Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Metaverse

View
73 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >

53. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 14, 2013, 01:18 Crustacean Soup
 
Jivaro wrote on Mar 14, 2013, 01:08:
It says exactly what I said it did. Atheists, by definition, do not believe in god, gods...otherwise known as "deities". I fail to see how that varies from what I said it would.
...
atheists do believe in something they can't actually prove, and I think that qualifies as faith.
I don't think to disbelieve and to believe are equivalent. Again, M-W

DISBELIEVE

transitive verb: to hold not worthy of belief : not believe

You said you do not believe in a god (nor believe in one). That, uh, fits M-W's definition of atheism. That's all I said.

And again, regardless of that, to characterize "atheists" as having faith in something using someone else's words doesn't really work. But you just repeated it again.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
52. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 14, 2013, 01:08 Jivaro
 
It says exactly what I said it did. Atheists, by definition, do not believe in god, gods...otherwise known as "deities". I fail to see how that varies from what I said it would.

I am not saying atheists are acting like anything. I believe other people were arguing about that. I did reference Dawkins, but only in reference to what was mentioned about him before. Previous to this discussion I was not very informed about the man and had to Google him to make sure I was thinking of the right person. All I am saying is that atheists do believe in something they can't actually prove, and I think that qualifies as faith. How they act varies from person to person I would imagine.

Lastly, I understand your point about the language however if everyone is going to decide to debate these types of issues I don't see how you can have a discussion of any value unless certain definitions are agreed upon. I mean, just look at this thread.

When I was younger, people asked me what I believed in, what religion I belonged to. I decided that agnosticism best described my state of being. It still does. Bill Maher on the other hand considers himself an atheist. The difference is easy to explain. If Bill and I were out on a boat fishing and suddenly Jesus appeared..walking across the water to us while making it rain frogs...Bill and I would have two different reactions. His would be "I guess I was wrong", mine would be "so it is true."

This comment was edited on Mar 14, 2013, 01:19.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
51. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 14, 2013, 01:00 Crustacean Soup
 
Jivaro wrote on Mar 14, 2013, 00:37:
As for atheists considering me one of them...well...that is their prerogative I suppose. By the definition of the terms however I am not one and the definition is the only thing I can go by. Atheism is not flexible, it is what it is. To me it seems pretty clear cut based on the fact that if I look in 3 different dictionaries I get the same definition.

My three dictionaries disagree. Merriam Webster's website says
ATHEISM
...
a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
b : the doctrine that there is no deity

Dictionary.com (Randomhouse) and oxforddictionaries.com (Oxford University Press) include equivalent definitions.

In any case, dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive. You're sitting here arguing that "atheists" have faith in something and are acting fanatical and this and that using dictionary definitions instead of their own words. That doesn't work. English isn't something like a computer language, it's a natural language.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
50. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 14, 2013, 00:37 Jivaro
 
Sepharo wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 23:48:
Jivaro wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 23:36:
They simply have faith that they are correct because they have never seen any proof to the contrary.

Uh... lack of evidence of something doesn't mean that you have to have faith it doesn't exist.

I would be interested to know what you would call it then. They can't prove they are right, yet they believe in it. Seems an awful lot life faith to me. "Complete trust or confidence in someone or something." (Merriam Webster) Atheists are convinced they are correct and yet they can't actually prove they are, all they can say is that no religion can prove they are correct. Sometimes they add the "If there was a God wouldn't he show himself once in awhile?". As my English professor in college would say, "Just because everyone else in the room is wrong doesn't mean you are right." I will acknowledge however that an atheist's beliefs seem more plausible then any religion I have ever heard of based on what I have been exposed to via my life experience and science.

As for atheists considering me one of them...well...that is their prerogative I suppose. By the definition of the terms however I am not one and the definition is the only thing I can go by. Atheism is not flexible, it is what it is. To me it seems pretty clear cut based on the fact that if I look in 3 different dictionaries I get the same definition. To be one you have to believe that God or gods do not exist, and as I said, I simply do not know. That is a major difference in beliefs. If people who consider themselves atheists see a grey area that is their prerogative. My atheist friends do not consider me to be one, my protestant family considers me agnostic, and more importantly...I consider myself agnostic. Other people can define themselves however they want, I am very comfortable with how I define myself.

This comment was edited on Mar 14, 2013, 00:57.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
49. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 23:49 Crustacean Soup
 
Jivaro wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 23:36:
Atheism, whether atheists want to admit it or not, can not prove they are correct without a shadow of a doubt. They simply have faith that they are correct because they have never seen any proof to the contrary.

In the interests of full disclosure, and despite the Bill Maher video I linked, I consider my self agnostic, not atheist. I don't believe in anything in particular other than the obvious truth that we are a very small part of a very big universe that has a whole lot of things going on that we can't predict or control. I don't believe their isn't a God or gods, I don't believe they exist either. I simply don't know. Nothing that I have observed or experienced in my life proves either belief to me. I do believe that regardless of whether a God or gods exist, religion itself is man made and that many religions, including all the modern varieties, get twisted by people for selfish reasons.
A lot of atheists would consider you to be one. Dawkins doesn't claim to know that gods don't exist either. Not many self-named atheists use the "certainty that gods don't exist" definition.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
48. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 23:48 Sepharo
 
Jivaro wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 23:36:
They simply have faith that they are correct because they have never seen any proof to the contrary.

Uh... lack of evidence of something doesn't mean that you have to have faith it doesn't exist.
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
47. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 23:36 Jivaro
 
The premise of the argument is skewed. Religion is very specifically defined as "The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods."

To believe that God or those gods do not exist is exactly the opposite of that definition, and thus not religious. To call someone "religious" because of their fanatical belief in atheism is an incorrect use of vocabulary.

Beamer said religion "is a belief about the purpose and cause of the universe". Most religions do contain such a structure, however that is not the definition of the word. By reducing it to that his caricature of Dawkins is easier to communicate, and I think that is all he meant to do...communicate the irony of how a man (Dawkins) who is absolutely fanatical about the fact that he does not believe there to be a God or gods ends up himself portraying atheism as being a religion or cult.

That said, the concept that simply having a belief in something you can not prove makes you religious is wrong. It does mean you have a capacity for "faith". Many people who consider themselves "fact based" or hang their hats on science are uncomfortable with the word "faith", but there isn't another word in the English vocabulary that better describes something you believe to be true but do not have any facts to prove. Atheism, whether atheists want to admit it or not, can not prove they are correct without a shadow of a doubt. They simply have faith that they are correct because they have never seen any proof to the contrary.

In the interests of full disclosure, and despite the Bill Maher video I linked, I consider my self agnostic, not atheist. I don't believe in anything in particular other than the obvious truth that we are a very small part of a very big universe that has a whole lot of things going on that we can't predict or control. I don't believe there isn't a God or gods, I don't believe they exist either. I simply don't know. Nothing that I have observed or experienced in my life proves either belief to me. I do believe that regardless of whether a God or gods exist, religion itself is man made and that many religions, including all the modern varieties, get twisted by people for selfish reasons.

This comment was edited on Mar 14, 2013, 01:01.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
46. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 23:25 PHJF
 
I don't give a shit what Dawkins says or believes. Atheists didn't up and vote Dawkins the Jesus H. Christ of atheism. We don't have prophets dictating our thought processes and lifestyles. That's for all the religious dolts out there.  
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
45. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 21:50 Beamer
 
PHJF wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 20:48:
Untrue. Agnostics don't believe in anything. Atheisms believe that there are no gods.
Still a belief.

You are arguing semantics and still coming up wrong.

Straight from Encyclopedia Britannica:

Comprehensive definition of atheism

Reflection on this should lead to a more adequate statement of what atheism is and indeed as well to what an agnostic or religious response to atheism should be. Instead of saying that an atheist is someone who believes that it is false or probably false that there is a God, a more adequate characterization of atheism consists in the more complex claim that to be an atheist is to be someone who rejects belief in God for the following reasons (which reason is stressed depends on how God is being conceived): for an anthropomorphic God, the atheist rejects belief in God because it is false or probably false that there is a God; for a nonanthropomorphic God (the God of Luther and Calvin, Aquinas, and Maimonides), he rejects belief in God because the concept of such a God is either meaningless, unintelligible, contradictory, incomprehensible, or incoherent; for the God portrayed by some modern or contemporary theologians or philosophers, he rejects belief in God because the concept of God in question is such that it merely masks an atheistic substance; e.g., “God” is just another name for love, or “God” is simply a symbolic term for moral ideals.

"More adequate" doesn't mean I'm wrong. "Rejects the belief of gods" isn't mutually exclusive from "believes there are no gods."

Dawkins is 100% belief.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
44. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 21:36 Kosumo
 
If I go out of my way to believe only in false gods, knowning they are false and not a true god, am I a believer or not?

I'm just gonna pass on the whole thing thanks, you can have my share if you want.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
43. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 20:48 PHJF
 
Untrue. Agnostics don't believe in anything. Atheisms believe that there are no gods.
Still a belief.

You are arguing semantics and still coming up wrong.

Straight from Encyclopedia Britannica:

Comprehensive definition of atheism

Reflection on this should lead to a more adequate statement of what atheism is and indeed as well to what an agnostic or religious response to atheism should be. Instead of saying that an atheist is someone who believes that it is false or probably false that there is a God, a more adequate characterization of atheism consists in the more complex claim that to be an atheist is to be someone who rejects belief in God for the following reasons (which reason is stressed depends on how God is being conceived): for an anthropomorphic God, the atheist rejects belief in God because it is false or probably false that there is a God; for a nonanthropomorphic God (the God of Luther and Calvin, Aquinas, and Maimonides), he rejects belief in God because the concept of such a God is either meaningless, unintelligible, contradictory, incomprehensible, or incoherent; for the God portrayed by some modern or contemporary theologians or philosophers, he rejects belief in God because the concept of God in question is such that it merely masks an atheistic substance; e.g., “God” is just another name for love, or “God” is simply a symbolic term for moral ideals.
 
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
42. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 20:35 SimplyMonk
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 20:13:
Untrue. Agnostics don't believe in anything. Atheisms believe that there are no gods.
Still a belief.

There are many forms of atheism and varying degrees of affirmation. Technically you are both right... or wrong?
 
Avatar 55902
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
41. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 20:13 Beamer
 
PHJF wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 19:42:
A religion, boiled down to its bare core, is a belief about the purpose and cause of the universe.

Ummm... no. Completely wrong.

Atheism is REJECTION of belief, or at the very least lack of belief. As an atheist I don't "believe" in anything.

Untrue. Agnostics don't believe in anything. Atheisms believe that there are no gods.
Still a belief.

And, while not a religion in all cases, unlike organized religions, but some make it a religion.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
40. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 20:03 SimplyMonk
 
NewMaxx wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 14:57:
You'll be disappointed. What most people don't realize is that science is just another religion.

Science isn't a religion. It might appear to be at times, but only because we, as humans, are so bad at living up to its ideals. The same could be said for religion itself in that most of them have inherently beneficial aspects to them, but they are abused and distorted from their ideals.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that humanity sucks and is the reason we can't have nice things.
 
Avatar 55902
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 19:42 PHJF
 
A religion, boiled down to its bare core, is a belief about the purpose and cause of the universe.

Ummm... no. Completely wrong.

Atheism is REJECTION of belief, or at the very least lack of belief. As an atheist I don't "believe" in anything.
 
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 19:02 Tom
 
Cutter wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 17:07:
WTH? Why was my comment removed? It's a valid point that most people in society agree with today, plenty of academics too. Guys like Dawkins have called Islam barbaric and it is. There's plenty of proof on that count.

Read the ground rules for this forum and reflect upon the myriad ways in which your comment was not in the spirit of the framework for civility that Blue has tried to encourage here.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 18:59 Cutter
 
Atheism isn't a religion, it is a belief system nonetheless. And yes, Dawkins is opinionated with good reason.

 
Avatar 25394
 
"Bye weeks? Bronko Nagurski didn't get no bye weeks, and now he's dead… Well, maybe they're a good thing." - Moe
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 18:40 Beamer
 
mag wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 17:45:
Beamer wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 17:26:
Every religion has its barbarians, even atheism (Dawkins tends to skirt the line between being one of them.)

Islam is really no different. What is different is that it tends to be common in areas with a much lower literacy rate and no government separation. It becomes a tool to sway the masses. But if you remove Islam those looking for power would find an equally useful crutch.

Again, the problem is not Islam. It's weird that some think it is. Islam, like Christianity, has many different branches, many of which have never inspired violence.

Dawkins is an ass opinionated, but please don't call atheism a religion.

It is a religion in the way Dawkins treats it. He's no different than the Christians.

A religion, boiled down to its bare core, is a belief about the purpose and cause of the universe. Atheism, in many practices, is just that. I'm not saying all cases, most cases, or even many cases.

But Dawkins fanaticsism makes him come across as religious.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
35. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 18:07 Jivaro
 
Atheism is a religion like abstinence is a sex position. -Bill Maher

Now Bill can be quite the ass himself and I am far from a devoted fan of his, but this particular segment is basically how I look at it. Atheism is not a religion.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34. Re: Morning Metaverse Mar 13, 2013, 17:45 mag
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 13, 2013, 17:26:
Every religion has its barbarians, even atheism (Dawkins tends to skirt the line between being one of them.)

Islam is really no different. What is different is that it tends to be common in areas with a much lower literacy rate and no government separation. It becomes a tool to sway the masses. But if you remove Islam those looking for power would find an equally useful crutch.

Again, the problem is not Islam. It's weird that some think it is. Islam, like Christianity, has many different branches, many of which have never inspired violence.

Dawkins is an ass opinionated, but please don't call atheism a religion.

This comment was edited on Mar 13, 2013, 18:07.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
73 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo