Are atheists irrational?

[ADigitalArtist]

I for example am not supportive of abortion although if somebody pays for it out of their own money I am fine with it. I do not believe it is a human right that should be paid for.

This alone was an issue that I was called a Christian for.

I also do not accept these redefining of gender considering its classical use in biology. This is something that has resulted in me being either shunned or compared to Hitler.

I also called religion a natural part of human existence and I expressed my enjoyment of Islamic philosophy and I was repeatedly called a questioning atheist or closeted Muslim.


I actually only have one atheist friend who either shares my views or accepts them. We disagree on veganism and cultural appropriation and that is about it.

*raises hand* I, as an atheist speaking only for myself, am able to disagree with you on those topics without calling you a theist in disguise or Hitler.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

"Atheism, the word, wouldn't exist if there was no theism"

I thought it would be clear enough that I am not talking about the word itself.

If atheism is a lack of belief or no belief in gods, then theism is a direct response to that.

I thought it would be clear enough that the etymology of the word atheism would have as much to do with the topic as the concept the word describes.

If theism is the belief in gods then atheism is a direct response to that. I'm not seeing why that wouldn't work both ways.

 

[Notanumber]

I was brought up being told not to discuss religion and politics in public, which is why I like coming on here.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

I thought it would be clear enough that the etymology of the word atheism would have as much to do with the topic as the concept the word describes.

If theism is the belief in gods then atheism is a direct response to that. I'm not seeing why that wouldn't work both ways.

People are not born believing in gods. Furthermore humankind had to invent the concept of gods; they invented them as a response to living is a godless existence.

 

[Nakosis]

Atheism is a rational position to me yet every atheist I know is so irrational.

As I see it, personal morals isn't rational. They are based on feelings, what you feel to be right. Feelings are very complicated. Some of it is genetic, some of it's experience, culture/upbringing. It's no wonder that you like Islamic philosophy.

What you like, what you dislike, that's part of who you are. You can't expect other folks to have the same like/desires as you. You have you morals, other folks have theirs. That's fine as long as you don't go expecting to force these personal moral views on each other.

Group morals are a different matter. People on the left or right might have some expectation of your group morals if your part of that group.

Atheism just means you don't believe in a God. That's it. Some groups may see that as immoral but that's their problem. Everything else is pretty much open to your personal feelings. As long as you're not intentionally trying to hurt someone else and not insisting your own personal morals on everyone else, it's all good in my opinion.

If you see transgenderism as wrong for yourself, that's fine. As long as you accept others may see this as ok. Their not hurting you, you're not hurting them. Let them be happy and pursue your own happiness.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

People are not born believing in gods. Furthermore humankind had to invent the concept of gods; they invented them as a response to living is a godless existence.

That would be the aforementioned "default position" argument. Many if not most theists do not take it as a given that humans aren't born believing in gods, or that it ever was in human nature to not believe in gods and so it will always develop naturally. Telling them 'nuh uh' is both ineffective and unproductive, which is why I stopped participating in those debates.
But anyway, like has been said, there's be nothing for atheists to speak about on the subject of atheism if theism didn't exist. So it is, in that sense, a response to theism.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

That would be the aforementioned "default position" argument. Many if not most theists do not take it as a given that humans aren't born believing in gods, or that it ever was in human nature to not believe in gods and so it will always develop naturally. Telling them 'nuh uh' is both ineffective and unproductive, which is why I stopped participating in those debates.
But anyway, like has been said, there's be nothing for atheists to speak about on the subject of atheism if theism didn't exist. So it is, in that sense, a response to theism.

I don't really care what theists think, it is more than abundantly clear that gods are not real.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I don't really care what theists think, it is more than abundantly clear that gods are not real.

And I'm sure they'd tell you much the same in reverse: 'I don't really care what atheists think, it's more than abundantly clear that gods are real.' And it'd be about as poiniant and effective, productive and illuminating as when you said it.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

And I'm sure they'd tell you much the same in reverse: 'I don't really care what atheists think, it's more than abundantly clear that gods are real.' And it'd be about as poiniant and effective, productive and illuminating as when you said it.

I am sure they would, but I happen to be right, and yes I know they would say that as well.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I am sure they would, but I happen to be right, and yes I know they would say that as well.

Yep, they would. And probably roll their eyes for good measure.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Yep, they would. And probably roll their eyes for good measure.

All the eye rolling in the world won't make God appear.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

All the eye rolling in the world won't make God appear.

And all the statements like that won't make your case convincing to them or make it seem less self-indulgent and ego-driven. Especially right after saying something like 'I don't care what they think, I'm right.' Why are you even here then if not to just hear yourself talk, metaphorically speaking?

 

[Twilight Hue]

If atheism is a lack of belief or no belief in gods, then theism is a direct response to that.

No. Atheism unlike theism, is not an ideology. Theism is however an ideology, not a response, by which atheism followed thereafter.

Did someone once say out of the blue, "I don't believe in any God", before the thought of God came about? How can that even work?

You could say theism responded back when told there was no belief in God, you would be right in saying so, but the ball was on the theists side first and foremost.

Theists made the assertions. Atheists followed those assertions. Point and counterpoint followed thereafter.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

And all the statements like that won't make your case convincing to them or make it seem less self-indulgent and ego-driven. Especially right after saying something like 'I don't care what they think, I'm right.' Why are you even here then if not to just hear yourself talk, metaphorically speaking?

"And all the statements like that won't make your case convincing to them or make it seem less self-indulgent and ego-driven."

So? I don't care about convincing people gods are not real, and they are fee to think whatever they want about me.

 

[Sha'irullah]

As I see it, personal morals isn't rational. They are based on feelings, what you feel to be right. Feelings are very complicated. Some of it is genetic, some of it's experience, culture/upbringing. It's no wonder that you like Islamic philosophy.

What you like, what you dislike, that's part of who you are. You can't expect other folks to have the same like/desires as you. You have you morals, other folks have theirs. That's fine as long as you don't go expecting to force these personal moral views on each other.

Group morals are a different matter. People on the left or right might have some expectation of your group morals if your part of that group.

Atheism just means you don't believe in a God. That's it. Some groups may see that as immoral but that's their problem. Everything else is pretty much open to your personal feelings. As long as you're not intentionally trying to hurt someone else and not insisting your own personal morals on everyone else, it's all good in my opinion.

If you see transgenderism as wrong for yourself, that's fine. As long as you accept others may see this as ok. Their not hurting you, you're not hurting them. Let them be happy and pursue your own happiness.

I sort of left out details, my mistake. I do not think many of these things are wrong. I just question their validity or usefulness in social progression. Questioning is the primary reason skepticism even exist and yet I as a skeptic am persecuted by skeptics for being skeptical. This only makes me think many atheists are ideological instead of skeptical which makes it no worse than any other religion. The whole reason I left religion is to get away from this and I left one of the most ideological religions possible.

No. Atheism unlike theism, is not an ideology. Theism is however an ideology, not a response, by which atheism followed thereafter.

Did someone once say out of the blue, "I don't believe in any God", before the thought of God came about? How can that even work?

You could say theism responded back when told there was no belief in God, you would be right in saying so, but the ball was on the theists side first and foremost.

Theists made the assertions. Atheists followed those assertions. Point and counterpoint followed thereafter.

Theism is not an inherent ideology. All it requires is a belief but religion is a hole other animal

 

[1137]

Atheism is a response to theism.

No, both are discrete stances.

 

[1137]

If theism was never introduced and no one ever mentioned the concept of God first, would atheism even be around ?
See the irrationality?

How could atheism not be a response?

How can you be an atheist without understanding theism or contemplating the possibility of it? Are you really willing to equate atheism and ignorance? While most theists would happily oblige, I know too many respectable atheists who don't lack belief in the way an ignorant man, a child, or rock would.

 

[Twilight Hue]

How can you be an atheist without understanding theism or contemplating the possibility of it? Are you really willing to equate atheism and ignorance? While most theists would happily oblige, I know too many respectable atheists who don't lack belief in the way an ignorant man, a child, or rock would.

Atheism wouldn't even be around if the ideology of theism never surfaced. There's nothing there to be ingorant about.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No, both are discrete stances.

Hardly.

 

[Valjean]

If theism was never introduced and no one ever mentioned the concept of God first, would atheism even be around ?
See the irrationality?

How could atheism not be a response?

Atheism isn't a response to anything. You don't need to be aware of God to lack a belief in Him. If no-one ever mentioned the concept of God then I expect everyone would be an atheist.

Do you believe in the eight-eyed hexapoids of Merak four? Probably not -- (I just made them up).
Is your a-hexapoidism a response to the concept of hexapoids, or did you lack a belief before I mentioned them?
I'll bet you've always been an a-hexapoidist.

Believing in something you have no evidence of is irrational.
Not believing in something you have no evidence of is rational.

Theists believe in something they have no evidence of.
Atheists lack belief in something they have no evidence of.
So which is the rational position?