Atheists under attack

[mikem8634]

What exactly are the "systems of belief" and philosophical positions of agnosticism and atheism?

 

 

Michael Martin, a leading atheist philosopher, defines atheism entirely in terms of belief.[1] For him, negative atheism is simply the lack of theistic belief, positive atheism is the asserted disbelief in God

 

Richard Dawkins does not provide such a strict definition of atheism, and the fact he opposes describing a child as 'Atheist' or 'Christian'[5] suggests that he views atheism as a conscious position and thus leans towards the dictionary definition of atheism as necessarily an active disbelief.

 

http://www.investigatingatheism.info/definition.html

 

 

Whilst there is some disagreement between Dawkins and Martin they both assert that atheism is not a belief in nothing or void it is the active belief in the non-existence of God and a philosophy extrapolated from that position to inform interaction with the world and the universe beyond. It is a belief system.

 

 

See my previous post above and check out the link.

 

I am not claiming that atheism is a religion, (although I have posted previously in this thread on the subject of Buddhism as an atheistic religion) but I do see it as a system of belief. Once you align yourself to the fundamental tenets of atheism it then informs your interaction with everything in the same way that the religious are informed by their faith. Perhaps others would prefer to see it as a grand meta-narrative rather than a system of belief - something that helps to define an individual's morality, decision making, opinions etc. Same goes for agnosticism but that's not for me.

[danot]

Ignosticism or igtheism is the theological position that every other theological position (including agnosticism and atheism) assumes too much about the concept of God and many other theological concepts.

 

The view that a coherent definition of God must be presented before the question of the existence of God can be meaningfully discussed.

 

Thanks max.

[RootsBooster]

My point is that belief and knowledge about god become isolated from one another when factual evidence to support the knowledge is all to often a customary requirement of none theists or the scientific community. Belief on the other hand doesn't need factual evidence to support it, which is probably why it's a fundamental requirement of theism. In short-Holding the position of believing that there cannot be any factual knowledge about god isn't a position that anyone may choose to hold if they so desire, it's simply the situation that all of mankind is confronted with, but that doesn't mean all of mankind have to believe it is of course. That was my point.

 

I'm going to pick out the bits I'm addressing here to make it clear for you...

 

In short-Holding the position of believing that there cannot be any factual knowledge about god isn't a position that anyone may choose to hold if they so desire, it's simply the situation that all of mankind is confronted with,

What do you mean "confronted with" ?

People can hold this belief or not hold it, it's a belief, not a default position.

but that doesn't mean all of mankind have to believe it is of course. That was my point.

Believe it is? Or believe it?

[RootsBooster]

Still having trouble understanding why a atheist would spend any time at all concidering whether the existance of god/s can or cannot be known before evevtually concluding it cannot? To me, that would make them agnostic, not atheist or agnostic atheist.

 

Does this help?

[RootsBooster]

Which is what I said. They can choose to not believe whatever they want but they still know as little as you or I do or anyone else about what god is in actuallity.

 

You didn't say that before. That's the difference though, it doesn't matter how little they actually know, it's what they think/believe can be known/can't be known.

[RootsBooster]

See my previous post above and check out the link.

 

I am not claiming that atheism is a religion, (although I have posted previously in this thread on the subject of Buddhism as an atheistic religion) but I do see it as a system of belief. Once you align yourself to the fundamental tenets of atheism it then informs your interaction with everything in the same way that the religious are informed by their faith. Perhaps others would prefer to see it as a grand meta-narrative rather than a system of belief - something that helps to define an individual's morality, decision making, opinions etc. Same goes for agnosticism but that's not for me.

 

I am without belief in God/s, I am an atheist.

It doesn't have any effect on my life one way or another.

I don't have any beliefs associated with it and no belief systems.

There is no philosophy involved in it.

 

It's just an absence of belief in God/s.

[mikem8634]

I am without belief in God/s, I am an atheist.

It doesn't have any effect on my life one way or another.

I don't have any beliefs associated with it and no belief systems.

There is no philosophy involved in it.

 

It's just an absence of belief in God/s.

 

And you are entirely entitled to think that way. However, I assume you believe there is no god/s. That is a belief associated with atheism.

 

 

 

"The overall perspective from which one sees and interprets the world." (thefreedictionary.com, answers.com/topic/worldview) If we can agree that the above is a decent definition of worldview then I would say that is pretty much the function that atheism provides for me.

 

Personally I would suggest that my belief that god does not exist is a more important statement about who I am as a person than my belief that, for example, Santa does not exist. For example, atheism, I feel is a position of enlightenment and freedom which is the polar opposite of the Catholic guilt that pervaded my childhood. That's what I'm getting at. To some extent I am who I am and live the way I do because I don't believe in god. Perhaps it is different for me because I had a staunch Catholic upbringing and have no idea what an entirely religion-free brain is like?

 

 

When men stop believing in God, it isn't that they then believe in nothing: they believe in everything.

UMBERTO ECO, Foucault's Pendulum

 

(PS I should have said 'as close to a grand meta-narrative as you're going to get' in post 303.)

[Ryedo40]

...Once you align yourself to the fundamental tenets of atheism it then informs your interaction with everything in the same way that the religious are informed by their faith.

 

Mikem, I'll assume there are many gods - and numerous other things like fairies, etc - that you don't believe in. Likewise, I guess there are many things you do not do; like not[a] collecting stamps. So now you've aligned yourself with the fundamental tenets of a[insert numerous gods, etc here], how does that inform your interaction in the same way that the religious are informed by their faith - or how does not collecting stamps[astampism] make you interact with stamps in the same way a stamp collector would?

[RootsBooster]

And you are entirely entitled to think that way. I feel different about being atheistic.

 

So how do you feel my non-belief affects my life?

[mikem8634]

Mikem, I'll assume there are many gods - and numerous other things like fairies, etc - that you don't believe in. Likewise, I guess there are many things you do not do; like not[a] collecting stamps. So now you've aligned yourself with the fundamental tenets of a[insert numerous gods, etc here], how does that inform your interaction in the same way that the religious are informed by their faith - or how does not collection stamps[astampism] make you interact with stamps in the same way a stamp collector would?

 

So how do you feel my non-belief affects my life?

 

Sorry you two I was typing and editing away on my previous post while you posted these. I may have addressed some of your points already if you take a look. Please don't think I am criticising anybody's position - I am aware my position is a personal one. I am more than happy to discuss it though.