Are atheists monists?

[ChristineM]

Why or why not? Do atheists think existence came from one thing, or a no thing? I think one thing seems unlikely enough I wouldn't speculate more.

Atheism : disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Any other speculation is a waste

 

[idav]

Oh that. That's what I term mental masturbation. Seriously, who can say, but again, what does it really matter?

Monism gets rid of the mind body issue. Do you think it's a duality like Plato describes? It's a serious philosophical conundrum.
Dualism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

 

[idav]

I happen to be a materialist and an atheist. While I understand that at present, materialism is a philosophical position. . . fMRI scans and neuroscience continue to provide evidence to support that position, and if I were a dualist, idealist, etc. . . . I'd find myself feeling more hemmed in by the oodles of contrary research.

In either case, that position has little to do with my atheist position.

You say it's not important to atheism yet you described exactly why I would assume atheists are monists. Your particular leanings away from dualism and idealism.

 

[idav]

No, I guess we are not generally monists, or even interested enough in the question to decide whether we are or should be monists or oppose monism.

It is not a practical question to ask.

I had not even heard of monism until someone told me that he understood Buddhism to be monist. I still wonder why he would think so.

Have your heard of the theory of everything? What do you think if it?
Theory of everything - Wikipedia

 

[Kuzcotopia]

You say it's not important to atheism yet you described exactly why I would assume atheists are monists. Your particular leanings away from dualism and idealism.

My atheism is a rejection of the claims that a god/gods exist, based on their inability to fulfill a burden of proof. It is not a positive claim.

My materialist (and monist) philosophical position is a positive claim about the way I believe the world works. There is evidence that can support it, but the matter is not, and perhaps cannot, be settled.

I suppose that's how I see the difference in how those things are unrelated.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I know I am. Atheist Materialist Monist. In my view, they go hand-in-hand when you're being intellectually honest.

Heh....whereas I wouldn't categorize myself as a materialist (in the true sense of the word) and still see myself as intellectually honest.
As for monism, who cares? It's hardly a definitive question for an atheist.

(Just mho)

 

[idav]

Heh....whereas I wouldn't categorize myself as a materialist (in the true sense of the word) and still see myself as intellectually honest.
As for monism, who cares? It's hardly a definitive question for an atheist.

(Just mho)

So atheists haven't answered where we come from even so they might say we didn't come from "God"? Did existence come from any thing, that thing would be god. Monotheism.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

So atheists haven't answered where we come from even so they might say we didn't come from "God"? Did existence come from any thing, that thing would be god. Monotheism.

I'm an agnostic atheist. I'd simply say 'buggered if I know' to the question 'where did we come from'.
If you want to define the unknown as God, then sure, we came from God. To me, that would lead to far more confusion than clarity (and so lacks utility), but I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

Suffice to say, pantheists aren't monotheists, nor are panentheists, and they seem far closer in philosophy to your point than 'monotheists'.
Then again, I never understand the aim in these discussions.

 

[Revoltingest]

Why or why not? Do atheists think existence came from one thing, or a no thing? I think one thing seems unlikely enough I wouldn't speculate more.

It's like asking a fish why it's a bear....inapplicable.

 

[idav]

I'm an agnostic atheist. I'd simply say 'buggered if I know' to the question 'where did we come from'.
If you want to define the unknown as God, then sure, we came from God. To me, that would lead to far more confusion than clarity (and so lacks utility), but I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

Not the unknown, just the answer to that particular question. Buggered if I know makes sense.

Suffice to say, pantheists aren't monotheists, nor are panentheists, and they seem far closer in philosophy to your point than 'monotheists'.
Then again, I never understand the aim in these discussions.

You mean to say pantheists are the true monistic theists.
The purpose in discussing is to evolve into yodas, without having to use chopped up English.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Not the unknown, just the answer to that particular question. Buggered if I know makes sense.

You mean to say pantheists are the true monistic theists.

Nope, I don't. However, that might very well be true. Monism (as you can tell by my posts) is not something I have invested much time or thought into. Only so many topics each of us can consider, and I find history more interesting.

The purpose in discussing is to evolve into yodas, without having to use chopped up English.

Heh. I like that answer. My comment wasn't meant to be personal, btw. Happily you don't seem to have taken it so. I am just epically confused when atheism is mistaken or assessed as a world view. It can be part of a world view, but the key difference is that there will be a complete lack of consistency amongst atheists in terms of general philosophies and beliefs.

I've been told I'm a hardcore materialist many times, since I'm an atheist, so that must be true. I've also been told I'm scientific and rational, since...ya know...atheist.
I mean, that whole 'Brights' movement made me want to throw up in my Wheaties, to be honest.

So anyway...I'm all for the search for wisdom. Assuming it's that you're after, rather than becoming 2 foot tall with green skin and large ears.

 

[LuisDantas]

Have your heard of the theory of everything? What do you think if it?
Theory of everything - Wikipedia

I have heard of it, but it never quite caught my attention. So I don't have a true opinion about it.

 

[Polymath257]

'Substance' refers to a foundational somethingness. It's not a technical term, but a common language term.
Substance (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Exactly. So how do I determine if, say, an electron is a 'substance'?

If, for example, there are multiple 'fundamental particles', does that mean that monism is false? What if they are all quantum particles and thereby share many properties? Or do we consider them all to be 'material' (whatever that means) and thereby claim all things are material and thereby monism is correct?

My issue is that these terms aren't well enough defined to lead to meaningful discussion.

 

[Polymath257]

Monism gets rid of the mind body issue. Do you think it's a duality like Plato describes? It's a serious philosophical conundrum.
Dualism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Do I think that mind and consciousness are ultimately physical processes? Yes, I do.

Does that make me a monist?

 

[David T]

A

Why or why not? Do atheists think existence came from one thing, or a no thing? I think one thing seems unlikely enough I wouldn't speculate more.

Atheist are southern baptists without jesus all truth starts with their cranium. Ironically atheism expertisism on the topic god is totally reliant on the church. It has zero framework of reference independent of church thus treats church as athoritative inspite of historical emperical evidence. Atheists never say or even realize the topic may be true the church is confused becUse they have the same confusion which they co equally -"beleive" is clarity exactly like the church.

 

[Polymath257]

Would Lenin's definition of Matter as " the objective reality given to us by sensation" help? It may seem broad but its intended as a basis for arguing about the source of knowledge as being outisde the mind rather than the structure of atoms, the conversion of atomic matter into energy, etc. The reason he chose that definition was specifically to seperate materialism from atomism, so that the conception of matter would not be superceded by scientific advance about the structure of matter.

So matter is anything that science can discover? I guess I can live with that.

I'm not sure what other alternatives there are. For example, is math 'objective reality'? It doesn't appear to be 'given to us by sensation', so if it is objective, it wouldn't be matter, right?

So, if I allow math, does that make me a non-monist?

 

[Polymath257]

Have your heard of the theory of everything? What do you think if it?
Theory of everything - Wikipedia

It is a goal. It is far from being obtained.

 

[idav]

It is a goal. It is far from being obtained.

Does it solve a theory for god?

 

[idav]

It's like asking a fish why it's a bear....inapplicable.

I'm generally under the impression that what science finds should have religious ramifications. Not that we'd expect everyone to actually carry out all the studies.

 

[Polymath257]

Does it solve a theory for god?

As Laplace said "It has no need of that assumption".