Are atheists irrational?

[Thehoodedmonk]

Atheism is simply the belief that the claims of gods existing do not have sufficient evidence to be believed.

What "creed"? That is virtually the only necessary thing required for one to be an atheist.

The only way for someone to call a secular "construct" a god is to redefine the word god to include ideas. This is not the normative use of the word god.

If you do not believe a god exists, you are still an atheist, no matter what you choose to call yourself.

how does not believing in a god for lack of evidence contain intellectual contradictions?

I don't believe in "gods" either, does that make me an atheist? I believe one God, the only God. Atheist do not have the ability to understand the one true God, that is why they are atheist. God does not WANT atheist to believe.

 

[LuisDantas]

Stuff that matters? What matters? Civilizations come into being and a lot of people work hard to make it happen, and they work to make it grow, but then the civilization collapses, and all the work, and inventions, and thought, and music and art, and whatever, it is gone.

Do things need eternal existence to matter? I don't think so.

God gave man the laws to keep civilizations going, but men disobeyed God's laws which brought down the civilizations. There is more to religion than just believing in God, one must obey God.

I quite disagree with all three of those claims.

 

[Thehoodedmonk]

you want to talk irrational? christians who not only believe 'god' has a penis but that their 'god' is 'unconditionally loving' while sending most people to eternal suffering in 'hell' (about as massive a contradiction as you can find); buddhist monks who believe those-with-wombs (men-with-wombs - wo-men) are spiritually inferior and must be reborn as males to become 'enlightened', and whose spiritual progress is set back lifetimes by the mere touch of a polluted 'wo-man'; muslims who cover their wo-men from head-to-toe and stone them for the slightest infraction... THAT is irrational !!!

I don't know what "Christians" you been talking to, but there is nowhere in the Christian religion that teaches that God has unconditional love, if you think this then you have been grossly misguided. Where in the world do people get this idea about unconditional love of God? "If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have keep my father,s commandments, and abide in his love." Saint John 15:10. God loves you only if you obey his commandments!

 

[Milton Platt]

I don't believe in "gods" either, does that make me an atheist? I believe one God, the only God. Atheist do not have the ability to understand the one true God, that is why they are atheist. God does not WANT atheist to believe.

One god is still a god, is it not? You're almost there, though.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't believe in "gods" either, does that make me an atheist?

I'm sure that you've come across this convention of the English language where negations use the plural:

"I don't keep parakeets."
"I don't stop for hitch hikers."
"I haven't visited any American states besides California."

I have a feeling you've figured out what people mean when they say those things; apply the same thinking when someone says "an atheist is someone who doesn't believe in gods."

I believe one God, the only God. Atheist do not have the ability to understand the one true God, that is why they are atheist. God does not WANT atheist to believe.

Is that why you're a monotheist? Because all those other gods don't want you to believe?

 

[Thehoodedmonk]

I'm sure that you've come across this convention of the English language where negations use the plural:

"I don't keep parakeets."
"I don't stop for hitch hikers."
"I haven't visited any American states besides California."

I have a feeling you've figured out what people mean when they say those things; apply the same thinking when someone says "an atheist is someone who doesn't believe in gods."


Is that why you're a monotheist? Because all those other gods don't want you to believe?

There aren't any other gods.

 

[Valjean]

There aren't any other gods.

People of a hundred different religions say the same thing.
Why do you say there is one God?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There aren't any other gods.

There you go! I knew you could figure out the grammar.

But monotheism is interesting, because it's kind of the worst of both worlds:

- on the one hand, it has all the logical problems of theism in general.

- on the other hand, except for the one God that the person believes in, it has all the logical of the strongest of strong atheism (i.e. claiming with certainty that no other gods exist).

... and your hands are a bit tied on that second point, since the typical strong atheist arguments for the non-existence of any gods at all aren't available to you, since they'd violate the first point.

Monotheism is pretty logically tenuous. I've never seen anyone give a rational defense of it; I've never seen someone give a reasonable argument for why one god exists AND no others exist, aside from theists who define "God" as something that there's apparently only one of (e.g. the "God is the universe" of pantheism).

When you think about it, monotheism is way more extreme about the non-existence of gods than even the most ardent atheists. Most atheists' position is something like "the evidence for gods is unconvincing, and the time to believe is when we have convincing evidence." You and your fellow monotheists go several steps further; you guys say, effectively "no, no - not only are we unconvinced of those other gods; we KNOW that our God is the only god that exists."

Like I said: it's the worst of both worlds. It has all the problems of theism in general combined with all the problems of strong atheism (and then some).

 

[Guy Threepwood]

As an avid atheist and to the greater degree anti-theist I have been trying for over a year to come to grips with what I believe and stand for. So many atheists prattle about reason and logic while even when I was a Muslim I did the exact same thing although with less intellectual contradictions. The more I speak to atheists and try to understand things that are valued to us like science and pragmaticism I find myself incapable of rationalizing my own atheism.

When I was a Muslim the primary reason I left Islam was because of other Muslims and also become of the ideology yet here I am in something that should be creedless and the minute I question something that is secular I am a public enemy amongst atheists. Just by questioned transgender issues I have been called a fake atheist and closet Christian. I used to cling to being a deist for this very reason as I could never understand the anger I witnessed by atheists, it made no sense to be angry at not religion but at secular ideas.

I witness conservatives, Christians, libertarians and pragmatic thinkers on religion criticize atheist for creating gods out of secular constructs and I can't help but wonder that this is the truth. As of now I am sure this is the truth as I am incapable of finding an atheist who is stringent with his principles and a fervent believer in safeguarding his own morals.

As of now I cannot call myself an atheist anymore. I do not believe in the supernatural yet all I have left is philosophy and all that emanates from it.

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

We all believe in something, the only irrational belief is pretending we don't.

i.e. I don't find atheist beliefs themselves irrational, I used to share them. But I also used to like to think my beliefs were 'default truths' until disproved

 

[Valjean]

We all believe in something, the only irrational belief is pretending we don't.

i.e. I don't find atheist beliefs themselves irrational, I used to share them. But I also used to like to think my beliefs were 'default truths' until disproved

What beliefs were these, that you considered default truths?

 

[Guy Threepwood]

What beliefs were these, that you considered default truths?

materialism, naturalism, spontaneous unguided mechanisms creating our universe etc.. I believed that the burden of proof was all on any other set of beliefs except mine- which means of course I didn't question my own beliefs as I questioned others' it's a very easy comfortable position to take.

 

[Valjean]

materialism, naturalism, spontaneous unguided mechanisms creating our universe etc.. I believed that the burden of proof was all on any other set of beliefs except mine- which means of course I didn't question my own beliefs as I questioned others' it's a very easy comfortable position to take.

So we're born with these disciplines hard wired into our operating system or ROM?

Aren't we born with no sets of beliefs; an empty slate? Aren't all other 'beliefs' downloads?

 

[Guy Threepwood]

So we're born with these disciplines hard wired into our operating system or ROM?

Aren't we born with no sets of beliefs; an empty slate? Aren't all other 'beliefs' downloads?

I wasn't born believing in atheism, I was taught it by parents, teachers, TV- a product of my environment..

 

[McBell]

I wasn't born believing in atheism, I was taught it by parents, teachers, TV- a product of my environment..

how does one "believe in" atheism?

 

[Valjean]

I wasn't born believing in atheism, I was taught it by parents, teachers, TV- a product of my environment..

Atheism isn't a belief. It's a blank slate. It's not a belief in anything.

Try again.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Atheism isn't a belief. It's a blank slate. It's not a belief in anything.

Try again.

sure!

And neither is amaterialism. As an amaterialist, I make no claims, I believe nothing, I simply refuse to believe in materialistic, naturalistic, unguided processes creating the universe and life, until proven otherwise

Anyone can play that game, framing one's belief as a disbelief of the alternative does nothing to alter the belief, it only betrays a desire to avoid trying to defend it!

 

[McBell]

sure!

And neither is amaterialism. As an amaterialist, I make no claims, I believe nothing, I simply refuse to believe in materialistic, naturalistic, unguided processes creating the universe and life, until proven otherwise

Anyone can play that game, framing one's belief as a disbelief of the alternative does nothing to alter the belief, it only betrays a desire to avoid trying to defend it!

Another big steaming pile of bull ****.

I am an atheist simply because theists have been unable to convince me that their chosen God(s) exist.

So my atheism is nothing more than an epic failure on your part to support your claim God(s) exist.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

sure!

And neither is amaterialism. As an amaterialist, I make no claims, I believe nothing, I simply refuse to believe in materialistic, naturalistic, unguided processes creating the universe and life, until proven otherwise

Except your "amaterialism" isn't up for debate - your theism is.

Anyone can play that game, framing one's belief as a disbelief of the alternative does nothing to alter the belief, it only betrays a desire to avoid trying to defend it!

1) I's not a game, it's just literally how atheism is defined.
2) Are you kidding me? Have you read these forums? Atheists are actively defending their positions all the time, so obviously this definition isn't assumed in order to somehow "avoid defending it". It's used to correctly identify where the burden of proof lies.

You claim there is a thing, atheists don't claim that there is a thing. The burden of proof is on the person who says "a thing exists" rather than on the person who say "I don't believe a thing exists".

Basic logic, threepwood. Learn it.

 

[osgart]

the argument is always in terms of theism. atheism is just a conviction that no God or gods exist.

There are plenty of other more worthy beliefs and convictions to debate.

such as non physical reality, and the apparent design in nature.

I am an atheist with spiritual convictions. nothing supernatural is my spirituality.

The God argument is way over done.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

the argument is always in terms of theism. atheism is just a conviction that no God or gods exist.

There are plenty of other more worthy beliefs and convictions to debate.

such as non physical reality, and the apparent design in nature.

I am an atheist with spiritual convictions. nothing supernatural is my spirituality.

The God argument is way over done.

You're officially the first atheist I've ever met to use that definition of "atheist." Generally, I only ever see it used by theists who are trying to portray atheists as foolish.

But if you say that you're an atheist and that atheism is a conviction that there are no gods, then you must know what a god is.

So what's a god? Can you give the whole definition? If you have a conviction that no gods exist, then you must have figured out a way to identify the entire set of gods and say "none of these things exist."

How did you do it? I've only ever been able to identify gods by a specific list of gods and non-gods that I realize is incomplete (e.g. Thor, Jehovah and Zeus are gods; Superman, angels and toasters aren't). I haven't been able to come up with any rhyme or reason for what is and isn't a god, so I've never been able to make any claims about "all gods" or "no gods." How did you solve this problem?