Atheists are more intelligent than Religious people

[SnailyBoy]

Entirely your choice, can't see why anyone ( other than lunatic religious nutjobs of whatever religion ) would object to your opinion.

 

Of course that's what it is, your opinion, and therefore a belief that you personally hold.

 

Were you able to prove your contention then it would become a fact, and no longer just an opinion.

 

It seems to me that some ( although not all ) atheists are under the impression that they are in some way a bit superior because of their views.

 

The title of this thread for instance implies that all atheists are more intelligent than all theists, which is of course nonsense.

 

What belief do you think I have.?

[Carlinate]

What belief do you think I have.?

 

You said " I don't believe in god/gods because I've yet to find any evidence to support the existence of god/gods ".

 

That statement suggests that you have given the matter some thought, and having failed to find any evidence to persuade you that maybe god/gods exist you have come to the conclusion that they don't.

 

Therefore I assume from your comment ( which included the word believe ) that you don't believe in god/gods.

 

That is an opinion which you are fully entitled to, but that's all it is, your opinion.

 

One that you can't prove but which you believe to be true, an unprovable opinion is a belief isn't it?

 

That would appear logical wouldn't it?

[achorste]

Seeing as there is no evidence whatsoever for proving the non existence of God then you could apply that equally to theists and atheists couldn't you?

 

Both are believers in something which neither of them can prove.

 

You may claim probability factors etc but that is proof of nothing.

 

Have you heard of the 'Black Swan' theory? Prior to the European discovery of Australia it was assumed on all empirical evidence that all swans were white.

 

They aren't, and things we think we know for certain based upon our knowledge to date are hostage to further research, which is as it should be.

 

As for intelligence and the belief in God some genius's have been known to hold a belief in a creative force which brought it all into existence.

 

Georges Lemaitre was a Belgian professor of physics and friend of Albert Einstein he was the man responsible for the 'Big Bang' theory of the origin of the universe.

 

He was also a Roman Catholic priest, a fact which didn't appear to cause him any conflict.

 

Atheism isn't a belief, it is the absence of belief, which is very different - the burden of proof is those those who claim that something exists.

[SnailyBoy]

You said " I don't believe in god/gods because I've yet to find any evidence to support the existence of god/gods ".

 

That statement suggests that you have given the matter some thought, and having failed to find any evidence to persuade you that maybe god/gods exist you have come to the conclusion that they don't.

 

Therefore I assume from your comment ( which included the word believe ) that you don't believe in god/gods.

 

That is an opinion which you are fully entitled to, but that's all it is, your opinion.

 

One that you can't prove but which you believe to be true, an unprovable opinion is a belief isn't it?

 

That would appear logical wouldn't it?

 

Are you suggesting that if someone doesn't have a belief in something, they believe the opposite is true?

[Carlinate]

Atheism isn't a belief, it is the absence of belief, which is very different - the burden of proof is those those who claim that something exists.

 

No it isn't, why would it be?

 

Unless someone is trying to convert you to their religion then I would agree, but other than in those circumstances why should a theist have to explain anything to anyone?

 

Of course atheism is a belief, a = without theist = god.

 

Atheists give themselves a description which makes a claim as to what their opinion is.

 

An opinion without proof is a belief.

 

They have reached a conclusion which they can't prove, in that they are the same as theists.

 

---------- Post added 23-05-2017 at 16:26 ----------

 

Are you suggesting that if someone doesn't have a belief in something, they believe the opposite is true?

 

Depends entirely on what they don't believe in doesn't it?

 

With regard to belief or non belief in god then yes.

 

It's a straight forward choice with only two answers, is there a god/creator or isn't there.

 

If you don't believe there is then you believe there isn't.

 

Unless of course you have never given the question any thought whatsoever, in which case belief doesn't apply.

 

In your case however you have stated that you have given the matter some thought and come to the conclusion that you don't believe in god/gods.

 

That would suggest that you believe there are no god/gods wouldn't it?

 

And that would be an opinion without proof, or a belief as it's known generally.

 

Obviously, I have no idea what you actually believe, you may be an atheist, you may be agnostic or you may be an ordained holy man on a wind up.

[achorste]

No it isn't, why would it be?

 

Unless someone is trying to convert you to their religion then I would agree, but other than in those circumstances why should a theist have to explain anything to anyone?

 

Of course atheism is a belief, a = without theist = god.

 

Atheists give themselves a description which makes a claim as to what their opinion is.

 

An opinion without proof is a belief.

 

They have reached a conclusion which they can't prove, in that they are the same as theists.

 

Right then, if we're going to get the dictionary out - Theist does not = god. Theist is "belief in the existence of a god or gods" (get the Oxford English Dictionary out). Atheism is by definition the absence of belief.

 

There is no belief structure to atheism, there are no claims as to the existence of any kind of supernatural deity, it is essentially a vacuum of belief.

 

I would dispute that they have reached a conclusion that is unsupported by evidence - logical paradoxes alone dictate against the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient god.

[petemcewan]

...for some atheists yes, for many others it's simply absence of belief in gods.

 

---------- Post added 21-05-2017 at 09:22 ----------

 

Studies with these results aren't new, I'm pretty sure a thread covering this topic has already taken place on SF, possibly more than once. Does it feel familiar to anyone else?

 

Yes it does.

[altus]

It's a straight forward choice with only two answers, is there a god/creator or isn't there.

There are three possible answers yes/no/there is insufficient evidence to tell either way.

[SnailyBoy]

 

Depends entirely on what they don't believe in doesn't it?

 

With regard to belief or non belief in god then yes.

 

It's a straight forward choice with only two answers, is there a god/creator or isn't there.

 

If you don't believe there is then you believe there isn't.

 

Unless of course you have never given the question any thought whatsoever, in which case belief doesn't apply.

 

In your case however you have stated that you have given the matter some thought and come to the conclusion that you don't believe in god/gods.

 

That would suggest that you believe there are no god/gods wouldn't it?

 

And that would be an opinion without proof, or a belief as it's known generally.

 

Obviously, I have no idea what you actually believe, you may be an atheist, you may be agnostic or you may be an ordained holy man on a wind up.

 

I agree, there is or there isn't.

 

However, saying that I don't believe the claim that a god exists simply means that the god claim hasn't met the burden of proof.

 

That doesn't mean that I believe the opposite is true.

 

If you claimed to have a dragon in your garage and I said that I didn't believe you, would it mean that I believed that you didn't have a dragon in your garage?

Edited May 23, 2017 by SnailyBoy

[Cyclone]

Are you suggesting that if someone doesn't have a belief in something, they believe the opposite is true?

 

If you don't have a belief in Santa, then you believe that Santa doesn't exist.

 

When it's a binary choice, exist/not exist, then not believing one, means believing the other.

 

But weren't we going to drop this as not really on topic?

 

---------- Post added 23-05-2017 at 16:47 ----------

 

If God created the world, then logically god must exist because the world exists, therefore the only remaining question is of the nature of god: is he no more than the aggregation of 15 billion years of the laws of physics acting upon a single point of nothing, which once exploded, or is he some kind of sentience?

 

Either way, can anyone argue that his creation is not a wondrous thing and therefore the wanton destruction of it is a sin against god, atheism notwithstanding?

 

That starts with an unprovable axiom, so the entire thing becomes meaningless.

And you'll note that the nature of the universe is towards entropy, so perhaps it's wrong to try to create order, the entire universe is an engine of destruction.

 

---------- Post added 23-05-2017 at 16:47 ----------

 

Seeing as there is no evidence whatsoever for proving the non existence of God then you could apply that equally to theists and atheists couldn't you?

 

Only if you think that you can prove negatives.

 

---------- Post added 23-05-2017 at 16:48 ----------

 

Georges Lemaitre was a Belgian professor of physics and friend of Albert Einstein he was the man responsible for the 'Big Bang' theory of the origin of the universe.

 

He was also a Roman Catholic priest, a fact which didn't appear to cause him any conflict.

 

So? It's a statement about populations, large groups. Of course there are outliers within both sets.

 

---------- Post added 23-05-2017 at 16:50 ----------

 

 

Were you able to prove your contention then it would become a fact, and no longer just an opinion.

 

It seems to me that some ( although not all ) atheists are under the impression that they are in some way a bit superior because of their views.

Can you prove that Santa doesn't exist?

What would you think of an adult who still believes in him?

 

The title of this thread for instance implies that all atheists are more intelligent than all theists, which is of course nonsense.

 

That isn't what the title implies at all, you've simply misinterpreted it.