

Vast majority are fine enough people, but there's a small group that's really vocal about it, and really annoying.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

Yeah, Atheists are not a monolithic entity that could be judged as a whole.

Kind of like Christians, huh?

I'm glad to read something that blows up the other side for a change.

I do feel that the author omitted the Ken Ham and Bill Nye debate for the convenience of arguing that this... trend... is what happens when progressivism becomes so obnoxious that it Blends into conservatism. Those took place with Obama in office.

I also may have missed Neil DeGrasse Tyson memes.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Wow! that's news to me. The current ruling party spawned from a terrorist organization?
So, what's the name of the organization and what acts of terror did they commit?

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, which is responsible for killing Gandhi, founded the ancestor of the current BJP. Modi is pretty ambiguous about his relationship with the violent fundamentalist militia.

They partaked in various pogroms against muslims, and the destruction of the Babri Masjid.

 

[Air]

Dan Dennett always slips by. Poor guy lol. I guess since he looks like Santa Claus and is rather congenital, he's forgotten.

Dan won. He's also the best representation of modern atheism I think. He carries himself very well and while I don't agree with a lot of his positions, they're well argued and intentioned. It also helps that he's just not really in the limelight aside from his research.

 

[mlclmtckr]

So it's not outrageous to says that only Islam is spawning violent movements ?
You don't consider blatant lies to be outrageous for an academician ? Especially when those lies are contributing to stigmatize muslims ?

People are really bad at telling cause from effect. A lot of the usual internet dumbass casual islamophobia comes from that.

 

[Audioboxer]

Dan won. He's also the best representation of modern atheism I think. He carries himself very well and while I don't agree with a lot of his positions, they're well argued and intentioned. It also helps that he's just not really in the limelight aside from his research.

He was quite active in debates up till not too long ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOMjEJ3JO5Q / https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tH3AnYyAI8

I think he's just had more health scares than some of them. Obviously, Hitch died first, but Dennets health went downhill a bit before Dawkins did. I'm certain he had a heart attack a few years ago now. Harris has always been the younger.

If anyone who hates them all wants their blood to boil this has always been a good way to spend 2 hours of your time. On the note of Dennet, he opens up the 2 hours with the hurt feelings card lines xD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7IHU28aR2E

For everyone else that 2 hours above is still great to sit through and think about some of it yourself.

 

[soldierblue]

Atheism is a (supernatural-related) belief system, though. It's just the opposite of Theism.

Not believing in something that there is literally zero rational reason to believe in is not a belief system. Does my friend’s cat have this belief system?

Imagine if the dude who dared ask a woman out was attractive.

Like I don’t even know where to start. Like, I can feel the hate from here. Do you seriously think this way?

Y’all need to do some serious introspective thinking.

 

[blu]

Common misunderstanding, but incorrect. I'd challenge you to find any atheist that actually has a strong faith in the idea that there aren't any gods. Again, not believing in gods isn't the same thing as believing there are no gods.

Don't atheists believe theists are wrong?

Agnosticism simply is an absolute conviction in the idea that the entire question of whether there are or aren't gods is pointless because the answer is inherently unknowable. It's a philosophical doctrine, not a belief.

And here we fully agree. Or did I say otherwise?

Grow up.

Oops, did I touch a nerve? Sorry, did not mean to - that money remark was a tongue in cheek.

Not believing in something that there is literally zero rational reason to believe in is not a belief system.

The only rational position here would be 'I don't know'.

Does my friend's cat have this belief system?

I don't know. Does she?

 

[NullPointer]

Atheism is a (supernatural-related) belief system, though. It's just the opposite of Theism.

Its as much a belief system as not believing in the Tooth Fairy is a belief system.

ie. Its not a belief system.

 

[Sinfamy]

Calling it millitant atheism is such a fucking biased and bullshit term clearly invented by the religious right which the left is eating right up. Calling atheism millitant when religious people are the ones shooting gay people and blowing up buildings.
Are there vocal assholes within atheist circles? Of course, but they are within every religion and belief, but you only see it with atheism that both the left and right agree to throw so many under the bus and easily stereotype them.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Ive noticed people accusing of Richard Dawkins of being arrogant, smug, and an asshole...act just like him when defending their viewpoints.

At least from anecdotal evidence

 

[mario_O]

The only rational position here would be 'I don't know'.

Nope, show me the evidence. We could also say Thor is real because hey "I dont know".

 

[mlclmtckr]

Calling millitant atheism is such a fucking biased and bullshit term clearly invented by the religious right which the left is eating right up. Calling atheism millitant when religious people are the ones shooting gay people and blowing up buildings.
Are there vocal assholes within atheist circles? Of course, but they are within every religion and belief, but you only see it with atheism that both the left and right agree to throw so many under the bus and easily stereotype them.

I mean I'm an atheist, all of my friends are atheists. But none of us would ever associate with movement atheism or New Atheism or any of that shit because those people are losers and grifters and cranks.

 

[blu]

Nope, show me the evidence. We could also say Thor is real because hey "I dont know".

The evidence that God does/does not exist? You can't be serious.

 

[Snorlocs]

Nope, show me the evidence. We could also say Thor is real because hey "I dont know".

Well, Thor could be real as he HAS been documented in Norse mythology and religion for thousands of years. Who knows?

 

[Sinfamy]

I mean I'm an atheist, all of my friends are atheists. But none of us would ever associate with movement atheism or New Atheism or any of that shit because those people are losers and grifters and cranks.

I don't either but its become a mainstay in today's culture to call any outspoken atheist a fedora twiddling neckbeard.
Atheists are literally the most disliked minority in the US, and falling for the millitant narrative doesn't help with that.

 

[NullPointer]

The evidence that God does not exist? You can't be serious.

There is no evidence that God exists, and God isn't and cannot be factored into any empirical experiments and findings. Its an irrelevant factor for the advancement of human knowledge. Its not necessary.

 

[Amibguous Cad]

I really feel like I needed the r/atheist part of my life.

When you're going to a religious school in a very deeply religious community m, and everyone you've ever known is telling you that pure going to suffer for eternity - I mean, it's not easy. The new athesits are guilty of incivilty, but they spoke to me, and many like me, when religion was being used as a tool of abuse and told us that it wasn't okay.

And without their assault on religion as the only source of possible morality, that they not only claimed that it was possible to be moral without a religion, but in fact claimed the moral high ground with the same haughtiness and sanctimony that their opponents did... well, for one, im not sure I'd be where I am today instead of being another statistic in the death tolls for queer suicide and religious abuse. And I'm also pretty sure none of the post-Lawrence gay tights victories happen without their challenge to the church's moral authority.

And I'd like to say their job is done, but it really isn't. There are plenty of people in religiously regressive communities, in small towns and cities, that are using their beliefs as an excuse to hurt their members. Dawkins is an asshole. But if his assholerey allowsnobe kid to take the first step towards overcoming spiritual abuse, I'd say it's worth it.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Well, Thor could be real as he HAS been documented in Norse mythology and religion for thousands of years. Who knows?

This sounds like my brother in law's argument for saying we can't know for sure if the earth is flat.

 

[blu]

There is no evidence that God exists, and God isn't and cannot be factored into any empirical experiments and findings. Its an irrelevant factor for the advancement of human knowledge. Its not necessary.

I fully agree. Ergo my 'I don't know'. I didn't say whether I was factoring God's existence into anything.

 

[mario_O]

The evidence that God does not exist? You can't be serious.

The evidence that there's a personal god, that watches us, loves us, and that it will judge us when the time comes. There's zero evidence. Why would I have to be agnostic about it?

 

[Neece]

Wow, never heard of this elevator gate thing.. and now I wish I hadn't. Why is everyone so awful these days.

Sorry someone hit on you and asked you out. There's nothing wrong with that.

So I get people thinking that's stupid to complain about.. but everyone took it straight to 11 it seems.

Imagine if the dude who dared ask a woman out was attractive.

Why is this being framed as if Rebecca had a problem being asked out?

Rebeca attended the conference in question to give a speech about how women are treated in the male dominated secular/atheism community. She talked about how she is sexualized a lot in the community and she finds it creepy. Then afterwards she talked about her speech at a bar with people that agreed and disagreed, and from all accounts had a great open dialogue with literally everyone else that participated in the discussion.

Then after having drinks she announced to everyone at the bar that she was exhausted and going to bed.

And some guy from the bar follows her to the elevator, waits until they are alone, right after she just talked about finding it creepy to be sexualized in this manner, and then invites her to his hotel room. She's a woman in a foreign country, that's been drinking with guys that have been drinking, and just spent the evening talking about being sexualized in this very setting, and she's exhausted because it's 4 am....and she felt uncomfortable.

And all she said in the video was "guys don't do that." That's all she said. She didn't yell, or rant or name any names, or go on a campaign to stop women from being asked out at conferences. She simply gave advice to men at these things that his approach was not appreciated by her, and probably isn't by many women in this setting. And the community exploded on her, largely because of Dawkins.

 

[blu]

The evidence that there's a personal god, that watches us, loves us, and that it will judge us when the time comes. There's zero evidence. Why would I have to be agnostic about it?

I just told you as much as I knew about the existence of God (we could extend that to anything supernatural, in general), and now you're asking me if God has a moustache?

 

[geomon]

ITT I've learned that Richard Dawkins is an asshole and a piece of shit. Ok.

 

[Dusk88]

Atheism's belief in the lack of a god or gods isn't the same type of "belief" that compels one to believe in one or more gods in the first place. It can be thought of as a rejection of theism.

There is a cult of personality that surrounds some mainstream authors of atheistic thought, but I don't think that should be confused with how atheism is defined relative to theism.

 

[Dusk88]

To add to my previous post. Atheism is not the assertion that there is no god, its the absence of a belief in one. There is a subtle but important difference.

 

[RustyNails]

Wow! that's news to me. The current ruling party spawned from a terrorist organization?
So, what's the name of the organization and what acts of terror did they commit?

Interesting fact. The guy who assassinated Gandhi was a member of RSS.

 

[Budi]

Since there's been so much talk about Dawkins and I have very little idea about "new atheism", I'll just comment on Dawkins. I was very taken back by his "'immoral not to abort if foetus has Down's syndrome" comment. But reading further on his clarification, it was respectful and well-reasoned. It's clear that I and him see this very differently, but doesn't mean I still wouldn't listen what he has to say and what he thinks. He is clearly an intelligent and well meaning guy.

 

[Dongs Macabre]

.

 

[mario_O]

I just told you as much as I knew about the existence of God (we could extend that to anything supernatural, in general), and now you're asking me if God has a moustache?

Hey, maybe Batman is real, I don't know. Who cares about evidence.

 

[Not]

Not surprised at all that r/atheism blossomed into Nazis

 

[Neece]

The only rational position here would be 'I don't know'.

If we're talking about flying dragons that breathe fire existing on earth, and Santa Clause being a real person that flies on reindeers and delivers presents all over the world, is your position only "I don't know?"

 

[blu]

Hey, maybe Batman is real, I don't know. Who cares about evidence.

Are you familiar with the concept of improvability?

 

[John Dunbar]

If we're talking about flying dragons that breathe fire existing on earth, and Santa Clause being a real person that flies on reindeers and delivers presents all over the world, is your position only "I don't know?"

for some reason god seems to be the only subject where people declare agnosticism to be the only reasonable stance.

 

[Sutton Dagger]

I fully agree. Ergo my 'I don't know'. I didn't say whether I was factoring God's existence into anything.

Your assessment of what athiesm and agnosticism is incorrect, the terms are not mutually exclusive. Theism/atheism deals with belief (I believe/don't believe in supernatural beings), where as Gnosticism/agnosticism is a position about knowledge (I know gods/no gods etc exist).

As such, I'm an agnostic atheist. I don't know if gods exist but I don't believe they do.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

Imagine if the dude who dared ask a woman out was attractive.

Cornered a woman he didn't know, in an elevator, at 4 in the morning, to pressure her for a date.

That's vastly different than the bullshit description of the act you're trying to push.

 

[blu]

If we're talking about flying dragons that breathe fire existing on earth, and Santa Clause being a real person that flies on reindeers and delivers presents all over the world, is your position only "I don't know?"

It depends if you equate the concept of God to those listed by you above.

What if I told you that by some definitions of God, you cannot prove or disprove her existence?

Your assessment of what athiesm and agnosticism is incorrect, the terms are not mutually exclusive. Theism/atheism deals with belief (I believe/don't believe in supernatural beings), where as Gnosticism/agnosticism is a position about knowledge (I know gods/no gods etc exist).

As such, I'm an agnostic atheist. I don't know if gods exist but I don't believe they do.

An gnostic theist/atheist is an oxymoron. The very notion of belief deals with the unknown - I believe it's 5 o'clock, though I have no indications it's actually so (I don't have a watch on me, etc)

 

[mario_O]

Are you familiar with the concept of improvability?

Sure. Are you?

 

[Neece]

It depends if you equate the concept of God to those enlisted by you above.

What if I told you that by some definitions of God, you cannot prove or disprove her existence?

Why didn't you answer the question?

I'm asking you if your position on Santa Clause and fire breathing dragons being real, "I don't know"?

 

[Budi]

I think his stances are often misconstrued, but there are also times where he legitimately does and says shitty stuff, like with Elevatorgate.

Yup I looked it up since it was mentioned earlier. Dawkins clearly overreacted in that. He made it a bigger deal than it had to be. Nobody was hurt, not Watson, not the guy asking her for a coffee and not even Dawkins. So yeah, only he made it a huge deal.

 

[mario_O]

It depends if you equate the concept of God to those listed by you above.

Welp, we have the same evidence for all of them: zero.

 

[SkeptiMism]

This sounds like my brother in law's argument for saying we can't know for sure if the earth is flat.

They're making the point that you can't prove or disprove God, just as you can't prove or disprove unicorns or Thor or whatever fictional thing you want. There's no existing proof either way.

Because of this, simply "not knowing" isn't the rational response. If it was, then you'd have to take it on every single case in which there's no defining proof either way no matter how unlikely the claim is.

This is obviously quite different from flat earth arguments as there is strong evidence against it. You can still deny it if you wish, but then you go against heavy evidence against your position. Even still, one can "bypass" it all by claiming something completely crazy like that Satan is behind all the "proof" that Earth is round and thus none of it is actually real and we're just seeing illusions and evidence planted by him. Again, that's a claim we don't have proof for either way, but it would be absolutely ridiculous to take the position that "I don't know" is the only rational response.

 

[Chmpocalypse]

The evidence that God does/does not exist? You can't be serious.

What?

There needs to be evidence that gods exist to merit belief in any of them. How is that hard to grasp?