-quote--
Atheism is a religion, too, one that requires more blind faith than any other. I speak from experience, having been an atheist most of my adult life until two years ago.
--endquote--
While not an atheist, I can't help but point out the error here.
The term atheism refers to a lack of religious belief, specifically the lack of a belief in a god or a supreme being.
--James
http://www.flutesite.com
OT: Important if you are interested in current politics/west
-
TelegramSam
- Posts: 2258
- Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Nashville, TN
- Contact:
-
aderyn_du
- Posts: 2176
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 6:00 pm
- antispam: No
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 8
- Location: Atlanta
Ah, but it's not necessarily a religious one Sam.On 2002-11-26 18:02, TelegramSam wrote:
To believe that life and the universe simply appeared out of nothing for no reason by chance and is held together by nothing for no reason and everything happens by chance takes a good deal of faith, James P...
James is correct that atheism is not a religion.Andrea ~*~
_________________
Music melts all the separate parts of our bodies together.
--Anais Nin
edited to clarify
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: aderyn on 2002-11-26 18:41 ]</font>
-
Walden
- Chiffmaster General
- Posts: 11030
- Joined: Thu May 09, 2002 6:00 pm
- antispam: No
- Location: Coal mining country in the Eastern Oklahoma hills.
- Contact:
Atheism literally means godlessness. And in a very real sense, I think James is right. But the idea that atheism is a religion arose out of a need to extend religious freedom to atheists, as well. A need for, not only freedom of religion, but freedom for the religionless.
While not truly a religion, atheism might be seen as a form of religious philosophy, namely any philosophy that denies God, gods, goddess, or goddesses.
It should also be noted that religions need not necessarily hold to a belief in God, in the sense that Christianity, Judaism, and Islam do. Traditional Chinese religion, for example, does not have this same concept of deity at all.
While not truly a religion, atheism might be seen as a form of religious philosophy, namely any philosophy that denies God, gods, goddess, or goddesses.
It should also be noted that religions need not necessarily hold to a belief in God, in the sense that Christianity, Judaism, and Islam do. Traditional Chinese religion, for example, does not have this same concept of deity at all.
Reasonable person
Walden
Walden
-
TelegramSam
- Posts: 2258
- Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Nashville, TN
- Contact:
-
herbivore12
- Posts: 1098
- Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2002 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: California
[Everytime I view this topic, I can see pages 1 - 4, and 6, but page 5 always comes up as a blank screen. Any reason for that?]
Now, now, TelegramSam. . .
First, you can't really have meant "held together by nothing", since we scientists are pretty sure there are a number of forces (gravity among them!) holding the universe together.
And the rest of your sentence there is a bit overreaching, too (if not condescending). We atheists (generally) believe everything acts according to physical laws, not that it all happens "by chance", and so on and on.
But mostly this "atheism is an act of faith" sort of sentiment rankles a little. A rationalist worldview operates on the basis that the observable laws of the universe operate the same for all actors in that universe, and that the laws governing the universe do not have to make appeal to any supernatural power for their creation or operation. If you're calling that an act of "faith", I'll answer a) that you're cheapening the word; b) or at least using it in a non-standard manner.
Here's a bit from The Atheism Web's introduction to atheism:
****************************************
"OK, maybe it's not a religion in the strict sense of the word. But surely belief in atheism (or science) is still just an act of faith, like religion is?"
Firstly, it's not entirely clear that sceptical atheism is something one actually believes in.
Secondly, it is necessary to adopt a number of core beliefs or assumptions to make some sort of sense out of the sensory data we experience. Most atheists
try to adopt as few core beliefs as possible; and even those are subject to questioning if experience throws them into doubt.
Science has a number of core assumptions. For example, it is generally assumed that the laws of physics are the same for all observers (or at least, all
observers in inertial frames). These are the sort of core assumptions atheists make. If such basic ideas are called "acts of faith", then almost everything we
know must be said to be based on acts of faith, and the term loses its meaning.
Faith is more often used to refer to complete, certain belief in something. According to such a definition, atheism and science are certainly not acts of faith. Of
course, individual atheists or scientists can be as dogmatic as religious followers when claiming that something is "certain". This is not a general tendency,
however; there are many atheists who would be reluctant to state with certainty that the universe exists.
Faith is also used to refer to belief without supporting evidence or proof. Sceptical atheism certainly doesn't fit that definition, as sceptical atheism has no
beliefs. Strong atheism is closer, but still doesn't really match, as even the most dogmatic atheist will tend to refer to experimental data (or the lack of it) when
asserting that God does not exist.
******************************************
Now, that's just one atheist viewpoint, but it serves to illuminate a little bit about why being an atheist isn't an act of "faith". Most secular rationalists who share a view of the world similar to mine simply demand objective (and *not* subjective) evidence for forming beliefs. Never having been presented with objective evidence for a universe that's anything other than purely physical and nondirected, etc., well, that's where I'm putting my money.
And believing that atheists must believe that the universe popped out of nowhere out of nothing, and so on, just belies a serious lack of deep knowledge in the current scientific literature. A number of good lay books are out there which can set you straight on what "Science" really has to say on the matter. Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" is one of them; there are many others.
(Just to be clear, I fully respect those who hold a religious belief and who are people of faith. I don't agree with them -- well, at least not on the essential nature of the universe -- but I respect their beliefs. Certainly enough not to make condescending posts about what it is they really believe on their behalf, eh, TS?)
Now, now, TelegramSam. . .
First, you can't really have meant "held together by nothing", since we scientists are pretty sure there are a number of forces (gravity among them!) holding the universe together.
And the rest of your sentence there is a bit overreaching, too (if not condescending). We atheists (generally) believe everything acts according to physical laws, not that it all happens "by chance", and so on and on.
But mostly this "atheism is an act of faith" sort of sentiment rankles a little. A rationalist worldview operates on the basis that the observable laws of the universe operate the same for all actors in that universe, and that the laws governing the universe do not have to make appeal to any supernatural power for their creation or operation. If you're calling that an act of "faith", I'll answer a) that you're cheapening the word; b) or at least using it in a non-standard manner.
Here's a bit from The Atheism Web's introduction to atheism:
****************************************
"OK, maybe it's not a religion in the strict sense of the word. But surely belief in atheism (or science) is still just an act of faith, like religion is?"
Firstly, it's not entirely clear that sceptical atheism is something one actually believes in.
Secondly, it is necessary to adopt a number of core beliefs or assumptions to make some sort of sense out of the sensory data we experience. Most atheists
try to adopt as few core beliefs as possible; and even those are subject to questioning if experience throws them into doubt.
Science has a number of core assumptions. For example, it is generally assumed that the laws of physics are the same for all observers (or at least, all
observers in inertial frames). These are the sort of core assumptions atheists make. If such basic ideas are called "acts of faith", then almost everything we
know must be said to be based on acts of faith, and the term loses its meaning.
Faith is more often used to refer to complete, certain belief in something. According to such a definition, atheism and science are certainly not acts of faith. Of
course, individual atheists or scientists can be as dogmatic as religious followers when claiming that something is "certain". This is not a general tendency,
however; there are many atheists who would be reluctant to state with certainty that the universe exists.
Faith is also used to refer to belief without supporting evidence or proof. Sceptical atheism certainly doesn't fit that definition, as sceptical atheism has no
beliefs. Strong atheism is closer, but still doesn't really match, as even the most dogmatic atheist will tend to refer to experimental data (or the lack of it) when
asserting that God does not exist.
******************************************
Now, that's just one atheist viewpoint, but it serves to illuminate a little bit about why being an atheist isn't an act of "faith". Most secular rationalists who share a view of the world similar to mine simply demand objective (and *not* subjective) evidence for forming beliefs. Never having been presented with objective evidence for a universe that's anything other than purely physical and nondirected, etc., well, that's where I'm putting my money.
And believing that atheists must believe that the universe popped out of nowhere out of nothing, and so on, just belies a serious lack of deep knowledge in the current scientific literature. A number of good lay books are out there which can set you straight on what "Science" really has to say on the matter. Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" is one of them; there are many others.
(Just to be clear, I fully respect those who hold a religious belief and who are people of faith. I don't agree with them -- well, at least not on the essential nature of the universe -- but I respect their beliefs. Certainly enough not to make condescending posts about what it is they really believe on their behalf, eh, TS?)
-
Chuck_Clark
- Posts: 2213
- Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2001 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Illinois, last time I looked
-
peeplj
- Posts: 9029
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2002 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: forever in the old hills of Arkansas
- Contact:
Sam, I think we've chatted together enough times so that you know what religion I am, and I am the last person to believe everything happens by blind chance, though I do think chance gets a knock in now and again, as do both fate and destiny.On 2002-11-26 18:02, TelegramSam wrote:
To believe that life and the universe simply appeared out of nothing for no reason by chance and is held together by nothing for no reason and everything happens by chance takes a good deal of faith, James P...
Best to ya and blessings on ya, Lady Sam,
--James
http://www.flutesite.com
What, you can have your say, but I can't have mine? Why is that, Teri? Why are you free to attack religion but I'm not free to defend it?On 2002-11-26 17:32, Teri-K wrote:
Convenient that you left out my words directly after the quote. I expressly said I'll have no more part in this thread. I will not debate theology and your god. Leave it!
Teri
I normally stay out of these religious/political debates, but I occasionally get tired of them being so fashionably one sided. I hadn't accessed this thread since it first began (because it's not about Irish music) and missed the opportunity to address your post until today. I wasn't answering you in particular but the idea of atheism. Sorry you took it personally.
OK, now I'll "leave it" until you bring it up next time.
-
cowtime
- Posts: 5280
- Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2001 6:00 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Appalachian Mts.
There's been entirely too much apology going on here lately. I must confess that it is nice on occasion to see folks express a concrete opinion/belief , even if everyone does not agree with it, or if the belief is not "politically correct". I agree with some of the views I've seen on this thread, I am appalled by some. I deal with it.
In order to keep this spirit going I'll jump in and throw out my thoughts or religion AND politics. I know some will not agree,but, that's life........
I do not have faith in our goverment having our(the average folk) best intrests at heart.
I am a Democrat! (there I said that bad word and you can imagine my thoughts on Ronald Reganzaz.)
I am a devout Christian.
I do not want war.
I do want more whistles.
In order to keep this spirit going I'll jump in and throw out my thoughts or religion AND politics. I know some will not agree,but, that's life........
I do not have faith in our goverment having our(the average folk) best intrests at heart.
I am a Democrat! (there I said that bad word and you can imagine my thoughts on Ronald Reganzaz.)
I am a devout Christian.
I do not want war.
I do want more whistles.
-
Daniel_Bingamon
- Posts: 2227
- Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 6:00 pm
- antispam: No
- Location: Kings Mills, OH
- Contact:
The Muslims play an instrument called a "Ney", it is a rim blown flute. It's extremely difficult to play. Maybe this whole problem is that they're jealous of our fipples.
We Americans probably have more whistles as well.
Maybe instead of air dropping food over Afganistan. We should air drop whistles - no one would get hit in the head by a whistle. For the whistles would sound in the wind as they are falling. (Someone might think it's a bomb instead).
We could stage the project here in Cincinnati, after all we have a reputation for dropping live turkeys from planes. (WKRP in Cincinnati).
I doubt that this C&F Messageboard is going to solve the worlds problems. We can only encourge people to pound their swords in plowshares (or whistles).
We Americans probably have more whistles as well.
Maybe instead of air dropping food over Afganistan. We should air drop whistles - no one would get hit in the head by a whistle. For the whistles would sound in the wind as they are falling. (Someone might think it's a bomb instead).
We could stage the project here in Cincinnati, after all we have a reputation for dropping live turkeys from planes. (WKRP in Cincinnati).
I doubt that this C&F Messageboard is going to solve the worlds problems. We can only encourge people to pound their swords in plowshares (or whistles).