The Atheist Perk

[Orias]

You have to understand though that there is a form of trust in consideration of truth when one takes a label unto themselves.

 

[DinChild]

You have to understand though that there is a form of trust in consideration of truth when one takes a label unto themselves.

Ah! I want to go to bed! Why do we assume that atheists ever assumed a label? I'd be just as happy without the damn label. I don't care about it. In fact, all atheists wouldn't give a crap about being apart of some club of non-believers. There is no trust. We don't have large, ornate buildings where we all get together once a week to compare clothing. Rejection (denial, as we've accepted) suspends atheists from the scrutiny of theistic qualities.

 

[Orias]

Ah! I want to go to bed! Why do we assume that atheists ever assumed a label? I'd be just as happy without the damn label. I don't care about it. In fact, all atheists wouldn't give a crap about being apart of some club of non-believers. There is no trust. We don't have large, ornate buildings where we all get together once a week to compare clothing. Rejection (denial, as we've accepted) suspends atheists from the scrutiny of theistic qualities.

Thats exactly my point, its sophisticate enough now to the point where they mind as well start doing that and handing out hand outs.

You shouldn't care to take a label onto yourself because it is misleading at most, and doesn't do anything besides tempt salesmen to try and sell each other their nonsense.

Like you said before

 

[DinChild]

Thats exactly my point, its sophisticate enough now to the point where they mind as well start doing that and handing out hand outs.

You shouldn't care to take a label onto yourself because it is misleading at most, and doesn't do anything besides tempt salesmen to try and sell each other their nonsense.

Like you said before

While I agree that labels are ridiculous; I'll refrain from taking said advice from someone who has his own label. Atheist's only label exists because we are, as the definition implies, FREE OF DEITIES. It's not a label so much as, we're free from labels. We are A=not Theists=Supreme-being-oriented. You could also call us by our first or last names, if that helps. I guarantee none of us would care I'll concede it is a label, but only so far as eliminating us from the confusion of religion is concerned. Barring that, we're just who we are for the very limited and fleeting time we have left on this planet.

 

[Orias]

While I agree that labels are ridiculous; I'll refrain from taking said advice from someone who has his own label. Atheist's only label exists because we are, as the definition implies, FREE OF DEITIES. It's not a label so much as, we're free from labels. We are A=not Theists=Supreme-being-oriented. You could also call us by our first or last names, if that helps. I guarantee none of us would care I'll concede it is a label, but only so far as eliminating us from the confusion of religion is concerned. Barring that, we're just who we are for the very limited and fleeting time we have left on this planet.

While many people here know that I practice Satanism, it is hardly a label I use to describe myself in terms of when people ask what I believe in, I simply say, "me". But aside from that, yea its kind of hard to do considering humans use labels to learn by association.

You can't really have a label that makes you free from labels heh, but I understand where you're trying to go with this.

 

[DinChild]

While many people here know that I practice Satanism, it is hardly a label I use to describe myself in terms of when people ask what I believe in, I simply say, "me". But aside from that, yea its kind of hard to do considering humans use labels to learn by association.

You can't really have a label that makes you free from labels heh, but I understand where you're trying to go with this.

Absolutely right. I'm sure there's always a label people throw on me. It's usually *******. Oh well. I need to sleep. Tooooo much beer.

 

[Orias]

Absolutely right. I'm sure there's always a label people throw on me. It's usually *******. Oh well. I need to sleep. Tooooo much beer.

Dude you keep saying that haha.

 

[DinChild]

Dude you keep saying that haha.

lol shut up! I just did in another thread too, I promise! this is it!

 

[tumbleweed41]

Atheism is a lack of belief in a god or gods. Not simply a "lack of belief" So yes, it is entirely possible to be both an atheist and a Buddhist.

I know that, which is why I said you can't be atheistic about Buddhism if you don't believe that atheism is a belief.

How can one be "atheistic about Buddhism"?

. Since science, religion and art are all really branches of the same tree.

How so?

Obviously, I thought it would be self explanatory, since the words you use and the environment (for the most part) you see was created by us, from the mind (which is the tree).

Our perceptions do come from our sensory input, and if one conflates objective and subjective deduction, then I can see how you can come to such a conclusion.

 

[Orias]

Look at post 25, near the end.

 

[outhouse]

In terms of reality being what you want it to be, sure.

wrong again

taking away what is unknown hocus pokus, is as true to reality as one gets. This is not personal opinion. This is fact.

If Atheists see the world for what it is, then how come they don't do anything about it?

atheist oe theist, whos job is it to do what????

what can one do atheist or theist???

but when it comes down to atheism is just a big a bag to carry as anything else

So wrong again

you dont understand the concept at all I see.


atheism is not baggage, its a lack of theistic baggage. thats all.

Generally I don't think you should be speaking of who is the more educated group,

why,,,,??????

statistics speak for themselves. its a fact not opinion.

Not my fault you dont know whats up.

Since when does getting your nails done have any practical survival application besides getting a guy? Since when is "Christian science" considered an education? What makes theoretical science so darned important that those scientists make more money than our army or farmers?

Face it, education is simply having a more developed knowledge of what people have invoked into existence.

Disagree, I dare you, education means nothing if you cannot realize that most people have one now days . Just because One is educated in a favored field does not make them more educated, just more one sided and likely to have irrational and unthought of biases.

I find most of this babbling at best and not worth a reply its so far off base.

 

[freethinker44]

If Atheists see the world for what it is, then how come they don't do anything about it?

This is funny to me. You are asking why one of the smallest minorities on earth, and possibly the most disliked, doesn't change the world.

 

[Matthew78]

This is funny to me. You are asking why one of the smallest minorities on earth, and possibly the most disliked, doesn't change the world.

Some atheists are trying to change the world. Richard Dawkins has his own foundation, which is devoted to charity. The Secular Web also has its own charity program where Humanists and other nontheists can donate money to relief programs and other forms of charity. So atheists are trying to make a better world. What gets me is that if they don't try to start their own charity programs, they get criticism for being uncaring and this is the naturally expected result of their atheism. But if they do start their own charity programs, I imagine they will still get criticized, for trying to prove that atheists can be moral people when just about everyone else "knows" that they have no morals and are just trying to win brownie points in the eyes of the public rather than truly care for their fellow human beings.

 

[LuisDantas]

Atheists do a lot to change the world. Some of the ways by which they do don't have a lot to do with Atheism itself. A few, however, are specifically possible because we bring question to belief in God - which is often necessary to avoid its excesses.

 

[Revoltingest]

This is funny to me. You are asking why one of the smallest minorities on earth, and possibly the most disliked, doesn't change the world.

On top of that, we have atheists on both sides of some conflicts, eg, capitalism vs socialism, where our net effect is approximately zilch.
Chnage the world? I'm just trying to get along with it. But right now, the mosquitoes are winning. (It might not rain tomorrow though.)

 

[tumbleweed41]

Look at post 25, near the end.

OK

....

Face it, education is simply having a more developed knowledge of what people have invoked into existence.

Disagree, I dare you, education means nothing if you cannot realize that most people have one now days . Just because One is educated in a favored field does not make them more educated, just more one sided and likely to have irrational and unthought of biases.

I disagree.

 

[laffy_taffy]

Some strong points!

But the label "atheist" requires conception and acceptance, which is conversion to a new mind set/attitude.

No dogma to remember, haha, then the dogma is set into an unreflective position of denial of arrogance.

And there isn't much contradiction towards science with a majority of other beliefs, just those scientists that all agree on something but haven't proven it. So I wouldn't say directly contradicting science, but contradicting what scientists generally agree on.

I like everything else though

I was born without a belief in god (atheist) and have never been convinced, due to lack of convincing evidence (to me), to leave this state of unbelief. I did not "become" an atheist or choose to be an atheist, I have always been one. Heck, I never even knew there was a word used to describe my unbelief until I heard it from one of my christian friends when I was about 10. It doesn't mean that I believe that gods do not in fact exist. How should I know? For all I know, there could be hundreds of gods out there. I just have not had any personal experience of any god or have seen any convincing evidence yet to believe that a particular god exists.

Like it or not, people who believe in god make up a majority of the world. The word "atheism" is just useful in making a distinction between these two groups of people. It is not something most of us go around calling ourselves on a daily basis outside of any kind of religious context. Only when the subject is brought up in comparison to those who DO believe in god, is the terminology useful in distinguishing our non-belief.

The Greek prefix "a" means "not" or "without."

For example:
A/theism = Without/theism (belief in the existence of god(s)
A/political = Without/politics OR Not/political
A/sexual = Without/sex(uality) OR Not/sexual
A/gnosticism = Without/knowledge
A/social= Without/lacking social skills OR Not/social
A/crania= Without/lacking a skull
A/cardia= Without/lacking a heart
A/genesis= Without/lacking (the development of) a body part
The list can go on and on with the use of the prefix "a". The word "a-(whatever)" means lacking "whatever".

These words are useful in describing someone or a condition that is juxtaposed to what is considered more of the norm. If theism didn't exist, then there would be no use for the label "atheist."

 

[laffy_taffy]

I understand what you mean and I agree with you.

Its just that if One is going to debate with me they better have their notebook handy

As an example, I once considered myself an atheist for some period of time, though I never really felt "fulfilled" I guess, and I broadened my horizon.

Atheism doesn't necessarily teach the Self to restrain or discipline the self in matters of emotional and mental gratification (ego), which can mislead a lot of people into their own sense of hypocritical dogma.

What? Atheism doesn't "teach" anything. "Atheist" is just a label used to describe someone who is without a belief in gods. Just like the word "bald" is used to describe someone who is without hair. Is baldness supposed to "teach" something?

Dishonesty, self deceit, hypocrisy, these are all perks that come along with taking on a label that isn't directly specific to the beliefs of a person.

If you want to know what the beliefs are of an individual atheist, you would just need to ask him or her. All you can know about an atheist just from them being labeled as such, is that they lack a belief in god/s. As far as what actual beliefs, philosophy, or even religion (buddhism) a particular atheist might hold, you would have to ask them personally, since the label "atheist" does not address anything else but the lack of belief in gods.

If an atheist takes on the philosophical position as a Buddhist, then they're representation of atheism becomes false under the single premise that atheism is a lack of belief, which means you cannot be atheistic about buddhism if you believe that atheism is not a belief.

This doesn't makes any sense to me. Can you rephrase this?

 

[Alceste]

Here are a few perks:

~ I am free.

~ Because I use reason and science - tools that are universally accessible to everyone - to formulate my opinions, I can demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt to any intelligent person that my opinions are well-founded.

~ Because I bear the ultimate responsibility for my own choices and act without fear of punishment or hope of reward, I can sincerely celebrate my own achievements and repent my own mistakes.

 

[laffy_taffy]

I know that, which is why I said you can't be atheistic about Buddhism if you don't believe that atheism is a belief.

Unless of course you are capable of realizing that anything believed to be true is a belief, than sure, you can be an "Atheist" and a "Buddhist", though the origins are hardly compatible.

What do you mean to be "atheistic about buddhism"? That doesn't make sense. Many buddhists do not have a belief in god. This means they are atheist. The term "atheist" refers to their lack of belief in gods, while the term "buddhist" refers to the religious beliefs/philosophy they hold within buddhism.