Any one here religious?

slashvanyoung said:
Thanks for the lecture, James!

I do however know the meaning of either word, believe it or not.

Well, if you dissect my words under a microscope, I agree, I should have added a small detail:

The "textbook" dogmas of strong/positive atheists are IMHO as ignorant as theist-dogmas.

There is a broad spectrum to atheist ideology and if your are familiar with the often cited classification of atheists after William Rowe (see "The Cambridge Companion to Atheism" or "Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy"), then the term strong or positive atheist should be familiar to you.

Those people, at the extreme end of the spectrum, are the ones I'm talking about when I say "textbook-atheists". I'll agree, that phrase might no be perfect. I'm sorry, this is not my native tongue.

However... I stand by the essence of my statement.

Atheists are not a homogeneous mass, you have the extreme ends of the spectrum with strong and weak atheists and all shades in between.

Therefore, this generalization:



.. is not valid in context of generally defining characteristics.

There are people who plainly and definitely deny the existence of a higher deity. People who consider themselves atheists and are considered to be atheists by others.

The characteristics you pointed out only apply to one fraction of the "atheist mass". The ones Rowe considers to be "weak" or "negative" atheists, borderline agnostics so to say.



I don't see why the doctrine of strong atheists doesn't qualify for dogmas under that criteria. They deny the existence of god and accept this believe as authoritative. And because they do, they live their lives accordingly.

Authority doesn't have to be chained to individuals or a deity.

Authority, for strong atheists, might manifest in science or simply their subconsciously shaped views and horizon of values.

As always, a pleasure discussing with you, James! :)
Click to expand...

yes.. there are "weak" and "strong" atheists... though i think you, and the book you quote, have it quite wrong.

by that definition, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and Daniel Dennett (the "four horsemen of atheism", as they are often called), are all "weak atheists"... since every single one of them believes that there is a possibility, however remote, that God exists, and all four have professed willingness to accept it if proven.

to me, this is the "strongest" position for atheists, and not in any way supportive of a dogmatic belief system.

i don't know of any atheists on the level of these four, intellectually, that profess absolute knowledge that god does not exist , and/or who profess that certainty dogmatically.

"strong atheists" as you, and your reference, describe them.... well, the only example i can think of are crackpots, and typical extremists, such as you would find in any aspect of life.... those that are the most fanatical, are always the least intelligent, least informed, and least worthy of our attention.
 
skeksis268 said:
:erk:

Judging by the tone of his previous posts i'd say he's definitely a gay hating, closed minded fundamentalist :zombie:

seriously, just why
Click to expand...

homos suck dick.


there, does that sound gay-bashing?















ftr, it's not. it's just a statement of fact... they do. i mean, it's one of the main things they do during sex... and they enjoy it, so DON"T JUDGE THEM!

;)
 
Melb_shredder said:
wtf... how do I sound gay hating?? You've got to be joking right??
Click to expand...

i was

you obviously sound like a reasonable person

i have a few gay members in my family and a few very catholic members, and unfortunately they refuse to see or acknowledge the ones who choose homosexuality

just thought itd be a fun way to bring up more religious bullshit
 
Ahhh good good, I was wondering what I said wrong!!!

@Amarshism: That really sucks man, family should be stronger than that. *sadface*
 
James Murphy said:
yes.. there are "weak" and "strong" atheists... though i think you, and the book you quote, have it quite wrong.
Click to expand...

I might agree that the terms strong/positive and weak/negative atheism are coined unfortunately because they might imply a qualitative judgement in a context of values.

But as the terminology is linked to the rigor of the denial or non-believe of the existence of a higher deity, it's hardly wrong.

Your categorization of "crappy/shitty" atheists probably leads to less confusion, though. ;)
 
I was raised Christian. I don't really associate with anything. I suppose you could consider me an agnostic, I'm definitely not Atheist.

Athiests can be just as abrasive or more with their Christianity hatred as Christians can be with Bibles yelling at people on the street corner though.

I fucking loath the debate because both sides pull out some sort of bullshit along the lines of "well this and that can't be argued with because it's fucking fact so therefore your argument makes you stupid" blah blah blah Science blah blah blah Bible. Science isn't always infallible, google pitdown man, luckily someone called that bullshit out. No other debate turns people into douchebags faster than the religion one.

For example: Since I was raised Christian, I brought up what some Christians believe and what they believe is the evidence etc... All that happened was a couple of fucking idiots calling me an unschooled moron. They just hated religion so furiously that they couldn't even hold any debate and it resulted in name calling and general tool douchebaggery really fast.

So seriously, fuck the debate and the shitty agendas that go with it.
 
James Murphy said:
i don't know of any atheists on the level of these four, intellectually, that profess absolute knowledge that god does not exist , and/or who profess that certainty dogmatically.

"strong atheists" as you, and your reference, describe them.... well, the only example i can think of are crackpots, and typical extremists, such as you would find in any aspect of life.... those that are the most fanatical, are always the least intelligent, least informed, and least worthy of our attention.
Click to expand...

Well, they have Douglas Adams on their team. ;)

But - referring to my initial statement - that's what I was trying to express. My disrespect for their absolute views.
 
I believe in ethics.
Thankfull not the be raised with any kind of religious pressure, but beeing forced to deal with them.
anyway i'm atheist.
 
Atheist.
My mom is a Catholic. I went to church with her once, it was boring as fuck
 
hmmm

tall stories collected from a few guys 2000 yrs ago or empirical data collected by scientists over a period of hundreds of years

hmmm
 
I was raised in a Methodist household. My Mothers family is very religious. While they are very religious, they are not to the point I would consider "scary." They are not like the Jesus Camp people. Good thing too because I would be frightened of them. My Dad's family is Catholic and my girlfriend and her family are Catholic. I am really not a fan of the Catholic church, however, I do not let my dislike of Catholicism interfere with our relationship. As long as she is happy and no one forces their beliefs on me, it's all good

Despite having been raised by a pretty religious family, I would consider myself Agnostic. I do not think the Bible is accurate. I think people take it too literally. Most of the stories are giant metaphors and it bothers me to no end when people state these metaphors as fact. I think there is a supreme being, but no freaking idea what form it would take. I have no problem with religion. What I do have a problem with is people who force their beliefs (religious or not) onto others and parade around like their beliefs trump all others. I feel that religion is something that should be kept private or shared with people who have common beliefs.
 
My answer depends on who I'm talking to. For some people, Agnosticism means you're not sure if the Christian God is real or not. For those people I'm an Atheist. I would hate for them to think I still gave the Bible any thoughts of validity. I am as certain as anyone can be that if a God exists, IT never provided us with a book, so I have no issues with denying the existence of any God that anyone has ever referred to throughout human history.

For those that understand that there is a fuck ton of things that we don't know and may never know, like how the universe began and what came before it if anything, I will call myself Agnostic with the caveat that the term "god" be used extremely loosely, and doesn't have to refer to a "being", but could refer to an essence or intelligence of some sort. Kinda like what Marcus said.

This is an excellent read (fiction):
Isaac Asimov's "The Last Question"

I was raised loosely Christian, and drifted from that just by way of research and logic. When I found myself jumping through hoops and stretching things to fit facts into a Christian mind-set, I really started questioning the whole thing, and questions led to research, and research led to a whole new worldview, albeit at a very slow pace. It took years to stop feeling "guilty" for my criticism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rob Logic
Bibles in hotel drawers?
Replies
52
Views
2K
Bar
26
2
Kazrog
Sarah Palin's New Christianity - What the Media Missed
Replies
22
Views
859
Bar
Baron of Norsworthy
B
Seditious
  • Locked
Atheism (Do you believe in God? If yes, then why?)
Replies
456
Views
19K
The Philosopher
Justin S.
J
S
Porcupine tree religious?
Replies
72
Views
8K
Opeth (Archived)
Alcapoth
A
STINNETT
Satanic metal...a retrospective analysis
Replies
62
Views
2K
Bar
Nuno Filipe
N
Top Bottom
Back