What religion/faith are you?

[oberth]

I'm an atheist. My only knowledge pertaining to this is that I lack a belief in "God". Why would I need extraordinary evidence to show that?

you don't need to, obviously but that's why i am an agnostic and not an atheist because to call myself an atheist i would need to

i have no problem with people calling themselves atheists - i have a problem with people calling me an atheist

if that were to be put into one category i'd be fine with atheists & agnostics but not with atheists

 

[Tosk]

Gotcha. No problem here then, I don't tend to go around telling other people what religious designation they are.

But to circle back, why do you say that 'both sides' require extraordinary evidence?

 

[oberth]

Gotcha. No problem here then, I don't tend to go around telling other people what religious designation they are.

But to circle back, why do you say that 'both sides' require extraordinary evidence?

for me - to state the definate absence of god is the same as to state the definate presence of a certain god. to do either i need to be able to prove it which i'm not.

i said that above (in my first post in here)

but i still don't know whether there's a god - i think rather not, but i don't know that for sure.

count me as an agnostic

so why am i told that i got it wrong aka that i am an atheist

i don't go about and tell people whether mormons are christians or not that's for them to discuss; to me they are all cultists*, anyway (and i don't run around telling them either)

what some might find strange i do enjoy sitting in the backrow during services here and then - mostly catholic (i used to be an altharboy) or jewish.

---

* no offence intented to anyone

 

[Tosk]

I hereby declare that Santa Claus DOES NOT EXIST.

 

[oberth]

I hereby declare that Santa Claus DOES NOT EXIST.

as it might be considered a bit off-topic i put my answer behind a link

 

[Kai "the spy"]

@oberth , I think there is a basic misunderstanding of what atheism is. It appears you think atheists believe that there is no god or other higher supernatural power. But in reality, atheists simply don't believe that there is a god. It may look like a very small distinction, but it actually is a completely different position.

 

[oberth]

@oberth , I think there is a basic misunderstanding of what atheism is. It appears you think atheists believe that there is no god or other higher supernatural power. But in reality, atheists simply don't believe that there is a god. It may look like a very small distinction, but it actually is a completely different position.

i know that, but for me that's not the case - it is not a binary choice, is it? i do neither believe there is a god nor do i believe there isn't - i just don't know and have not enough evidence to come to a conclusion. what i can do is stating

[insert god of your chosing] is a fraud​

that's why i'm an agnostic and no theist or atheist.

why have i to be pidgenholed as an atheist? the chances for no god are way higher than for a god but not high enough to convince me. too close to call doesn't mean 50:50, does it?

... and i always thought atheists don't send out missionairies

it's my, and mine alone, decision what i declare as and not somebody else's who wants to increase their numbers for whatever reason.

i didn't tell any self-professed atheist: you aren't you are ...

there's exactly one user interacting in this thread with me who doesn't try to convince me of something but has just asked why - all the others tell me i'm wrong.

@Tosk, thanks a lot

 

[Kai "the spy"]

it's my, and mine alone, decision what i declare as and not somebody else's who wants to increase their numbers for whatever reason.

i didn't tell any self-professed atheist: you aren't you are ...

there's exactly one user interacting in this thread with me who doesn't try to convince of something but has just asked why - all the others tell me i'm wrong.

And neither have I told you that you aren't an agnostic, or that you are an atheist. I was just trying to correct you, because when you say stuff like this ...

for me - to state the definate absence of god is the same as to state the definate presence of a certain god. to do either i need to be able to prove it which i'm not.

... it does leave the impression that you indeed think that atheists believe that there is no god. I was just trying to help you clear up an apparent misunderstanding of the concept of atheism, not tell you what you are and what you do or don't have to believe.

 

[oberth]

And neither have I told you that you aren't an agnostic, or that you are an atheist. I was just trying to correct you, because when you say stuff like this ...



... it does leave the impression that you indeed think that atheists believe that there is no god. I was just trying to help you clear up an apparent misunderstanding of the concept of atheism, not tell you what you are and what you do or don't have to believe.

you have a funny way of highlighting stuff

 

[Timelord79 (he/him)]

Just throwing my two cents in here and give my definitions.

Gnostic: someone who professes to have knowledge about a claim. This can be negative or positive.

Agnostic: someone who doesn’t profess to have knowledge about a claim. This is the null position before falsifying either positive or negative position.

Theist: someone who holds the specific believe of the existence of one of more gods.

Atheist: someone who doesn’t hold the believe a god exists (not synonymous with but does include belief that no gods exist)

gnostic Theism: the positive belief to hold knowledge about the existence of a god/gods

agnostic Theism: the acknowledgment that one doesn’t really know about the existence of a god but believes one exists anyway

gnostic Atheism: the claim of knowledge that no god exists. A claim that is hard to defend in general but usually very easy in regards to specific gods.

agnostic atheism: the absence of belief in a god/gods due to good enough evidence for their existence.

And bonus definition: Deism
The belief that a higher power/god exists that doesn’t interact with the universe or care about it and humans in it. Basically a prime mover who steps back and watches the dominos fall at best.
Usually the existence of the universe is regarded as evidence for this, as it is considered inconceivable that it could exist without a deity.

so, under my definition oberth falls in the agnostic atheism category, as no other definition fits.

But if we go by his definitions, then yes that would leave only agnostic as the only intellectually honest position.
As long as we come to an agreement what the actual position is and don’t haggle about semantics, I don’t have a problem with either.
that said, the actual atheist community does by and large share his position and would call him an atheist under the commonly accepted definition.

 

[oberth]

so, under my definition oberth falls in the agnostic atheism category, as no other definition fits.

But if we go by his definitions, then yes that would leave only agnostic as the only intellectually honest position.

thx, i have no problem at all with that - next time you do that to someone it might be a good idea to page them

 

[Timewalker]

an atheist can't proove his 'knowledge' no more that any 'theist', so that means extraordinary evidence for both of them

You've heard that old saying about proving a negative, right?

why have i to be pidgenholed as an atheist?

You don't. Label yourself in any way you want, as long as you're not claiming to be something you're not.

... and i always thought atheists don't send out missionairies

We don't.

 

[think]

 

[Danoz]

I seem to have landed on, "I'm not sure, I don't know - not enough evidence." I do tend toward the belief that there is a greater consciousness/design bigger than ourselves (and even humanity in general) - but that's more of a "gut feeling" than a belief. And I'm not hostile toward religion, I still attend church at times, see value in what Christianity and other religious have to teach, etc.

All I can say for certain, is that even if we are just hyper-evolved simians, an accident of evolution, hurling on a spec of dust through a cosmic explosion, it doesn't change a thing for my here and now; it's a beautiful spec of dust and I want to enjoy every second of it.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

It's a meaningful distinction to make between a person who thinks there's probably no God, isn't totally sure, but has no particular other belief they lean toward, and a person who is torn between atheism and a specific belief system.

A person who has set up a choice between Christianity and Atheism has very different beliefs from a person who has set up a choice between Atheism and 'Unknown other'.

I consider myself an atheist though I am not sure, and think if there is a higher power, no human being quite knows what they are or what they want. The scientific origin of the universe has not been proven to any extent of certainty, just an assertion of 'Best fit model to the evidence available to us'.

It's also worth noting that (Per my observation), Jews and Hindus who don't believe in God tend to call themselves Jews and Hindus, but Christians and Muslims who don't believe in God call themselves Atheists. There's cultural components to what religion you identify as, not just theological ones.

 

[Commander Troi]

This is why there's a distinction between positive and negative atheism.

That's new to me. Would you please say more on this?

I've been questioning a lot of my labels lately, seeing which do and don't fit anymore. I'd like to thank all of you for making me think about my labels in this area. I don't want any right now.

Two quoted scenes kind of sum up what I've been thinking recently.

The first is from Dogma:

Bethany: So you're saying that having beliefs is a bad thing?
Rufus: I just think it's better to have an idea. You can change an idea; changing a belief is trickier.​

The other is from TNG:

Jean-Luc Picard: Considering the marvelous complexity of the universe, its clockwork perfection, its balances of this against that... matter, energy, gravitation, time, dimension, I believe that our existence must be more than either of these philosophies. That what we are goes beyond euclidean or other 'practical' measuring systems... and that our existence is part of a reality beyond what we understand now as reality.​

 

[Tosk]

but Christians and Muslims who don't believe in God call themselves Atheists.

Do you mean ones that used to believe and then stopped? Because if they never believed, there'd be no label to drop in the first place.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Do you mean ones that used to believe and then stopped? Because if they never believed, there'd be no label to drop in the first place.

People who were raised in the culture of the religion. Maybe it's because those are the religions where if you don't strictly believe in the theology your culture will reject you for it, people who grew up with those religions feel more need to rebel against the culture when they stop believing in the theology.

 

[dupersuper]

That's new to me. Would you please say more on this?

I've been questioning a lot of my labels lately, seeing which do and don't fit anymore. I'd like to thank all of you for making me think about my labels in this area. I don't want any right now.

Two quoted scenes kind of sum up what I've been thinking recently.

The first is from Dogma:

Bethany: So you're saying that having beliefs is a bad thing?
Rufus: I just think it's better to have an idea. You can change an idea; changing a belief is trickier.​

The other is from TNG:

Jean-Luc Picard: Considering the marvelous complexity of the universe, its clockwork perfection, its balances of this against that... matter, energy, gravitation, time, dimension, I believe that our existence must be more than either of these philosophies. That what we are goes beyond euclidean or other 'practical' measuring systems... and that our existence is part of a reality beyond what we understand now as reality.​

The Dogma quote's great, but the Picard quote that matches my view is:

"Horrifying. Doctor Barron, your report describes how rational these people are. Millennia ago, they abandoned their belief in the supernatural. Now you are asking me to sabotage that achievement, to send them back into the Dark Ages of superstition and ignorance and fear? No!"

 

[NewHeavensNewEarth]

Jean-Luc Picard: Considering the marvelous complexity of the universe, its clockwork perfection, its balances of this against that... matter, energy, gravitation, time, dimension, I believe that our existence must be more than either of these philosophies. That what we are goes beyond euclidean or other 'practical' measuring systems... and that our existence is part of a reality beyond what we understand now as reality.​

I've always thought that quote was interesting, too. Nothing about our universe suggests chaos. From the galactic level to the subatomic, there's order and precision, making us possible and science possible as well - without laws governing everything, science itself would be a hopeless attempt to quantify chaos. Instead, systematic study through observation and experimentation in this well-ordered universe is accessible to all, from kids' 2nd grade science projects to the treks to the stars we see on a regular basis these days.