Is Atheism the Easier Position?

[Trailblazer]

Judging by some of the comments it is much much more difficult to be an atheist to some of the atheists. One reason in my opinion seems to be, they have this idea that they are superior in knowledge about every single thing in the whole universe, thus they have to keep up appearances even if they are clueless about something. That is very very difficult. Sometimes you make such blunders you look silly and even childish. But still one must pretend or colour themselves.

It might be more difficult to hold their own on a forum, but I was referring to real life and the actual responsibilities believers have vs. the responsibilities atheists have. We are answerable to God and atheists aren't, or so they believe. We also have teachings, laws, and religious practices to follow and meanwhile atheists are enjoying a life of leisure.

Have you ever heard that ignorance is bliss? Do you think that these atheists know that they look silly and even childish? No, ego prevents them from knowing that.

 

[firedragon]

It might be more difficult to hold their own on a forum, but I was referring to real life and the actual responsibilities believers have vs. the responsibilities atheists have. We are answerable to God and atheists aren't, or so they believe. We also have teachings, laws, and religious practices to follow and meanwhile atheists are enjoying a life of leisure.

Have you ever heard that ignorance is bliss? Do you think that these atheists know that they look silly and even childish? No, ego prevents them from knowing that.

Well. My answer would be that atheists find it harder. I mean that honestly.

1. Some of them actually may find it difficult to openly be atheistic because of their society. But its not universal of course.
2. Almost 20% of atheists are self confessed believers of a higher power which by definition makes them only communicators of an identity, but in their hearts they are not atheists. They also have their societal pressure. Societies in modern times is not only geographically bound, they reach far and wider.
3. The atheists who are militantly evangelical are people like Dawkins, Sam Harris, Hitchens, Krauss etc. They are revered as intellectuals. Thus, even if you have the education and the intellectual level to match up with these prophetic figures you have to always pose as intellectual. Take a simple walk down a religious discussion, lets say in peoples park or in a university classroom, the atheists mannerism and his defiance to accept he does not know something will be evident to you. Its not easy. Just try teaching a classroom for sometime.

Many more IMO.

 

[Justanatheist]

Let me correct my comment. Everyone has a worldview, and some worldviews include or reject certain propositions (such as "God exists"). If your worldview doesn't include (i.e., rejects) certain facts about the world, it is incoherent. That's my point. For example, suppose that in my worldview, I reject the existence of the sun. Clearly there is something wrong with it, even though I don't claim the sun does not exist or that belief in the existence of the sun is a whole worldview.

Yes there are certain facts about the world, however the existence of a god or not is not one of them, it is purely the speculation of the religious.

That's not the question, though. The question is whether your worldview stands up to scrutiny. Whether your friends are religious or not is not relevant to the coherence of your view.

It is perfectly coherent to have no view on the speculations of a great many things especially in a modern democracy. An atheist require no view on the speculations of the religious. It appears to me that the religious do not understand this because the religious cannot comprehend how utterly irrelevant to the world we live in their speculations have become.

 

[Justanatheist]

Have you ever heard that ignorance is bliss? Do you think that these atheists know that they look silly and even childish? No, ego prevents them from knowing that.

It is not ignorance or ego is it apathy, no one cares about your speculations, the religious are like someone who has just discovered a new hobby, constantly going on about it and trying to convince others that Zumba really is needed in their life and how it would improve everything if you just tried it. How utterly irrelevant to the modern world their god is remains beyond their comprehension.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Judging by some of the comments it is much much more difficult to be an atheist to some of the atheists. One reason in my opinion seems to be, they have this idea that they are superior in knowledge about every single thing in the whole universe, thus they have to keep up appearances even if they are clueless about something. That is very very difficult. Sometimes you make such blunders you look silly and even childish. But still one must pretend or colour themselves.

Ever suspect how those tied to some particular religious text look to those who aren't so?

 

[PureX]

Whatever, dude. It sounds like you need to go argue with "strong/positive/hard/gnostic atheists." Virtually all self-identifying atheists don't hold to that type of atheism.

I know. That's why I said most atheist have no idea what atheist even is. And I see that you have no logical objection to make regarding this observation.

So, how about you stop ranting at us, and either talk to us about our actual positions or leave us alone?

I have just clarified the actual position of 'atheism'. And I have also clarified some other positions, like skepticism, indifference, and agnosticism. So what is it you wish to discuss, now that we recognize the differences?

Words are defined by their common usage, so maybe you should go rant at some dictionary companies too while you're at it?

Only confused and dishonest wrongly self-proclaimed "atheists" are misusing the term in this way. I see no reason to kowtow to them, And you don't seem to be offering one.

At this point I really couldn't care less about you or your views on gnostic atheism, because I'm not a gnostic atheist and I don't think I've heard of anyone who is.

I know. That's why so many atheist are trying to hide behind this gibberish about their "unbelief" - because they have no "gnosis" to offer in defense of their atheism.

 

[Justanatheist]

Well. My answer would be that atheists find it harder. I mean that honestly.

1. Some of them actually may find it difficult to openly be atheistic because of their society. But its not universal of course.
2. Almost 20% of atheists are self confessed believers of a higher power which by definition makes them only communicators of an identity, but in their hearts they are not atheists. They also have their societal pressure. Societies in modern times is not only geographically bound, they reach far and wider.
3. The atheists who are militantly evangelical are people like Dawkins, Sam Harris, Hitchens, Krauss etc. They are revered as intellectuals. Thus, even if you have the education and the intellectual level to match up with these prophetic figures you have to always pose as intellectual. Take a simple walk down a religious discussion, lets say in peoples park or in a university classroom, the atheists mannerism and his defiance to accept he does not know something will be evident to you. Its not easy. Just try teaching a classroom for sometime.

Many more IMO.

There is something about non belief that riles the believer in my experience, tell a Christian your a Jew and they will leave you alone 9 times out of 10. But tell them you have no belief and they ask you to justify it. Just look at this forum and look at the number of times "Atheist" is used as a pejorative term, everyone respects others as long as they believe in something! I find it most amusing.

 

[Justanatheist]

I know. That's why I said most atheist have no idea what atheist even is. And I see that you have no logical objection to make regarding this observation.
I have just clarified the actual position of 'atheism'. And I have also clarified some other positions, like skepticism, indifference, and agnosticism. So what is it you wish to discuss, now that we recognize the differences?
Only confused and dishonest wrongly self-proclaimed "atheists" are misusing the term in this way. I see no reason to kowtow to them, And you don't seem to be offering one.
I know. That's why so many atheist are trying to hide behind this gibberish about their "unbelief" - because they have no "gnosis" to offer in defense of their atheism.

What is it about non belief that gets you so animated, why does not having a belief on your speculations affect you? Do you define Hindu to Hindus?

 

[firedragon]

Ever suspect how those tied to some particular religious text look to those who aren't so?

I did not understand your statement MT.

 

[RestlessSoul]

There is something about non belief that riles the believer in my experience, tell a Christian your a Jew and they will leave you alone 9 times out of 10. But tell them you have no belief and they ask you to justify it. Just look at this forum and look at the number of times "Atheist" is used as a pejorative term, everyone respects others as long as they believe in something! I find it most amusing.

A question of perception, perhaps?

My impression of this forum is that, where there is hostility it generally comes from some atheists, and is directed at people of faith (any faith).

I’ve been sucked into a few bad tempered exchanges on here, and they’ve exclusively been with atheists of the belligerent variety. I don’t, however, tarnish all atheists with the same brush. Most are respectful of the opinions of others. Quite a few are not.

 

[firedragon]

There is something about non belief that riles the believer in my experience, tell a Christian your a Jew and they will leave you alone 9 times out of 10. But tell them you have no belief and they ask you to justify it. Just look at this forum and look at the number of times "Atheist" is used as a pejorative term, everyone respects others as long as they believe in something! I find it most amusing.

Well, if you look at the flip side, I believe that atheists have been the most demeaning and insulting which seems like insults is the main argument sometimes. Its so common. I am not saying personal insults, but just you know throwing pejorative terms at religions, scripture, religious people, God, concepts or/and what ever other things one could catch hold of. Atheists in my personal experience have been the most tribalistic and dogmatic. Also they are the ones who mostly speak of things they have no clue of with a lot of assumptions and a no acceptance of a mistake attitude.

I have always found that amusing.

 

[PureX]

I thought I'd comment though it wasn't addressed to me.

Since atheists (well, those I'm referring to) don't have a concept of god/deity it would make no sense to ask evidence for something without any knowledge of some sort of what they need evidence for.

But that's not atheism, that's just undetermined skepticism. If one says "I'm an undetermined skeptic regarding the existence of any gods" we would not then ask them to defend a position they have not yet determined to hold. But if one proclaims themselves to be atheist, they are proclaiming the antithetical position to theism which is the proposition that a God/gods do exist in a way that significantly effects humanity. So, of course, the antithetical to that proposition is that such God/gods do not exist in any way that effects humanity. So if one does not want to be called on to defend atheism, they shouldn't proclaim themselves to be atheist.

If they are atheist, however, they should be prepared and willing to defend their antithetical position to theism, just as they would expect the theist to defend his pro-position.

See how reasonable and sensible this is?

So, the best way to look at it when someone says they don't believe god exists is that they a. have no clue what god is, b. have no clue what criteria one would use to derive that god's existence, and c. how that criteria would best fit the god they are unfamiliar with.

There is nothing to "look at". What one does not believe and does not assert is irrelevant to everyone, including even himself. There is nothing to consider, or discuss. It's empty rhetoric.

The problem is an atheist would need to know what god is in order to determine whether there is such thing as evidence for it to begin with.

The problem, here, is the intent to negate a position in advance of it's being proposed. It's just plain dishonest. Either your mind is open to a proposition or it's not. If you are an undetermined skeptic, then your mind is still open to the theist proposition. If you are an atheist, then your mind is not open (to any theist's proposition). And I find that a great many self-proclaimed atheists are trying to claim both roles at the same time. And that's both dishonest, and frustrating for any theist to try and deal with in discussion.

This is what this thread is trying to address.

I assume there are atheists that genuinely believe there are no gods and if evidence pops up, like you said, they probably wouldn't detect. How do you know the difference between who is a "real" atheist (or theist) and who is not just from the fact they don't believe (or do believe) gods exists?

Well, if they are honest, all I have to do is ask. Unfortunately, many are not. And so I have to try and determine from discussion whether or not their minds are still open to the theist proposition, in some form, or they are just out to negate anything I propose.

I am a theist, and even I do not accept many of the god-concepts that other theists propose. So I don't expect anyone to be open to them all. But an atheist is not going to be open to any of them, because atheism is the determined antithetical position to theism. And the atheist should be honest about this. AND they should be willing to defend their atheism to the same degree and by the same standards that they demand the theist to defend, his.

 

[Justanatheist]

Well, if you look at the flip side, I believe that atheists have been the most demeaning and insulting which seems like insults is the main argument sometimes. Its so common. I am not saying personal insults, but just you know throwing pejorative terms at religions, scripture, religious people, God, concepts or/and what ever other things one could catch hold of. Atheists in my personal experience have been the most tribalistic and dogmatic. Also they are the ones who mostly speak of things they have no clue of with a lot of assumptions and a no acceptance of a mistake attitude.

I have always found that amusing.

Do you find it insulting that I do not believe a god exists, because many believers appear to find it so?
Can you give some examples of what you find insulting and demeaning?

 

[Justanatheist]

A question of perception, perhaps?

My impression of this forum is that, where there is hostility it generally comes from some atheists, and is directed at people of faith (any faith).

I’ve been sucked into a few bad tempered exchanges on here, and they’ve exclusively been with atheists of the belligerent variety. I don’t, however, tarnish all atheists with the same brush. Most are respectful of the opinions of others. Quite a few are not.

Have you ever had a bad tempered debate with an atheist outside of forums, social media etc?

 

[blü 2]

Thats not only corresponding, not causal, it is also an investigators bias along with it also being an absolutely fallacious method to prove something completely irrelevant. To prove that a child is born with "no belief" you have to prove that the child is born with "no belief", not "muslim parents make their kids muslim".

Also how do you correlate that to "birth"? you are making an absurd statement.

If kids are born with belief then they're born with belief in a particular something, not a generalized susceptibility for supernatural beings.

So you're arguing that children are born with a belief distinct from their parents, presumably one that their parents indoctrinate out of them.

But in that case the children, not so much of declared atheists as apatheists, should have no impediment to maintaining those beliefs as they grow, while their parents are entirely indifferent to whether the child believes in something or not.

I'm not aware of any study that's found anything of the kind.

Which is better evidence against children being born with whatever belief you're proposing, than any evidence for.

Incidentally, what religious belief do you say children are born with? As I said, an unspecific susceptibility to God ideas isn't what we're talking about.

 

[firedragon]

Do you find it insulting that I do not believe a god exists, because many believers appear to fins it so?

Of course not. Your system is yours, mine is mine. Its like this. Some of the most sophisticated scholars are atheists. In my world, an insult or whats deemed insulting is not based on ones faith, it is based on what he presents.

Can you give some examples of what you find insulting and demeaning?

You did not understand what I said. And I am not gonna give examples of some insults.

 

[firedragon]

If kids are born with belief then they're born with belief in a particular something, not a generalized susceptibility for supernatural beings.

How do you know that? What evidence to have to prove your conclusion?

 

[Justanatheist]

I believe that atheists have been the most demeaning and insulting which seems like insults is the main argument sometimes.

You did not understand what I said. And I am not gonna give examples of some insults.

I cannot think how I do not understand such a clear statement, looks like you simply do not want to answer the question, you made a statement but do not want to back it up, fine.

Since you do not want to tell atheists what you find insulting and demeaning the chances are they will continue to behave that way, life is like that.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Do you find it insulting that I do not believe a god exists, because many believers appear to fins it so?
Can you give some examples of what you find insulting and demeaning?

No, I am not remotely insulted by the beliefs, or lack of them, of yourself or anyone else when they are different to mine. Why should I be?

Nor am I insulted when my own beliefs are challenged, though it is a little infuriating when people with no idea what those beliefs might be, make assumptions and generalisations about them.

Examples of peoples beliefs, as well as their intelligence and personal integrity, being ridiculed, belittled and demeaned by angry atheists with axes to grind, aren’t hard to find on here. I don’t think there’s much to be gained by me drawing attention to those exchanges, and the handful of posters who seem unwilling or unable to debate in good faith; better if I just avoid engaging with them in future.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Have you ever had a bad tempered debate with an atheist outside of forums, social media etc?

No, can’t say I have tbh.

That’s perhaps why I was so taken aback when it first happened on here.