• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Atheist GAF: Your moment of realization

Status
Not open for further replies.
TheExecutive said:
Oversimplification.

Not really.

Each brand is a subset of fast food.

Each faith is a subset of religion.

There are enough similarities between the members of each set that the rejection of one may very well be enough to reject them all. Some people do need to try the White Castle diet first, just to be sure. I don't blame them.
 
besada said:
Yay, a junior member has arrived to begin the ancient debate regarding the meaning of the word atheism!

I find the definition of agnostic just as elusive and ever changing as well. I've always believed that if you're agnostic, then you're an atheist until proven otherwise.
 
GhaleonQ said:
*is a conservative Lutheran* It's a good summary. Sure. That said, don't pay attention to the theological arguments. Even atheists think they're weak and based on Sunday School theology.
Where I come from that is an oxymoron.

Yeah, the theological argument part is silly. Both the theological arguments are stupid and Dawkins doesn't really do a good job dealing with them.
 
Arment said:
I find the definition of agnostic just as elusive and ever changing as well. I've always believed that if you're agnostic, then you're an atheist until proven otherwise.
Yeah, I hate the ambigous definition of both 'atheist' and 'agnostic' problem. In the dictionary, Athiest = One who does not believe in OR disbelieves in god. (Both the 'weak' and 'strong' atheist.) I'm in the weak atheist camp (like Sagan). But most people believe the word only refers to strong atheism. And I believe the majority of atheists are in the weak atheism camp (including Dawkins with his '6.9' self classification).

And it brings up a practical problem. How should one classify themselves on an internet dating site? If you put 'atheist', you alienate tons of potential significant others. If you look at the sites, a gazillion people pick "spiritual but not religious'. What the fuck does that even mean? It sounds like you believe in ghosts.
 
I awoke when I started to study other religions. Being in the Army kinda nailed it for me. The term there is no Atheists in a Foxhole meant nothing to me, as I would always joke to myself by saying that if this was "Gods plan" for me than what a motherfucker he is.

I like some of the Mythology and stories in The Bible, but that's as far as it goes.

It's the fear of Death, the idea that this is it. "The undiscovered country for which no man (or woman or being) returns from" scares me. It makes me pine for something more, that we move on, but in the end I'll just be food for microbes and be recycled into the Earth.
 
Count Dookkake said:
A retard may be one who thinks discussions of the two unrelated topics of the deduction of the non-existence of gods and the color of the sky have enough similarity so that the dismissal of the former hinges solely on the mention of the latter.



This is a good thread and it serves a purpose. It is fun, sometimes funny, and even heart-warming to hear tales of kids and young adults who figured out their own way, despite the strong-arm tactics of those bigger and more powerful than they. If you don't like it, you are free to post in other threads that are more to your liking or to even start a new thread of your own.

So you call me a retard for making an analogy and then proceed to do the exact same thing. My, you sure are brilliant. Anyways, I don't even see the need for you to call me a retard. You seem intelligent enough to be above that. At this point I would think that being an atheist/agnostic on GAF would be such a trivial issue that threads like this would be pointless. I guess I was wrong. I guess we need MORE THREADS about it.

Carry on.
 
speculawyer said:
Yeah, I hate the ambigous definition of both 'atheist' and 'agnostic' problem. In the dictionary, Athiest = One who does not believe in OR disbelieves in god. (Both the 'weak' and 'strong' atheist.) I'm in the weak atheist camp (like Sagan). But most people believe the word only refers to strong atheism. And I believe the majority of atheists are in the weak atheism camp (including Dawkins with his '6.9' self classification).

And it brings up a practical problem. How should one classify themselves on an internet dating site? If you put 'atheist', you alienate tons of potential significant others. If you look at the sites, a gazillion people pick "spiritual but not religious'. What the fuck does that even mean? It sounds like you believe in ghosts.

I always thought that describe some sort of agnosticism, or you hold a religious belief that you keep to yourself, and only to yourself, and it can not be labeled.
 
Treo360 said:
I awoke when I started to study other religions. Being in the Army kinda nailed it for me. The term there is no Atheists in a Foxhole meant nothing to me, as I would always joke to myself by saying that if this was "Gods plan" for me than what a motherfucker he is.
Interesting. Isn't the military generally a pretty religious organization?

For example:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=404821

Were you going against the grain?
 
Treo360 said:
I always thought that describe some sort of agnosticism, or you hold a religious belief that you keep to yourself, and only to yourself, and it can not be labeled.

Ditto on those sentiments... My friend says that all the time.
 
Reading many of the posts in this thread, it seems many people here are:

-anti-clerical
-anti-christianity (more specifically catholicism in some cases)
-anti-whatever-crazy-thing-you-were-forcefully-taught-growing-up
-anti-superficial beliefs and other batshit crazy trains of thought (e.g. scientology, creationism, etc.)

I'm all of the above myself. I don't very much like religion as an organization/institution. In that sense, I distinguish between religion/being religious and faith. The former revolves around a set of rules, principles (and scriptures sometimes) that a set of people believe in, leading them to join together around those beliefs in a way that's more or less official. The latter is just what you personally believe in, your profound, unique outlook on life, which you can't even express sometimes (that's my case). Some would call it one's private domain (the French have an expression for this that I think is more apt: son jardin secret, literally "one's secret garden", one's inner belief). To me at least, this is the essence of faith and spirituality. It doesn't have to conform to an established religion, or any religion at all.

I'm not an atheist.

Atheism, as I see it, is a strong claim. A very strong claim. In fact, it's so strong a claim that I don't think I've ever met anyone in my life that I would really consider an atheist, even if they said they were. But that's probably because the notion of "God", for me, goes way beyond the stereotypical "invisible bearded man that is inherently good and has a plan for us" hypothesis. You might as well replace the word with "Chance", "Cosmos", "Wisdom", "Nature", "Life" or even "the Origin/Big Bang". Although I wouldn't directly equate God with science, but that's another topic. Anyway, just as I'm not fond of religion of any kind as a source for personal spirituality, I'm not fond of atheism as described above. The implications of complete atheism are way too heavy (and, in a sense, too pretentious) for me to be an atheist. I'd rather use agnosticism to describe myself and many people who claim to be atheists.

Since the topic at hand is our realization, the only event that sticks to my mind as a turning point is when I was preparing for my declaration of faith — I was raised in a then-catholic family, but we all slowly drifted away from it all. I was once told by this instructor I had — a religious man obviously, but he was all right — that you could believe in God without practising, to which he replied that it was a bit contradictory. I left the conversation at that, but there you go, that's my story. To this day I don't know what I believe exactly. I don't belong to any religion or movement or sect, but I'm not an atheist either, according to my definition. So for the time being, I'm an agnostic, for lack of a better word.

luxarific said:
...

At this point, I don't hate religion. I actually find it pretty interesting as a cultural and sociological phenomenon. I do know that I've outgrown any emotional need I have for it. (I still go to church on occasion since I like hearing Greek and watching the liturgy - it's like a little piece of Byzantium has been transported right to my neighborhood. :lol) I've accepted the fact that one day I will die and that will be the end of my consciousness. That makes me sad since I love being alive, and the world, even with all its misery, is an amazing place, but it's still better (for me at least), than believing in the lie that I'll meet all my loved ones again after death. All I can do is love my friends and family as much as I can right now, since this life is all I will ever get.

Thanks for this interesting post, luxarific. I especially like this last paragraph. I can relate to it. As for the bolded, this is one of the many points where I hit a wall. While I have a hard time believing that we will all go to some kind of paradise as we usually envision it, I have an equally hard time believing that death is all there is to it. Why? Because as with all good mysteries, I just can't fathom what happens if your consciousness just dies. It's one of the things that utterly blows my human mind. What is death like? What happens after it? If nothing happens, then what is "nothing"? What does it feel like? Obviously I will never have an answer to that while I'm alive, and I might even not have an answer when I die, and that's why it blows my mind even more. I just can't imagine what it's like to be dead with my limited human mind.

[EDIT] @Treo360: that's a good way to summarize it, yeah. Makes a good chunk of my post redundant, actually :lol.
 
Science happened.

More importantly, I was interested in astromy and the cosmos and reading up all that stuff in my spare time.


I'm more of an existentialist though.
 
Kilrogg said:
Atheism, as I see it, is a strong claim. A very strong claim. In fact, it's so strong a claim that I don't think I've ever met anyone in my life that I would really consider an atheist, even if they said they were.
Well that is because you got the definition wrong.
 
ultim8p00 said:
So you call me a retard for making an analogy and then proceed to do the exact same thing. My, you sure are brilliant. Anyways, I don't even see the need for you to call me a retard. You seem intelligent enough to be above that. At this point I would think that being an atheist/agnostic on GAF would be such a trivial issue that threads like this would be pointless. I guess I was wrong. I guess we need MORE THREADS about it.

Carry on.

Not all analogies are retarded.
 
tumblr_l7hgutlGzy1qa61ryo1_500.jpg


Had to.
 
speculawyer said:
Interesting. Isn't the military generally a pretty religious organization?

For example:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=404821

Were you going against the grain?

Please don't confuse what happened over there for the Military as a whole, I wrote in that thread what happens in some instances. What is not clear to me is if those who were "punished" are new recruits, who have few options when they first get there to a Training Center like Eustis.
 
speculawyer said:
Well that is because you got the definition wrong.

And I'd be glad to be explained what being an atheist entails, you know! I'm just saying how I perceive the notion of atheism, but if someone disagrees with me and is willing to tell me how and why I got the notion wrong, be my guest, I'm all ears. Since I'm not an atheist myself, I'm necessarily missing some pieces of the picture. You're an atheist, right? Tell me what atheism is to you, that would help me.
 
Kilrogg said:
Atheism, as I see it, is a strong claim.

No it isn't.

It isn't even a claim.

It is a word used to describe the amount of belief one has in a deity or deities. (None.)

Gnostic atheism would be a strong claim, just as gnostic theism would be. Simple atheism, though, is the quality of not having belief in a god or gods.
 
Kilrogg said:
And I'd be glad to be explained what being an atheist entails, you know! I'm just saying how I perceive the notion of atheism, but if someone disagrees with me and is willing to tell me how and why I got the notion wrong, be my guest, I'm all ears. Since I'm not an atheist myself, I'm necessarily missing some pieces of the picture. You're an atheist, right? Tell me what atheism is to you, that would help me.

2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

a= 'weak' atheist. Just don't believe. But there is not assertion that god does not exist.

b = 'strong' atheist. Believes there is no god. This makes an assertion.

Wikipedia on it:
Atheism, in a broad sense, is the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[2] Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.[3] Atheism is contrasted with theism,[4] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.[5][6]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

(This discussion comes up nearly every time atheism is discussed and gets kinda annoying that it must be explained everytime.)
 
Count Dookkake said:
Not all analogies are retarded.

Well you're saying I'm "retarded" for making a supposed stupid analogy, then you proceed to make a stupid analogy yourself. I'm essentially saying yours would be just as "retarded" if I were to miss the point, but you know, I'm not.
 
speculawyer said:
2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

a= 'weak' atheist. Just don't believe. But there is not assertion that god does not exist.

b = 'strong' atheist. Believes there is no god. This makes an assertion.

Wikipedia on it:
Atheism, in a broad sense, is the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[2] Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.[3] Atheism is contrasted with theism,[4] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.[5][6]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

(This discussion comes up nearly every time atheism is discussed and gets kinda annoying that it must be explained everytime.)

Thanks, and sorry for bringing it up then. Turns out I was the one lacking precision in my notions :p. I should have replaced "God" with Transcendence, which is a far broader, unequivocal term. What I wonder is whether strong atheists completely reject the notion of transcendence, or simply that of God(s). While I have no problem with believing that there is no God (meaning no Allah, no Lord, no Hindu pantheon, or nothing akin to Buddhas), the idea that there can't be any kind of transcendence is the one I have a hard time wrapping my head around. But again, it's easy for me to say this, since I'm not an atheist in the first place.
 
ultim8p00 said:
Yeah, that's exactly what I said. Brilliant!

No, it is not. In fact you never said that or anything approximating the meaning of that.

Here's what happened:

You got butthurt because I dismissed your analogy as retarded. Then I even bothered to explain why, since you seemed to miss the obvious.

Later I presented a different analogy in response to a different post and then you attempted to draw a comparison between the two analogies, as though the retardedness of yours had any effect on the value of mine.

You are out of your league.


EDIT- In response to your edit:

ultim8p00 said:
Well you're saying I'm "retarded" for making a supposed stupid analogy, then you proceed to make a stupid analogy yourself. I'm essentially saying yours would be just as "retarded" if I were to miss the point, but you know, I'm not.

You should go back and find where I called you a retard.

After you don't find that, you should think about why I think your analogy is retarded.

After you grudgingly admit that legislation, war, and oppression tend more often to be influenced by assumptions about deities rather than the actual color of the sky at any given moment, then you can examine my analogy. If you really think it is retarded, I can help explain it for you here:

Fast food = all religion
Brand = specific religion
Mascot = deity
Common menu items = common beliefs and practices
Unique menu items = "weird" religious practices

And so on.

For the purposes of saying that the rejection of one religion is enough for some people to reject all religion, this analogy stands.
 
i find it a little embarrassing that enlightened 21st century society has any requirement for the term "atheist".
 
Kilrogg said:
Thanks, and sorry for bringing it up then. Turns out I was the one lacking precision in my notions :p. I should have replaced "God" with Transcendence, which is a far broader, unequivocal term. What I wonder is whether strong atheists completely reject the notion of transcendence, or simply that of God(s). While I have no problem with believing that there is no God (meaning no Allah, no Lord, no Hindu pantheon, or nothing akin to Buddhas), the idea that there can't be any kind of transcendence is the one I have a hard time wrapping my head around. But again, it's easy for me to say this, since I'm not an atheist in the first place.

I'm sure it doesn't go for all atheists but for me it's not necessarily a question of not believing in god but of not believing in the supernatural.

There is no more reason (and certainly no more empirical proof) of transcendence than there is for god, the Easter bunny or ghosts.
 
Man, I was shitfaced when I made this thread.
All true, though.

It's kind of interesting to think that I would probably be more likely to be a religious person had I not been raised as a Christian or sent to Christian schools until the 9th grade. Being surrounded by it every day and being around a lot of people that used their religion as an excuse to be horrible and judgmental. I learned first hand what I didn't want to be by being around these people. Good stuff.

Ultim8poo, you said this thread has been done many times before but somehow I haven't seen one like this in my time on GAF. Oh well.
 
I was raised in a household that encouraged freedom of belief/thought, so I never saw the reason to attach myself to beliefs that surround deities.

I would consider myself atheist, as I do not believe in deities, but I really like what Buddhism has to offer in the field of moral guidelines.

That's not to say that I bash religion, belief in deities, etc. for being illogical. I simply try to see the world as a scientific wonder, but take bits and pieces from Buddhism as a means to function morally.

As an aside, I would have to say my favorite type of religious people tend to be 'Progressive Christians' as they seem to approach religion the same way I do; logically.

I do, however, believe that there are other forms of life in our universe, and whether they are superior or inferior in ability to our kind, I STILL BELIEVE, haha.
 
Count Dookkake said:
No, it is not. In fact you never said that or anything approximating the meaning of that.

Here's what happened:

You got butthurt because I dismissed your analogy as retarded, Then I even bothered to explain why, since you seemed to miss the obvious.

Later I presented a different analogy in response to a different post and then you attempted to draw a comparison between the two analogies, as though the retardedness of yours had any effect on the value of mine.

You are out of your league.

lol "leagues"

Let me guess, are you a med student or something along those lines?
I don't care much about "leagues" and I don't need to compete with smug idiots. As I said, you missed the point I was making (or rather I did not do a good enough job elaborating, which is fair criticism). The deduction of the non-existence of gods and the color of the sky have nothing to do with my analogy (if you even want to call it that). I said that we've been through enough of these threads that at this point it should be like realising that the sky is blue. We've heard the same stories several times, and it's always nearly the same story about growing up in a catholic family etc etc. It was fun the first few times, but you'd think it would be trivial enough by now to be comparable to the sky being blue (like every other thread that gets old), hence why I made that response when someone suggested that we should have threads about it everyday (that's what I was actually responding to, you know, the thing I quoted). I even later on said that it was also comparable to asking your research buddies when they started believing in evolution.

Anyways, I went through the same issue when I slowly realized that there was no God, at least as currently defined by religion. I've posted in threads like this about my own experience, but I think it's getting old. It's just an opinion, so relax. No need to get bent out of shape. I am entitled to express my opinion as long as I am not being an asshole and throwing insults. If you don't agree, there are smarter ways to say so.

lol "leagues"
get outa here

EDIT:

Count Dookkake said:
After you grudgingly admit that legislation, war, and oppression tend more often to be influenced by assumptions about deities rather than the actual color of the sky at any given moment, then you can examine my analogy..

Really? You're really going to do this? Are you going to bring Hitler into this next? :lol
 
ultim8p00 said:
lol "leagues"

Let me guess, are you a med student or something along those lines?
I don't care much about "leagues" and I don't need to compete with smug idiots. As I said, you missed the point I was making (or rather I did not do a good enough job elaborating, which is fair criticism). The deduction of the non-existence of gods and the color of the sky have nothing to do with my analogy (if you even want to call it that). I said that we've been through enough of these threads that at this point it should be like realising that the sky is blue. We've heard the same stories several times, and it's always nearly the same story about growing up in a catholic family etc etc. It was fun the first few times, but you'd think it would be trivial enough by now to be comparable to the sky being blue (like every other thread that gets old), hence why I made that response when someone suggested that we should have threads about it everyday (that's what I was actually responding to, you know, the thing I quoted). I even later on said that it was also comparable to asking your research buddies when they started believing in evolution.

Anyways, I went through the same issue when I slowly realized that there was no God, at least as currently defined by religion. I've posted in threads like this about my own experience, but I think it's getting old. It's just an opinion, so relax. No need to get bent out of shape. I am entitled to express my opinion as long as I am not being an asshole and throwing insults. If you don't agree, there are smarter ways to say so.

lol "leagues"
get outa here

:lol


EDIT for your edit:

ultim8p00 said:
Really? You're really going to do this? Are you going to bring Hitler into this next? :lol

:lol, of course not. That was a clarification of why I thought your retarded analogy was in fact retarded, before you further clarified, revealing that you were just bad at explaining things initially. The way you presented it made it sound retarded, when in fact what you were trying to say was merely egocentric.

Anyway, as I said in my first response to you, this is a worthwhile thread. Just because you got out of a religious upbringing easily enough, does not mean that everyone has the same situation, freedom or courage as you did. Some folks maybe inspired by the stories. If you really think any thread is pointless, just avoid it. The mods will do what they will.
 
I'm going to say a prayer for all of you atheists. Hopefully you'll all come around at some point in your lives and avoid eternal damnation.
 
I was like 6, my grandma was watching TV, some kind of mass was on, at some point the Pope started to speak in Latin. I asked my grandma what he was saying, she obviously didn't know and started to yell at me for asking, saying that me daring to speak while the Pope was speaking meant I was possessed by the devil and shit.

From that day even though my mind couldn't quite put it that way at the time, I basically said fuck that shit, what kind of religion gets you treated like shit just for asking a simple question and trying to know wtf is going on. Also, listening at something for hours without understanding a single word of it? More wtf flags for me, even at that age.

Nowadays I think I could accept the existence of a superior being that as humans we couldn't really reach or even grasp in our minds. I respect faith, either you feel there's someone up there or you don't, can't do anything about it. But religion? Get out of here with that. I don't believe that that hypothetical being can be anything like what's depicted in the books, and faith being personal, if it hit me someday, I don't think any other human would have any business telling me how I should relate to that being.
 
Holy Order Sol said:
Also, listening at something for hours without understanding a single word of it? More wtf flags for me, even at that age.

In fairness, I can kind of understand why people do that. After all, I am a Sigur Ros fan :lol

Though that raises a topic I've always found interesting. When I listen to certain types of music I can get that "spiritual" feeling that religions always talk about. Of course, I don't ascribe it to any sort of actual deity, but I think that feeling is a big reason for people's "enjoyment" of religion.

To speak on the black church, which is what I'm most familiar with, that's why you get things like this :P And that's why some preachers have a very specific cadence and rhythm to their speaking. It helps to lull you into that religious "zone".
 
I think I have known it always, but when I was in preschool and we had to sing hymns and I was like "well this is not for me".

I haven't been baptised or anything and none of my family is religious
 
soul creator said:
In fairness, I can kind of understand why people do that. After all, I am a Sigur Ros fan :lol

Well I guess I couldn't do it without getting curious at some point and trying to figure things out. :lol
 
I'm agnostic personally, but I came to the conclusion of no existence of a deity thanks to this guy:

Flying_Spaghetti_Monster.jpg


Once I realized that there was just as much proof of the existence of the spaghetti monster than there was of a big bearded white dude in a robe in the clouds, I stopped acknowledging any deities from that point. I mean I don't walk around worried that a vampire is going to come and get me, or the boogey man is gonna attack me, so why am I gonna worry about a god when there's absolutely 0 proof of either of those existence.
 
Count Dookkake said:
:lol


EDIT for your edit:



:lol, of course not. That was a clarification of why I thought your retarded analogy was in fact retarded, before you further clarified, revealing that you were just bad at explaining things initially. The way you presented it made it sound retarded, when in fact what you were trying to say was merely egocentric.

Anyway, as I said in my first response to you, this is a worthwhile thread. Just because you got out of a religious upbringing easily enough, does not mean that everyone has the same situation, freedom or courage as you did. Some folks maybe inspired by the stories. If you really think any thread is pointless, just avoid it. The mods will do what they will.

It wasn't easy at all for me, but I don't make several threads a week about it because I am comfortable enough with the decision that I don't see anything special about it. We literally had one of these like 3 to 4 days ago or so. If you know something you did was right, then that's it. It doesn't matter that your family treated you like shit or ignored you. It is what it is. My comment really wasn't that difficult to understand, but I figured that if I didn't give you an opportunity to be less of a prick while keeping your ego intact (essentially by saying that I could have fucked up my explanation) things would have kept escalating. I'm also guessing that you probably made the assumption that I was a theist because I was against the thread, which made you process my "analogy" with some bias.
 
ultim8p00 said:
It wasn't easy at all for me, but I don't make several threads a week about it because I am comfortable enough with the decision that I don't see anything special about it. We literally had one of these like 3 to 4 days ago or so. If you know something you did was right, then that's it. It doesn't matter that your family treated you like shit or ignored you. It is what it is. My comment really wasn't that difficult to understand, but I figured that if I didn't give you an opportunity to be less of a prick while keeping your ego intact (essentially by saying that I could have fucked up my explanation) things would have kept escalating. I'm also guessing that you probably made the assumption that I was a theist because I was against the thread, which made you process my "analogy" with some bias.

Jesus.

Remember what I was saying about "leagues"?

The bolded never happened. Like analogies, atheists can be retarded, too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom