The difference between an Atheist and Theist

[viole]

A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious. Thats the only difference between us. very little difference really

yes, and believers in the garden fairy think that the mess in the garden has been caused by a conscious fairies into carrots, while the afairist believes it was the weather, or something.

Very little difference indeed.

ciao

- viole

 

[SigurdReginson]

Ameba for instance. Brain came up just about 700 million years ago in a fish.They react to their environment. Is not that consciousness?Wikipedia. Let me find the page for you.

Well... That's a good point. There's a difference between being conscious, and being alive and responding to stimuli, though.

If I were to become unconscious in hospital bed, I could still respond to certain stimuli. Would I still be conscious, then?

What is your definition of consciousness? If it means responding to stimuli, then everything alive is conscious, and I'm not sure that qualifies...

 

[Audie]

Well... That's a good point. There's a difference between being conscious, and being alive and responding to stimuli, though.

If I were to become unconscious in hospital bed, I could still respond to certain stimuli. Would I still be conscious, then?

What is your definition of consciousness? If it means responding to stimuli, then everything alive is conscious, and I'm not sure that qualifies...

If everything has it but it is undetectable, has no effect and cannot be affected that's pretty much the same as non existent.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yeah, if such a patient responds to stimuli, he/she is said to have that kind of consciousness. "Yeah, his fingers moved for a few seconds.", etc. That would also mean that the person was alive. Patients in coma are fed through tubes for yeas, there digestive systems work and keep them alive. Michael Shoemacher remained in coma for a long time. A nurse in a Bombay hospital remained in coma for 37 years after being subjected to assault and rape. She was kept alive by her colleagues and nurses who joined later. Very unfortunate.
Aruna Shanbaug case - Wikipedia

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I believe a response which changes according to a trigger is consciousness, whether in animals, vegetation or even in non-living things. Call it "Karma", if you so desire.

What's the trigger? I'd think it be movement in itself.

I'm making an educated guess. Would karma be synonym for what you're describing?

 

[Irate State]

My point in this tread:

A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious.

Atheism it's not a stand on cosmogony. It may have a part in their global worldview tho.
It's a no claim, the lack of belief in the existence of gods.

 

[Quintessence]

Interesting perspective, @Meandflower ! There is some merit to this particular map of the territory. Theologies that focus on a monotheist creator god that intervenes in human affairs (e.g., is conscious) would find use for this map. The map has drawbacks, though, and applies poorly to other theologies including my own. As such, I am in this awkward position of simply not falling into either of your classifications on this map. I don't think there is a way to correct that without significantly altering how you have set up the map, though.

 

[SigurdReginson]

Yeah, if such a patient responds to stimuli, he/she is said to have that kind of consciousness. "Yeah, his fingers moved for a few seconds.", etc. That would also mean that the person was alive. Patients in coma are fed through tubes for yeas, there digestive systems work and keep them alive. Michael Shoemacher remained in coma for a long time. A nurse in a Bombay hospital remained in coma for some 35 years after being subjected to rape. She was kept alive by her colleagues and nurses who joined later. Very unfortunate.
Aruna Shanbaug case - Wikipedia

How sad... My heart goes out to her...

I don't know if I can agree with your thoughts on conscious, though.

It seems to me that consciousness requires self awareness, and the ability to problem solve. When a single celled organism seeks light because it's light sensing spots draw it to that light, it isn't going there because it decided to. It's going there because it was compelled to do to it's DNA. Now, avoiding the light because a predator was there, and waiting until it wandered off to head towards the light would be a "conscious choice."

Consciousness - Wikipedia

"Consciousness, at its simplest, is "sentience or awareness of internal or external existence"."

None of those examples qualify. To experience this, one at least has to have some kind of nervous system.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Wait wait wait...

You are actually wrong on this. There are atheists that say that there definitely is no God. This is the atheists that you are addressing.

On the other hand there are atheists who do not make assumptions about that which we cannot examine and is unfalsifiable, and in response to the question of how the universe came to be, will just say "I don't know ". Your OP will not be addressing those atheists.

I'm an agnostic atheist, and don't claim knowledge of how the universe started. However, if I believed it was started by a conscious force, I wouldn't be an atheist.

My standing assumption is that it wasn't started by a conscious force, even though I have no idea how it was started, and readily admit I can't prove anything, nor have certainty on this.

The OP seems fine to me.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Are you sure about that? I'm not a theist, and I think the universe and the energy that composes it is a product of (or more accurately, an appearance in) pure consciousness.

Which sounds somewhat panentheistic...although I admit to being unsure what 'an appearance in' means.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Which sounds somewhat panentheistic...although I admit to being unsure what 'an appearance in' means.

It’s more pantheistic than panentheistic.

In my understanding, all is Brahman, and as a result of Maya, everything in pragmatic reality is illusory; an appearance.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

It’s more pantheistic than panentheistic.

In my understanding, all is Brahman, and as a result of Maya, everything in pragmatic reality is illusory; an appearance.

Then...doesn't that just mean you don't fit on either of the broad groupings referred to in the OP (ie. atheist or theist)?
I don't think those 2 groupings encompass everyone on the planet (although I have heard some propose that it does - I don't think so, and the OP doesn't seem to claim so).

 

[SalixIncendium]

Then...doesn't that just mean you don't fit on either of the broad groupings referred to in the OP (ie. atheist or theist)?
I don't think those 2 groupings encompass everyone on the planet (although I have heard some propose that it does - I don't think so, and the OP doesn't seem to claim so).

You're spot on. I identify as neither. The term transtheist more accurately portrays my worldview.

 

[Aupmanyav]

What's the trigger? I'd think it be movement in itself.
I'm making an educated guess. Would karma be synonym for what you're describing?

Anything that causes a response. "Karma" doctrine has been applied to animals. Have not heard of a soul reappearing as a tree or stone in Hinduism. Though 'Advaita' of my type would not exclude them. But then, my 'Advaita' does not recognize 'soul' or 'rebirth' other than chemical re-cycling. My 'Advaita' is a bit different from the normal.

 

[Aupmanyav]

"Consciousness, at its simplest, is "sentience or awareness of internal or external existence"."

That is how the consciousness system evolved. In a single-celled animal, it was primitive consciousness or whatever you would like to call it. That is there even in an RNA or DNA string - the ability to react. As I mentioned, the nervous system evolved around 700 million years ago and improved later.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It's a no claim, the lack of belief in the existence of gods.

Yeah, 'the lack of belief in the existence of gods' is a belief and not a claim.

Then...doesn't that just mean you don't fit on either of the broad groupings referred to in the OP (ie. atheist or theist)?

Perhaps Salix does not fit in either of the categories, but I certainly fit completely in the Atheist category because I do not consider 'whatever' started it as 'God'.

How sad... My heart goes out to her...

Read the Wiki article again - "Shanbaug died of pneumonia on 18 May 2015, after being in a persistent vegetative state for nearly 42 years".
What life gives to some people!

 

[paarsurrey]

There is "no other reasonable claimant" in your opinion. There are lots of others who say the same thing about their claimant, and their claimant is necessarily Allah or God.

If you are going to make such a claim, in the face of such other claims, then you should be prepared to defend it with evidence.

There is "no other reasonable claimant" in your opinion. There are lots of others who say the same thing about their claimant, and their claimant is necessarily Allah or God.

If you are going to make such a claim, in the face of such other claims, then you should be prepared to defend it with evidence.

Let there be real , reasonable and with methodology a claimant, not a hypothetical one, please. Right, please?

Regards

 

[Irate State]

Yeah, 'the lack of belief in the existence of gods' is a belief and not a claim.

Maybe, I'm not so sure about that. I'm pretty sure it's the absence of belief, and a no claim. I've never said I believe there's no god, quite the opposite I don't believe claims of god(s) given the current insufficient evidence.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Atheist are happy at their own things. Generally they make no claim unless a theist comes along claiming things.

 

[osgart]

Gods and an intelligent force that brings forth consciousness are not the same things.

I maintain I'm an atheist! I deny the existence of gods but believe in an natural eternal process that is an intelligent force. Someone might say that logically leads to a God or Gods but I don't think so.