The other side of the coin: Athiesm

[TMA_1]

I have noticed that Athiesm itself is just as closed minded as any religion out there. Athiests are matericalistic in their beliefs. This means that they limit their thinking to what is strictly imperical and provable by the senses. This said, athiests reject anything outside of the physical. This is the negative of the vast majority of world religions. This negative is just as far right as religion is far left. Also, Athiests in general have ah ard time debating because of this issue. They often use their own emotionalism to defeat other ideas.

I have found that the only open minded philosophy is agnosticism. They truly are "ignorant" of what the meta physical is. This isnt a bad word, it just means that they admit to not understanding what the supernatural is but dont deny it. Athiests deny it and therefore close their mind to a posibility of it. I remember my Biology teacher saying once. That dogma is dangerous, nothing is unprovable and therefore you should not reject anything that we can comprehend and not comprehend.

[nemafakei]

What makes you think this?

Atheism need only be the deduction that, to the senses we have availible, it is most likely that there is no god.

What makes you think that Atheism necessitates a closed mind?

I agree that some atheists are stubborn beyond persuasion about the issue, but I don't see why you beleive it is a pandemic condition among atheists.

Please quantify: Do you mean all (or nearly all) atheitst, the majority, a few, or what?

Then qualify - What makes you think so, and why should they be so?

[SurlyPIG]

Who says we completely reject it? If there was a reason to be a theist, I would be one. Should a reason ever emerge, I will become one. Until then, there is none. Not one. Emotional we are not. We do not have religious attachments to the material we debate so we are often the most controlled party. The only thing that frustrates us is the lies and dogma that is often presented ans fact by other parties. I value honesty and truth very highly, that's the only reason.

Some respect that. Others hate us for it, not because what we believe is untrue or upsets them, but because we represent what they hate, and what their religion has taught them to hate. By our very nature, theists should hate us. Thankfully, the vast majority are more civilized than that, so we are instead subjected to a barrage of what is almost propaganda in an attempt to convert us to their faith. That is, by design, the second-most important thing for them to do as religious people.

How can you say nothing is un-provable? Religion is unprovable, that is the entire foundation on which it based, that it cannot be proven or disproven.

There are SSSOOOO many things that are can't be proven or disproven, and it seems almost ridiculous to believe in all those things, so why believe in religion? That is my position as an atheist.

[zamboe]

When it comes to Atheism is just not possible to group all those people in the same bag.

As an example, during the missile crisis, back then in the 60's, when the churches were opened 24/7 for confessions, many self proclaimed Atheists went to church.

I mean that under "normal" conditions many people for convenience choose atheism, but when it comes to threats that put it's life in danger they inmedieately recover the faith in God.

[Davidu]

The Atheistic try to demonstrate that there is a logical definition for everything that is around us. An atheistic can't be narrow-minded if he defines (or tries to define) everything by logic. What about a parralel between God and the Quantum Phisycs?? That couldn't be narrow-minded.

Instead of saying "God did that","God wanted that","God's will be done", these people try to explain everything. And that's not easy.

Religion gives the impression of a family: God watches over you, so nothing bad happens to you. An atheistic person doesen't believe in this. Thay have to take their destiny in their own hands and the have to explain to themselves and to others everything it happens, how, and why...

[Gobalopper]

"God watches over you, so nothing bad happens to you."

Err that isn't true, bad things happen to everyone, even people that believe in God.

And people are close minded not doctrines.

[Acriku]

What a load of crock. Well I will clear my mind of what a crock this is, and reply to it.

Atheism suggests neither closed-mindedness nor open-mindedness. Gnosticism suggests closed-mindedness because it means having the knowledge to know the truth. Since neither position (atheism/theism) can be accepted the truth due to lack of enough evidence on both sides to eliminate the other, this is closed-mindedness to be gnostic. Most theists are gnostic. But there are agnostic theists out there.

Atheists are not matericalistic in their beliefs because they have no beliefs conscerning any god(s). They may have beliefs in things like the sun coming up the next morning, but that doesn't mettle with atheism. Why do you disregard other beliefs, such as in the Greek or Roman gods? For that same reason, we atheists disregard your beliefs. Lack of evidence.

Atheists can be spiritual, the Buddhists for example. To achieve enlightenment would be a goal for such Buddhists. So, atheists do not reject anything outside of the physical.

Atheists have no problem debating, many can leave their emotions at the door, some cannot for whatever reason. Generalizing them would be wrong, as no atheist is the same.

Agnosticism is not the "middle guy" of atheism and theism. Agnosticism/gnosticism deals with knowledge or lack thereof. Atheism/theism deals with beliefs or lack thereof. They are separate issues, allowing an atheist to be either agnostic or gnostic, as well as for the theist.

For example, I am an agnostic atheist. I do not deny the possibility of a god because I couldn't possibly know, but I do lack a belief in it.

Someone must be either an atheist or a theist. One must arrive at a conclusion. You can say "But I have no knowledge to answer the question," but yet still you have to arrive at a conclusion, there is no way around it. You cannot be just an agnostic, or just a gnostic.

To conclude, your post is a load of crock. Read above again to see what I mean.

[Davidu]

But you'll rarely see a man gard-hit by fate to curse God...

The people usually pray to God to help them come out of their misfortune. When all is ok they pray to thank him...

No religious person would blame God for all the things that went wrong in the world!(they could blame Satan...)

[SurlyPIG]

But you'll rarely see a man gard-hit by fate to curse God...

The people usually pray to God to help them come out of their misfortune. When all is ok they pray to thank him...

No religious person would blame God for all the things that went wrong in the world!(they could blame Satan...)

So, in other words, good fortune is God's doing, but everything wrong in the world has nothing to do with god, but Satan?

This is one of the funnier aspects of religion. People thanking god for cures for cancer and good fortune, but never blaming God for disease, poverty, and misfortune.

[Davidu]

Well that's what's usually going on.

You'll see a man becoming atheistic due to misfortunes in his life. He will deny the existance of God, but he will rarely turn against Him.

You're right, that's kind strange... but I think that's human nature. Balme someone, thank someone else. You can't blame a person for something and thank the same person for something else:

"Curse you for killing my cat!! BTW thanx for whashing my car, dude."

That's insane isn't it? ::)

[SurlyPIG]

But that's illogical! If he becomes an atheist to spite/revenge God, doesn't that suggest he still believes in him? I suppose you can be a theist and hate God. But as an atheist, I know that my good luck and bad luck is just that; luck. I don't say that my good luck is luck but my bad luck is the work of God, that's hypocritical! That would be just as wierd as the beliefs of the literal theists I mentioned.

No, it doesn't make much sense does it? But hey - that's people. In the words of Mr. Spock, "Humans are illogical, Sir."

[Davidu]

If a person is atheistic it doesen't beleive in God. He can't hate God, 'cause for that person God doesen't exist.

Am I right?

[SurlyPIG]

Of course that's correct, that's exactly what I was saying!

[Acriku]

Of course, some 'hate' the idea of a God displayed in the bible, and what people make God out to be.

[TMA_1]

never call yourself or any other athiest spiritual. Spiritual beliefs deal with the meta-physical and things we dont fully understand. Ask any cast of buddhism and there are plenty of supernatural aspects to it. Things that we cant comprehend inside their beliefs.

It isnt a crock of crap because I said Generally, athiesm seems to point out the fact of denying something exists when it isnt answerable either way. Athiesm seems to go too far one direction. Why deny an existance of something when you cant prove something either way? Instead of denying it, just say there isnt sufficiant evidance to prove either way the subject of supernatural existances. Many athiests take the next step though, they will say that a supernatural world does not exist flat out. I remember you acriku saying that we pray to nothing. That God does not exist. You take a side that is beyond saying there is insufficant evidance. You deny what you cant answer is impossible. You take the negative side rather than being neutral. You cant say its impossible, so why are you?

[Acriku]

Why not TMA? Scared?

First of all, no one needs spirituality to keep their compassion, pity, sympathy or any other feeling. So what is the need for spirituality? Hope, above most. Things we cannot comprehend need not be supernatural.

Second, a portion of Buddhists are atheists. Are those Buddhists spiritual? Yes.

You did not say generally, you said atheism itself. Atleast be consistent. Atheism goes in no direction. This is where you are mistaken. Atheists tend to go in the direction of disproving christianity, but that is their choice and atheism doesn't hold them to it either way. You may not be able to prove or disprove God, but you can provide evidence against the god in a certain religion, with attributes associated with it. The general god has no attributes, just that it is our creator. You can disprove something when it arrives at a conflict of nature. Like a square circle. You don't need to be everywhere to disprove the existence of such a thing.

Saying god doesn't exist flatout is being an gnostic atheist. That is their choice, and their conclusion. I an gnostic towards a christian god, but agnostic towards a god. So, I am an agnostic atheist. I declare right now that the Judeo-Christian God does not exist, from multiple conflicts of nature derived from the attributes associated with the Judeo-Christian God.

Also, please try spelling atheism correctly :)

[TMA_1]

low blow acriku.

So, you are attacking the christian God alone? that is extremely immature and bitter. I know many of my friends who are atheists that would think you silly. See nema? This is what I dont get. Agendas like acriku poses are selfish and silly. Why attack the christian God alone? that itself is a sign of being closed minded. Atheism is about rejecting the supernatural. you limit yourself and your beliefs because of your agenda.

Also, I said that buddhists believe in the supernatural. I never said that they all believe in a God. Dont confuse the two. of course many dont believe in a god because they dont concern themselves with a deity. They focus on other things that are supernatural. geesh.lol

[Acriku]

Low blow? You seem like you were scared of atheists being spiritual. You ordered me to not call myself spiritual.

I am attacking the Judeo-Christian(not the christian god, as it is Jewish as well) god because it holds attributes that conflict in nature, which is why I can't believe in it, I have no belief in a god that conflicts in nature. A general god holds no such attributes, so I can't say it is impossible for one to exist. This isn't selfish. Not immature. This is from a logical standpoint. Atheism is not about rejecting the supernatural. Atheists reject the supernatural if they choose to do so, as rejection requires more than a passive action - which atheism holds. It seems you have a selfish and immature position against atheism.

[TMA_1]

You havent studied enough of the judeo christian God to reject it. At least from what I have gathered. I think you take other's ideas other than thinking on your own.

[Acriku]

I do not need to study the Judeo-Christian God extensively to know its attributes. Now you are going to pull the old "You do not know god, so you can't understand him"? Please TMA. I haven't studied extensively into the square circle, whatever information there may be, because I have the attributes associated with it affront. The attributes conflict in nature. Just as the Judeo-Christian God does. Unless you take back those attributes? If so, without the attributes that conflict in nature, I cannot say that it does not exist. I will grant possibility to that god as well.

You do not know the hours I have spent pondering the possibilities, and the wonders. This is my eternal life I am talking about! Why would I risk it just taking what other's say and not thinking about it? You choose to dismiss my entire arguments because you think I have not studied it enough. Very well.

[Gobalopper]

Acriku based from some of your questions I would agree with TMA. Either you have been purposely pretending to not know the answers or you really don't know. Have you actually read the Bible? Or are you starting these arguments based on things you've heard?

[SurlyPIG]

It isnt a crock of crap because I said Generally, athiesm seems to point out the fact of denying something exists when it isnt answerable either way. Athiesm seems to go too far one direction.

As does theism. You can't prove either way yet you hold it as your highest belief! Certainly that's more souvere than the beliefs of most atheists, myself included. My disbelief in any kind of omnipotent diety is not my highest value and certainly not the purpose of my life. On the contrary. Can you say that about God in your life? If not, you have no right to call Acriku's beliefs a "crock of crap" as you put it.

[TMA_1]

that isnt the point though Ace. I set that up as a defense against calling people that follow faith systems as closed minded. you too are as well.

[nemafakei]

TMA, you're being very unlear...

Please quantify: Do you mean all (or nearly all) atheitst, the majority, a few, or what?

And do you also include buddhists as Atheists?

Then qualify - What makes you think so, and why should they be so?

[Caid Ivik]

There is no real atheist. Everyone believes in some sense of his or her existence and that is his religion. Difference between religions is just form of the highest sense. For some it is natural force, for other human mind and for other some higher being. You aren't fully true, TMA. Only real atheist were Nietzsche, who gone crazy from it, and his nihilist followers. But all were trying to seek something against God, what is also a proof of His existence. You can fight against windmill - but against a phantom?