• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

where are the differences between Anti-theistic and Atheistic

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Yep, any time.



I wish I knew why you say such things. The truth is, I do not.
Which of course go to my point. You say in effect that unlike theism, atheism is impervious to criticism, and when I speak to where it is you don't understand the rationale behind the criticism. I think a more rational approach saying that you're unaware of any valid criticism of atheism, but logically there has to be would seem sensible since no human belief or point of view is infallible, is better than saying it just simply isn't.

I wouldn't mind have a civilized discussion about atheism with you, understanding that I see much positive things, as well as negative things about it, such as the militant, fundamentalist approach which you in previous discussions seem to deny is real. I would not argue it is "wrong" and needs to be gotten rid of (anti-atheism, to coin a term). But I would argue for a more realistic understanding of it as I see it as "transitional" between theism and what I would call a transtheism/transatheism, a view which can understand itself in previous modes of interpretive thought (each valid in its own right). I would argue that to cling to 'atheism' as an identification of belief is itself just as limiting as a theistic view which rejects all other beliefs or views about God as 'wrong-headed'.

So if you're interested, let me know. It could be a different discussion than this thread.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
"Periyar propagated the principles of rationalism, self-respect, women’s rights and eradication of caste. He opposed the exploitation and marginalisation of the non-Brahmin indigenous Dravidian peoples ofSouth India and the imposition of, what he considered, Indo-Aryan India. His work has greatly revolutionised Tamil society and has significantly removed caste-based discrimination.

Periyar was born in Erode, Madras Presidency to a wealthy family of Balijas." Periyar E. V. Ramasamy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I suppose it was his guilt feeling to have been born in a wealthy family while the majority suffered, and his love for his language and culture (Tamil).
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
"Periyar propagated the principles of rationalism, self-respect, women’s rights and eradication of caste. He opposed the exploitation and marginalisation of the non-Brahmin indigenous Dravidian peoples ofSouth India and the imposition of, what he considered, Indo-Aryan India. His work has greatly revolutionised Tamil society and has significantly removed caste-based discrimination.

Periyar was born in Erode, Madras Presidency to a wealthy family of Balijas." Periyar E. V. Ramasamy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I suppose it was his guilt feeling to have been born in a wealthy family while the majority suffered, and his love for his language and culture (Tamil).
Interesting. What I'm hearing here is sort of what I said before about anti-theism, that's its really about how society is structured and religion is held and practiced within that structure. This then becomes rolled up into and symbolizing as a "god-belief" as cause. What he opposes is the caste-system, and believes that getting rid of a belief in God will affect a change in the system.

The argument I make is that it's not that simple, by any means, and to say belief in God is the cause is to completely miss the deeper underlying causes. Easy enough to challenge would be to say look at religion in the West where caste systems don't exist. God is obviously common between the two, but caste systems are not. So another root cause needs to be addressed.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
It's never simple. To blame religion, and in particular Hinduism, for the caste situation is definitely oversimplification, as all Hindu teachers oppose it, and it exists throughout Indian society (and in some form or another, in most societies) Now it's as complicated as Brahmins, in some localities, being a hard done by group. But it;s relatively easy to find some kind of scapegoat, when you look at a society and recognise, "Something's wrong here."

Social inequality is a result of many factors, and those vary widely culturally. Often it's a matter of 'the conquered'. Here in America the conquered are the most disadvantaged peoples, whether its the aboriginals, or others brought here by indentured labour or slavery. It has nothing to do with theism.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
This is news to me. What's good for others is what others deem is good for themselves. Who am I to say?

You are a human being gifted with perception and discernment.

Which is all the qualification that you need.

The question is rather how you would justify refusing to employ those gifts, IMO.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
I don't understand, Luis. Who is refusing to employ these gifts?
You, apparently. Or anyone else who sees fit to ask this:

This is news to me. What's good for others is what others deem is good for themselves. Who am I to say?

Maybe you are blessed with such a life as to find no need to use that right and duty. I doubt it. In any case, I am nowhere near that level and I doubt many people are.
 

Sha'irullah

رسول الآلهة
namaskaram



if you realy think setting up resturaunt constitutes taking over the world , ......then the Italians have allready won , the pitza allready has world domination , ....and by the way pitza's are Italian not american ! ...so that by your standards means that the pope rules the world !!!:D



if this is what you have heard , and you actualy beleive it then you have just disscredited every word you have ever spoken , ....and you think you can make judgements about what is good for others .....

excuse me while I pick my self up of the floor , sorry I just cant stop laughing , ....
...and no Native Americans. I know what your kind is up to!

if this isnt bigoted I dont know what is ???



sorry but this is seriously sad !

Oh you are just so jelly! You are jelly of me because of my good looks and rational arguments :D
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Something is only as dangerous as its user want's it to be. Neither is more inherently dangerous than the other.

Your experience with theism and anti-theism must be remarkably different from mine for you to say such a thing!
 

Apex

Somewhere Around Nothing
Your experience with theism and anti-theism must be remarkably different from mine for you to say such a thing!
Personal experience should play no part in it. But if you really want to play the "religion has done more harm than atheism" game, be my guest. I am sure you can find plenty of atheists willing to cheer you on.
 

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
Why would it be? Being pro-theism is analogous to being pro-atheism. There is a difference in being "pro" something, and being "anti" something else. You can promote theism or atheism without crossing the line into intolerance towards those of differing beliefs (the definition of bigotry). But once you start promoting ideas that are against (anti) something, that line becomes much harder to distinguish and far easier to cross.
Nonsense. If anti-theism is against theism, then theists who proselytize are anti atheism. so if anti theism is bigotry, so is evangelizing or proselytizing.

Anti theist fight theism. Theist evangelists and proselytizers fight atheism.
 

ratikala

Istha gosthi
namaskaram

Oh you are just so jelly! You are jelly of me because of my good looks and rational arguments :D

no no , I am not jelly , in the least'est , tinni'est , itsy , bittsy bit , ....

but I am intrigued as to how an Anti theist thinks that it has a soul to sell ?

do Anti-theists have souls ???
 

Apex

Somewhere Around Nothing
Nonsense. If anti-theism is against theism, then theists who proselytize are anti atheism. so if anti theism is bigotry, so is evangelizing or proselytizing.

Anti theist fight theism. Theist evangelists and proselytizers fight atheism.
Your line of logic makes no rational sense a all. The literal meaning of "anti" is "against". So anti-theism is very much to be against theism. Proselytization has nothing to do with it.
 

Sha'irullah

رسول الآلهة
namaskaram



no no , I am not jelly , in the least'est , tinni'est , itsy , bittsy bit , ....

but I am intrigued as to how an Anti theist thinks that it has a soul to sell ?

do Anti-theists have souls ???

Yes we do indeed have souls. They just don't fly off when we die. They die along with the Anti-theist or unless the Global Anti-Theistic Society of Earth decides to keep us on life support :D
 

Sha'irullah

رسول الآلهة
Your line of logic makes no rational sense a all. The literal meaning of "anti" is "against". So anti-theism is very much to be against theism. Proselytization has nothing to do with it.

I love hoe Evangelist support atheism. Christian Evangelicals always do their best to ensure that people remain atheists. :rolleyes:
 
Top