Can atheists reconcile with theists?

[ManSinha]

This is a somewhat lighthearted attempt to try and find common ground around the fringes of beliefs of both -
Turn on the captions if you cannot understand his accent
Fair warning - he does not answer the question in a straightforward way - but that is typical of the way he interacts - his goal as stated is to encourage self realization rather than provide answers - belief versus knowledge

The Hindu astika schools of thought span duality and monotheism all the way to atheism - and really allow for personal customization of belief. I think some of what this gentleman is referring to, comes from Samkhya

Any and all thoughts welcomed

 

[Salvador]

There's zero evidence of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, highly benevolent supernatural deity; so then, there's good reason for us to be atheists rather than theists.

 

[ManSinha]

There's zero evidence of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, highly benevolent supernatural deity; so then, there's good reason for us to be atheists rather than theists.

Did you even take a few moments to watch the linked video? I was asking specifically in the context of what he says in there
But thank you for the reply

 

[Skwim]

.

Can atheists reconcile with theists?

No, because theists make an assertion of fact, and, for the most part, atheists say they lack a belief in the "fact."

.

 

[Salvador]

Did you even take a few moments to watch the linked video? I was asking specifically in the context of what he says in there
But thank you for the reply

I did not view said linked video... Do you mind either elaborating or briefly summarizing in your own words the significance of what has been stated in this 10 minute video that I didn't care to watch?

 

[LuisDantas]

.


No, because theists make an assertion of fact, and, for the most part, atheists say they lack a belief in the "fact."

.

I don't think so.

Theism is about belief, not fact. At least for some people.

There isIMO no inherent reason for serious disagreement to come between god-believers and unbelievers.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

This is a somewhat lighthearted attempt to try and find common ground around the fringes of beliefs of both -
Turn on the captions if you cannot understand his accent
Fair warning - he does not answer the question in a straightforward way - but that is typical of the way he interacts - his goal as stated is to encourage self realization rather than provide answers - belief versus knowledge

The Hindu astika schools of thought span duality and monotheism all the way to atheism - and really allow for personal customization of belief. I think some of what this gentleman is referring to, comes form Samkhya

Any and all thoughts welcomed

I watched the video, and I have to say that the "enlightened" he was talking about was ultimately revealed to be a mischievous liar - I would have stopped trusting anything he had to say right there and found myself another direction to put my attention to. The words "enlightened" or "enlightenment" are thrown around so often, and are couched in such ambiguity as to render them almost meaningless - I honestly slightly distrust anyone who uses them almost immediately and await further evidence of their disposition.

I also disliked his last statement. It was nothing but specious clap-trap. "The longing to know will arise within you. If the longing arises, the seeking arises. If the seeking arises the possibility of knowing exists." The bolded/underlined bit isn't necessarily true for all subjects, and requires a very broad presumption. I try to avoid talk like this, and don't always succeed, so I don't judge too harshly for things like this unless it is obvious that the person is just trying to sound wise. And in this case, I have to go with my gut and say that that is exactly what was going on.

In the end, theists and atheists can and have been known to reconcile differences and remain bonded. It can happen, it does happen, but on the specific views that divide them there will probably always be struggle. Their getting along depends a lot on how badly they feel the need not to be challenged.

 

[Skwim]

I don't think so.

Theism is about belief, not fact. At least for some people.

Just to be clear, it's the assertion of fact.

There isIMO no inherent reason for serious disagreement to come between god-believers and unbelievers.

And that's pretty much what I was wondering; what is there to be reconciled?


So, Mansinha, what needs to be reconciled?

.

 

[Salvador]

I don't think so.

Theism is about belief, not fact. At least for some people.

There isIMO no inherent reason for serious disagreement to come between god-believers and unbelievers.

Atheists take the logical default position that any magical fairies likely don't exist until proven otherwise; whereas, theists take the nonsensical default position that their version of some magical fairy likely exists until proven otherwise.

 

[ManSinha]

I did not view said linked video... Do you mind either elaborating or briefly summarizing in your own words the significance of what has been stated in this 10 minute video that I didn't care to watch?

He tries to separate belief in what someone has been told by another versus personal exploration to discover facts oneself - it is a short - ish video and I admit that even amongst what I said - there are broad areas of overlap that may confuse the issue

I watched the video, and I have to say that the "enlightened" he was talking about was ultimately revealed to be a mischievous liar - I would have stopped trusting anything he had to say right there and found myself another direction to put my attention to. The words "enlightened" or "enlightenment" are thrown around so often, and are couched in such ambiguity as to render them almost meaningless - I honestly slightly distrust anyone who uses them almost immediately and await further evidence of their disposition.

I also disliked his last statement. It was nothing but specious clap-trap. "The longing to know will arise within you. If the longing arises, the seeking arises. If the seeking arises the possibility of knowing exists." The bolded/underlined bit isn't necessarily true for all subjects, and requires a very broad presumption. I try to avoid talk like this, and don't always succeed, so I don't judge too harshly for things like this unless it is obvious that the person is just trying to sound wise. And in this case, I have to go with my gut and say that that is exactly what was going on.

In the end, theists and atheists can and have been known to reconcile differences and remain bonded. It can happen, it does happen, but on the specific views that divide them there will probably always be struggle. Their getting along depends a lot on how badly they feel the need not to be challenged.

Thank you for taking the time to watch and post your thoughts - this guy is known for sticking to the middle - he almost never takes a stand but tries to boil issues down to the practicality of the times

So, Mansinha, what needs to be reconciled?

What the person in the video is saying - from my understanding - is that perhaps it is best to leave a small area of one's mind open to possibilities that one might otherwise reject. That may be the (albeit slim) area of overlap

 

[ChristineM]

In some aspects and in some cases, yes, for example i know several theists who accept the big bang, abiogenesis and evolution as reality. Have no problem with having an annual flu shot and are not hypocritically using cell phones and computers to diss science..

However i dont know of any atheist who will accept god magic.

 

[Quintessence]

Reconciliation does not require common ground. It would help tremendously if we stopped insisting otherwise. Besides, "atheist" and "theist" tell us next to nothing about someone. They are useless descriptors that only tell us "this person believes in something called god (which can be literally anything) and this person doesn't" sans additional context.

 

[Stanyon]

It's easy, live and let live
or not

 

[Windwalker]

There's zero evidence of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, highly benevolent supernatural deity; so then, there's good reason for us to be atheists rather than theists.

But do you ever have any doubt? The point is there is a difference from beliefs, and knowledge.

 

[Windwalker]

.
No, because theists make an assertion of fact, and, for the most part, atheists say they lack a belief in the "fact."
.

Theists are asserting a belief. Atheists are doing the same. Neither is knowledge.

 

[Windwalker]

I also disliked his last statement. It was nothing but specious clap-trap. "The longing to know will arise within you. If the longing arises, the seeking arises. If the seeking arises the possibility of knowing exists." The bolded/underlined bit isn't necessarily true for all subjects, and requires a very broad presumption.

Knowing is a subjective experience. Therefore it is true for everyone.

 

[ManSinha]

But do you ever have any doubt? The point is there is a difference from beliefs, and knowledge.

Theists are asserting a belief. Atheists are doing the same. Neither is knowledge.

I do not know if you watched the video but you seem to have captured the essence of what he is trying to say (I guess)

 

[Vinayaka]

Sure they can find common ground ... but it's outside religious belief.

 

[Windwalker]

I do not know if you watched the video but you seem to have captured the essence of what he is trying to say (I guess)

Yes, I did watch it, and I agree with him. For someone with experience, it moves beyond belief. It all is simply a matter of how you choose to talk about it. That was the point in the story of how you can say God doesn't exist, as well as God does exist. It's past the point of belief at that point. Theism and atheism, are opposite sides of the same belief coin.

 

[LuisDantas]

Sure they can find common ground ... but it's outside religious belief.

Gee, don't tell that to me, or to @Aupmanyav , please.