Water Dog wrote: For me it usually just boils down to those identifying as "atheists" being arrogant pricks.
Really?
Water Dog wrote: For me it usually just boils down to those identifying as "atheists" being arrogant pricks.
Jersey Girl wrote:
With regard to atheism in general. I can't know the mind of every atheist, however, but I don't see atheism as a choice. I see it as a progressive falling away of god belief in general until there is no God belief left at all. Atheism is a lack of belief in God. I don't see that as choosing a soft place to land. I see it as God disappearing from the world view and mind of the disbeliever.
Maksutov wrote:It's fascinating to me that there's such a large, vibrant, noisy ex- group for Mormons. A similar sized church group, the Seventh Day Adventists, doesn't have such a large and articulate ex- community.
Does Mormonism produce an unusual number of former members? Does it produce an unusual number of schismatic groups? If so, why?
Res Ipsa wrote:Jersey Girl wrote:
With regard to atheism in general. I can't know the mind of every atheist, however, but I don't see atheism as a choice. I see it as a progressive falling away of god belief in general until there is no God belief left at all. Atheism is a lack of belief in God. I don't see that as choosing a soft place to land. I see it as God disappearing from the world view and mind of the disbeliever.
Get outta this atheist's head!
Meadowchik wrote:As someone leaning toward atheism a year after leaving Mormonism, it is because of authority. It's not just that men are fallible and make mistakes, it's the sheer spiritual violence of one person telling another that they stand between them and god. It is ridiculous. Most rational people would not allow this, if not for the time, tradition, and culture that has aggregated over generations, mythologizing the person and their claims.
If a stranger walks up to you and says, "Come with me, I have a message for you from god. If you don't do what I say you will die," how would you respond?
deacon blues wrote:Meadowchik wrote:As someone leaning toward atheism a year after leaving Mormonism, it is because of authority. It's not just that men are fallible and make mistakes, it's the sheer spiritual violence of one person telling another that they stand between them and god. It is ridiculous. Most rational people would not allow this, if not for the time, tradition, and culture that has aggregated over generations, mythologizing the person and their claims.
If a stranger walks up to you and says, "Come with me, I have a message for you from god. If you don't do what I say you will die," how would you respond?
Good thoughts Meadow.
My next bumper sticker is gonna read "Stomp out Spiritual Violence."
Jersey Girl wrote:So are these folks heading over to the Catholic Church to sign up?
EAllusion wrote:
Atheism is rejection of belief in gods. It doesn't require one to claim they know gods do not exist.
Everyone reading this post knows that there are gods they *don't* believe in, therefore they're an atheist to those believers. So is it arrogant to dismiss Vishnu or Thor? Or more arrogant to believe in them?
Symmachus wrote:That is true to an extent, but beyond mere clinical definition the word has a social life of its own, like it or not. For example, take Mak's comment
EAllusion wrote:Symmachus wrote:That is true to an extent, but beyond mere clinical definition the word has a social life of its own, like it or not. For example, take Mak's comment
I favor defining atheism as how self-described atheists and atheist philosophers prefer to use it with a little deference given to etymology. Happily, that consistently is something to the effect of "lack of belief in gods." I can only thing of one major atheist philosopher, William Rowe, who defends the definition of atheism in terms of belief that God does not exist. (Agnosticism, by contrast, is usually defined by atheists as a position on the possibility of knowledge of God, which corresponds with its historical use.)
I try to emphasize the notion of rejection rather than mere unbelief because I think atheism is an attitude about the idea of a god. This requires one to have heard of the concept of "god" and positively not accept it. I do not, for example, think newborn infants are atheists just because I think they probably do not have belief in deities at that point. When I make this point to fellow atheists, they always agree in my experience. Atheism isn't just nontheism. It's a stance on the idea of theism.
There is a popular idea about atheists, heavily reinforced by polemics against atheists, that contends atheism is belief that God does not exist. Often I see it described as unassaiable certainty that God does not exist. But I don't see why they should get to define the term. This is usually a rhetorical strategy that describes the atheist position as one they think is easier to refute or portray as unreasonable. Agnosticism is usually defined by the very same people as a wishy-washy uncertainty. Atheists who think they have compelling reasons to reject theistic justification are just defined right off the map.