Why Atheists and the Religous are Both Wrong

If you want to make guesses about whether or not gods exist...and call them "beliefs"...do so. I respect your right to do so.

I prefer to call my guesses...guesses.

If ANYONE wants to make a guess about whether gods exist or not...and to call that guess a "belief" they are free to do so...and I accept that they can do it.

I prefer not to do it myself.

I have no idea of why you are making a big deal of it...but when asked, I tell people I do not do "believing."

That does not mean that I do not guess, or suppose, speculate, engage in conjecture, presume or assume. But when I do those things, I prefer to call it guessing, supposing, speculating, conjecturing, presuming or assuming. I do NOT want to call it BELIEVING.

Why does that bother you?

I am FAR from a lonely person. My list of friends and acquaintances is LONG...and lasting.

No reason to be sad about that.

 

Okay.

It does, however, matter to me...especially when someone uses the erroneous etymology derivative to call me an atheist.

I hope to make myself VERY CLEAR that the fact that I lack a belief in any gods...DOES NOT MAKE ME AN ATHEIST.

If you suppose your use of your self-serving definition makes me one...I am going to disagree and disagree strongly.

If you suppose the definition YOU are using causes me to be defined as an atheist...I am going to disagree and disagree strongly.

Your "logic" is far from clear...and YOU are not going to define me as an atheist.

Okay?

Okay, here are three reputable definitions from reputable dictionaries:

From Merriam-Webster:

one who believes that there is no deity

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheist

From Cambridge Dictionary of the English Language:

someone who believes that God does not exist

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/atheist?a=british

From Webster's New World Dictionary:

a person who believes that there is no God

http://www.yourdictionary.com/atheist

Using those definitions...since I do not "believe" gods do not exist...I AM NOT AN ATHEIST.

Ummm...the reasoning is that I am NOT an atheist.

What else could it mean?

Please refer back to the definitions of atheist that I provided. Nothing there about this "belief" nonsense.

Whatever.

I am not an atheist. I am an agnostic...and since I see no unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess for or against the existence of gods...I choose not to.

 

You have missed the first step which is to define what is meant by "God"

 

There is a third side. The side that believes in the afterlife without the existence of a God. There is plenty of evidence of the after life - none of it proof or proof that would suffice those demanding proof. Show me proof and when you do - "photo shop - GCI", etc.

 

Really?

And where did I mention "God?"

Why is it necessary to mention "God?"

 

Actually, the existence of Moses is every bit as questionable as that of Jesus. In addition, their existence as persons, whether true or not, really has no bearing on whether the religious stories are true overall. The fact that Pontius Pilatus demonstrably existed does not mean that he did any of what the gospels claim, for instance. Same with other historical persons included in the fables, such as Herod. In fact, history is very much against the claim that Herod had a bunch of babies killed.

Also, none of that even has a bearing on the question of the existence of deities. An atheist, by definition, rejects the positive claims made by others about the existence of deities and does not believe in or worship a deity. Biblical claims are actually pretty incidental to that, since there could exist something that could be called a god (definition is important here) without the bible being involved. Of course, you're not likely to find an atheist who would embrace the bible for obvious reasons, but you might find a theist, or especially a deist, who does not embrace the bible (or Koran, or whatever), but believes in some other kind of deity. Especially historically, before the Abrahamic gods (as memeplexes) conquered so much of the world...

Oh, and lulz @ "there is no evidence historically that allows us to know for sure why [Hitler] killed those Jews." I think his motives were pretty clear. But that would be a very different discussion.

 

It would seem possible that while admitted athiests are rare, those who actually are athiests may be more common. An analogy might be the time before being homosexual became socially acceptable so most stayed in the closet rather than accepting the pariah status that would result from being open about their sexual orientation.

 

This would be a good time for me to mention that my protestations that I am NOT an atheist have absolutely NOTHING whatever to do with any thoughts that there is something wrong with being an atheist.

There is absolutely nothing wrong, in my opinion, with guessing that there are no gods.

I know that at times the fervor with which I defend my comment "I AM NOT AN ATHEIST" leads some to think that I have a bias against atheists.

I do not...just as I have no bias against theists.

I just am neither.

 

We ,as Atheists, define ourselves not dictionaries and I don't care what your opinions are Atheism is a belief claim largely based on lack of evidence for supernatural beings and a lot of evidence for a natural world under the tools of science. Which means until theists can present sound evidence of the supernatural then of deities I have no need to believe them now do I? And I mean real evidence not holy books, not NDE, not faith I demand reasonable evidence.

You prove it sufficiently I would change my position.

 

When it comes to the question of how good or bad religion is, I tend to think that it's been bad on a social level but good on a personal level. It helps a lot of people personally to cope with life and the reality around them, but socially it includes unnecessary rules and creates needless suffering.

 

Yeah...I realize that atheists do not want to acknowledge that they are basing their designation on guesswork.

MY GUESS, however, is that almost every person who uses the designation "atheist" (whether modified by "agnostic or not) guesses that there are no gods.

I understand they want to assert that their designation only involves not having a "belief" that gods exist...but that doesn't really seem to hold water. Like I said...it is just a guess...

...but my guess is that everyone using the designation "atheist" is guessing that there are no gods.

 

Dawkins must be going soft..

 

`
My examples are anecdotal. You are also correct in your summation. However, I was in a private high school in the mid to late 90's. Social acceptance of both atheists and gays were generally (not always) the norm in my age group and socioeconomic status. My perspective is, different.

 

That is because atheists in general are not basing their designation on guess work at all.

Your premise is false. Atheism is better described as a conclusion rather than a guess or belief. They do not guess that there are no gods they conclude that there are no gods based on complete lack of evidence of such entities and on understanding of religion and it's supporting literature.

 

Yeah, Soup...they really are. But getting them to acknowledge that is not the easiest job in the world.

I've offered several items...none of which is false.

Yes, by atheists who do not want to acknowledge that they are making a guess.

I'm pretty sure they do...but I'll listen to your arguments in the other direction.

There ya go, Soup.

There is no way anyone can "conclude" that there are no gods...especially based on a "lack of evidence."

Conclusions...valid ones, anyway, are based ON EVIDENCE...not a lack of it.

Anyway...there is NO WAY that I can see to come to the "conclusion" that there are no gods using reason, logic, science, or math. If you can show me a way you consider it can be done, I certainly will consider it and comment on it.

By the way...there also is NO WAY that I can see to come to the "conclusion" that it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one. If you can show me a way you consider it can be done, I certainly will consider it and comment on it.

 

No you are wrong.

It is not a guess which is why they do not acknowledge your claim it is simply a false and misinformed claim.

Yes your premises are all false period.

No not by atheism but by what the word simply means and how it is arrived at which you ignore because to acknowledge how it is arrived it destroys your simplistic premises.

They do not guess there is no gods you simply wish that they did in order to place their conclusion on the same level as belief in a god which it is not.

Wrong and way wrong. Yes in fact one can conclude that there are no gods based on lack of evidence just as one can conclude there are no unicorns based on lack of evidence.

You also willfully ignore that it is not simply lack of evidence of a god but in fact overwhelming evidence that the ideas of there being any god are all fictional.

The only knowledge of any god comes from what others have written about said gods in various letters and books. We can easily establish that these are all merely stories with no basis in reality.

This is why atheism is a conclusion and not a guess or belief as you desperately wish to claim.

 

You seem out of sorts, Soup. Perhaps a chill pill would help.

I am not wrong...not in any of the instances you raved about here.

Anyway...let's take one thing and see if that leads to some kind of understanding between us. You wrote:

What are you saying the word "simply means?"

And how do you suppose "it is arrived at?"

I have NOT ignored that. I know how it was "arrived at." I suspect you think it was "arrived at" in a way that it was NOT arrived at.

But...let's discuss it...and as I said, perhaps we can come to an understanding.

 

I have not raved at all I have quite factually and logically explained why you are wrong and you are simply having an overly childish reaction.

Yes you have ignored what leads to atheism it is a conclusion based on observation and logical reasonable thinking. It is not a guess.

 

If so...why did you not respond to my suggestion for a discussion.

You seem to think that you know what "atheism" "simply means" and "how it was arrived at."

I DO KNOW what it means...and how it was arrived at.

I suspect the actuals on that issue differ from what you think.

So...tell me what you think the word means...and tell me how you think that was arrived at...

...and I will explain to you why YOU are wrong and I correct.

If the question is: Do gods exist?...then any answer other than "I do not know" is a guess.

It is a BLIND GUESS.

Saying that there are no gods...IS A BLIND GUESS.

If you would like to talk about it...we can.

 

For me it not not about belief, but the lack of it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and in the case of Theism I see no compelling evidence that would lead me to conclude in the existence of the supernatural. It would be very convenient for me to simply accept the claims of the religious. It would take a lot of uncertainty away from the questions and mysteries of life. I cannot, however, take emotional and intellectual shortcuts simply to offer myself some sort of false solace. You can lie to others, but not yourself.

 

I agree.

There is no reason to accept that any gods exist.

There also is no reason to accept that there are no gods.

We do not know.

You are correct that the claim "There is a god" is an extraordinary claim...and demands extraordinary evidence.

But the thing some people miss is that the claim, "There are no gods" is every bit as extraordinary a claim...and demands extraordinary evidence also.

The claim I make "I do not know the true nature of the REALITY of existence. Gods may exist...and they may not. I do not know which it is"...does not need lots in the way of evidence.

I simply do not know...and there is not enough unambiguous evidence in either direction upon which to base a meaningful guess.

Do I don't!

 

Wrong it is not a guess or blind at all.

It is a logical and reasonable conclusion based on the evidence.

It is clear and fact that you do not know what you are talking about.

Now you and I both know you are merely repeating bull(*)(*)(*)(*) which you have heard but it is not and cannot be supported by any evidence.

We are in a discussion and have been all along you have been proven wrong and your premise is a proven false one. Now forget your talking points you derived from idiots and focus on the facts that I have taught you.

 

It is a blind guess. In fact, it is a BLIND GUESS.

It is far from logical or reasonable.

I know exactly what I am talking about.

Oh, really. And what specifically have I been saying that is not supported by any evidence?

I'd sooner take instruction on how to stay thin from Rush Limbaugh.

Look...it is okay. You can blindly guess that there are no gods. No one is going to arrest you for doing so.

By the way...I am still waiting for you to tell me what you suppose the word "atheist" "simply means?"

And how you suppose "it is arrived at?"

Are you ever going to get to that?

 

It absolutely is not a guess period you simply wish to assert it is.

It is in fact extraordinarily logical and reasonable. Theistic beliefs are neither.

You are ignorant of this subject and do not know what you are talking about.

Your arbitrary assertions about atheism are not supported by any evidence i have in fact presented evidence proving them false.

For example it is FACT that atheism is a conclusion based on all available evidence it is not a guess by any reasonable or logical standard.

No atheist is blindly guessing that there are no gods they are generally examining all the evidence and arriving at an intelligent and logical conclusion.

I have repeatedly answered you while you have only babbled mindlessly repeating the same assertions without evidence based on a false premise.

 

Well, the question pertains only to the existence of God. One's opinion on an afterlife or heaven or Jimmy Hoffa doesn't play in directly. If you do not believe in gods, then you are an atheist. If you on top of that believe in an afterlife, that's a separate question. It's true that people might assume that you hold a certain stance if you say you are an atheist, but that's their assumptions failing (also, in that case, it might be relevant to inform them).