Secular Aggression

[Willamena]

If we only focus on what we can readily observe, doesn't that exclude the potential for future revelation?

Absolutely not. What we observe is blunt as well as meaningful, and those are the realms where signs are found.

And does proving something make it more comfortable for those who fear the unknown and how to manage their lives?

I can't imagine how it could not.

Without imagining, there would be no discovery of colorless gases. No discovering viruses, or microscopic particles, et al.

That only seeing outwardly is believing.

*thumbs up*

 

[Fool]

Who is aggressive against who? From your link



Has any of the new atheists threatened to prevent believers from practicing or proclaiming their faith in a peaceful manner? In the public square of a democratic state when did criticism of opposing views became a bad thing? Can only the Abrahamics get to piously proclaim how their "good" God will lovingly roast all nonbelievers in eternal Hell from their pews?

Also public policy should not be influenced by private revelations, correct? If one has had a private revelation, who is stopping one from living by it and encouraging others to adopt it? Why would a government follow a private revelation over another? Note,

This modern-day atheism and secularism is advanced by critics of religion,[7] a group of modern atheist thinkers and writers who advocate the view that superstition, religion and irrationalism should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever their influence arises in government, education and politics.[8] The phrase "New Atheism" was coined by Gary Wolf in a 2006 article in Wired magazine.[9]


There are many things I disagree on with them, but I have no reason to demonize a group that so far has not been either a source of violence or harm to either themselves or to others.

i'm not demonizing a group. i'm showing the human condition is possible from both extremes in the guise of different forms. not all atheists are bad and not all theists are good.

i'm pointing out the fact that people at two extremes might look different but they have the potential to act the same.

 

[Valjean]

atheism is a belief system.

Wouldn't a belief system require a belief and a system? Atheism, essentially, is a lack of belief, and there is no system to it.

no, it's a word used to describe a person who doesn't believe in god. doesn't mean they don't have beliefs. a theists foundation starts with a god an atheist without one but that isn't the end of the beliefs. a philosophy is still a belief system.

But it's not a philosophy. It's just the lack of one, specific belief.

you're missing the point, beliefs are all that is required

OK -- but atheism has no beliefs.

 

[LuisDantas]

so an atheist has a lack of belief?

That is what the word means, so yeah.

so you're saying everything an atheist does, or says, is based on Absolute truth?

An atheist is by definition an actual person, not an "elemental of atheism" or somesuch.

 

[Fool]

Absolutely not. What we observe is blunt as well as meaningful, and those are the realms where signs are found.


I can't imagine how it could not.


*thumbs up*

proving another is considered controlling. one doesn't always need to be in control. absolute power destroys absolutely. i have no control except for self. people will be and do what they will and are.

 

[sayak83]

i'm not demonizing a group. i'm showing the human condition is possible from both extremes in the guise of different forms. not all atheists are bad and not all theists are good.

i'm pointing out the fact that people at two extremes might look different but they have the potential to act the same.

What makes new atheist extreme? Please provide your evidence that new atheists have the potential to act like religious fundamentalist terrorists in starting a reign of terror in a quarter of the world.

 

[Willamena]

proving another is considered controlling. one doesn't always need to be in control. absolute power destroys absolutely. i have no control except for self. people will be and do what they will and are.

I don't understand. Proving another what?

You should be in control, whether it's "god" you find in the signs or "truth."

 

[Fool]

Wouldn't a belief system require a belief and a system? Atheism, essentially, is a lack of belief, and there is no system to it.
But it's not a philosophy. It's just the lack of one, specific belief.
OK -- but atheism has no beliefs.

a belief system is as much what it doesn't contain as what it doesn't. an object can only be defined by the denser/finer matter that surrounds it.

atheism has no gods. it doesn't lack belief. i do not believe in ............. is a belief. its a negative belief

 

[Valjean]

everyone has an agenda, some are more self serving that others.

Yes, but atheists' agendas usually have nothing to do with atheism. What would a non-belief's agenda be?
Do disbelievers in unicorns have an agenda? maybe, but it probably has nothing to do with their a-unicornism.

 

[Fool]

I don't understand. Proving another what?

You should be in control, whether it's "god" you find in the signs or "truth."

somethings are not testable, or provable. like constantly requesting someone prove that they love you. a person could hold the disbelief no matter how hard someone proved to them. it's a state of closed mindedness

 

[columbus]

i don't care what its the lack of, its a belief system that lacks a god.

I am not surprised that you prefer to make up stuff and attribute it to people you don't listen to.
It's the religious thing to do. Y'all do that more often than not.
Tom

 

[LuisDantas]

self identifying is the foundation of a belief system

Our point exactly.

people have the potential to be violent, anti-social, and intolerant, no matter their belief system. there are atheists in prison and vice versa. depending on the country of origin dictates the percentages of believers incarcerated

You are in bad need of improving your understanding of atheism.

 

[Fool]

Yes, but atheists' agendas usually have nothing to do with atheism. What would a non-belief's agenda be?
Do disbelievers in unicorns have an agenda? maybe, but it probably has nothing to do with their a-unicornism.

usually is the key word. again not thinking in terms of absolute

 

[Willamena]

somethings are not testable, or provable. like constantly requesting someone prove that they love you. a person could hold the disbelief no matter how hard someone proved to them. it's a state of closed mindedness

It's true that some things are not testable--I know, because I tested it. But my testing it doesn't make it true.

 

[columbus]

thats a belief, yes. whether i believe it or not is irrelevant. that would be your belief.

You have a reason to Believe that 2+3=5 better than empirical science?
Or are you just implying that everybody is a Believer and you don't like Believers except for the ones who Believe your unsupported claims?

You aren't being very clear.
Tom

 

[Fool]

I am not surprised that you prefer to make up stuff and attribute it to people you don't listen to.
It's the religious thing to do. Y'all do that more often than not.
Tom

no its called language and we don't redefine the language to fit the circumstances.

 

[Fool]

Our point exactly.


You are in bad need of improving your understanding of atheism.

this is a belief

 

[Fool]

Wouldn't a belief system require a belief and a system? Atheism, essentially, is a lack of belief, and there is no system to it.
But it's not a philosophy. It's just the lack of one, specific belief.
OK -- but atheism has no beliefs.

disbelief, or not belief, is a lack of belief; which would only allow for truth.

atheism is a belief that there are no gods, or an indifferent belief when considering anything else in relation to another, or something else. thus there could exist nothing beyond the five senses for a strong/positive atheist.

 

[Valjean]

disbelief, or not belief, is a lack of belief; which would only allow for truth.

atheism is a belief that there are no gods, or an indifferent belief when considering anything else in relation to another, or something else. thus there could exist nothing beyond the five senses for a strong/positive atheist.

Some atheists believe there are no gods, but, as has been pointed out repeatedly, the only common feature among all atheists is a simple lack of belief; a suspended judgement pending evidence.

 

[David M]

If we only focus on what we can readily observe.

Who does that? Science is also very much about what can potentially be observed.

The wonder of science is that it pursues what is currently unknown.