Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

[dblack]

I don't believe it is possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory because there is no affirmative case for atheism. The only argument of atheism is to argue against religion and to criticize religion.

So my question is... Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

Atheism is simply a statement of a lack of belief in any deity. Nothing more and nothing less.

That there is no actual proof of the existence of any deity means that all religious belief is theory.

And you are only able to confirm your belief by arguing against the beliefs of others, right?

There's nothing to confirm. You're making a mistake common among theists: assuming that atheists believe there are no gods. Some might, but that's not part of atheism. Atheism isn't a belief, it's a lack of belief.

Let me ask you this - Do you believe in all gods, or just one? If there are gods you don't believe in, do you feel the need to argue against every god you don't believe in? Do you have to confirm your lack of belief in all other gods? Each and every one? Or is it enough to just say, "I don't share that belief"?

 

[SweetSue92]

Outraged? No. Just stating facts. The only way you can validate your beliefs is to tear down the beliefs of others. You need to do that. You literally can’t help yourself.

Horseshit. I am an atheist. And I have even argued in favor of people being allowed to practice their religions.

The overwhelming majority of atheists simply go about their life without following any religious dogma. However, there are plenty of religious people who seem bound & determined to attack atheists for their lack of belief. This thread is a perfect example of that.

We're on a political message board - attacking and defending beliefs is the point.

Do you remember that atheist guy in the checkout line at the grocery store who wished you a merry Christmas? The atheist who wasn't attacking your beliefs? Of course you don't. He didn't bother to tell you he was an atheist. That's the way it is with most of us, most of the time.

Agree....most the time I just smile and go along with their religious nonsense
I enjoy saying Merry Christmas and God Bless you when you sneeze
I also say God Damnit and Jesus Freak’n Christ

It is only stupid threads like this where morons make ridiculous claims about atheists that I bother to respond

How is the premise of this thread ridiculous exactly?

Are you suggesting that you can confirm your beliefs some other way than arguing against the beliefs of others?

What is ridiculous is that you think I need to

Burden of proof is on you, my friend
You are the one worshiping a creator

You just haven’t convinced me

It is not actually our job to convince you. We can present the information, that's it. The rest is entirely out of our hands.

 

[SweetSue92]

I don't believe it is possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory because there is no affirmative case for atheism. The only argument of atheism is to argue against religion and to criticize religion.

So my question is... Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

Atheism is simply a statement of a lack of belief in any deity. Nothing more and nothing less.

That there is no actual proof of the existence of any deity means that all religious belief is theory.

And you are only able to confirm your belief by arguing against the beliefs of others, right?

There's nothing to confirm. You're making a mistake common among theists: assuming that atheists believe there are no gods. Some might, but that's not part of atheism. Atheism isn't a belief, it's a lack of belief.

Let me ask you this - Do you believe in all gods, or just one? If there are gods you don't believe in, do you feel the need to argue against every god you don't believe in? Do you have to confirm your lack of belief in all other gods? Each and every one? Or is it enough to just say, "I don't share that belief"?

"Lack of belief" is a ridiculous position of a ridiculous age. It is internal temperature-taking: "I have investigated the inner reaches of my mind and soul and found that I 'lack a belief' in Thor."

Honestly, it's weak, bordering on puke-worthy. Here I will show you: Thor was the imagining of a tribal people before they came to know Jesus Christ.

And see, I didn't even need to peruse my own self for that. Imagine that.

 

[dblack]

I don't believe it is possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory because there is no affirmative case for atheism. The only argument of atheism is to argue against religion and to criticize religion.

So my question is... Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

Atheism is simply a statement of a lack of belief in any deity. Nothing more and nothing less.

That there is no actual proof of the existence of any deity means that all religious belief is theory.

And you are only able to confirm your belief by arguing against the beliefs of others, right?

There's nothing to confirm. You're making a mistake common among theists: assuming that atheists believe there are no gods. Some might, but that's not part of atheism. Atheism isn't a belief, it's a lack of belief.

Let me ask you this - Do you believe in all gods, or just one? If there are gods you don't believe in, do you feel the need to argue against every god you don't believe in? Do you have to confirm your lack of belief in all other gods? Each and every one? Or is it enough to just say, "I don't share that belief"?

"Lack of belief" is a ridiculous position of a ridiculous age. It is internal temperature-taking: "I have investigated the inner reaches of my mind and soul and found that I 'lack a belief' in Thor."

Honestly, it's weak, bordering on puke-worthy. Here I will show you: Thor was the imagining of a tribal people before they came to know Jesus Christ.

And see, I didn't even need to peruse my own self for that. Imagine that.

I couldn't make any sense out of that. Can you rephrase?

 

[anynameyouwish]

It's so amusing when people complain that someone is "criticizing religion." Here on USMB alone, people criticize Catholics, Protestants of various hues, Jews, Muslims, and others such as Wiccans. In the meantime, out in the real world, Jews and Muslims are going at it, as are Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland, Hindus and Muslims in India, Shi'a and Sunni Muslims, and so much else. It's wasted breath, and would be hilarious if such strife did not place so many people in danger. One cannot be a Muslim in Pakistan going to market without risking being blown up by another Muslim. I don't know why adults get involved in this crap. It's so juvenile. As I have always said:

Die and find out!

[This post brought to you by a former medieval history major]

Not complaining. Just saying that all atheists can do to validate their beliefs is to tear down the beliefs of others. That’s just a fact.

Apparently you agree because you sure aren’t disagreeing.

"Not complaining. Just saying that all atheists can do to validate their beliefs is to tear down the beliefs of others. That’s just a fact."

the way christians tear down the beliefs of muslims and atheists?

kinda like that?

 

[edthecynic]

Critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe.

And that makes YOU a "Critical Theorist" "Cultural Marxist" HYPOCRITE when it comes to Atheism.

 

[ding]

Critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe.

And that makes YOU a "Critical Theorist" "Cultural Marxist" HYPOCRITE when it comes to Atheism.

How so?

Maybe militant atheism, sure. But atheism in general, no way.

 

[ding]

It's so amusing when people complain that someone is "criticizing religion." Here on USMB alone, people criticize Catholics, Protestants of various hues, Jews, Muslims, and others such as Wiccans. In the meantime, out in the real world, Jews and Muslims are going at it, as are Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland, Hindus and Muslims in India, Shi'a and Sunni Muslims, and so much else. It's wasted breath, and would be hilarious if such strife did not place so many people in danger. One cannot be a Muslim in Pakistan going to market without risking being blown up by another Muslim. I don't know why adults get involved in this crap. It's so juvenile. As I have always said:

Die and find out!

[This post brought to you by a former medieval history major]

Not complaining. Just saying that all atheists can do to validate their beliefs is to tear down the beliefs of others. That’s just a fact.

Apparently you agree because you sure aren’t disagreeing.

"Not complaining. Just saying that all atheists can do to validate their beliefs is to tear down the beliefs of others. That’s just a fact."

the way christians tear down the beliefs of muslims and atheists?

kinda like that?

I don't have a problem with Muslims or atheists.

But the difference is that I can make a positive argument for my beliefs. So can Muslims for that matter. Often times certain adherents of a religion do attack the beliefs of rival religions. That's not my cup of tea.

And lastly I am more than happy for people to not believe in God. It's not for everyone.

It does no harm to me for others to see God the best way for them or no God for that matter.

 

[edthecynic]

Critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe.

And that makes YOU a "Critical Theorist" "Cultural Marxist" HYPOCRITE when it comes to Atheism.

How so?
Maybe militant atheism, sure. But atheism in general, no way.

Surprise, surprise, the dumb act.
You equate Atheism with "Critical Theory" and "Cultural Marxism" as positive aspects of Atheism rather than criticisms of Atheism.

 

[SweetSue92]

I don't believe it is possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory because there is no affirmative case for atheism. The only argument of atheism is to argue against religion and to criticize religion.

So my question is... Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

Atheism is simply a statement of a lack of belief in any deity. Nothing more and nothing less.

That there is no actual proof of the existence of any deity means that all religious belief is theory.

And you are only able to confirm your belief by arguing against the beliefs of others, right?

There's nothing to confirm. You're making a mistake common among theists: assuming that atheists believe there are no gods. Some might, but that's not part of atheism. Atheism isn't a belief, it's a lack of belief.

Let me ask you this - Do you believe in all gods, or just one? If there are gods you don't believe in, do you feel the need to argue against every god you don't believe in? Do you have to confirm your lack of belief in all other gods? Each and every one? Or is it enough to just say, "I don't share that belief"?

"Lack of belief" is a ridiculous position of a ridiculous age. It is internal temperature-taking: "I have investigated the inner reaches of my mind and soul and found that I 'lack a belief' in Thor."

Honestly, it's weak, bordering on puke-worthy. Here I will show you: Thor was the imagining of a tribal people before they came to know Jesus Christ.

And see, I didn't even need to peruse my own self for that. Imagine that.

I couldn't make any sense out of that. Can you rephrase?

You do not claim a position, an ideology or a worldview. Claiming a "lack of belief" is just, again. canvassing the inner recesses of your own soul and mind and saying you "lack a belief" in God. Okay. To be fair though I'm not at all interested in that.

It would be like this: "I do not like the taste of brussels sprouts, therefore I do not recommend them to anyone. I call myself an anti-Brussels Sprout because I lack an enjoyment of them."

Okay, fine. YOU don't like them, but you're also unwilling to argue on the merits. Are they edible? Are they even nutritious? There are no merits or objective data being argued here. It's just "I don't like them, therefore they suck"

Again, this is modern atheism. Weak. Even pathetic.

 

[edthecynic]

I can make a positive argument for my beliefs.

No you can't! You can only pontificate what you claim to believe, that you pretend to back up by deliberately misrepresenting anything you cite as support.

 

[anotherlife]

Atheism was an important third option in the 20th century. A atheism banks on rejecting both God and Satan. Thereby it was conceived as a religion of itself.

But in the 21st century, computers have eliminated this 3rd option, and so wherever there is no God, there is definitely Satan. This caused atheism to lose its history and become more of another satanist cult recently.

 

[ding]

I don't believe it is possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory because there is no affirmative case for atheism. The only argument of atheism is to argue against religion and to criticize religion.

So my question is... Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

Atheism is simply a statement of a lack of belief in any deity. Nothing more and nothing less.

That there is no actual proof of the existence of any deity means that all religious belief is theory.

And you are only able to confirm your belief by arguing against the beliefs of others, right?

There's nothing to confirm. You're making a mistake common among theists: assuming that atheists believe there are no gods. Some might, but that's not part of atheism. Atheism isn't a belief, it's a lack of belief.

Let me ask you this - Do you believe in all gods, or just one? If there are gods you don't believe in, do you feel the need to argue against every god you don't believe in? Do you have to confirm your lack of belief in all other gods? Each and every one? Or is it enough to just say, "I don't share that belief"?

There is something for them to confirm; their belief there is no God. They do so by attacking the beliefs of others who believe there is a God. Otherwise, why would they care?

I believe there is only one God and he cares not how you see him which is why I try not to get in his way. Whether or not others share my belief is unimportant to me. Everyone is being pruned. Even those who don't believe in God.

The point of this OP is very narrow. There is no positive affirmation of atheism; only negative affirmation. Namely by attacking the beliefs of others. Which is exactly what we see here in this forum.

 

[ding]

I can make a positive argument for my beliefs.

No you can't! You can only pontificate what you claim to believe, that you pretend to back up by deliberately misrepresenting anything you cite as support.

Sure I can. I have done so quite often. You just dismiss it. But the case was made.

But let's try to stay on the topic of the OP.

Because you are just proving my point by what you are doing now.

 

[edthecynic]

Atheism was an important third option in the 20th century. A atheism banks on rejecting both God and Satan. Thereby it was conceived as a religion of itself.

But in the 21st century, computers have eliminated this 3rd option, and so wherever there is no God, there is definitely Satan. This caused atheism to lose its history and become more of another satanist cult recently.

Or God and Satan are one and the same, two sides of the same coin making Atheism the ONLY alternative to Satan.

1 Ch 21: 1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

2 Sam 24: 1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

 

[ding]

Outraged? No. Just stating facts. The only way you can validate your beliefs is to tear down the beliefs of others. You need to do that. You literally can’t help yourself.

Horseshit. I am an atheist. And I have even argued in favor of people being allowed to practice their religions.

The overwhelming majority of atheists simply go about their life without following any religious dogma. However, there are plenty of religious people who seem bound & determined to attack atheists for their lack of belief. This thread is a perfect example of that.

We're on a political message board - attacking and defending beliefs is the point.

Do you remember that atheist guy in the checkout line at the grocery store who wished you a merry Christmas? The atheist who wasn't attacking your beliefs? Of course you don't. He didn't bother to tell you he was an atheist. That's the way it is with most of us, most of the time.

Agree....most the time I just smile and go along with their religious nonsense
I enjoy saying Merry Christmas and God Bless you when you sneeze
I also say God Damnit and Jesus Freak’n Christ

It is only stupid threads like this where morons make ridiculous claims about atheists that I bother to respond

How is the premise of this thread ridiculous exactly?

Are you suggesting that you can confirm your beliefs some other way than arguing against the beliefs of others?

What is ridiculous is that you think I need to

Burden of proof is on you, my friend
You are the one worshiping a creator

You just haven’t convinced me

I'm not trying to convince you or need you to make an argument. You entered this thread.

Maybe you should reread the OP.

 

[ding]

Critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe.

And that makes YOU a "Critical Theorist" "Cultural Marxist" HYPOCRITE when it comes to Atheism.

How so?
Maybe militant atheism, sure. But atheism in general, no way.

Surprise, surprise, the dumb act.
You equate Atheism with "Critical Theory" and "Cultural Marxism" as positive aspects of Atheism rather than criticisms of Atheism.

Only because the only case that can be made for atheism is to criticize the beliefs of others. By definition that is critical theory.

 

[edthecynic]

I can make a positive argument for my beliefs.

No you can't! You can only pontificate what you claim to believe, that you pretend to back up by deliberately misrepresenting anything you cite as support.

Sure I can. I have done so quite often. You just dismiss it. But the case was made.

I dismiss it by giving the actual context of what you cite exposing your deliberate misrepresentations. That is why you run away from those threads only to pop up in a new thread with the same deliberate misrepresentations.

 

[ding]

Critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe.

And that makes YOU a "Critical Theorist" "Cultural Marxist" HYPOCRITE when it comes to Atheism.

How so?
Maybe militant atheism, sure. But atheism in general, no way.

Surprise, surprise, the dumb act.
You equate Atheism with "Critical Theory" and "Cultural Marxism" as positive aspects of Atheism rather than criticisms of Atheism.

What positive aspects of atheism do you find?

Because I don't believe this OP is attacking atheism. Just stating the fact that there is no positive case to be made for atheism. You can't prove a negative, can you?

 

[ding]

I can make a positive argument for my beliefs.

No you can't! You can only pontificate what you claim to believe, that you pretend to back up by deliberately misrepresenting anything you cite as support.

Sure I can. I have done so quite often. You just dismiss it. But the case was made.

I dismiss it by giving the actual context of what you cite exposing your deliberate misrepresentations. That is why you run away from those threads only to pop up in a new thread with the same deliberate misrepresentations.

What am I misrepresenting? Can you prove a negative? If not, your only option is to criticize religion.