Scientists discover that atheists might not exist, and that’s not a joke

If one is in the habit of seeking out other people who don't collect stamps to talk about not collecting stamps (especially in subforums dedicated to stamp collecting) and so forth, then yes. It starts to look that way.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thank you ... remarkable ..I like it☺

What you call my beliefs are probably best called "facts".

My point is I come from a position where god just does not figure...its a non event...the fact is there is no god and that is the way it is... in fact I dont like to be drawn into "I dont believe" as its just a nonsence not worth addressing.

No one can show there is a god to not believe in...

If you are hinting that I am brainwashed please dont be shy...tell me why you think that...do you think I was taken by heathens as a child and subjected daily to their beliefs like the unfortunate offspring of theists..or do you suggest I am simply annoying you...well I am sorry that I annoy you but please dont hate me.

I am here just like others rattling on about stuff of no consequence and you should not let me get under your skin.

I like to think I dont believe in anything ...I dont trust humans heck I dont even trust myself...that comes from observing how most folk can fool themselves so easily and convincingly...

But look if you want to find fault in my character or writting let me help as I could put more in that list than you could...unlike most folk I recognise I am just a little fallable human of little importance no better nor worse than the next.
Alex

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And I went to church and sunday school and even then I saw it was a con job...maybe my brain was not worth washing.
Alex

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Theism is no more a religion than atheism is.
You can have theistic and atheistic religions.
Theism may be at the core of many religions, but I don't see it as being in and of itself a religion.

 

Atheism itself isn't a belief, rather just a lack of a rather specific one.
It is a position that may very well be supported by other beliefs, but is not in and of itself a belief.
If atheism is a belief then it is one that must surely be shared by all atheists, right?
Then can you detail what this belief is, perchance?

 

If you're observing life through your navel then I imagine it would look like that.

 

I make a stronger distinction between philosophy and religion.

Religion is more closely associated to myth than to philosophy in my opinion, where 'myth' doesn't mean 'bullshit', but rather something like 'explanatory account presented as a narrative in the form of a story'. Philosophy is distinguished from that by its attempt to use rational argument and reasoning to justify everything.

For example, religion historically accounted for the origin of everything with creation stories (like the very abbreviated verses at the beginning of Genesis) and by theogonies. The latter were more common and prevailed where different gods and goddesses were associated with (and served as personifications of) different aspects of reality. So the elaborate stories about which gods and goddesses gave birth to others, and what kind of conflicts and strife arose among them, represented early (more or less unconsciously allegorical) attempts to account for how the various aspects of reality relate to one another.

The earliest Greek philosophers in Ionia addressed the same issues, the origin of everything and how various aspects or reality relate and interact, but didn't personify them and tried to relate them using reasonable arguments.

That use of reason to address foundational issues is more of less definitive of philosophy in my view. Science didn't exist yet in ancient Greek times, though trial-and-error craft traditions certainly did. And until the 1800's science was most commonly referred to as 'natural philosophy' (that specialty of philosophy that addressed the natural world, alongside other specialties like logic, epistemology, ethics and aesthetics). So our distinction between philosophy and science is comparatively recent.

Anaximander imagined the original 'stuff' ('arche') of the universe as formlessness (his 'apeiron', 'without boundaries', the 'undefined'). Then he tried to imagine how it might have acquired definition and form (setting in motion the form/matter metaphysics which is still very much alive today, in the form of things like structural realism).

The Pythagoreans (Pythagoras seems to have been an Ionian who moved to southern Italy where his school was influential) used simple mathematics such as numbers as its explanatory principle, where mathematics more or less plays the role of Anaximander's perimeters, shapes and forms, and we still see something of that in theoretical physics today.

Like theoretical physicists with the equations that they scrawl all over their chalkboards and believe explain the deepest mysteries of the universe?

I think that an ambiguity in the meaning of 'atheist' is exposed there. If 'atheism' means 'disbelief in the existence of gods' (including the big one the monotheists envision), then it's entirely possible to be spiritual without being a theist. (Imagine Theravadan Buddhist monks for whom gods may or may not exist but are irrelevant to their practice. The gods, should they exist, are probably more in need of enlightenment than we are.) But if 'atheism' is interpreted to mean 'non-religious' or even 'anti-religious' (as it often seems to be by the 'New Atheists') , then you might have a better point.

And I think that 'shamanism' might be best conceived as the belief that there is a higher spiritual world besides this one, and that the higher world can be contacted and influenced by ecstatic means (by altered states of consciousness). We supposedly all experience something of it in dreams. I think that it's entirely possible (and probably most common historically) to conceive of such powers and abilities among specially endowed people without belief in the existence of named and personified gods. There's just something powerful on a higher (abstract?) plane (the laws of physics?) which influences events down here in the world we inhabit. (Of course physicists don't typically believe that they can influence the laws of physics by psychedelic means, though some of the quantum idealists (and their intellectual ancestors, the Kantians) seem to come very close with their belief that consciousness constructs physical reality.)

 

No. I meant what I said.

(Gods and unicorns.) By all means, point out the differences.

 

Wrong reply

 

When atheists start talking about (what they believe) what god really is, then you start to get a uniform picture of the belief structure of atheism.

 

Maybe it's time for you to start a new hobby, like not collecting stamps.
You could try reading the views of prominent non stamp collectors to get a good grounding on the basics. Or maybe ask your peers, who are their favourite non-stamp collecting writers.

 

Abrahamic montheistic belief?
Where have even given the the impression that I imply this this (whatever it is)?

A dick-measuring contest? Really?
The disturbing thing is, I'm totally not surprised.

Jan.

 

Here lies the difference between theism, and atheism. Atheists are simply without God, as their title suggests.

So you're not wishing that, if God does exist (from your perspective) will almost "certainly", not be the God theists believe in?
Do you realise the obvious sentiment behind your atheist wishful thinking?

Jan.

 

So rather than answer the question meaningfully and addressing the issue raised, you just come up with a one-liner that has mere vague allusions to being an answer?
I ask again: what belief is it that you think the atheist holds?

 

That's all you got?

 

There aren't hundreds of Gods. Where did you get such a silly idea. There are gods, and there is God. One God.
People may believe in gods, but it has nothing to do with God.

That's asking, which water? American, Derbyshire, Portuguese?

I don't know every single Christian, or Muslim. Do you?

I didn't think so.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achintya_Bheda_Abheda

Jan.

 

I only typed it. It is the title of the article.
But if you had read the op, you would have known that. Right?

As for post 20...

You is trippin!

.

Then you have nothing to defend.
So stop defending, and leave room for the defenders of their faith.

Theist, make a connection with God (however small).
Atheists don't

In fact atheists are without God.
So how did you arrive at your conclusion?

You're an atheist, you have no idea what theists believe. Sure you can make stabs in the dark, and believe your conjecture.
But until you become a theist, you are simply in the dark.

Jan.

 

Ooh!
You big old ex-theist you.

Jan.

 

Dumb. Isn't it?
And here you are not believing in God.

Jan.

 

Have you looked up substance abuse counseling?