Why?

[fadetree]

Nope. Unfounded argument from authority. Next.

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Troubled [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

http://www.400monkeys.com/God/

This faq should answer all your questions.

Hahahah! Wasn't expecting that. Good one.

[Faron]

I don't *know* there isn't a god, just like I don't *know* that there isn't a race of flying mushroom people live in the upper atmosphere of Jupiter and control everything on Earth through the use of a magical cabbage given to them by the ghost of Thomas Jefferson.

fence-sitting bullshit.

[Plur]

I too am ashamed to admit that I was once an Atheist. Everyone knows that a magical creature dictates what happens in nature. This creature is hard to accept as real, but we must have faith that he is going to lead us to the magical beer volcano that is littered with strippers.
I too denounced god, then one day he reached down from the heavens and touched me with his noodly appendage. I saw with my own eyes his enormous balls, and he promised me salvation at the great beer volcano.
All hail the flying spaghetti monster.

[fadetree]

But isn't that what 'Atheist' means? Categorical denial of any god or gods? Since Atheists appeal to reason and science all the time, and criticize the religious crazies all the time, I thought there might be a better argument than 'well, there just isn't'.

I don't understand the fence remark, atheism is hardly sitting on the fence. That'd be agnosticism.

[Danth]

I don't understand why self-described atheists argue about religion. I don't believe in nor care about UFO's or little green men, and as such I don't argue about those things on internet web sites. You can consider yourself an atheist as far as traditional religions are concerned without necessarily disavowing the possibility of higher forms of intelligence or life beyond that which science can presently explain.


Danth

[Faron]

The point is that the existence of "God" is given validity only because it has a lot of history behind it, even though "God" and the flying mushroom people have the exact same amount of evidence which proves there existence - that amount being zero. The fact that people came up with the idea of "God" a long time ago and people continue to believe it in reality gives the belief no weight. Taking the position that there might be a god or that there might be flying mushroom people on Jupiter simply because you can't disprove it is fence sitting bullshit. And people who say those things probably just passed their Phil101 class and think they are Plato reincarnated.

[Borak]

Originally Posted by fadetree [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ok, I'd like to be an Atheist. Seriously. It would help if someone could tell me how they *know* a god or gods don't exist. As an Atheist, I'd believe strictly in reason. Therefore, note that lack of evidence for is not evidence against, so all arguments beginning with 'We don't need a god to explain..' don't count. For the same reason, emotional arguments about why would we suffer if God was good, etc, don't count, as the question is not about the nature of God or gods but the existence of them.

Go.

There are a number of things that are vexing about this post. Allow me to explain.

I have been an atheist (note, no capital) for about 12 years now, before which I was nominally Catholic. At no point in my life, before or after deconversion, did I say to myself, "I'd like to be an atheist." I don't think that belief, or lack thereof, is something you can choose. I can't believe the sky is pink, no matter how much I want it to be so. I didn't want to become an atheist, actually the realization that I was one was quite jarring when it dawned on me. I became an atheist because it seemed like all the evidence available to me pointed in the direction of there being no credible evidence for supernatural beings.

Notice how I defined atheism. I did not define it as *knowing* that a god or gods do not exist. No atheist that I know in person defines being an atheist that way! Atheism to me, and to every other atheist I personally know, is simply the LACK OF BELIEF in the god proposition. It does not necessarily imply the absolute belief in the NO GOD proposition.

Yes this sounds like agnosticism. Guess what? Most atheists like myself would define themselves as agnostic atheists. What this means is that, even though I do not possess absolute knowledge about the (non)existence of a god or gods (the agnostic part), I do not believe a god actually exists (the atheist part). I would argue that a high percentage of believers are agnostic theists, who also lack absolute knowledge but believe the evidence points to god(s). The people that scare me, are the gnostic people on either side - gnostic atheists ("I know everything"), or gnostic theists ("god speaks to me").

I do not categorically deny that god(s) exist. I just find the probability so unlikely, especially given how they have been defined in ancient texts, that I ignore it, just as I ignore the possibility of me personally winning that $300 million lottery and save myself that $1.

[fadetree]

Faron, do you mean 'The point is that the belief in the existence of "God" is given validity only because it has a lot of history behind it"? Certainly valid from a social perspective, but not so much from reason. The number of people believing or not believing in something doesn't seem to have much relationship to its actual truth or not. Conversely, the Pythagorean Theorem has a lot of history behind it, but that's not what gives it it's validity.

The rest of that argument seems to be citing lack of positive evidence, which as I've mentioned, is not evidence against.

Your criticism is of Agnosticism as being fence-sitting bullshit I still don't understand. Since you say can't prove a negative, why would you take a radical position ( Atheism ) to criticize another radical position ( Theism ).

From your arguments I'd wind up an Agnostic I think.

[fadetree]

Originally Posted by Borak [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There are a number of things that are vexing about this post. Allow me to explain.

I have been an atheist (note, no capital) for about 12 years now, before which I was nominally Catholic. At no point in my life, before or after deconversion, did I say to myself, "I'd like to be an atheist." I don't think that belief, or lack thereof, is something you can choose. I can't believe the sky is pink, no matter how much I want it to be so. I didn't want to become an atheist, actually the realization that I was one was quite jarring when it dawned on me. I became an atheist because it seemed like all the evidence available to me pointed in the direction of there being no credible evidence for supernatural beings.

Notice how I defined atheism. I did not define it as *knowing* that a god or gods do not exist. No atheist that I know in person defines being an atheist that way! Atheism to me, and to every other atheist I personally know, is simply the LACK OF BELIEF in the god proposition. It does not necessarily imply the absolute belief in the NO GOD proposition.

Yes this sounds like agnosticism. Guess what? Most atheists like myself would define themselves as agnostic atheists. What this means is that, even though I do not possess absolute knowledge about the (non)existence of a god or gods (the agnostic part), I do not believe a god actually exists (the atheist part). I would argue that a high percentage of believers are agnostic theists, who also lack absolute knowledge but believe the evidence points to god(s). The people that scare me, are the gnostic people on either side - gnostic atheists ("I know everything"), or gnostic theists ("god speaks to me").

I do not categorically deny that god(s) exist. I just find the probability so unlikely, especially given how they have been defined in ancient texts, that I ignore it, just as I ignore the possibility of me personally winning that $300 million lottery and save myself that $1.

Thanks Borak, that's a great post. This kind of atheism/Agnosti-whatever I could work with.