Pffftttt...........Jake, Jake, Jake............what are we going to do with you, man?
Evidence=none:
Atheism doesn't require faith.
So you're saying that atheists do not have faith in their own ability to reason and discern truth? You believe that atheists do not have faith in their own senses, research, experiments, or conclusions? That is a very unscientific view for an atheist to have.
Strangely enough, I am agreeing with you to som extent, Machaut
Mature adult atheist do have some kind of 'trust-value' system(which could be called a 'faith'-based system of beliefs except ....) based on assumptions and axioms of reasoning. But there are some caveats to this.
One is that you do not need a trust-value system to be an atheist. In other words, lack of or disbelief in a religion does not translate to a ready made faith-based belief system for you. For instance, you could be ignorant of a religion. Therefore you have 'disbelief due to ignorance' of that religion since you cannot believe anything you do not know. Yet it is entirely possible for that person to lack a "trust-value" system as well. OR, the person is in the process of developing one that has no bearings on belief or disbelief of any religion.
Now here is a strange but true realization about this example, the person in question may have developed this "trust-value" system, and then come to learn and accept a religion afterwards..
.
Machaut--you have done this, the problem is that you are not
presently separating your "trust-value" system from your "faith-based" system of beliefs. They are distinct, and your religious beliefs sits on top of your "trust-value" system.
Without this "distinction" in the minds of humans--deconversion would be an impossibility. Also, conversion from one religion to another would be an impossibility as well.
I think that I am separating them more than you realize. I was raised as a Christian, but now I am a Muslim. In great detail, I have considered atheism, agnosticism, Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism, the Baha'i Faith, Mormonism, and various sects of Christianity, Islam, animism, and paganism, and I arrived at my current denomination based upon this trust-value system. I am willing to accept that I could be wrong, that I have missed something in my reasoning and research, and that some other religion that I may or may not have previously reviewed is either correct or at least more correct than my current one. However, I do not think it is likely. All the same, I constantly question my own beliefs; it seems to me that many Catholics, Muslims, and atheists share this agnostic quality amongst themselves, the idea that their current way of doing things
could be wrong, but probably isn't.
You say that my religious beliefs sit on top of my trust-value system. What do you mean by this, that my religion is illogically overriding my trust-value system, or that my trust-value system is a foundation for my religious beliefs?
Another caveat, and one theist try to ask but have a habit of "messing their question up", is that a 'trust-value' system in an atheist does not necessarily lead to a code of absolute morals. However it can lead a system of 'personal' morals for the atheist which is a direct product product of the 'trust-value' system applied to real life situations.
As a theist, this 2nd caveat should be problematic for you!!
Why?
There are other problems with the 'trust-value' system such as it can be different in each individual, can produce different results for an individual based upon ones perspective, and can be separated into two parts--a subconscious part and a conscious part. An atheist can 'believe' he/she is rational(and this could be true), but our subconscious can lead us down a road of irrationality in a heart beat.
So deconverting does not lead one to some kind of Universal Enlightenment. In fact, it mainly changes the perspective with one added body of knowledge(knowing as in understanding to the individual): They no longer think the religion they had followed is ABSOLUTELY true. They may still accept some part of it and so forth, but the god based tenets are highly scrutinized and/or flat out rejected.
All of this applies to theists as well. It is interesting that Catholics, Muslims, and atheists (it has been these three primarily in my own experience, perhaps it is different for others?) seem to have so much in common in terms of this intellectual and spiritual journey. I think that all of these semi-agnostic people, myself included, tend to, as you said, have different results based upon their individual perspective. People who believe strongly in the first commandment would turn to Islam ("Why am I praying to Jesus or asking a saint for intercession, rather than talking to God Himself?"), while those with a sense of independence or rebelliousness may wind up as atheists ("Why must a higher power necessarily exist?"). Of course, I say this as someone with a very limited perspective of having lived only in the U.S., so I suppose that needs to be taken into account.
I hope I am answering some of your questions. Of course I should warn you-you may not want to keep going down this road. There is too much 'peeking behind the curtains " and it could 'land you in the fire'.
Yes, you are answering my questions. We seem to think a lot alike, in my opinion, but have somewhat different ways of expressing it.
If by "land you in the fire" you're implying that any kind of rigorous investigation of one's own beliefs is somehow un-Christian/un-Islamic, hateful, etc., then I must disagree. It is incumbent upon anyone with an opinion on religion to question their beliefs. Questioning a basic idea, including the existence of God, is not a sin; rather, it is an opportunity to grow. I have considered arguments against the existence of God many times, but each time, my faith in God's existence has only increased. I think that blind belief immune to constructive inquisition is ultimately harmful to anyone, theist or atheist.
face, which is the universal symbol for "I am not feeling laid back right now."
