Atheists/Agnostics/Skeptics! What are your sources of knowledge?

[lewisnotmiller]

I don't quite understand. There isn't a single religion of which I am aware that defines itself solely by reading and interpreting a sacred text (literally or otherwise). Why does adapting itself and breathing beyond the confines of a book mean it was made up by clueless people? I'm really not following your logic here.

It's not too important, but out of curiousity, would Quranism meet your definition?

 

[dgirl1986]

I currently read blogs, news sources (the non conventional ones as well as abc.net.au), I listen to many atheist and humanist podcasts and I hope to download some audio books by hitchens, dawkins and the like.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I currently read blogs, news sources (the non conventional ones as well as abc.net.au), I listen to many atheist and humanist podcasts and I hope to download some audio books by hitchens, dawkins and the like.

Heya, dgirl. Harris may be more up your street than Hitchens or Dawkins, I think? Anyway, my advice (which is worth precisely nothing) is to mix in some varied perspectives to your reading. You probably are, and you're just shorthanding here, but I wouldn't go with a steady diet of atheist literature, for example.

Yep, I know this makes me sound like an arrogant tool, so feel free to ignore, slap, or otherwise roll your eyes at me.

 

[dgirl1986]

Heya, dgirl. Harris may be more up your street than Hitchens or Dawkins, I think? Anyway, my advice (which is worth precisely nothing) is to mix in some varied perspectives to your reading. You probably are, and you're just shorthanding here, but I wouldn't go with a steady diet of atheist literature, for example.

Yep, I know this makes me sound like an arrogant tool, so feel free to ignore, slap, or otherwise roll your eyes at me.

I heard and read some comments he was making on the episode of bill maher where ben affleck was on and it was a bit off putting. Doesnt mean I cant give it a whirl.

Lol well I know a lot about paganism, christianity, hinduism and buddhism so the next natural step was humanism and atheism

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I heard and read some comments he was making on the episode of bill maher where ben affleck was on and it was a bit off putting. Doesnt mean I cant give it a whirl.

Lol well I know a lot about paganism, christianity, hinduism and buddhism so the next natural step was humanism and atheism

All makes sense. For me, Hinduism is a massive black box, and I really should dive in at some point. The reason I suggested Harris is that he is much more open to spirituality than Dawkins or Hitchens, who are more hardcore materialists.
I personally like Hitchens most, but it's more because I find his delivery very interesting, and think he is a good debater. Plus, I'm as spiritual as a cup of coffee. Anyhow, don't discount Harris. (if I'm reading your worldview right)

Maybe try this as a taster, see if it makes any sense/interest? Like I said, not really my thing, but he does at least think and speak about some issues I think you also think about.

 

[dgirl1986]

All makes sense. For me, Hinduism is a massive black box, and I really should dive in at some point. The reason I suggested Harris is that he is much more open to spirituality than Dawkins or Hitchens, who are more hardcore materialists.
I personally like Hitchens most, but it's more because I find his delivery very interesting, and think he is a good debater. Plus, I'm as spiritual as a cup of coffee. Anyhow, don't discount Harris. (if I'm reading your worldview right)

Maybe try this as a taster, see if it makes any sense/interest? Like I said, not really my thing, but he does at least think and speak about some issues I think you also think about.

Hitchens was english wasnt he? From little clips Ive heard he was very eloquent in the delivery of his messages.

Thanks for that I will check it out when I get home from work

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Hitchens was english wasnt he? From little clips Ive heard he was very eloquent in the delivery of his messages.

Thanks for that I will check it out when I get home from work

Yes, English, but he lived in America, and was very interested in American politics, etc.
He has a whole raft of work which is NOT about religion, but religion is where he ultimately became best known worldwide I guess. Certainly took a lot of time as his life progressed.

I guess some see him as arrogant, or blame him for not being an expert in everything he debates about, but I think they're missing the point a little, to be honest.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Everybody could respond. Theists or Non-theists.

Regards

I don't have simply one source.

 

[Riverwolf]

Experience; that of myself, and others shared with me.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Everybody could respond. Theists or Non-theists.

Regards

Perception. That which I can perceive (whether I read it, hear it, am hit in the face by it, etc.) I can then learn of/from/by.

 

[LuisDantas]

The believers of Religion have sources of knowledge like Word of Revelation from G-d in addition to the other sources available to the Atheists.

Regards

Scripture fulfills a very specific role. Nor is it really unavailable to non-believers.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Everybody could respond. Theists or Non-theists.

Regards

Empirical and verifiable data.

 

[Quintessence]

It's not too important, but out of curiousity, would Quranism meet your definition?

I'm honestly not familiar enough with it to say. But in general, it doesn't seem possible for a system of belief and practices to rest solely upon an unchanging text. Human life and existence is too dynamic for that; even differences in interpretation would produce variation.

 

[LuisDantas]

This thread is interesting in that it lampshades the challenges of holding a belief in a creator God in the Abrahamic mold.

One of the main ones is: how come not everyone perceives that creator God as existing and being the same as ours?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I'm honestly not familiar enough with it to say. But in general, it doesn't seem possible for a system of belief and practices to rest solely upon an unchanging text. Human life and existence is too dynamic for that; even differences in interpretation would produce variation.

Yes, in practice I suspect that is true, and there seems to be a level of individuality or difference amongst Quranists. But their intent (if not their practice) is to rest their entire religion on a book. And in contrast to Christianity, the book is supposed to represent the direct word of God.

Anyway, it's a side-track to the OP, so I'll stop. Just thought it worth raising the flag that there are groups that try to tie everything back solely to a book, imho.

 

[Sapiens]

Everything but religious works, bodice rippers, manga, Chaucer, fashion magazines, & academic journals.

Why not Chaucer?

 

[Revoltingest]

Why not Chaucer?

Nothing against the guy, but I just never got around to reading him.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Nothing against the guy, but I just never got around to reading him.

That's my grandfather that you're talking about!!

 

[Revoltingest]

That's my grandfather that you're talking about!!

The guilty think all talk is of themselves.
Geoffrey Chaucer

 

[jonathan180iq]

Granddad knows best.