Rejecting Atheism

[Infinite Grey]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0zSCpsOSSw


You call people by what they accept, not by what they dont.
In this sense the word atheist is redundant.

I accept physical evidence and reasoned logic (PEARL), the core of the scientific method.

It has made our standard of life vastly better.

It has also delivered us incredible destructive power. In a society like this those who act on faith (without evidence) are an increasing hazard to us all.

The power that science delivers us must be wielded responsibly, else there will be noone left to discuss the folly.

Doomsday, end of times Christians like PCS (posterboy for creationist stupidity) lust and desire the end of the world.

Religion such as this in a society such as ours is simply a recipe for disaster.

[Cunae]

OMG, is that self-indulgent! That would be accurate, come to think of it. Atheism is all about self.

Belief in nothing is still a belief... even if someone wants to call it the anti-belief.

Maybe we should just call you a Flying Spaghetti Monsterist or an FSM for short.

I don't know of any Christians who "lust for and desire the end of the world". That's just another Christian-hating slam.

[BearDancing]

I feel that viewing the world through your eyes is of a 5 sensory persception... when viewed throught the eyes of a multisensory human it is very clear.....it is a knowing that can not be satisfiyed by the 5 human senses:hairred:or explained to someone with words that they would actually understand:uhhuhuh:

[ignescentphoenix]

I like how they included that part from "Dark Star".

Who would build a sentient bomb? lol

[Infinite Grey]

OMG, is that self-indulgent! That would be accurate, come to think of it. Atheism is all about self.

Atheism simply mean a lack of belief in a god or gods. Buddhists tend to be atheists and they're all about losing perceptions of self centered ess. You prejudice is showing.

The point of the video is illustrating the lingustic implications of titles and illogical nature of labeling everyone else by what they believe and then labeling another group by what they do not believe.

That is why, logically - it makes as much sense to call someone an Atheist as it is to label a Christian a Flying Spaghetti Monster Denialist. It tells you nothing about the person's belief, but only what they do not believe.




Belief in nothing is still a belief... even if someone wants to call it the anti-belief.

Errr, no. Nihilists believe in nothing; very few Atheists are Nihilists, but all Nihilists are Atheists. The terms are not synonymous - how is it that you have not come to realize this? Or are you going to insist on misrepresent Atheists as something they're not?


Maybe we should just call you a Flying Spaghetti Monsterist or an FSM for short.

That makes no sense at all.



I don't know of any Christians who "lust for and desire the end of the world". That's just another Christian-hating slam.


Interesting that you would complain about a "christian-hating" slam right after labeling atheists essentially nihilists. You do know what the word hypocrite means right?

Oh, and I'm surprised you haven't met Christians who "lust for and desire the end of the world"; they're very common among Evangelicals - talking about the Judgment Day and the Rapture... gleefully awaiting the day when they get to hang with Jesus for eternity and everyone else will be burning in hell for just as long. Here's a whole website of the nut cases http://www.raptureready.com/

[Infinite Grey]

I like how they included that part from "Dark Star".

Who would build a sentient bomb? lol

mmmm I would. Just for the LuLz.

"I think therefore I am... kamikaze sentience!!!! [BOOM!]"

Or just before it blows up it screams at its victims

"PWN'D Bitches!" [BOOM!]

[ignescentphoenix]

mmmm I would. Just for the LuLz.

"I think therefore I am... kamikaze sentience!!!! [BOOM!]"

Or just before it blows up it screams at its victims

"PWN'D Bitches!" [BOOM!]

It would be cool, as long as I wasn't floating in space with it.:hahugh:

[Cunae]

Oh, and I'm surprised you haven't met Christians who "lust for and desire the end of the world"; they're very common among Evangelicals - <snip>


Hmmm, maybe it's because I'm not an Evangelical.

[Infinite Grey]

Hmmm, maybe it's because I'm not an Evangelical.

I never said you were - but there is a great deal of them in the USA, so you're bound to know at least one.


And your hypocrisy? Are you allowed to misrepresent atheists, but no one is allowed to misrepresent Christians? Interesting that. :cutie:

[Laisrean]

Blind faith in science is as much a religion as any other.

Science is merely a means to an end - a tool you use to decipher the truth, but it is not the only tool one should employ.

[Infinite Grey]

Blind faith in science is as much a religion as any other.

Science is merely a means to an end - a tool you use to decipher the truth, but it is not the only tool one should employ.

If one has blind faith in science then one does not understand what science is.

I really do not know why you posted this as the concept was not addressed at all.

[feralmama]

Perhaps atheism in general needs new terminology. I have met a few people who identify as atheist simply because they don't acknowledge or believe in any form of deity, yet they still acknowledge and experience natural forces and cycles at work. A couple of these people I've known call themselves Pagan Atheists, which is a perfectly valid term since one doesn't have to believe in deity of any kind to be Pagan.

Human experience tends to put things that are too large to really understand into categories for understanding that then label things with 'divine' or 'God' or the like, and for some people it's the opposite. My sister is an atheist and while I have no issues with that, since her faith, if you want to call it that, is placed in herself and the people she chooses to associate with. But I do have a problem with the certitude so many atheists including her have when it comes to religion or spiritual belief of any kind, the arrogance behind it, and the superiority of 'I know this to be true, and the rest of you are living a fantasy' is just as bad as any religion without the temperance of logic. They believe strongly that there is no divinity, absolutely, because logic tells them so, and all the while complain about the exact same kind of certitude in religion, while neither party has any proof either way.

This is why I believe in the personal path. Someone who believes in no supreme being, no divine presence with a face on it, can be an atheist- and still see that their experience, feelings, and perceptions are still only human and fallible. But I haven't found that the case with most atheists I've known or heard speak of their beliefs- instead, they say 'There is nothing out there, nothing to religion or spirit" and be just as certain of something they can't really know as the people who they claim are full of crap due to believing they know something is out there.

It's the certainty of pretending to know absolutely that's the problem I have with anything. It's ironic as it gets.

[Infinite Grey]

Perhaps atheism in general needs new terminology. I have met a few people who identify as atheist simply because they don't acknowledge or believe in any form of deity, yet they still acknowledge and experience natural forces and cycles at work. A couple of these people I've known call themselves Pagan Atheists, which is a perfectly valid term since one doesn't have to believe in deity of any kind to be Pagan.

Human experience tends to put things that are too large to really understand into categories for understanding that then label things with 'divine' or 'God' or the like, and for some people it's the opposite. My sister is an atheist and while I have no issues with that, since her faith, if you want to call it that, is placed in herself and the people she chooses to associate with. But I do have a problem with the certitude so many atheists including her have when it comes to religion or spiritual belief of any kind, the arrogance behind it, and the superiority of 'I know this to be true, and the rest of you are living a fantasy' is just as bad as any religion without the temperance of logic. They believe strongly that there is no divinity, absolutely, because logic tells them so, and all the while complain about the exact same kind of certitude in religion, while neither party has any proof either way.

It's a bit of personal irk of mine to feel a slight irrational when people talk about logic while failing to recognize one of the basic principles of reasoned logic - the burden of proof. An secularists, or any other philosophy that does not recognize religion as truth can afford to be arrogant and display opinions of superiority - it is not always good for communication or even socially advisable, but it is justifiable. Religion and spiritual traditions make positive assertions, which places the burden of proof squarely on their shoulders... they can refuse to accept the burden, but it does not change the fact that it is theirs and a refusal to comment is paramount to admission of forfeit in a debate setting. This means, as a standard, or as a default... these arrogant, superior acting atheist assholes ( :smileroll ) are correct - if one wants to use logic.



This is why I believe in the personal path. Someone who believes in no supreme being, no divine presence with a face on it, can be an atheist- and still see that their experience, feelings, and perceptions are still only human and fallible. But I haven't found that the case with most atheists I've known or heard speak of their beliefs- instead, they say 'There is nothing out there, nothing to religion or spirit" and be just as certain of something they can't really know as the people who they claim are full of crap due to believing they know something is out there.

I know a lot of atheists - I admit, most of them do not hold to any supernaturalistic beliefs - but a great deal of them do. Buddhists, Jainists, Taoists, atheistic Jews, Witches, Wiccans, druids, and so on. Do not blame the atheists for the stereotypical archetype of the religion hating frothing at the most image - it was the religious groups that invented that image (most especially the Christians, just look and MysticChristian's first post in this thread).


It's the certainty of pretending to know absolutely that's the problem I have with anything. It's ironic as it gets.

Most atheists do not know that there is no god or supernatural forces at work... we just do not believe there to be any. There is a difference.

[David19]

Atheism simply mean a lack of belief in a god or gods. Buddhists tend to be atheists and they're all about losing perceptions of self centered ess. You prejudice is showing.

Just a quick, OT, correction, but, it tends to depend on the Buddhist or the Buddhist tradition, whether they're Atheist or not, some Buddhist's are Atheists, some aren't and believe in a God, or Gods, etc (for example, I think Tibetan Buddhism has quite a lot of deities that people worship), then, there are Jewish Buddhists (JUBUs, as they're called), who both worship the Jewish God, and practice Buddhism as well, etc.



Oh, and I'm surprised you haven't met Christians who "lust for and desire the end of the world"; they're very common among Evangelicals - talking about the Judgment Day and the Rapture... gleefully awaiting the day when they get to hang with Jesus for eternity and everyone else will be burning in hell for just as long. Here's a whole website of the nut cases http://www.raptureready.com/

I haven't met those types, but, I know the type you mean, the ones that really want the End of the World to come about (I think the authors of the Left Behind Series are like that, aren't they?), from what I've heard, some of the radical Christian groups, that make up the Religious Right, only support Israel, 'cause, they think that if the Jews return to Israel, the Temple will get rebuilt, and Jesus will return, starting the Apocalypse, and sending everyone, including Jews and other Christian's, to Hell. Personally, I think they should realise that the Temple won't get rebuilt, considering the Golden Dome, a Holy site to Muslims, is built right on top of it (and, I think Israel is smart enough to realise, knocking it down will not be good at all for Israel).

Now, that said, I do like learning about the Apocalypse, or Apocalypses, right now, I'm reading Imagining the End: Visions of Apocalypse from the Ancient Middle East to Modern America' by Abbas Amanat and Magnus T. Bernhardsson, it's got quite a cool selection of essays on the Apocaylpse in various religions (from ancient Mesopotamia, to Zoroastrianism, Christianity, etc). I realise that actually has nothing to do with the topic, so, I'll stop there.

[Infinite Grey]

Just a quick, OT, correction, but, it tends to depend on the Buddhist or the Buddhist tradition, whether they're Atheist or not, some Buddhist's are Atheists, some aren't and believe in a God, or Gods, etc (for example, I think Tibetan Buddhism has quite a lot of deities that people worship), then, there are Jewish Buddhists (JUBUs, as they're called), who both worship the Jewish God, and practice Buddhism as well, etc.

Oh I know that... my point was that Buddhism in of its self is atheistic... that's why it can be attached to Judaism, Christianity and so on.



I haven't met those types, but, I know the type you mean, the ones that really want the End of the World to come about (I think the authors of the Left Behind Series are like that, aren't they?), from what I've heard, some of the radical Christian groups, that make up the Religious Right, only support Israel, 'cause, they think that if the Jews return to Israel, the Temple will get rebuilt, and Jesus will return, starting the Apocalypse, and sending everyone, including Jews and other Christian's, to Hell. Personally, I think they should realise that the Temple won't get rebuilt, considering the Golden Dome, a Holy site to Muslims, is built right on top of it (and, I think Israel is smart enough to realise, knocking it down will not be good at all for Israel).

Now, that said, I do like learning about the Apocalypse, or Apocalypses, right now, I'm reading Imagining the End: Visions of Apocalypse from the Ancient Middle East to Modern America' by Abbas Amanat and Magnus T. Bernhardsson, it's got quite a cool selection of essays on the Apocaylpse in various religions (from ancient Mesopotamia, to Zoroastrianism, Christianity, etc). I realise that actually has nothing to do with the topic, so, I'll stop there.



Well I've known a lot... but mostly they're passively awaiting the end of the world - they'll make comments like "the end is near", "Jesus will come soon" and such... and do not take it further than that. THere is a significant percentage of Americans that believe Judgment Day will occur within their life time (if anyone is really interested I'll look up the source, but I'd rather not bother) - they may not be proactive in bring about the events, but it does afford them some nasty attitudes... like preventing climate change for example.

[David19]

Well I've known a lot... but mostly they're passively awaiting the end of the world - they'll make comments like "the end is near", "Jesus will come soon" and such... and do not take it further than that. THere is a significant percentage of Americans that believe Judgment Day will occur within their life time (if anyone is really interested I'll look up the source, but I'd rather not bother) - they may not be proactive in bring about the events, but it does afford them some nasty attitudes... like preventing climate change for example.

True, some don't want to stop climate change, 'cause, they think the Apocalypse will happen, so, there's no point in stopping it, or that, climate change is a sign of the Apocalypse, and, so is a good thing. Luckily, most Christians (at least in Europe) aren't like that.

[Xentor]

Labelling someone for something they aren't might seem silly... however Pagans seem to have no problem defining themselves as something they aren't... they aren't Christian, aren't Muslim, aren't Judaic, aren't a whole lot of things. And proud of it, too.

At some point in time, a label can be used to set oneself apart from that which one despises. As time goes by and one matures in one's own identity, the label's definition can switch from a negative to a positive: this is what I am, this is a name to define me. The next step is to find a better suiting label.

It is possible that some Atheists now are ready for that next step. Your future may prove a battlefield. Good luck!

[Infinite Grey]

Labelling someone for something they aren't might seem silly... however Pagans seem to have no problem defining themselves as something they aren't... they aren't Christian, aren't Muslim, aren't Judaic, aren't a whole lot of things. And proud of it, too.

At some point in time, a label can be used to set oneself apart from that which one despises. As time goes by and one matures in one's own identity, the label's definition can switch from a negative to a positive: this is what I am, this is a name to define me. The next step is to find a better suiting label.

It is possible that some Atheists now are ready for that next step. Your future may prove a battlefield. Good luck!

Mmmm true that part of the definition of pagan is non-Abrahamic, but there is the generalized description of belief within the definition also. Atheism by contrast has a simple definition.


I should have mentioned earlier - I have little problem with the label atheist - I just find to logical fallacy involved with the name amusing.

[Laisrean]

Once you label me you negate me.

[Owd Scrat]

Once you label me you negate me.

You labeled me
I'll label you
So I dub thee Unforgiven....

Sorry couldn't resist!