I'm trying to discover if 'a lot' of people on this forum are 'hard atheists" IE will state 'there is no god' or 'I believe there is no god "
My perception is that such a position is held by a small minority, not by 'a lot' .
Oh yeah, how many/what percentage approximately is "a lot" ? It's a vague term to me.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Well, for what it's worth, my belief in the god of the bible ranks right up there with my belief in Zeus, Odin, Shiva, and all the other thousands of gods that have ever been created by man. To me, the bible is a jumbled mess of ridiculous nonsense that has been used to control a vast amount of the human population for several centuries. None of it made any sense to me when I was a little kid of seven and eight years old, and it is even LESS credible to me now that I am older and more educated/experienced. In my own humble opinion, it is seriously mind-boggling (and disturbing) that any educated rational adult can read the bible and think, "Wow, this really makes so much sense! I should teach others how wonderful this is!" It really does baffle me.
Now, that being said, as it stands right now, I honestly have NO IDEA whether or not some sort of "higher being" actually exists. And even IF it does exist, until it decides to make itself known to the Human Race, I - quite frankly - don't give a drop of rat's piss what that being may or may not think. Moreover, if that entity turned out to be anything like the god depicted in the bible, then I would have zero respect for it and would certainly not worship it.
So, there you go. I don't know where that ranks me on the "hard-to-soft atheist scale", but I'm honestly not all that concerned about it in the first place.
@Tin man
" Now, that being said, as it stands right now, I honestly have NO IDEA whether or not some sort of "higher being" actually exists."
That's my position too. I call that ' agnostic atheism"; don't believe (atheist) but don't claim to know. (agnostic)
IMO a soft atheist is one who is unwilling to say 'there is no god' or "I believe there is no god" without equivocation.
--it's just a label, and I'm being pedantic because the difference matters to me, although I don't know why it should . Probably something to do with my world view ; it has always been my impression that the vast majority of folks on atheist forums are agnostic atheists . It has alway seemed to me that the position of hard atheist is based on an unfalsifiable claim.
@Cranky Re: "It has alway seemed to me that the position of hard atheist is based on an unfalsifiable claim."
Yep. Pretty much. To me, anybody who makes the statement, "God definitely does not exist," is no different than a theist who states, "God does exist." Keep in mind, that is me knowing the things I know now. Just a little less than three years ago I did not know enough to be able to make that observation. I'm still amazed sometimes at how much I have learned since joining this site.
There are no gods, ghosts, Santa, or Satan. .
Wwwhhhhhaaattt?????? NO SANTA?!?!?!???
@Whitefire13:
Well maybe Santa. I'm a Santa agnostic.
I am an agnostic atheist. I will never claim a god does not exist, but I am not convinced a god or gods exist.
My definition of "god" is: the supreme or ultimate entity of the entire cosmos, having ultimate power and knowledge, who is worshiped (as in Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism) as creator and ruler of the universe.
I apply similar standards as a court of law in determining the validity of any claim.
I do not bend my knee in worship to anyone or anything. If there is a god that demands worship, it is thus an insecure egotistical maniac who is not deserving of respect.
@Cranky: I would agree. I think the longer someone has been an atheist the less likely they are to make an all inclusive statement like "There is no god." Instead you get comments like--- "I have never seen good evidence for a god." "I'm happy to believe in your god if you can prove it exists." etc....
I think it is important to ask any theist... "What are you calling God?" Only then can I make a determination as to whether "that" god exists or not.
I dont believe any claims for any god......so far.
@And old man skirts around the issue exactly like a good atheist would. At no point did he even suggest that there "Is no God!" Gooooood Atheist! This appears to be the most tenable position for a non-believer and it keeps the burden of proof exactly where it belongs, on the theist.
For myself, any man-made ideas of god - 100% do not believe.
If I go all mind-candy and shit I can come up with better ideas, but alas, nothing testable ;)
I do not rule out the idea altogether, just like I don’t rule out aliens, time travellers, alternate realities...
However, once, if ever, these things are “known” they become apart of our natural world.
I’m atheist because “I with-hold belief”. I’m not agnostic because even though it may not be in my lifetime I do think all things can be “known”...I roll with “what we know now” and speculate on what we are in the process of learning or discovering.
@White... Never Mind.... I misread....
"I’m not agnostic because even though it may not be in my lifetime I do think all things can be “known”...I roll with “what we know now” and speculate on what we are in the process of learning or discovering."
That sounds pretty agnostic to me.
I'm very confident that all the current religions, and god images, are fiction. Whatever god(s) might have objective existence, It's certainly not the obviously fictional stories and characters religionists are always going on about. Religion is fiction, and "God" is a character type commonly found in such fiction.
Sorta like "wizard", from Merlin to Harry Potter to Gandalf, wizards exist as characters in fiction. But if everyone stopped caring, wizards would cease to exist. Same with God images, as described by religious believers.
How many gods have there ever been, eventually forgotten, and ceased to exist? Probably more than currently exist. Because gods only exist between people's ears, as far as anybody knows.
But, still. We puny humans don't know everything. I'm confident that Reality is far beyond out ability to understand, so I don't rule out everything.
Tom
@Columbus Re: "Religion is fiction, and "God" is a character type commonly found in such fiction..... I'm confident that Reality is far beyond out ability to understand, so I don't rule out everything."
Nice. I like how you put that. Just so you know, I may end up stealing that and using it myself... *chuckle*...
@Cog...you can read?
White: Reading is one of my favorite pastimes. I can outread anyone on the site, besides, I like to chase the little froggies.
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
I, too, have found that hard atheists are quite unusual. I'm not one.
Generally, I find that there are are far more "confident" atheists. They're not as likely to assert, "There is no God" as they are to assert, confidently, "Your God image is incoherent and irrational."
Which is easy to do if you get well acquainted with the assertions of religionists as a group. It's easy to understand religion if you listen to a Muslim describe Hindu. Or a Presbyterian describe Hellenistic beliefs. Or a Catholic describe Judaism. Or whatever.
Just listen to a hard theist explain how religion is fiction, for the vast majority of "believers" who don't believe in The One True God.
Tom
My personal belief is actually to the contrary, I think deep down the vast majority are 'hard atheists' but being in the public domain that takes the burden of proof.
So most are smart and will make the standard claim in order to ensure theist retain the burden of proof, rather then letting them weasel out of every debate.
@Randomhero: Hmmmm..... I am certainly an "antitheist." I have never liked the words strong or hard outside the bedroom. At the same time, I am not running about making claims that God's do not exist. Some gods, like those of the "deists" are just completely unnecessary.
But I don't know.... around here we see a whole lot of very verbal atheists. Not sure we are representative of the masses. There are a whole lot more lurking and willing to just let the theists go their way. I think you nailed me and some others on the site but are we actually representative of the majority?
@ Cognostic.
"At the same time, I am not running about making claims that God's do not exist."
I am not convinced a god exists, but in my opinion, the evidence for the existence of Spider Man, Bugs Bunny, Santa Clause, and god are the same. Non-existent.
I am a vacillating atheist.
Some days, if I get all warm and cosy and philosophical, I will accept that I can't know everything, therefore can't deny anything.
And then most days I think 'fuck it'; rationality beats probability; the existence of a god (or anything outside quantum mechanics) isn't even presented as a 50/50 proposition; it exists or it doesn't; its heaven or no afterlife.
I am still waiting to witness a bona fide resurrection, miracle, answered prayer or even a visit from a demon. St. Paul got a whole visionary revelation all to himself and he helped murder Christians. I'm not a bastard, just a bad boy, I'll settle for a local miracle. In the meantime I will meander back and forth across my small divide between soft and hard.
edited for sense.
@Grinseed
"Some days, if I get all warm and cosy and philosophical, I will accept that I can't know everything, therefore can't deny anything."
Are you saying you try to be ope minded yet not so open minded that your brains fall out.
Not an easy stance to take. Far easier to be dogmatic and rigid .I was going to say as one grows older. However, observation here and generally suggests the young are easily as rigid and bigoted as the most ancient of us.
I think the word for which I'm groping is human,.
To Cranky,
"Are you saying you try to be open minded yet not so open minded that your brains fall out."
Some might say its too late for that precaution.
"Human" is a good word, but with the inevitable lack of utter and complete knowledge, "balance" is another, if only to prevent the brains slipping out completely.
The issue is I am a keen atheist but a reluctant agnostic. I don't ever expect to witness a miracle, but I am wary of admitting to hard atheism if only to avoid pointless disputes over the impossible burden of proof which in my personal rigid and bigoted dotage I hold I am not at all obliged to provide.
Grinseed - well said. When teaching my boys the idea of “rationality, probability” I used the well known “which came first chicken/egg”
After letting them talk/think...I simply pointed out that one was “potential or probable” and one “is” ... don’t know if this was the “right” approach, but taking into consideration their ages at the time, it helped them to settle information into “probable” and “real”
Of course the little assholes grilled me after that it’s a stupid example :)
Ummm..... I really hate to break the bad news to you White....... "The Egg Came First and that is a scientific fact." No probability and no guess work here at all.
@White
"
Grinseed - well said. When teaching my boys the idea of “rationality, probability” I used the well known “which came first chicken/egg”
OId Playboy cartoon:
A chicken and an egg are lying in bed. Egg is having a post coital ciggy,.
Chicken says wryly; "Well, I guess that answers THAT question."
No, I don't think the cartoonist was trying to be deep. Joke works equally well with chicken or egg.
Cog, you flightless heretic, the Egg did not come first.
As it is written: "In the beginning were the two Eternal Sulphur Crested Cockatoos, male and female were they both. And enjoined they were in the same place as like a frantic swirling feathered clusterfuck. Yea verily it was they who cameth first, culminating in the sacred Climatic Squawk."
It then goes on for three thousand pages detailing the Immaculate Laying and Celestial Incubation which culminates of course in the Big Crack and the Endless Feathering of matter, time and space. Its all there in the Cockatoological Principle which to be honest is really hard to read as it all looks no better than chicken scrawl, but I could recite it in its entirety for your listening pleasure if you have a week or two to spare sometime.
I tried to stop myself from this.
But.....
I see your screen name and picture a Grin, with seed dripping from your chin.
Sorry. I'll behave better in the future.
Probably.
"Cog, you flightless heretic, the Egg did not come first."
Obviously, the egg came first. There were eggs before there were even vertebrates, much less birds. Pick up a textbook before you embarrass yourself further.
Tom
:)
@Grinseed: Another idiotic assertion by an idiotic book. It is a scientific fact that eggs came before chickens. In the beginning there were in fact two Sulfur Crested Cockatoo eggs. Sorry to burst your bubble. EGGS CAME FIRST!
Hi Tom. I confess I first learned about the ascendency of the egg from Ralph Buschbaum's Animals Without Backbones and the marvels of parthenogenesis from S.J.Gould and others but to be frank I have an avian cosmological agenda here to push against the blasphemies of simian Bananaism and Tinpot Cosmic Blue Bunnies. I preach the gospel of the egg despite the crippling burden of cognitive dissonance.
I sense you possess a good deal of knowledge like many good folks here and I look forward to your sharing such information but I assure you true cockatoos are never ever embarrassed. Squawk!
Pages