Is Atheism a logical belief?

All scientific theories are our current best understanding, based on the information we have.

Science has no way of proving an idea to be true.

Religion doesn't bother with that. With religion, evidence isn't required, and it doesn't matter if any existing evidence appears to conflict. It's just a totally different system than is science. And, ANY mixing of the two is guaranteed to lead to total nonsense.

 

It isn't a theory because it is still based on models using the DEDUCTIVE approach.

 

The theory of evolution isn't inductive, either.

 

I never said it was, your deflection is noted.

 

Is Atheism a logical belief?

~ No. Atheists do not believe.

 

My racism comments are examples of hypocritical atheists who say they don't believe in god(s) 'cause there is no evidence of god(s) but then go on to say that racism in America is heinous to blacks even though there's no evidence racism (against blacks) is prevalent or is heinous to blacks in America. You know what hypocrisy means, right?

 

Well, the creed of atheists is to not believe something they can't quantify so I'm just asking the atheist why they, for example, believe that racism against blacks in America is so heinous if they can't quantify the amount of racism against blacks in America? You get it, now?

 

There is a difference between falsifiable and falsified. Falsifiable means that there is a possibility that something can be proven false. Falsified means it has been proven false. One example of how BB is falsifiable is that the model predicted Cosmic Background Radiation. If the CMB wasn’t there then the theory would be false. The competing theory did not include that prediction.

From the Wikipedia article on Big Bang Theory.

Theism relies on evidence that can’t be shared (personal experience) so it can’t be proven false.

Science deals in empirical data to gain an understanding of how specific things in the universe works. It is an example of Empiricism. Empiricism is concerned with what can be known through the senses, through data that can be measured in some way.

Atheism deals with reasoning out the existence of god so it is an example of rationalism. Rationalism is concerned with what can be known by reasoning things out. For example we don’t have direct evidence that god does not exist but we can reason out that the claim that God does exist can not be proven wrong or right (unfalsifiable), that the meaning of God has changed based on culture, that even though the claim that God exists is unfalsifiable it makes more sense to live as though God does not exist since it is reasonable to proportion belief to the evidence. So, while we don’t know empirically that God does not exist we can say that it is not probable that god exists unless the definition of god is altered dramatically from what most Christians believe.

 

Of course it was about people like Koko. I understood what you meant by "unlikely".

I'm just trying to figure out the why of the what - why are some people thinking and reacting like he does. That's the only hypothesis I have so far. Feel free to falsify it

Oh, I beg to differ.

Spoiler

 

It does not exclude them either!

True if you hold the belief irrational is really rational and neo atheists are the only ones smart enough to rationalize insanity.

Yep like pisa and the bird insist, neoatheism is a superstitious religion, hence faith based! Thanks for your concession wil!

But supernatural is defined as irrational, unreasonable belief in things that do not exist, the G/god zone.

[Clarity] added for the grammatical handicapped neoatheists!

Both pisa and the bird have just admitted atheism in fact a faith based religion, talk about shooting themselves in the foot on steroids!

What are some supernatural beliefs?

Supernatural beliefs are beliefs in things that do not and cannot exist to the best of scientific knowledge, but which appear real to believers.

Examples are the belief in god, angels, daemons, reincarnation, ghosts, and mind-body dualism.

Supernatural Belief Scale - PsyToolkit

There you have it folks!

Atheists according to pisa and the bird are both irrational, superstitious, and faith based!

Supernatural

By the powers of woo

“”Belief in the supernatural reflects a failure of the imagination. —Edward Abbey[1]

“”To the scientist the word "supernatural" is a contradiction. Everything that is in the universe is natural; the supernatural is the natural not yet understood. And that which is called the supernatural is often the figment of a disordered, undisciplined or undeveloped imagination.
—Elbert Hubbard (1905) Little Journeys to Homes of Great Scientists


Supernatural is an adjective which can refer to events, entities, or explanations, or to powers claimed to be possessed by certain individuals.

What all these have in common is that is that they do not conform to a naturalistic worldview.

Alleged supernatural events would include interventions by poltergeists or a God, virgin births, or miraculous healings.

Injuries or illnesses of unknown origin may be blamed on Supernatural causes, or curses.

• Supernatural beings include gods, fairies, ghosts, spirits, and suchlike.
• Supernatural things include magic rings, witch's brooms and Ouija boards.
• Supernatural substances include ectoplasm and ambrosia.
• Supernatural places include Valhalla;
• Supernatural times include, Friday 13th, February 29th;
• Supernatural forces, animal magnetism.

​

Supernatural powers are those claimed to be held by people such as psychics, fortune tellers, dowsers etc. As with all claimed supernatural activity these powers have not been demonstrated.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Supernatural

Is Atheism a logical belief?

HELL NO!

NeoAtheism definition:

Let me take you down
'Cause I'm going to Strawberry Fields
Nothing is real
And nothing to get hung about
Strawberry Fields forever
Living is easy with eyes closed
Misunderstanding all you see
It's getting hard to be someone
But it all works out
It doesn't matter much to me
Let me take you down
'Cause I'm going to Strawberry Fields
Nothing is real
And nothing to get hung about
Strawberry Fields forever
No one I think is in my tree
I mean it must be high or low
That is you can't, you know, tune in
But it's all right
That is I think it's not too bad
Let me take you down
'Cause I'm going to Strawberry Fields
Nothing is real
And nothing to get hung about
Strawberry Fields forever
Always, no sometimes, think it's me
But you know I know when it's a dream
I think I know I mean a yes
But it's all wrong
That is I think I disagree
Let me take you down
'Cause I'm going to Strawberry Fields
Nothing is real
And nothing to get hung about
Strawberry Fields forever
Strawberry Fields forever
Strawberry Fields forever

NeoAtheists are a gift that keeps on giving and giving, and giving, like the everyready energizer!

 

That doesn't make sense. It can be (and is) heinous without being quantified, unless you are claiming it does not exist at all. There are plenty of heinous things that are not common.

 

Yes. For mere Deism, yes.

But most religions do make claims that can be falsified, and most also contain inconsistency that can be used to disprove at least those versions of the religions. The bible is full of this, and it's very existence conflicts with the claim that God wants to be know and understood clearly by all, since an all powerful being could just make that happen and not have to rely on the limitations of written text.

 

Some are, yes. Atheism only concerns God belief. If it isn't God belief then atheism doesn't exclude it. This should have been obvious, but apparently it is a great revelation and gotcha moment for the kokopuff.

There are also some racist atheists, anti-semitic atheists and even atheist Jews. Just because somebody isn't an atheist doesn't mean they fit your imagined stereotype. Atheist only means they don't believe in God(s).

 

My theories are either mental illness or trolling. I have not been able to falsify either yet, but I think we have managed to falsify good faith confusion.

 

After watching several South Korean TV series lately, I'm convinced that Jesus may very well look South Korean.

 

.

 

Good point.

 

I also know what being blind to clear and present evidence means.

 

You're purposefully choosing to fail to understand those posts.

Atheism doesn't have any of the characteristics of religion.

There is no worship. There is no case where atheism is consulted in decision making. There is no case where the concept of "no god" plays a role in exploring this universe. Etc.

You are totally failing in your attempts to turn a lack of belief in the existence of a god into some sort of guiding principle.

Whether an individual is superstitious doesn't have any bearing on this issue. For example, homeopathy is essentially superstition, but it's not a religion.

 

I'm just pointing out that your disdain for deduction is not damning of scientific theory.

 

So, your argument is that if I don't believe in God, then I must not believe in anything else, either?

Or, did I misconstrue your post?

 

The "big band" is a HYPOTHESIS that has never met the falsification criteria LINK to be viable. That is why they use the deductive approach to something not supported by hard data.

 

He means Atheists do not believe in the existence of god From American Athesis:

Atheism is one thing: A lack of belief in gods.
Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

LINK

===

James statement was concise and to the point.

 

There is absolutely NO question that the Big Bang theory could be proven false. In fact, multiple approaches have been carefully carried out for that purpose.

Also, perhaps the major issue in physics today is the difference between quantum theory and Einstein gravity. That problem shows up when comparing the precise measurements of the SEVERAL approaches to the Big Bang. The point here is that the Big Bang gets HUGE attention from physicists interested in cosmology as well as quantum theory.

Popper would have NO PROBLEM with the Big Bang theory being a theory.