| Welcome to The Snipers Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, voting in polls, and introducing yourself to our entire community. Registration is simple and fast! Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Question for Atheists | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Wed Jun 17, 2009 8:54 pm (1,921 Views) | |
| HaZy | Thu Dec 3, 2009 2:36 am Post #101 |
![]()
Level 3
|
FaZ got it totally right. Atheism is by definition a system held that tries to shed sufficient doubt on the "god theory"; it's agnostics who say there is no way of knowing whether god exists, or rather no proof that could be convicting to anyone across the board either way. Most academic atheists don't really try to disprove god, because they know by their own scientific method that that would be an impossible task. No atheist is really going to say God doesn't exist. At least, no atheist who wants to be taken seriously. Atheists will say that there are reasons to disbelieve god. Some of the most commonly cited are things like theodicy, god's seeming uninterest in the state of the world, a disapproval of "organized religion," and other such things. This may seem like an overstatement, but to me personally it would seem that agnosticism is really just the logical end of atheism. After all any scholar would know that no one can really disprove god. Even if you found some kind of definitive evidence (which you couldn't) that disproved god, which god are you disproving? The fact that there are as many "gods" as there are civilizations, and then some, would really make it impossible to even shed "sufficient doubt" on the existence of "some god." I guess this is just a student's logical reflection, but it seems to me that the logical end of a true atheistic scholar would simply be in agnosticism. To be honest after all, he would have to say that rather than having "sufficient doubt" not to believe in a god, rather there is no way of knowing if there is or not. And that, at its very root, seems to be landing that atheist right into the class of agnostic. Replies are welcome. Edited by HaZy, Thu Dec 3, 2009 2:38 am.
|
![]() |
|
| GoDs-WeapoN | Thu Dec 3, 2009 3:14 am Post #102 |
![]()
Level 4
|
Yeah, there are some very good point of views being said.. When i say, "i dont believe in God" i dont mean that i completely believe in nothingness and science.. I just dont agree with like the religious faith, and all that stuff.. Like if you never sin, you go to heaven, and if your a sinner, hell, and the commandments and all that.. Basically, i'm one of those people that's like, "seeing is believing".. Because it's true.. You see it for yourself, its true, I believe that, that's pretty much why science and reasoning made more sense to me, because it has proof, depth, and evidence, and can be explained and demonstrated.. But that doesn't mean that I completely dont believe in God, or a God.. Sometimes things happen that can't be explained, and that stuff has happened to me countless times.. Which makes me second-guess myself, and think maybe there is a Lord, or God, or Supernatural Being around that is blessing people's lives with fortune for being good to the Lord.. But, I do believe in "guardian angel's".. Which is like a spirit who guide's you through every circumstance within your life and leads your life to a perfect path, the way it believes you wanted it to end.. That's why, even though i'm atheist, when something cool happens to me that i didn't expect to happen, i say, "THANK YOU GOD!!" or "THANK YOU JESUS!", not just to be joking around, but because I believe it was his doing, or someone's doing.. That's why I named myself God's Weapon.. I'm his elite soldier, owning everyone in SC, because he sent me to do so.. So to sum it all up, i dont believe in religious sayings, and i dont think there is a "God", but there's something.. :ermm: |
![]() |
|
| Great | Sun Apr 11, 2010 6:43 pm Post #103 |
![]()
Level 4
|
Adhering to atheist beliefs forces faith. You can't prove or disprove a god; therefore, faith is required at either end of this spectrum ;o. |
![]() |
|
| DeMuRe | Sun Apr 11, 2010 11:06 pm Post #104 |
|
Level 25
|
Thank you. |
![]() |
|
| Tonic | Mon Apr 12, 2010 2:46 am Post #105 |
|
The Mambo King
|
True. I have faith that glycolysis isn't the result of little green martians manually detaching and rearranging atoms. I do believe that there is ample evidence showing the glycolysis occurs via a stepwise process in which glucose is broken down into pyruvate via intermediary compounds such as Glyceraldehyde 3-P and catalyzed by enzymes. Does this disprove the green-martian theory? Nope. Is it necessary to disprove the green-martian theory in order to accept the stepwise theory? Nope. Is it even appropriate to label the LACK of belief in something as "faith", such as God or the green martian theory? Is it appropriate, or even accurate, to use the word "faith" when describing belief in something supported by evidence, or the lack of belief in something in the absence of evidence? Would you really say that the faith necessary to believe that green martians are responsible is the same as the "faith" required to believe that they are not responsible, especially when there is sufficient evidence supporting another theory? Atheism dictates that God is a theory in which sufficient evidence has not been provided in order to be accepted as valid. It doesn't say that God certainly doesn't exist. Atheists merely contend that there is no evidence supporting this theory. A theory that is unfalsifiable by nature. There is a difference between the two, if you care to think about it. Edited by Tonic, Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:55 am.
|
![]() |
|
| Churned | Tue Apr 13, 2010 10:09 am Post #106 |
|
Level 1
|
Atheists define themselves differently. I've spoken to many. The term is rather broad per individual; however, by definition, it is the rejection of belief in any supernatural deity. "Atheism dictates that God is a theory in which sufficient evidence has not been provided in order to be accepted as valid. It doesn't say that God certainly doesn't exist". By definition, replace the first word with Agnosticism, and there is truth to that statement >.>. *Great* Edited by Churned, Tue Apr 13, 2010 10:11 am.
|
![]() |
|
| Tonic | Tue Apr 13, 2010 5:12 pm Post #107 |
|
The Mambo King
|
Then the atheists you've spoken to are mistaken in what the doctrine they claim to adhere to actually entails. It is a common misconception that Atheism asserts the non-existence of anything, since proving such a claim is impossible. I repeat, atheists don't disbelieve in anything. Not accepting an assertion in absence of evidence is more accurate. And I repeat, there is a difference. Atheists don't accept the theory that God exists. This is different than claiming to know with absolutely certainty that God does not exist. I can say that I don't accept the theory that a pink walrus has broken into my home without claiming to know that pink walruses do not exist. However, if sufficient evidence were to be provided, I would accept that a pink walrus was responsible, just as an atheist would similarly accept the God theory. And no, it's not the same as Agnosticism. Agnosticism holds that knowledge of the ultimate truth is, in essence, beyond our capability. It doesn't reject the God theory and it doesn't support it. Atheism does reject the God theory. |
![]() |
|
| Great | Tue Apr 13, 2010 7:53 pm Post #108 |
![]()
Level 4
|
Would you mind posting a few sources (or even one) regarding your presentation of information? I'd just like to read up on what you've been reading. Why atheism instead of agnosticism tonic (your belief that is)? Edited by Great, Tue Apr 13, 2010 7:55 pm.
|
![]() |
|
| SOLAR | Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:57 pm Post #109 |
|
Level 9
|
Atheism isn't being sure there is no god, great. It's actually just plain not believing in god. I'm not asserting that I'm sure there is no god, I'm just saying I have not been convinced that God exists. I don't need to be called an Afairyist because I don't believe in fairies. I just haven't been convinced by anyone that they exist. |
![]() |
|
| Tonic | Wed Apr 14, 2010 8:48 am Post #110 |
|
The Mambo King
|
I'll do that later, if you'd actually like to read up on what atheism really is and not just the popular misrepresentation of it. |
![]() |
|
| Tonic | Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:40 am Post #111 |
|
The Mambo King
|
Start here. If you need more, I can find more reputable opinion but this is a good start. Forgot links http://atheism.about.com/od/definitionofatheism/p/AtheismReligion.htm http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismquestions/a/whatisatheism.htm http://atheism.about.com/od/definitionofatheism/a/AtheismBelief.htm http://atheism.about.com/od/definitionofatheism/a/FaithBelief.htm http://atheism.about.com/od/definitionofatheism/a/BeliefDisbelief.htm http://atheism.about.com/od/definitionofatheism/a/DisbeliefDenial.htm http://atheism.about.com/od/aboutagnosticism/a/atheism.htm While they are from one website, they are authored by multiple people. Edited by Tonic, Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:49 am.
|
![]() |
|
| FaZ- | Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:21 am Post #112 |
|
Level 39
|
Looks like they're all by Austin Cline to me. -.- |
![]() |
|
| Tonic | Thu Apr 15, 2010 3:10 pm Post #113 |
|
The Mambo King
|
You're right. But I think he clarifies many misconceptions on atheism in a common sense style. Christopher Hitchens would be a more mouthy read, but I do suggest anything by him, such as "God is not great". |
![]() |
|
| Great | Tue Apr 20, 2010 8:39 pm Post #114 |
![]()
Level 4
|
If I ever get a chance, tonic, I'll go read a bit. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Serious Discussions · Next Topic » |









3:06 PM Jul 11