Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Pause Switch to Standard View WHAT ATHEISM IS
Show More
Loading...
Flag Idbc April 24, 2012 2:03 PM EDT
I've heard a rumor that there are people who are interested in what Atheism IS .


The defination of the word is:


atheism  

1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.

2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.


It is a "belief" that is no God and or a "disbelief"  in the existence of a supreme being or beings.  


It is a doctrine and not a dogma.  It is a belief or disbelief.   It is not a statement of knowledge or fact.   

I know that I have a brain.   That is a fact.   

I do not know that I have or don't have a soul for the same reason I do not know if god/gods, supreme beings/beings that have no physical existence.  

Nor do I believe that I have a soul.  I disbelieve in the existence of my soul for the same reason I disbelieve in the existence of god/gods.   

There is I think a difference between believing and knowing, and between knowing an not knowing, between gnosticism and agnosticism. 


I would not be suprised if there are masterminds who think that belief/disbelief,  knowing and  not knowing are all the same thing. 


For a more in depth information about  what atheism IS that expands beyond the definition of the word you may or may not see: 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

www.atheistscholar.org/




                     
Flag steven_guy April 24, 2012 4:13 PM EDT

Once more, with feeling.


Atheism is a lack of belief in the existence of god, gods and goddesses. One may describe it as a position on a single philosophical issue.


Like everyone, I was born an atheist and I remain one to this very day. If theism didn't exist I wouldn't even need to call myself an atheist in regards to the claims of theists.


Atheism is not a doctrine.


Atheism is not a belief.


Atheism is not a philosophy.


Atheism is not a "path".


Atheism is not a doctrine.



Apr 24, 2012 -- 2:03PM, Idbc wrote:

I've heard a rumor that there are people who are interested in what Atheism IS .


The defination of the word is:


atheism  

1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.


2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.


It is a "belief" that is no God and or a "disbelief"  in the existence of a supreme being or beings.  


It is a doctrine and not a dogma.  It is a belief or disbelief.   It is not a statement of knowledge or fact.   

I know that I have a brain.   That is a fact.   

I do not know that I have or don't have a soul for the same reason I do not know if god/gods, supreme beings/beings that have no physical existence.  

Nor do I believe that I have a soul.  I disbelieve in the existence of my soul for the same reason I disbelieve in the existence of god/gods.   

There is I think a difference between believing and knowing, and between knowing an not knowing, between gnosticism and agnosticism. 


I would not be suprised if there are masterminds who think that belief/disbelief,  knowing and  not knowing are all the same thing. 


For a more in depth information about  what atheism IS that expands beyond the definition of the word you may or may not see: 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

www.atheistscholar.org/




                     




Flag Seefan April 27, 2012 5:51 PM EDT

Hmhmhmhm!  I thought it was .....


Atheism – The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reasons, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. 


This probably makes as much sense to me ....


 


 

Flag steven_guy April 27, 2012 5:53 PM EDT

Apr 27, 2012 -- 5:51PM, Seefan wrote:


Hmhmhmhm!  I thought it was .....


Atheism – The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reasons, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. 


This probably makes as much sense to me ....



That's a strawman argument and may be dismissed as such.


You don't know very much, do you?

Flag redshifted April 27, 2012 5:55 PM EDT

Apr 27, 2012 -- 5:51PM, Seefan wrote:


Hmhmhmhm!  I thought it was .....


Atheism – The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reasons, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. 


This probably makes as much sense to me ....




You're joking, right?

Flag Seefan April 27, 2012 6:01 PM EDT

Apr 27, 2012 -- 5:55PM, redshifted wrote:


Apr 27, 2012 -- 5:51PM, Seefan wrote:


Hmhmhmhm!  I thought it was .....


Atheism – The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reasons, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. 


This probably makes as much sense to me ....




You're joking, right?




What do you think?  It's about as correct and understandable as your understanding of spiritual reality ...


And steve - I'm sure you are right, right!



 

Flag steven_guy April 27, 2012 6:08 PM EDT

Apr 27, 2012 -- 6:01PM, Seefan wrote:


Apr 27, 2012 -- 5:55PM, redshifted wrote:


Apr 27, 2012 -- 5:51PM, Seefan wrote:


Hmhmhmhm!  I thought it was .....


Atheism – The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reasons, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. 


This probably makes as much sense to me ....




You're joking, right?




What do you think?  It's about as correct and understandable as your understanding of spiritual reality ...


And steve - I'm sure you are right, right!



 




What's there to understand about spiritual reality? All of it is simply made up, sometimes on the spot. One might as well say critics don't understand the spiritual reality of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


Flag steven_guy April 27, 2012 6:08 PM EDT

Apr 27, 2012 -- 5:55PM, redshifted wrote:


Apr 27, 2012 -- 5:51PM, Seefan wrote:


Hmhmhmhm!  I thought it was .....


Atheism – The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reasons, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. 


This probably makes as much sense to me ....




You're joking, right?




Sadly, I think not.

Flag Seefan April 27, 2012 6:10 PM EDT

Apr 27, 2012 -- 6:08PM, steven_guy wrote:


Apr 27, 2012 -- 6:01PM, Seefan wrote:


Apr 27, 2012 -- 5:55PM, redshifted wrote:


Apr 27, 2012 -- 5:51PM, Seefan wrote:


Hmhmhmhm!  I thought it was .....


Atheism – The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reasons, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. 


This probably makes as much sense to me ....




You're joking, right?




What do you think?  It's about as correct and understandable as your understanding of spiritual reality ...


And steve - I'm sure you are right, right!



 




What's there to understand about spiritual reality? All of it is simply made up, sometimes on the spot. One might as well say critics don't understand the spiritual reality of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. 



My point exactly steve ...


Thanks ...



 

Flag redshifted April 27, 2012 6:28 PM EDT

Apr 27, 2012 -- 6:10PM, Seefan wrote:


Apr 27, 2012 -- 6:08PM, steven_guy wrote:


Apr 27, 2012 -- 6:01PM, Seefan wrote:


Apr 27, 2012 -- 5:55PM, redshifted wrote:


Apr 27, 2012 -- 5:51PM, Seefan wrote:


Hmhmhmhm!  I thought it was .....


Atheism – The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reasons, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. 


This probably makes as much sense to me ....




You're joking, right?




What do you think?  It's about as correct and understandable as your understanding of spiritual reality ...


And steve - I'm sure you are right, right!





What's there to understand about spiritual reality? All of it is simply made up, sometimes on the spot. One might as well say critics don't understand the spiritual reality of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. 



My point exactly steve ...


Thanks ...




Um, alrighty then. Good talk.

Flag JCarlin April 27, 2012 8:52 PM EDT

Apr 27, 2012 -- 6:01PM, Seefan wrote:

What do you think?  It's about as correct and understandable as your understanding of spiritual reality ...


You will find that atheists understand spiritual reality much better than most theists.  They know that spiritual reality has been hijacked by those little vuvuzelas in the fancy dresses in the over decorated balconies to con believers into thinking that God has something to do with spiritual reality.  However the lie has been told so many times that even some who know better have given up on spiritual reality. 




Flag Seefan April 27, 2012 8:59 PM EDT

Apr 27, 2012 -- 8:52PM, JCarlin wrote:

 

Apr 27, 2012 -- 6:01PM, Seefan wrote:

What do you think?  It's about as correct and understandable as your understanding of spiritual reality ...


You will find that atheists understand spiritual reality much better than most theists.  They know that spiritual reality has been hijacked by those little vuvuzelas in the fancy dresses in the over decorated balconies to con believers into thinking that God has something to do with spiritual reality.  However the lie has been told so many times that even some who know better have given up on spiritual reality. 



So are you saying that people give up on developing an greater understanding of personal \spiritual reality because of some preceived mis-understanding others have that's not to their taste??  That's odd ...

Flag Ken April 27, 2012 9:05 PM EDT

There is no "spiritual reality." There's only "reality," and you're stuck with it whether you like it or not.

Flag JCarlin April 27, 2012 9:57 PM EDT

Apr 27, 2012 -- 8:59PM, Seefan wrote:

So are you saying that people give up on developing an greater understanding of personal \spiritual reality because of some preceived mis-understanding others have that's not to their taste??  That's odd ...


No, they do very well developing their personal /spiritual reality, they just use different terms for it.  Personal reality development is a given in atheism as atheists need waste no time on contemplation of supernatural unreality.  As noted earlier appreciating spiritual reality is a natural reward mechanism in the human mind/brain. It is just the term that is avoided by some due to its common association with supernatural unreality.   

Flag Blü April 27, 2012 10:29 PM EDT

STEP 1 - When you say 'belief', do you mean belief=opinion or belief=faith?


Take a proposition (or set of propositions) X that purports to be a correct statement about reality.


If you have a view on the correctness of X, you have an opinion, a belief, about X - call it a belief/opinion.


If you have a view on the correctness of X, and in addition, sound argument can't alter that view, then you hold your view on faith - call it belief/faith.


STEP 2 - Which kind of 'belief' is atheism?


It can be either.


Mine is belief/opinion. It reads -


We have no good reason to think that supernatural beings have objective existence, so I don't.


You can argue me out of my opinion (though you'll need to clear up the denotation of 'supernatural being' first).

Flag Seefan April 28, 2012 8:23 AM EDT

Apr 27, 2012 -- 9:57PM, JCarlin wrote:


Apr 27, 2012 -- 8:59PM, Seefan wrote:

So are you saying that people give up on developing an greater understanding of personal \spiritual reality because of some preceived mis-understanding others have that's not to their taste??  That's odd ...


No, they do very well developing their personal /spiritual reality, they just use different terms for it.  Personal reality development is a given in atheism as atheists need waste no time on contemplation of supernatural unreality.  As noted earlier appreciating spiritual reality is a natural reward mechanism in the human mind/brain. It is just the term that is avoided by some due to its common association with supernatural unreality.  



Thanks JC for your reply!  So I guess you're saying that some are hesitate to use the term spiritual because it may imply to others a connection to a supernatural unreality.  Although as pointed out I don't know much still I get that and I think I understand that type of fear ...

Flag chevy956 April 28, 2012 12:10 PM EDT

Seefan said: "Thanks JC for your reply!  So I guess you're saying that some are hesitate to use the term spiritual because it may imply to others a connection to a supernatural unreality.  Although as pointed out I don't know much still I get that and I think I understand that type of fear ... "


>>>>Who said there was any fear involved? There is zero objective evidence for anything that is commonly labeled "supernatural" or "spiritual". I ignore such terms because they are meaningless, not because I am afraid of something which has no objective existance.

Flag costrel April 28, 2012 1:27 PM EDT

Apr 28, 2012 -- 12:10PM, chevy956 wrote:

>>>>Who said there was any fear involved? There is zero objective evidence for anything that is commonly labeled "supernatural" or "spiritual". I ignore such terms because they are meaningless, not because I am afraid of something which has no objective existance.


I don't use spiritual because I have always associated spiritual with "religion or religious belief" rather than with "the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things" (quotes taken from the two Oxford Dictionaries Online definitions of spiritual). Yet even the second definition, which associates spiritual with "the human spirit or soul" and with non-material and non-physical things seems problematic with me. For instance, what is exactly non-material and non-physical? Feelings? Emotions? What exactly does one mean by "the human spirit or soul" from a non-theistic or atheistic perspective? 


And since I was raised Catholic, religious meant someone who was a monastic. So when I first heard people declare they were "spiritual but not religious," I wasn't entirely sure what they meant, but I was fairly certain that they weren't identifying themselves as non-monastics. The idea that they were actually identifying themselves as people who believed in at least one god (and oftentimes also believed in angels, demons, ghosts, spirits, aliens, reincarnation, zombies, an afterlife, etc.) but who did not attend a church or a non-Christian "house or worship" did not occur to me. 

Flag mainecaptain April 28, 2012 2:29 PM EDT

Apr 28, 2012 -- 12:10PM, chevy956 wrote:


Seefan said: "Thanks JC for your reply!  So I guess you're saying that some are hesitate to use the term spiritual because it may imply to others a connection to a supernatural unreality.  Although as pointed out I don't know much still I get that and I think I understand that type of fear ... "


>>>>Who said there was any fear involved? There is zero objective evidence for anything that is commonly labeled "supernatural" or "spiritual". I ignore such terms because they are meaningless, not because I am afraid of something which has no objective existance.




Using the word "fear" gives a feeling of superiority to the person accusing others of being afraid.


Like when theists say atheists hate  their god. So they became atheists.



Which of cousre shows a true lack of understand.

Flag chevy956 April 28, 2012 2:39 PM EDT

Apr 28, 2012 -- 2:29PM, mainecaptain wrote:

Apr 28, 2012 -- 12:10PM, chevy956 wrote:


Seefan said: "Thanks JC for your reply!  So I guess you're saying that some are hesitate to use the term spiritual because it may imply to others a connection to a supernatural unreality.  Although as pointed out I don't know much still I get that and I think I understand that type of fear ... "


>>>>Who said there was any fear involved? There is zero objective evidence for anything that is commonly labeled "supernatural" or "spiritual". I ignore such terms because they are meaningless, not because I am afraid of something which has no objective existance.




Using the word "fear" gives a feeling of superiority to the person accusing others of being afraid.


Like when theists say atheists hate  their god. So they became atheists.



Which of cousre shows a true lack of understand.


Yep, they do love to project....and then get bent out of shape when called on it.


 

Flag JCarlin April 28, 2012 2:47 PM EDT

Apr 28, 2012 -- 1:27PM, costrel wrote:

I don't use spiritual because I have always associated spiritual with "religion or religious belief" rather than with "the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things" (quotes taken from the two Oxford Dictionaries Online definitions of spiritual). Yet even the second definition, which associates spiritual with "the human spirit or soul" and with non-material and non-physical things seems problematic with me. For instance, what is exactly non-material and non-physical? Feelings? Emotions? What exactly does one mean by "the human spirit or soul" from a non-theistic or atheistic perspective?


I will readily admit to a Quixotic element to my attempt to reclaim spiritual, the human spirit, and the soul, from the big lie that they are the property of religious poo-bahs.  But I find all three concepts too valuable and unique to cede to God.  They are all non-material except as brain action is a material activity and they are generated by activities of the brain. But a spiritual experience is a brain state where the ordinary tangle of the thoughts of daily living are momentarily quieted and the dopamine high (yes it is natural) comes from the reality of being.  It can be volitional but frequently is associated with a sense of wonder coupled with understanding of the reality behind the wonder.  Your baby's smile is generally such a spiritual experience.  Certainly you can explain all of the genetic components of the bonding experience, but when the smile comes, the world stops being important. 

Flag chevy956 April 28, 2012 3:07 PM EDT

Apr 28, 2012 -- 2:47PM, JCarlin wrote:

Apr 28, 2012 -- 1:27PM, costrel wrote:

I don't use spiritual because I have always associated spiritual with "religion or religious belief" rather than with "the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things" (quotes taken from the two Oxford Dictionaries Online definitions of spiritual). Yet even the second definition, which associates spiritual with "the human spirit or soul" and with non-material and non-physical things seems problematic with me. For instance, what is exactly non-material and non-physical? Feelings? Emotions? What exactly does one mean by "the human spirit or soul" from a non-theistic or atheistic perspective?


I will readily admit to a Quixotic element to my attempt to reclaim spiritual, the human spirit, and the soul, from the big lie that they are the property of religious poo-bahs.  But I find all three concepts too valuable and unique to cede to God.  They are all non-material except as brain action is a material activity and they are generated by activities of the brain. But a spiritual experience is a brain state where the ordinary tangle of the thoughts of daily living are momentarily quieted and the dopamine high (yes it is natural) comes from the reality of being.  It can be volitional but frequently is associated with a sense of wonder coupled with understanding of the reality behind the wonder.  Your baby's smile is generally such a spiritual experience.  Certainly you can explain all of the genetic components of the bonding experience, but when the smile comes, the world stops being important. 


JC, I do see your intentions as honorable. but why not simply call wonder and being present in the moment what they are ?

Flag JCarlin April 28, 2012 4:29 PM EDT

Apr 28, 2012 -- 3:07PM, chevy956 wrote:

JC, I do see your intentions as honorable. but why not simply call wonder and being present in the moment what they are ?


Ordinarily I do, since "spiritual, and by that I don't mean all that religious God BS." is just too combersome.  However, I find there is a significant difference in connotation between the terms, and I still think spiritual, as being the better word.  


On this forum there are several words, morality, meaning, and spiritual among them that I resent being hijacked by religious nutcases as belonging to or attributable only to God. 

Flag Idbc April 28, 2012 10:28 PM EDT

Howdy 


This discussion concerns what Atheism IS.  


It is not about the existence of a "soul".    Atheists could have a belief-opinion in the existence of a soul. 


It not about "spirituality".  An Atheist could be "spiritual".       


Atheism IS a belief that that god has no existence.   Or  a disbelief in the existence of god.


 


It is clear to me that "god" has no physical existence.  It is a fact that the physical universe has existence.   I KNOW that the physical universe does have existence.  The existence of the physical universe is NOT AN OPINION, NOT A BELIEF.


I can NOT KNOW that the existence of god. 


It seems clear to me that modern science cannot state one way or the other about the existence of god because modern science is concerned with the material-physical universe and since god has no physical material existence then it cannot be used  to prove the existence of god. 


Philosophy deals with reason.  What are the "reasons"  for the existence of god.   


Faith is pure belief.   It does not concern reason.   If you have faith you do not need reason-philosophy to have a belief-opinon on the existence of god.  


Atheists have the opinion that there is no philosophical proof in the existence of god. 


Nor do they  the have faith in the existence of god.      


Theists do have the opinion-belief that there are philosophical reasons that proof the existence of god, or a simple faith in the existence of god.  


When I die and if  "I" have some time of continued existence "I" will then "know"  wether god has existence or non-existence.   But until then it "I" will have an opinion-belief that god has no existence. 


 


 


  


 


 


 

Flag steven_guy April 28, 2012 10:47 PM EDT

Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:28PM, Idbc wrote:

Atheism IS a belief that that god has no existence.  



Do you actively believe that the Tooth Fairy has no existence?

Flag Ken April 29, 2012 12:07 AM EDT

Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:47PM, steven_guy wrote:


Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:28PM, Idbc wrote:

Atheism IS a belief that that god has no existence.  



Do you actively believe that the Tooth Fairy has no existence?



If I ever come face to face with her, she won't have it much longer. I hate that dirty little beast.

Flag Seefan April 29, 2012 7:33 AM EDT

Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:28PM, Idbc wrote:


Howdy 


This discussion concerns what Atheism IS.  


It is not about the existence of a "soul".    Atheists could have a belief-opinion in the existence of a soul. 


It not about "spirituality".  An Atheist could be "spiritual".       


Atheism IS a belief that that god has no existence.   Or  a disbelief in the existence of god.


 


It is clear to me that "god" has no physical existence.  It is a fact that the physical universe has existence.   I KNOW that the physical universe does have existence.  The existence of the physical universe is NOT AN OPINION, NOT A BELIEF.


I can NOT KNOW that the existence of god. 


It seems clear to me that modern science cannot state one way or the other about the existence of god because modern science is concerned with the material-physical universe and since god has no physical material existence then it cannot be used  to prove the existence of god. 


Philosophy deals with reason.  What are the "reasons"  for the existence of god.   


Faith is pure belief.   It does not concern reason.   If you have faith you do not need reason-philosophy to have a belief-opinon on the existence of god.  


Atheists have the opinion that there is no philosophical proof in the existence of god. 


Nor do they  the have faith in the existence of god.      


Theists do have the opinion-belief that there are philosophical reasons that proof the existence of god, or a simple faith in the existence of god.  


When I die and if  "I" have some time of continued existence "I" will then "know"  wether god has existence or non-existence.   But until then it "I" will have an opinion-belief that god has no existence. 



Hey IDBC now that is clear and very understandable and without belittling or putting the beliefs/opinions of others down.  Well done!  You're alright, a standup guy, at least in this post ...


Thanks ... Smile


 

Flag Fodaoson April 29, 2012 1:44 PM EDT

If atheism is not a belief or religion, why do atheists seek an audience on BELIEFNET? BNs mission” Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness.”
 If there is no spirit, no soul, then there is no spiritual path to sleek.


If there is no belief there is nothing to discuss. 

Flag Ken April 29, 2012 1:55 PM EDT

Apr 29, 2012 -- 1:44PM, Fodaoson wrote:


If atheism is not a belief or religion, why do atheists seek an audience on BELIEFNET?


We're the opposition.

Flag Abner1 April 29, 2012 2:38 PM EDT

Fodaoson wrote:


> If atheism is not a belief or religion, why do atheists seek an audience on BELIEFNET?


Because while atheism is not a belief or a religion, many of those who do follow religions have incorrect or even dangerous beliefs about atheism.  When people regard you as foolish, evil, malicious, weak, lecherous, incapable of love, emotionless, unhappy, etc. just because you don't believe in their religion, it's best that someone be there to point out their errors and keep them from spreading them to others.


> BNs mission” Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path


> that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness.”


> If there is no spirit, no soul, then there is no spiritual path to sleek.


No, but there are alternatives to those spiritual paths that work just as well for us in bringing comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness, and it is best if we are here to describe those paths for those who are interested in learning, and to defend ourselves from charges of being incapable of comfort, hope, clarity, strength and happiness by those who are not interested in learning but only in attacking.


If we do not defend ourselves, many might be deceived into thinking such charges were true.


> If there is no belief there is nothing to discuss. 


But the beliefs of theists about atheists do exist and give us plenty to discuss.

Flag mainecaptain April 29, 2012 2:57 PM EDT

Apr 29, 2012 -- 1:55PM, Ken wrote:


Apr 29, 2012 -- 1:44PM, Fodaoson wrote:


If atheism is not a belief or religion, why do atheists seek an audience on BELIEFNET?


We're the opposition.




That and perhaps to set the facts straight, after all the lies spread about atheists.

Flag JCarlin April 29, 2012 5:04 PM EDT

Apr 29, 2012 -- 1:44PM, Fodaoson wrote:

BNs mission” Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness.”


  Beliefnet provides alternatives to religion for those whose spiritual path is so rutted and full of potholes that it no longer serves their needs.  Many come to DA to discuss their spirtual path ruts and potholes et. all.  in the hope that perhaps we can show them an alternative that works.  Many of us have been down that path and found our way off it. 


Over the years we have seen a few get help, and suspect that others have as well although they don't come on the board to thank us.  Many of the arguments we get here seem to be desperate attempts to save Faith.  While we don't proselytize, there is nothing to sell, we can help others find an alternative path. 


Atheism is an alternative to failed dogmatism.


Flag steven_guy April 29, 2012 6:26 PM EDT

Apr 29, 2012 -- 1:44PM, Fodaoson wrote:


If atheism is not a belief or religion, why do atheists seek an audience on BELIEFNET?



A number of non-religious issues are discussed on Beliefnet. Atheism is one of them. Atheism is not a belief or religion. We should know, we're atheists.


Apr 29, 2012 -- 1:44PM, Fodaoson wrote:

BNs mission” Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness.”



But they also devote space to the alternative.


 

Apr 29, 2012 -- 1:44PM, Fodaoson wrote:

If there is no spirit, no soul, then there is no spiritual path to sleek.



Of course. There is no spiritual path to seek. However, many people believe that there is and  other forums cater to that belief.


Apr 29, 2012 -- 1:44PM, Fodaoson wrote:

If there is no belief there is nothing to discuss. 



The fact that you seem impervious to our explanations of what atheism actually is gives us something to discuss. Atheism appears to very misunderstood in the United States of America and it also appears that many theists resist our explanations of atheism. There is also the issue of religions' attempts to interfere with society and people's freedom.

Flag Fodaoson April 29, 2012 6:46 PM EDT

To  oppose, to offer an alternative or to “set the record straight” requires a belief system or opinion (another way of saying “I believe that…”)  therefore SOME  of the postings by atheists are annulled.

Flag steven_guy April 29, 2012 6:57 PM EDT

Apr 29, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Fodaoson wrote:


To  oppose, to offer an alternative or to “set the record straight” requires a belief system or opinion (another way of saying “I believe that…”)  therefore SOME  of the postings by atheists are annulled.




Ay-yayay!


Atheism is not a belief system.


Just like not stamp collecting is not a hobby and bald is not a hair colour.

Flag JCarlin April 29, 2012 7:20 PM EDT

Apr 29, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Fodaoson wrote:

To  oppose, to offer an alternative or to “set the record straight” requires a belief system or opinion.


Only for those so attached to belief that they can see no alternative. 

Flag mainecaptain April 29, 2012 7:30 PM EDT

Apr 29, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Fodaoson wrote:


To  oppose, to offer an alternative or to “set the record straight” requires a belief system or opinion (another way of saying “I believe that…”)  therefore SOME  of the postings by atheists are annulled.




No. Set the record straight from the LIES theists tell about atheists. That does not require a belief system, so no atheists postings are not annulled, except by the foolish.


Everyone has an opinion. An opinion is not a belief system or religion. And offering an alternative is not offering a belief system or religion either. It is simply showing that one can live a happy fulfilled life without religion or god beliefs.


It is that very notion you posted, that has to be corrected.



Try again.

Flag Idbc April 29, 2012 7:55 PM EDT

Howdy Steven


Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:28PM, Idbc wrote:

Atheism IS a belief that that god has no existence.  



Do you actively believe that the Tooth Fairy has no existence?




I do not actively believe that the Tooth Fairy has in the physcial-material univserse.


I do actively disbelieve that the Tooth Fairy has existence in the physcial-material universe.


Since the Tooth Fairy does not have a physcial-physcial material existence science cannot prove or disprove the existence-non-existence of the Tooth Fairy.  


There are no scientists that I am aware of that has a "belief" in the existence of the Tooth Fairy. 


There are few if any adults who  are not scientist believe in the Tooth Fairy.   


There are however scientist and other adults who do believe in the existence of god, certainly more who believe in the existence of the Tooth Fairy. 


However what the Tooth Fairy and god have in common is that their are stories about their existence. 


But the Tooth Fairy does have an existence metaphysically.  There are stories about the Tooth Fairy.  


I am not aware of any philosopher who offers any reasons for the existence of the Tooth Fairy. 


I am not aware of any theologian or a religion that involve the Tooth Fairy.  


Comparing the Tooth Fairy with god is  like comparing apples with oranges.  Both apples and oranges are fruits but different fruits.  


Both the stories about god and the tooth fairy even if both are fictional they are still very different.   It would be like the difference between a fairy tale and a myth. 


I am also not aware of any philosopher who would try to make a reasoned argument for tooth fairies.     


   


 


 




 

Flag Blü April 29, 2012 8:00 PM EDT

fodaoson



If atheism is not a belief or religion, why do atheists seek an audience on BELIEFNET?


I find it interesting to compare and contrast the belief=opinion of atheism with with religious versions of belief=faith.


BNs mission” Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness.”


Atheism fits easily into that, once the word 'spiritual' is seen to refer to certain emotional states - awe, tranquility, meditative self-awareness, attunement to the natural world, poetry and metaphor, music, altered consciousness &c - with no supernatural connotation or denotation.



If there is no spirit, no soul, then there is no spiritual path to sleek.


If you're looking for a path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness then truth, in my view, is an advantage. 


If there is no belief there is nothing to discuss.


Our visitors are of another view.


Flag steven_guy April 29, 2012 8:01 PM EDT

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:55PM, Idbc wrote:


Howdy Steven


Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:28PM, Idbc wrote:

Atheism IS a belief that that god has no existence.  



Do you actively believe that the Tooth Fairy has no existence?




I do not actively believe that the Tooth Fairy has in the physcial-material univserse.


I do actively disbelieve that the Tooth Fairy has existence in the physcial-material universe.


Since the Tooth Fairy does not have a physcial-physcial material existence science cannot prove or disprove the existence-non-existence of the Tooth Fairy.  


There are no scientists that I am aware of that has a "belief" in the existence of the Tooth Fairy. 


There are few if any adults who  are not scientist believe in the Tooth Fairy.   


There are however scientist and other adults who do believe in the existence of god, certainly more who believe in the existence of the Tooth Fairy. 


However what the Tooth Fairy and god have in common is that their are stories about their existence. 


But the Tooth Fairy does have an existence metaphysically.  There are stories about the Tooth Fairy.  


I am not aware of any philosopher who offers any reasons for the existence of the Tooth Fairy. 


I am not aware of any theologian or a religion that involve the Tooth Fairy.  


Comparing the Tooth Fairy with god is  like comparing apples with oranges.  Both apples and oranges are fruits but different fruits.  


Both the stories about god and the tooth fairy even if both are fictional they are still very different.   It would be like the difference between a fairy tale and a myth. 


I am also not aware of any philosopher who would try to make a reasoned argument for tooth fairies.  



The Tooth Fairy, like God, is an imaginary being and honest philosophers know that there are no reasoned arguments for either of them or any other imaginary being.


Flag Ken April 29, 2012 8:03 PM EDT

Apr 29, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Fodaoson wrote:


To  oppose, to offer an alternative or to “set the record straight” requires a belief system or opinion (another way of saying “I believe that…”)  therefore SOME  of the postings by atheists are annulled.



To oppose requires nothing more than an opponent.

Flag Abner1 April 29, 2012 8:28 PM EDT

Fodaoson wrote:


> To  oppose, to offer an alternative or to “set the record straight” requires a belief system


> or opinion (another way of saying “I believe that…”) 


Not at all.  For example, being a foreigner is an alternative to being a member of a nation; that doesn't being a foreigner a belief system or an opinion.  It doesn't even make the foreigners a group; rather, it's a catchall for every person who isn't a member of that nation.


And, as with atheists, there are lots of people who hate foreigners, feel superior to them, and spread lies about them (i.e. "Only people in our country love freedom; all those foreigners hate freedom.").  A foreigner hearing such dangerous and malicious claims might well want to correct them; that still doesn't make being a foreigner a belief system.

Flag Ken April 29, 2012 10:25 PM EDT

Apr 29, 2012 -- 10:04PM, steven_guy wrote:


Ken, Abner, Blü, Wohali and Main, I am constantly in admiration of your postings.



Awww! You're pretty admirable yourself.

Flag mainecaptain April 29, 2012 10:35 PM EDT

Apr 29, 2012 -- 10:25PM, Ken wrote:


Apr 29, 2012 -- 10:04PM, steven_guy wrote:


Ken, Abner, Blü, Wohali and Main, I am constantly in admiration of your postings.



Awww! You're pretty admirable yourself.




Thank you :) and I agree with Ken Smile

Flag costrel April 29, 2012 11:27 PM EDT

Apr 29, 2012 -- 1:44PM, Fodaoson wrote:

If atheism is not a belief or religion, why do atheists seek an audience on BELIEFNET? BNs mission” Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness.”


 If there is no spirit, no soul, then there is no spiritual path to sleek.


If there is no belief there is nothing to discuss. 


So what exactly is the purpose then of the U.S. News and Politics board on Beliefnet then, where you and I spend so much of our time? Or for that matter, any of the many politics, news, and current events boards? Is politics all about belief, religion, spirit, soul, and a spiritual path? I don't think so. In fact, in the U.S., we have a separation of Church and State. And as you know well, if we talk too much about religion over on the politics boards, the threads are either locked or sent to a more appropriate board. 


And atheists have much to discuss. Just look at the way that atheists criticize the Catholic Church for its sex abuse scandal, which certain Christians want to deny even exists. And look at the way that atheists criticize young earth creationism. And look at the way that atheists legitimately criticize Christian theocratic politicians like Santorum. Should I continue? 

Flag wohali April 30, 2012 3:53 PM EDT

Steven, you ain't no slouch...........

Flag steven_guy April 30, 2012 5:45 PM EDT

Thanks guys. I learn from you all. 

Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook