Atheism is not a faith. So, pull your head out of your arse, submittard....

LordZorch: Atheism is not a faith. So, pull your head out of your arse, submittard....

It is not a church, cult, or sect; those require some level of organization. However, most atheists hold a priori an untestable belief that "God Does Not Exist". This makes it a tenet of faith.

For myself, it's not a priori; it's a consequent of several other beliefs held as untestable truth. However, the Robbins axioms and ZF set theory make for a strange starting point for religious discussion.

abb3w: It is not a church, cult, or sect; those require some level of organization. However, most atheists hold a priori an untestable belief that "God Does Not Exist". This makes it a tenet of faith.

The more accurate idea is that supernatural beings (gods) do not exist. The Judeo-Christian god is just one of many gods that atheists don't believe in.

Is a lack of belief in the supernatural a tenet of faith?

They probably didn't have a lot of options, but does it have to be on "Air America". That will just reinforce the perception the left is a bunch of godless liberals.

/godless independent

This thread will be a bastion of rational, cool-headed dialogue.

NancyGracesTesticles: Is a lack of belief in the supernatural a tenet of faith?

No, but subtle nuances like the difference between lack of belief and no belief make turning any thread even tacitly related to atheism into a "You're just like us!" circle among the religious much more difficult.

If you've got to find a social club for your atheism you may as well call it church and nod your head and say "Amen!" whenever the guy talking says something that strikes you as profound.

NancyGracesTesticles: Is a lack of belief in the supernatural a tenet of faith?

Since it seems to be an untestable proposition, yeah. This is why I count the Robbins Axioms, consistency of ZF, some notion of Observability (that I'm still trying to formally phrase), and the Strong Church-Turing Universe Thesis as tenets of Faith.

My faith on the last is weakest, as I can almost imagine a way to disprove it (involving a pair of stone tablets with the general Busy Beaver function values for 1<n<9 and 1<m<9), but that might just be a limitation of human intelligence.

Wolf_Blitzer: This thread will be a bastion of rational, cool-headed dialogue.

I'm pondering just letting this one go. I know how it will end and I've had the argument far to many times. I guarantee that before the 50 comment mark we'll be having a debate over whether we should use the layman definitions of agnostic and atheist or the academic/philosophical definitions.

/not to mention a lot of blowhard self-identified "agnostics" waltzing in here screaming "I don't know, and neither do you!" and/or claiming that agnostics are the only intellectually honest participants to the discussion

Wolf_Blitzer: This thread will be a bastion of rational, cool-headed dialogue.

Bastion, or Bastille?

abb3w: Since it seems to be an untestable proposition, yeah.

More formally: when it's simply a lack of belief, that's not faith. When it's an active disbelief (as is most often the case), that's a form of faith.

That might be more important than it seems. A 2006 University of Minnesota study identified atheists as America's most distrusted minority

Athiests distrusted? Now where would anyone get a crazy notion like that from?

No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots

~G H W Bush

Riiiight! Fergot about that one.

Speaking of quotes...

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

~Stephen Roberts

Is God real? The concept of God has been real enuff throughout the course of Human History to get one killed if one professes the wrong faith in the wrong place at the wrong time but that death has always been at the hands of man.

The real question here is "Did God make Man?" or "Did Man make God?"

Quatchi has shiatloads of proof for the latter statement and absolutely none for the former, if that helps at all.

* disclaimer *

Quatchi is athiest/ recovering Catholic.

Athiesn is a faith?

That's almost as foolish as saying that an athiest believes in nothing.

Does it take faith to not believe in Unicorns?

Does it take faith to not believe in Santa Claus?

Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?

~Douglas Adams

abb3w: When it's an active disbelief (as is most often the case), that's a form of faith.

Firstly, I think you'll find that most atheists in the world don't have an active disbelief. They just can't be bothered with religion.

Secondly the "faith" to believe that God does not exist is quite different from the faith required to believe that God does. It's more akin to the "faith" that your car will start in the morning, rather than the faith required to believe that some sort of supernatural superpower, for which there is absolutely no evidence, is watching over your every move.

Seems to me that most atheists are areligious. If they weren't constantly bombarded by the faithful, they'd never broach the subject.

/goes to church on Sundays.

Where religion allows or inspires people to do good works, be charitable, compassionate or tolerant then Quatchi applauds it.

Where religion allows or inspires people to do evil works, be mean-spirited, uncompassionate or intolerant then Quatchi decries it.

It aint rocket science, ya know.

Deeds are more important than Words.
Words are more important than Thoughts.

Think. Say. Do.

Life is choice.
Choose Well.
Be Well.

OTOH, Atheists are prone to believe in UFOs, or a libertarian utopia, or whatnot. So it's always something.

Dear Jerk: OTOH, Atheists are prone to believe in UFOs, or a libertarian utopia, or whatnot. So it's always something.

Care to back that up with evidence?

/I thought not.

Dear Jerk

Recent studies have shown that religious people are more likely to be big fat doody-heads.

/*blows raspberry*

abb3w: It is not a church, cult, or sect; those require some level of organization. However, most atheists hold a priori an untestable belief that "God Does Not Exist". This makes it a tenet of faith.

Atheists believe God does not exist because there is no evidence for it. Faith is something you believe without evidence. Atheists are simply withholding belief because of lack of evidence.

I am also seconding 'pull your head out of your ass, submittard'.

abb3w: as is most often the case

Prove that. Sounds like some unfounded anecdotal evidence. I don't have active disbelief- but based on everything I do know, the chances of any religion being right is vanishingly improbable. The chance of a supernatural force that guides the Universe is slightly less improbable. The chance of a natural force guiding the Universe is roughly 1: physics.

In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.

~Thomas Jefferson

My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance - but for us, not for God.

~Albert Einstein

If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is "God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is, "Probably because of something you did."

~SNL, Jack Handey, "Deep Thoughts"

One word sums it up but man has always been vane and self serving. SAD!

Jesus claims to be God, and Jesus is a physical being running around Israel for all to see. He apparently performed millions of miracles in front of millions of people. The God of the Bible is not hiding -- God is so hungry for publicity and exposure that he actually incarnates himself and then starts performing miracles for everyone on the planet. Then he creates a God-breathed book to describe everything and publishes billions of copies all over the world.

Yet, for some reason, God wants none of us today to see any of those miracles because he "needs to remain hidden" so that he will not "taint our free wills." Does that seem likely?

Link (new window)

Personally, I'm opposed to believing in things.

For example, I don't believe in gravity. I don't need to- gravity works whether or not I believe in it. I have to accept it, because the evidence of its operation is overwhelming. I can watch it here on Earth. I can see it working by looking at the way the Earth, Moon and Sun interact. We launch probes millions of miles out into space using our knowledge of gravity. I can look at photos from Hubble of objects 13 billion light years away and see that gravity works the same there as it does here.

I don't believe in gravity. "Belief" implies that I have a choice in the matter. I accept gravity because I have all the evidence in the world that it exists.

Styro Foam2008-01-19 07:35:33 PM
Dear Jerk: OTOH, Atheists are prone to believe in UFOs, or a libertarian utopia, or whatnot. So it's always something.
Care to back that up with evidence?
/I thought not.

You ask me a question, give me no time to reply, and conclude that I can't. That's strong faith in your powers of deduction. You fall into the whatnot category and you fail.

larry00: man has always been vane

Dear Jerk: You ask me a question, give me no time to reply, and conclude that I can't.

This is Fark. The chances of you providing evidence to support your claim are nil. I note you have yet to do so.

t3knomanser: For example, I don't believe in gravity...

Gravity is more than a good idea... it's the LAW!

whatshisname:
Firstly, I think you'll find that most atheists in the world don't have an active disbelief. They just can't be bothered with religion.

Yep. It's not so much that I have strong belief that "there is no god/s", it's more that I don't give a crap about it. I prefer to concern myself with the manifestations of the world around me and the people in it. This doesn't preclude philosophy or morality, it simply expects them to have more substantial basis than "because a thousand years ago, somebody claimed that a higher power said it must be so".

I guess it takes faith to not believe in the boogeyman or elves too. Damn my faithfulness.

It appears to me that a lot of people confuse "faith" with inductive reasoning.

One is based on at least some amount of evidence. The other is not, and many times exists in spite of opposing evidence.

Patience is a virtue.
Virtue is a Faith.
Faith is a little girl
Who never washes her face.

Nobody Said it,
I Believe it,
That settles it.

/

t3knomanser 2008-01-19 08:12:36 PM
This is Fark. The chances of you providing evidence to support your claim are nil. I note you have yet to do so.

Styro Foam (like you) demonstrated his belief in the infallibility of his assumptions; a belief which is just as intoxicating as faith in God. He asked me for evidence. He supplied it himself.

Echoic: Atheists believe God does not exist because there is no evidence for it. Faith is something you believe without evidence. Atheists are simply withholding belief because of lack of evidence.

Conclusive evidence, anyway. Tales from random lunatics are evidence, if ambiguous and generally unpersuasive.

However, such Atheists' trust in past evidence as a valid guide for the present and future state of things is thus an untestible proposition... aaaand we're back to them having Faith. =)

/see articles three and four of my personal Creed
//#3: we're observing SOMETHING
///#4: it ain't REALLY complicated, just a smidge

An omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity is logically contradictory. If this describes the deity you profess belief in, you are either ignorant or insane. If you claim belief in a deity doesn't fit this description, you're as logically sound as anyone that believes in ghosts, fairies, leprechauns, witches, or sorcerers. It's not disprovable, but it's so statistically unlikely that if you were to say the exact odds of it's existence aloud, you'd die before finishing the number.

Dear Jerk: [you] demonstrated [your] belief in the infallibility of [your] assumptions

That's interesting that you should say that, since I have no such belief. I don't think I'm wrong, but I'm more than happy to give you the opportunity to prove me wrong.

Dear Jerk: He asked me for evidence. He supplied it himself.

That is anecdotal and shoddy evidence. I don't even know that he's an atheist. I'm still waiting for real evidence.

My assumptions are not infallible, but they're only changed in the face of evidence.

abb3w: However, such Atheists' trust in past evidence as a valid guide for the present and future state of things is thus an untestible proposition... aaaand we're back to them having Faith. =)

No, that's inductive reasoning. You have a reasonable assumption that your car will start tomorrow morning, because it has many times in the past.

And it is also testable. When you start your car tomorrow morning, you have tested your prediction.

abb3w: However, such Atheists' trust in past evidence as a valid guide for the present and future state of things is thus an untestible proposition

It is so testable. If past evidence ever ceases to be useful for predicting future events, it will have failed the test. Thus far, it hasn't. We have a 13 billion year sample space that we can observe right now. Looks good so far.

abb3w: aaaand we're back to them having Faith. =)

That word doesn't mean what you think it means.

abb3w: ///#4: it ain't REALLY complicated, just a smidge

Dude, I clicked that link and now I feel like a real idiot. I can't even understand the introductory essay.

Perhaps Christians should prove their faith by refusing Medicare and leave their own healthcare up to prayer. What? No faith, tsk tsk.

AndyMan1: It appears to me that a lot of people confuse "faith" with inductive reasoning.

Ah, but for reasoning to be inductive, you need to have a foundation. Any attempt to test the foundation itself within the system becomes circular reasoning (at best), not inductive. So, you have to have some untestables: Axioms. Thus: Faith.

The Mathematicians ran into this problem back around 1900 or so; Goedel's work comes out of the Principia Mathematica effort, and proved that a system can't prove itself consistent. This is why I mentioned ZF and Robbins Axioms above. Anyone here not have Faith that "'P OR Q' is equivalent to 'Q OR P'"? Doubts? Hesistation about its certainty?

I refuse to play with your imaginary friend.

Please don't throw tantrums because I don't want to obey the voices in your head.

t3knomanser 2008-01-19 08:28:12 PM
That is anecdotal and shoddy evidence. I don't even know that he's an atheist. I'm still waiting for real evidence.

I don't either. I assumed he's a libertarian, (because they bite more than atheists) but I'm not betting my soul on it. Anyway, he didn't ask for a scientific (ha) study. And he didn't exclude anecdotal evidence.
My original point was that it's normal for humans to believe in something larger than themselves, spirits, logic, advanced races, conspiracy theories, etc. Problems arise when one has the hubris to believe he can harness these powers, or that he is powerless before them.

abb3w: Anyone here not have Faith that "'P OR Q' is equivalent to 'Q OR P'"? Doubts?

No faith required- "P OR Q ≈ Q OR P" by definition. I could just as easily derive a logical system wherein that is not true, again, by definition. Just like A + B = B + A is simply true because we defined it that way. It's child's play to create a non-communicative math as well.

abb3w: Goedel's work comes out of the Principia Mathematica effort, and proved that a system can't prove itself consistent.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Gödel proved that, given a mathematical system, it is always possible to construct a true statement that can't be proven within the confines of that system. Very very different than what you're saying.

Dear Jerk: My original point was that it's normal for humans to believe in something larger than themselves, spirits, logic, advanced races, conspiracy theories, etc.

Prove it. I don't believe you.

"Don't you know there aint no Devil that's just God when he's drunk"

~Tom Waits.

Ta to Krymore fer the Epicurus quote.

That's good meme, right there!

If it's perfectly reasonable to disbelieve in Lephrechans and Unicorns, then what's so damn unreasonable about actively believing that God doesn't exist?

What's so special about Yahweh that it gets a free pass when all other fairy tails are unequivocally dismissed?