God? Don't be silly!

[nath]

Explain to me why the analogy doesn't hold up?

I believe in God.
I believe that a man has a full head of hair.

I become aware that everything that has lead me to believe in God has no basis in reality.
I become aware that the man is wearing a wig.

I no longer believe in God.
I no longer believe that the man has a full head of hair.

I can't quite see why you think religion should be immune to this level of thinking?

 

[old.Tohtori]

That doesn't even make sense. If you're going to try and refute a point you could put a little more effort into it.

The default position when it comes to religion/beliefs etc. is to have none. This is how we're born and everything we later believe is taught to us by others. Now given that atheism is the lack of belief in God then it is clearly the default position i.e. that we have when we are born.

You don't choose to have a lack of belief, you can only choose not to believe what others tell you.

It makes sense in a way that everything you've been taught is how you live, sum of all experiences and teachings.

You can't go back to default.

You can choose to drop god/religion from the equation, but otherwise being an atheist is no more "default" then being a buddhist.

And there you go, alst line, choose not to believe. All i've been saying.

Explain to me why the analogy doesn't hold up?

I believe in God.
I believe that a man has a full head of hair.

I become aware that everything that has lead me to believe in God has no basis in reality.
I become aware that the man is wearing a wig.

I no longer believe in God.
I no longer believe that the man has a full head of hair.

I can't quite see why you think religion should be immune to this level of thinking?

Because fact of somenoes hair is not a choice you make, it's "forced knowledge" if you pardon the term.

Atheism is like vegetariaism like i said, in the way that "i choose not to eat meat" or "i choose not to believe this".

If i tell you "i have a full head of hair", you make a choice of believing it or not. Wheather that choice has any basis on reality or how things are, doesn't matter, it's a choice to believe or not. Two sides, one coin.

what i can't understand is the seemingly strong will to keep atheism out of every single possible term.

Not a choice, not a way of life, it's nothing!

Then don't call yourself an atheist, don't call yourself anything.

If you say you're an atheist, you ARE something. Face it.

 

[Scouse]

You can choose to drop god/religion from the equation, but otherwise being an atheist is no more "default" then being a buddhist.

You can choose to take up religion. Babies can't choose to drop it - they never had it.

Simple as that.


Oh. And just call me a liar then, rather than avoiding it and saying my experience is "bull". I'd never stoop so low as to lie just to win an argument on a website...

...and you wonder why atheists roast you for being religious - you're so unable to see their point of view you'd rather believe they were lying to you.

 

[old.Tohtori]

You can choose to take up religion. Babies can't choose to drop it - they never had it.

Simple as that.

Oh. And just call me a liar then, rather than avoiding it and saying my experience is "bull". I'd never stoop so low as to lie just to win an argument on a website...

Oh come on...bull..liar...same thing. You didn't, there were factors in it, previous days, thought process, something lead to it. Maybe a brick to the head for all i know. Everything has a reason, no matter how small.

Babies can't choose sh*t all, but most are taught something and THEN you choose. Everyone chooses.

It's not an unability to see "your side", it's very simple afterall, it's facts. You should know as an atheist what that is.

Everyone chooses these things, dropping something is choosing, taking on something is choosing, calling yourself an atheist is choosing and so forth.


Ah now i see it; an atheist is so hellbent on being against religion and not believe anything, that "choice" and "way of life" or "what i am" becomes a danger to be mistaken as religion.

Maybe you need a backbone to be what you are.

Since we're going down this road...

 

[Krazeh]

Babies can't choose sh*t all, but most are taught something and THEN you choose. Everyone chooses.

Babies start with a lack of beliefs, continuing to maintain that lack of beliefs, i.e. remain an atheist, is not a choice. The only choices are choosing not to take up a belief whether it be christianity, judaism, hindu, islam, buddhist etc.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Babies start with a lack of beliefs, continuing to maintain that lack of beliefs, i.e. remain an atheist, is not a choice. The only choices are choosing not to take up a belief whether it be christianity, judaism, hindu, islam, buddhist etc.

Yes and it's a choice!

Jesus mary and josef...is it SO f*cking unbelievable to be put in some form of "group"?

If you want to be so gods damned individual, stop calling yourselves atheists.

No definition, human, billy...f*cks sake.

This is why i ahte talking to atheists, everything is an attack on person, everything becomes some obscure example of some other religious person, everything becomes an issue about god(while it's not defining in religion) and everything except own views and undisbuted scientific proof becomes nonsense or trolling.

 

[Scouse]

Oh come on...bull..liar...same thing. You didn't, there were factors in it, previous days, thought process, something lead to it. Maybe a brick to the head for all i know. Everything has a reason, no matter how small.

Now you're arrogant enough you're telling me how my life went!

I woke up one day and *realised I didn't believe*. It was shocking. It led to me ditching a girl I'd been seeing for 4 years.

calling yourself an atheist is choosing

I don't choose to call myself an atheist because I know it's a label I'm uncomfortable with. I'm just a normal person. I've already explained where the term "atheist" comes from (page 1, remember, with the maths you ignored) - it was invented by religious people who couldn't understand the concept of people not believing in something.

Fez. I've just realised something. Religious people invented the term atheist because they couldn't understand...

Soz Toht. You'll never get it. Without the experience, you can only guess at what it means - which is why you don't get it.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Now you're arrogant enough you're telling me how my life went!

I woke up one day and *realised I didn't believe*. It was shocking. It led to me ditching a girl I'd been seeing for 4 years.

I don't choose to call myself an atheist. I'm just a normal person. I've already explained where the term "atheist" comes from - it was invented by religious people who couldn't understand the concept of people not believing in something.

Fez. I've just realised something. Religious people invented the term atheist because they couldn't understand...

Soz Toht. You'll never get it. Without the experience, you can only guess at what it means - which is why you don't get it.

And like i said, something lead to it. You made a choice to accept that you don't believe, if it was a "shock", then you thought about it and came to a conclusion. Choice.

So you're special, you don't call yourself anything, why are you arguing the atheist side? You're sure as hell arguing about "don't call atheism a religion, it's insulting" on page 1.

Like i said, and i'll return to it, it's a f*cking meme to be different.

 

[DaGaffer]

It makes sense in a way that everything you've been taught is how you live, sum of all experiences and teachings.

You can't go back to default.

Except you have gone back to "default". You had to work it out, weigh up the evidence, but the net result is the same. The only element of choice involved is the choice to believe your own conclusions, but that's a pretty semantic distinction; its like saying you choose to breathe.

You can choose to drop god/religion from the equation, but otherwise being an atheist is no more "default" then being a buddhist.

And there you go, alst line, choose not to believe. All i've been saying.

Except it is more default for all the reasons stated by countless posts. No-one is born Buddhist. And you're jumping on a word out of context.

Because fact of somenoes hair is not a choice you make, it's "forced knowledge" if you pardon the term.

I don't even know what this means, but I think you're implying that the knowledge obtained through direct observation (the man's hair) is different to the knowledge obtained through deductive reasoning (the odds of God), and because you've used different methods to draw your conclusions, one outcome isn't a choice and the other is.

Atheism is like vegetariaism like i said, in the way that "i choose not to eat meat" or "i choose not to believe this".

And you keep using that analogy and everyone keeps batting it out of the park; the two things are not analogous; the only way they could be comparable would be if you said the atheist thought "I choose not to lie to myself", and I don't think many atheists articulate their thought processes in those terms, but that's the only "choice" they're making.

If i tell you "i have a full head of hair", you make a choice of believing it or not. Wheather that choice has any basis on reality or how things are, doesn't matter, it's a choice to believe or not. Two sides, one coin.

Yes it is, but as I said above, only in the sense that one has a choice to ignore the evidence of their own senses and intellect. Personally I don't think that's much of a choice at all, but maybe that's why I'm an atheist and you're not.

 

[Scouse]

why are you arguing the atheist side

Because language is inexact. It is hard to talk about these concepts without using a word to represent some of them. That is why I *explicitly defined* what I meant by "atheist" on the first page.

You choose to ignore that. You continue to ignore it after page after page after page of protestation. It's because you can't grasp the concept.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Yeah dagaffer, still a choice.

No matter how "high horsing" you try to make it sound, it's a choice.

I'm done with this, because no matter how much you say "it's impossible to talk about it with religious people", take a look at this thread and evidence shown here, really LOOK at it and see who tried to discuss it, who attacked views, who didn't listen to other peoples side of it and all that crap.

Take your precious evidence and look at your own damn selves.

Because language is inexact. It is hard to talk about these concepts without using a word to represent some of them. That is why I *explicitly defined* what I meant by "atheist" on the first page.

You choose to ignore that. You continue to ignore it after page after page after page of protestation. It's because you can't grasp the concept.

I can bloody well grasp the concept, it's simple, even if you odn't like it: life without religion. Simple. Done.

What i can't grasp is the complete and utter "to arms" mentality whenever anyone dares say that an atheist is a group term of any sort.

If you really were so "nothing", you wouldn't care about religion.

 

[Krazeh]

Really don't see why you're having such difficulty grasping what is such a simple concept.

Everyone is born atheist, you do not have any beliefs about gods or higher powers. You don't make a choice about that, it's how you are born.

You may then choose to believe in god and possibly at a later date choose to accept that you can't reconcile your beliefs with your experiences and thus stop believing them.

You don't however at this point make another choice to have a lack of beliefs. You simply return to the default human position, i.e. not having any beliefs.

 

[mooSe_]

this thread has turned into a pointless semantic argument where nobody will achieve anything

 

[old.Tohtori]

You may then choose to believe in god and possibly at a later date choose to accept that you can't reconcile your beliefs with your experiences and thus stop believing them.

Many times said, choice, choice, CHOICE.

Choose to accept, choose not to believe...why the HELL can't you grasp that it IS a choice.

this thread has turned into a pointless semantic argument where nobody will achieve anything

Yeah it has, though it only re-enforced my original concept of atheists...same bullsh*t, different excuse.

I dare any of the atheists here to take a look at the thread objectively, i know i lost my temper at the end, which is why i'm not continuing it.

Take a look at the evidence and proof of your actions.

 

[DaGaffer]

Toht, you've spent 11 pages (and other threads) arguing a central thesis that religion and atheism are the same. Everyone who has tried to debate with you has faced the same evasions and the whole argument has come down to a ridiculous semantic discussion about the word "choice". At NO TIME have you made any attempt to justify why your religion, or indeed any religion is real. And before we get into another semantic and pointless argument about the reality of religious organisations, I'm talking about religious tenets and beliefs. WHY would anyone be a Norse? Or a Christian, or a Moslem? If you'd been living in a box all your life and you came out into the world for the first time with no idea what even the word religion meant and religion was presented to you (doesn't matter which one), why should you believe?

You claim to be so concerned about attacks on your beliefs, but the reality is you haven't bothered to articulate them once in this thread.

 

[Scouse]

I'm done with this, because no matter how much you say "it's impossible to talk about it with religious people", take a look at this thread and evidence shown here, really LOOK at it and see who tried to discuss it, who attacked views, who didn't listen to other peoples side of it and all that crap.

That'd be YOU m8. I defined my terms on page 1. With maths. And you ignored them. In fact we're still arguing about them. You even call me a liar when you don't like what I say.

 

[Scouse]

You made a choice to accept that you don't believe, if it was a "shock", then you thought about it and came to a conclusion. Choice.

Just re-read this. Do you now accept that I haven't chosen to "not believe in god", but just chosen to "accept that I don't believe"?

There's a big difference.

Choose to accept, choose not to believe...why the HELL can't you grasp that it IS a choice.

It's two very different choices...

 

[nath]

OK I think we're coming to the end of this thread. Toht, for the most part this thread has remained civil and we've had reasonable discussion. You're now appearing to take a "lalala I'm not listening" stance. Several people have explained why it's not entirely accurate to claim that it's a choice to become an atheist. Why it's not on a par with religion, and yet you're point blank refusing to budge, and you're not coming back with any reasonable arguments as to why.

I have no problem being classed as an atheist, or being grouped as one, that's not the issue here. The issue is that you're claiming that somehow atheism and religion are on equal levels, psychologically. As if the difference between choosing to believe in God and not choosing to believe in God is the same as choosing between a ham sandwich or a chicken sandwich. The two positions are not, in any way, on equal footing.

I'm starting to agree with Scouse, and that it's because you don't really understand atheism. Your religion is so much a part of who you are that you think people who have no spirituality are simply choosing a different outlook. That's simply not how it works, and we're just going round in circles now.

 

[old.Tohtori]

You claim to be so concerned about attacks on your beliefs, but the reality is you haven't bothered to articulate them once in this thread.

I did, you ignored a complete post about how norse beliefs work in this day and age.

And if it was supposed to be about difference between atheism and religion why the attacks, which came mostly from your part?

That'd be YOU m8. I defined my terms on page 1. With maths. And you ignored them. In fact we're still arguing about them. You even call me a liar when you don't like what I say.

Just re-read this. Do you now accept that I haven't chosen to "not believe in god", but just chosen to "accept that I don't believe"?

There's a big difference.

It's two very different choices...

Yes and i never disbuted that there's a difference in that choice, just said it's a choice like any other, as in, by definition of choice, you made a choice.

I don't believe you jsut woke up and ding, you're an atheist(or whatever term preferred), i believe there's a reason there. That's the part i'm disbuting with your story.

OK I think we're coming to the end of this thread. Toht, for the most part this thread has remained civil and we've had reasonable discussion. You're now appearing to take a "lalala I'm not listening" stance. Several people have explained why it's not entirely accurate to claim that it's a choice to become an atheist. Why it's not on a par with religion, and yet you're point blank refusing to budge, and you're not coming back with any reasonable arguments as to why.

I have no problem being classed as an atheist, or being grouped as one, that's not the issue here. The issue is that you're claiming that somehow atheism and religion are on equal levels, psychologically. As if the difference between choosing to believe in God and not choosing to believe in God is the same as choosing between a ham sandwich or a chicken sandwich. The two positions are not, in any way, on equal footing.

I'm starting to agree with Scouse, and that it's because you don't really understand atheism. Your religion is so much a part of who you are that you think people who have no spirituality are simply choosing a different outlook. That's simply not how it works, and we're just going round in circles now.

If you haven't noticed, i'm always civil...i've never attacked another person in ages. Haven't done that here either, not once have i judged you on being an atheist.

I becamse lalala, because like many others, i felt like banging my head against the wall with the word "choice", when in scouses answer you can see it IS a choice, even if there's variation of the choice.

There's a problem alright, that problem is that i didn't claim atheism is a religion, i said it's LIKE religion. YOU took it as "we're not religion!".

And the other problem is in the last part of your post, i explained in detail how religion isn't part of my life, how gods don't effect my life and how my life is effected by a way of life that was back then, and yet you claim that.

Atheism and religion are, on equal footing, in the sense that one is a choice to take in your life, other is a choice of not. Black white, ying yang, plus con, whatever.

And like i said, there's nothing to understand about atheism, hell, i'm an atheist everytime i don't think about afterlife or the gods. It's not that special. It's life without religion/god/gods and so forth.

And if there's anything else in atheism then that, you haven't explained it.

To all:

Like i said; take a look at the thread from a neutral position and notice how YOU might be cause of problems too. Particulary with the "you are" "you think" "you assume" "you live" accusations. Drop that and maybe, it's easier to discuss the TOPIC.

 

[nath]

There's a problem alright, that problem is that i didn't claim atheism is a religion, i said it's LIKE religion.

I couldn't disagree more with this comment. It's not like a religion at all, I won't argue as to why because that would require me to assume what you mean when you say "like". So rather than do that, maybe you could expand on what similarities religion and atheism have, preferably without just saying "they're both choices" as that's very vague.

Specifically, why is there any similarity between forming a belief with no rational/logical basis and... well, not forming a belief based on that.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I couldn't disagree more with this comment. It's not like a religion at all, I won't argue as to why because that would require me to assume what you mean when you say "like". So rather than do that, maybe you could expand on what similarities religion and atheism have, preferably without just saying "they're both choices" as that's very vague.

Specifically, why is there any similarity between forming a belief with no rational/logical basis and... well, not forming a belief based on that.

Choice, to live a certain...
...way to life.
Similarity with other people. Something to talk about.
Set of beliefs(or there lack of).
Your god is science.

There's some.

The initial comment was towards "atheists are as bad as any other people who judge oothers for their choices and way of life" because everyone was ripping on religion.

And as i've said on this thread, god and religion ai't a problem, people en masse are.

 

[ECA]

I believe in the two true gods, bacon and garlic bread.
I can even prove they exist!

 

[Scouse]

Toht, you're saying the same things over and over, stuff like "your god is science".

Hate to say it, but you still don't get it. I'd go so far to say as you can't - because unless you've been there you can't appreciate it. I'm not saying you're stupid - it's analogous to Ian Rush saying "I've scored in front of the Kop, and I can tell you about it, but unless you've been there you'll never know how it feels"...

I understand where you're coming from (I've been there) but soz m8, you're missing my message. I get yours. Completely. That's why I'm convinced you're not capable of appreciating mine.

 

[nath]

Choice, to live a certain...
...way to life.
Similarity with other people. Something to talk about.
Set of beliefs(or there lack of).
Your god is science.

The only non-vague thing in that list is "your God is science". It's entirely not though, and that's a claim often aimed at an atheist perspective. God is omnipotent, mustn't be questioned - just is. There's no proof for it, there's no understanding. God is just God.

Science is all about understanding, about repeatable demonstrable facts. In addition to that when someone posits a theory in science, the best way to prove it is to attack it from every angle imaginable. The more it withstands an attack, the more valid it becomes.

I'd really like you to be very clear about why you think atheism is like religion - so far I don't think you've done more than give a few throw away lines that don't really mean anything.

Toht, you're saying the same things over and over, stuff like "your god is science".

Hate to say it, but you still don't get it. I'd go so far to say as you can't - because unless you've been there you can't appreciate it. I'm not saying you're stupid - it's analogous to Ian Rush saying "I've scored in front of the Kop, and I can tell you about it, but unless you've been there you'll [/i]never[/i] know how it feels"...

I understand where you're coming from (I've been there) but soz m8, you're missing my message. I get yours. Completely. That's why I'm convinced you're not capable of appreciating mine.

That I don't actually agree with. Though my mum is not part of any organised religion, she's quite in to spiritual bollocks. I chat to her quite a bit about this (when she can stomach talking to me about it ) and she does understand atheism, so I don't think you have to be a part of it to understand.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Ofcourse i can't see how an athiest is or feels, that's like asking you to know how i feel as a norse believer. You can't.

That's why i'm asking, trying to define things etc.

I snapped a bit there earlier 'cause usually at that point, i have asmoke and think things through, at work it wasn't possible.

My apologies for that, but otherwise, my opinions stand though.

"Your god is science" i haven't said before, that was just something i thought just now.

I just don't think that atheism is THAT different or "special"(lack of term) as it sounds like, from comments from atheists.

You know? It always sounds like "we're smart, you're not, you're stupid and diluted, we rule."

 

[old.Tohtori]

I'd really like you to be very clear about why you think atheism is like religion - so far I don't think you've done more than give a few throw away lines that don't really mean anything.

I've explained it though.

I said what religion term means to me, way of life etc, and how via that i view atheism in equal ground.

Group of people with certain "thing" could be the simplest of ways to put it.

And yes, atheism is a "thing" too. Otherwise, you wouldn't care about what people said about atheists because you wouldn't be one.

I hear someones an atheist, i think "Ok, this guy doesn't have a religion or belief in god, trusts in science and proven things."

I hear someones a christian, i think "Ok, this guy believes in god, bible, etc."

Equal people, with different views, in certain groups, their way of life. Same without the few tidbits.

 

[TdC]

<mod>

Guys, if the discussion is no longer on-going/on-topic I suggest you present closing arguments.


</mod>

 

[Ch3tan]

but Toht, you STILL have not explained why atheism is like religion. That was the assertion you made, and even after nearly 13 pages I cannot see where you have explained it. This thread is going nowhere if you cannot just state your arguments clearly, without getting lost in silly issues over the word choice.

 

[ECA]

<mod>

Guys, if the discussion is no longer on-going/on-topic I suggest you present closing arguments.


</mod>

Garlic bread is really fucking tasty, requires 10 min prayer in the oven and it miraculously transforms from air temperature and untasty to 2nd best food ever ( behind bacon ).

PRAISE THE LORD! ( bacon ).

 

[old.Tohtori]

but Toht, you STILL have not explained why atheism is like religion. That was the assertion you made, and even after nearly 13 pages I cannot see where you have explained it. This thread is going nowhere if you cannot just state your arguments clearly, without getting lost in silly issues over the word choice.

Read above. Gave it, actually gave it long ago. Funny how i'm told i ignore things

My closing argument is pretty much on that previous answer, to add:

People en masse and judging people are a problem, not religion, belief or god.

Also, people should stop using the "you think/are/act/assume" thing in discussions and discuss the issue, not the person discussing it.