"Humans are born as atheists"

[1137]

No, I'm sorry, but they aren't. I have no idea where this idea could have come from other then poor reasoning or ignorance of psychology. The entire concept of there being or not being a god is abstract, and requires abstract reasoning. An object that cannot think about such questions, such as plants, would never be considered atheists with intellectual honesty. Yet babies are the same way, entirely mechanistic and bound to conditioning et al, unable to even understand that their parents can be wrong about things. They can only even understand the concept of right and wrong, on their own, once abstract reasoning begins to develop (7-12). I'd go as far as to say a first grader rambling about Jesus is not even Christian, they're simply running on a program. If I make a program that always responds to questions from an atheistic perspective, the program and computer are still not atheists.

Beside the simple fact that kids have no idea what we're even really discussing, the fact is that atheism requires making a judgement call. I'm not saying anything more than atheists consciously weight evidence and arguments to decided there probably is no god, so please save the straw men. A baby cannot make a judgement call, as we said they can't even really grapple with morality and values anyway. If you explain the cosmological argument to a baby, and explain why it's invalid/valid, they won't understand. They're incapable. They're going to **** their pants then wander the room aimlessly. While I'd love to make a joke right now, this is not what the atheist does.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Some people believe that babies are atheists. I find their belief in this to be as flawed, deep and rigid as any religious person's belief in god. Go figure.

 

[Ouroboros]

Considering the story about the chimps that have some strange rituals that some have interpreted as sacred, it wouldn't be against nature or evolution if we actually have evolved to be born with a sense of "hidden agents behind events" thinking. Doesn't mean the thinking is right, but it's not against a concept of being born with a brain pre-wired to suspect hidden dangers or "agents" in nature. In other words, we might be born with the concepts in place.

 

[Demonslayer]

Of course babies are atheists. You have to teach someone to believe in a God. You think if you left a baby in a vacuum they would somehow know about Yahweh and Jesus, or Allah or Buddha? Of course not.

Each and every one of you religious people has been indoctrinated into the religion of your parents. Without the early teaching of your religion, you wouldn't be in your religion and you wouldn't miss it.

To the few of you that have converted, you still wouldn't have been whatever your original religion was without early indoctrination.

If we didn't teach babies about Jesus, one generation later there would be zero Christians.

 

[Jumi]

Considering the story about the chimps that have some strange rituals that some have interpreted as sacred, it wouldn't be against nature or evolution if we actually have evolved to be born with a sense of "hidden agents behind events" thinking. Doesn't mean the thinking is right, but it's not against a concept of being born with a brain pre-wired to suspect hidden dangers or "agents" in nature. In other words, we might be born with the concepts in place.

That's still quite a few steps away from god beliefs.

 

[Ouroboros]

That's still quite a few steps away from god beliefs.

A god belief is a belief in a hidden agent. A being that's hidden from sight that influences nature around us. So the step might be there, but not very far. If (notice "if"), and only if, we're born with this "hidden agent" part in our brain. Not saying that we are, but it is possible, and from the study of the apes, perhaps it started much earlier than australopithecus. Not saying that this is so. It's a speculation. And it would be completely natural.

 

[Jumi]

A god belief is a belief in a hidden agent.

But a belief in a hidden agent is not necessarily a god belief.

A being that's hidden from sight that influences nature around us.

Sometimes groups of smaller beings, fairies and such are believed like my ancestors believed in. Yet they are not called gods.

So the step might be there, but not very far. If (notice "if"), and only if, we're born with this "hidden agent" part in our brain. Not saying that we are, but it is possible, and from the study of the apes, perhaps it started much earlier than australopithecus. Not saying that this is so. It's a speculation. And it would be completely natural.

Pattern recognition was there, sure.

 

[`mud]

Here we go again !
Been there, done that !
~
'mud

 

[Skwim]

Of course babies are atheists.

Gotta disagree. Atheist have knowledge of what they are denying, babies do not. They are no more atheists than they're a-atheists, which would amount to being theists.


.

 

[Demonslayer]

A god belief is a belief in a hidden agent. A being that's hidden from sight that influences nature around us. So the step might be there, but not very far. If (notice "if"), and only if, we're born with this "hidden agent" part in our brain. Not saying that we are, but it is possible, and from the study of the apes, perhaps it started much earlier than australopithecus. Not saying that this is so. It's a speculation. And it would be completely natural.

A lot of what you say is true, there have been studies on the evolutionary benefits of religious belief.

But at best what it does to a tabula rasa human infant brain is wire in some vague deistic idea of a God. Theism is a little more specific, usually includes the idea of a very specific God, one who created the universe and is present in our day to day lives.

Babies do not have theistic beliefs based on brain chemistry or any 'hidden agent' part of our brain. And if they are not theists they are...say it with me folks...atheists.

the·ism
ˈTHēˌizəm/
noun
noun: theism

1. belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures.

 

[Demonslayer]

Gotta disagree. Atheist have knowledge of what they are denying, babies do not. They are no more atheists than they 're a-atheists, which would amount to being theists.

The default is atheism. You need to develop a specific idea of God, what that being is like, etc. to be considered a theist. babies have no such ideas until they are taught.

 

[Ouroboros]

A lot of what you say is true, there have been studies on the evolutionary benefits of religious belief.

But at best what it does to a tabula rasa human infant brain is wire in some vague deistic idea of a God. Theism is a little more specific, usually includes the idea of a very specific God, one who created the universe and is present in our day to day lives.

Sure. But isn't deists considered theists? Or is deist something in between?

Babies do not have theistic beliefs based on brain chemistry or any 'hidden agent' part of our brain. And if they are not theists they are...say it with me folks...atheists.

the·ism
ˈTHēˌizəm/
noun
noun: theism

1. belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures.

But if deistic belief is something that's not theism or atheism, then we have a middle category that doesn't belong. Is deism a form of atheism?

Anyway. It's neither here nor there. There are many different ideas and thoughts about this, and we've discussed it so many times before. There's no need to rehash all 500 threads from last year. So I'm not going to respond to anymore posts in this thread.

 

[Altfish]

No, I'm sorry, but they aren't. I have no idea where this idea could have come from other then poor reasoning or ignorance of psychology. The entire concept of there being or not being a god is abstract, and requires abstract reasoning. An object that cannot think about such questions, such as plants, would never be considered atheists with intellectual honesty. Yet babies are the same way, entirely mechanistic and bound to conditioning et al, unable to even understand that their parents can be wrong about things. They can only even understand the concept of right and wrong, on their own, once abstract reasoning begins to develop (7-12). I'd go as far as to say a first grader rambling about Jesus is not even Christian, they're simply running on a program. If I make a program that always responds to questions from an atheistic perspective, the program and computer are still not atheists.

Beside the simple fact that kids have no idea what we're even really discussing, the fact is that atheism requires making a judgement call. I'm not saying anything more than atheists consciously weight evidence and arguments to decided there probably is no god, so please save the straw men. A baby cannot make a judgement call, as we said they can't even really grapple with morality and values anyway. If you explain the cosmological argument to a baby, and explain why it's invalid/valid, they won't understand. They're incapable. They're going to **** their pants then wander the room aimlessly. While I'd love to make a joke right now, this is not what the atheist does.

So are you saying that they are born believing in God?

Because if not, they are atheists until they are indoctrinated by parents, religious leaders, etc.

 

[viole]

No, I'm sorry, but they aren't. I have no idea where this idea could have come from other then poor reasoning or ignorance of psychology. The entire concept of there being or not being a god is abstract, and requires abstract reasoning. An object that cannot think about such questions, such as plants, would never be considered atheists with intellectual honesty. Yet babies are the same way, entirely mechanistic and bound to conditioning et al, unable to even understand that their parents can be wrong about things. They can only even understand the concept of right and wrong, on their own, once abstract reasoning begins to develop (7-12). I'd go as far as to say a first grader rambling about Jesus is not even Christian, they're simply running on a program. If I make a program that always responds to questions from an atheistic perspective, the program and computer are still not atheists.

Beside the simple fact that kids have no idea what we're even really discussing, the fact is that atheism requires making a judgement call. I'm not saying anything more than atheists consciously weight evidence and arguments to decided there probably is no god, so please save the straw men. A baby cannot make a judgement call, as we said they can't even really grapple with morality and values anyway. If you explain the cosmological argument to a baby, and explain why it's invalid/valid, they won't understand. They're incapable. They're going to **** their pants then wander the room aimlessly. While I'd love to make a joke right now, this is not what the atheist does.

I agree.

Belief in imaginary agents seem to be an evolutionary adaptation.

Ciao

- viole

 

[The Mormonator]

If babies are born with souls of awaiting angels, then they most certainly are not atheists.

 

[Skwim]

The default is atheism. You need to develop a specific idea of God, what that being is like, etc. to be considered a theist. babies have no such ideas until they are taught.

Do babies believe there is no god? Do babies deny there is a god? Do babies reject the claim that god exists? Do babies dismiss the idea of god? Do babies challenge the notion of god?

These are all things atheists commonly do. Name one thing babies do that puts them in the same camp as atheists. (It should be pointed out that mere lack of belief doesn't necessarily make an atheist; dogs and cats also lack a belief in god.)


.

 

[Skwim]

If babies are born with souls of awaiting angels, then they most certainly are not atheists.

FYI, This

is one highly irritating signature.

​

Makes me want to skip right past your posts.


.

 

[Jumi]

FYI, This

is one highly irritating signature.​

It's worth it to have an image blocker in your browser.​

 

[Jumi]

If babies are born with souls of awaiting angels, then they most certainly are not atheists.

Can't remember being an angel. How would you know you are one?

 

[Yerda]

The only reason this ever comes up, I think, is so that we atheists can assume we hold the default position and constantly lob demands for evidence every time we see something we don't agree with (or suspect it is the kind of thing that we probably don't agree with). We're devious like that.