Stigma of Atheism

[PratchettFan]

No problem. If Stephen Hawking is an Atheist, then his Atheism is irrational. He has no more evidence there is or is not a God than anyone else. Any conclusion made in the absence of evidence is pure belief and pure belief is irrational. I doubt he would argue otherwise.

spirituality, which I have no problem with, is faith-based and has nothing to do with logic.

Any position arrived at in the absence of evidence is faith-based and has nothing to do with logic. I have no problem with any of them.

no one has to prove a negative.

You do if one claims it to be true. Calling it a negative does not get you off the hook of backing up a claim. And it is quite easy to prove a negative. You just have to have the evidence. If you don't have the evidence, what you do is not make the claim or admit it is nothing but belief.

not how it works. you don't need to prove a negative. nor can you. you are, however, required to prove an asserted fact. if you believe in something absent such proof, that is "faith".

Nonsense. I claim there is no planet in Earth's orbit which is always on the other side of the sun where we can't see it. That is a negative. Now, I can point out that if such a planet existed, it's gravity would effect other bodies in our solar system in a particular manner. Pure physics. We can then look to see if that were happening and, if not, we have just proven a negative. Claiming you can't prove a negative is a cop out.

How it works is if you make a claim, whether negative or not, the onus is on you to demonstrate the claim is accurate. You don't get to say it's a negative so I have to accept that it is true until such time as I prove it isn't. The person making the claim has to prove it.

Claiming there is no God (and for all of the rhetoric, that is the clam) is no different than claiming there is. It requires exactly the same level of proof. You can believe there is no God, or believe there is, and no evidence is required because it is a belief. But when you say it is more than a belief, I want to see the evidence. I have yet to meet an Atheist who was neutral on the subject, who did not say it was more likely there was not a God than there was. That is a claim. If it has no evidence to support it, then it is nothing but belief. If it is a position supported only by belief, then it is faith based.

That is how it works. You don't apply one standard to one side of the argument and another to the other. You apply one standard to both sides equally.

 

[PratchettFan]

No problem. If Stephen Hawking is an Atheist, then his Atheism is irrational. He has no more evidence there is or is not a God than anyone else. Any conclusion made in the absence of evidence is pure belief and pure belief is irrational. I doubt he would argue otherwise.

spirituality, which I have no problem with, is faith-based and has nothing to do with logic.

Any position arrived at in the absence of evidence is faith-based and has nothing to do with logic. I have no problem with any of them.

no one has to prove a negative.

You do if one claims it to be true. Calling it a negative does not get you off the hook of backing up a claim. And it is quite easy to prove a negative. You just have to have the evidence. If you don't have the evidence, what you do is not make the claim or admit it is nothing but belief.

Zeus said shut the fuck up. Why do you defy a god? Prove he didn't say it.

I don't have to. I didn't make the claim, you did.

 

[PratchettFan]

Even today, however, the self-proclaimed atheist incurs a stigma of being evil, a heretic who deserve to be a pariah in a society that ostensibly adulates freedom of speech, thought, and religion.

you forgot "irrational"......that's the primary characteristic of atheists......

Atheism is irrational only to the extent it is based upon belief. It is no more irrational than Theism.

I consider it irrational to condemn accepting unproven things while professing something unprovable......

I agree. Again, no more irrational than Theism.

 

[sealybobo]

Sometimes the minority is right. It's why we aren't an actual democracy which is majority rules. We have a constitution that sometimes tells the majority they are wrong. Like gay marriage, abortion and this issue for 3.

The minority don't define a culture, by definition. That's what keeps flying over your head.

Neither do Christians. Sorry, too many of us Athiests, Agnostics & Muslims for you Christians to claim that you define our culture.

And I love it how no Jews founded this country but you guys have an unholy alliance with each other now because both your stories come from the same original lie, so you like to say we are a "Judao Christian" country. Gimme a break. We are a secular society.

Also, so if/when Muslims ever outnumber you Christians, are you going to let them re define the culture or finally understand why and how here in America, we let you stupid Christians be stupid Christians and you let dumb Muslims be dumb Muslims and us atheists may be the minority but so was Christopher Columbus when he said the world was round.

No one back in Columbus' day thought they were dumb because the majority of the people in that society agreed with them that the world was flat and that God existed.

an "unholy alliance" with jews?

idiotic....

extremes on the left are as stupid as extremes on the right. and your anti-Semitism is no better than their misogyny.

Are you a Jew or Christian dispensationalists?

And Jews don't seem to mind that you guys are crazy. As long as you protect them and Israel they don't care what you believe.

Why Don t Jews Like the Christians Who Like Them by James Q. Wilson City Journal Winter 2008

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Luddly, step off, son. We use our religious opinions as you do your ethical values to inform our opinions and thus actions in the public square. Each are equally valid.

If you are saying organized religion should not intrude into the public square, then I agree with you.

That's exactly what I'm saying and I'll keep saying it.

There is a time and place for everything. As a nation, we have set aside countless, special, tax-free buildings where people can share their beliefs. Where do I find the same kind of special treatment for atheists?

You SAY all opinions are "equally valid" but then tell me I should take mine and "step off"? I don't visit this forum very often because, in point of fact, all opinions are not considered to be "equally valid" and if you're not a screeching preaching bible thumper, you're shouted down by fake christians who hate the god they say they follow.

Sorry but I'm just not up for your particular brand of bible thumping. You can take your condescending "son" and put it where the sun don't shine.

 

[jillian]

and that's the same as taking rightwing positions that deny SNAP to hungry children? or support the murder of doctors?
.

I find it amusing when folks on the left find it impossible to distinguish between religious and political issues......not to mention simply being wrong about both......

it isn't the left that has that problem. it's the right... hence the pollution of our courts with theocratic judges and legislatures with theocratic, misogynist, gay bashing legislation.

you should move to the US.....things are different here.....

you mean the part of the US that twice elected a democratic president with 52% of the vote? I already live here.

thanks for proving my point.

ah, I assumed since you were listing things that only happened in the US during some liberals imaginary day-dream, that you were referring to some place where they actually happened......

i guess you haven't been paying attention to the misogynist efforts of the rightwing religious zealots to interfere with women's control over their own body.

 

[sealybobo]

Sometimes the minority is right. It's why we aren't an actual democracy which is majority rules. We have a constitution that sometimes tells the majority they are wrong. Like gay marriage, abortion and this issue for 3.

The minority don't define a culture, by definition. That's what keeps flying over your head.

Neither do Christians. Sorry, too many of us Athiests, Agnostics & Muslims for you Christians to claim that you define our culture.

And I love it how no Jews founded this country but you guys have an unholy alliance with each other now because both your stories come from the same original lie, so you like to say we are a "Judao Christian" country. Gimme a break. We are a secular society.

Also, so if/when Muslims ever outnumber you Christians, are you going to let them re define the culture or finally understand why and how here in America, we let you stupid Christians be stupid Christians and you let dumb Muslims be dumb Muslims and us atheists may be the minority but so was Christopher Columbus when he said the world was round.

No one back in Columbus' day thought they were dumb because the majority of the people in that society agreed with them that the world was flat and that God existed.

an "unholy alliance" with jews?

idiotic....

extremes on the left are as stupid as extremes on the right. and your anti-Semitism is no better than their misogyny.

So you are a Jew who doesn't believe in gods? Am I mistaking you for someone else?

If not, this sort of confirms my feeling that a lot of Jewish people maybe consider themselves "Jewish" but not religious. Is Jewish more of your culture and not necessarily a religion? In other words, can one be an atheist and still be Jewish?

I don't mean any offense to Jewish people when I say an "unholy alliance". I just mean they are two completely different stories that have teamed up to form an alliance here in America to go against either Muslims or Atheists.

 

[Treeshepherd]

The atheist is not a romantic, and that has real world consequences. Or, he suspends his true beliefs in order to indulge himself is the frivolities of romanticism.

Can the atheist stand aside and leave the future of the human race to a crap-shoot? 'Eugenics' is a bad word now, after the horrors of the 20th century. 'Bio-engineering' is less of a dirty word.

Politically speaking, the role of government must play a larger part for the atheist. Hobbes' Leviathan becomes more of a political beast. Once again, without Providence, and without vertical truth illuminating Man from a higher plane, good government is key. Social engineering is key. Our education system must indoctrinate the children on issues of morality and ethics rather than simply teaching reading, writing and math.

We aren't? Could have fooled every woman I've ever been with. We also feel love. So do dogs. Did you see the latest report on "Do Dogs Really Love Us?" Turns out they do. When you look them in the eyes the love pharamone goes off.

What beliefs do we have to "suspend" in order to "fake" love?

It isn't on God to save this planet. This is on us. Butt fucking isn't destroying the planet, man made global warming and plastic are. The future of the human race is on us not god.

You guys love big government more than we do. In fact if you could you'd impose your Christianity on us just like the Muslims force it on their citizens. And in your world, the line is blurred between government and religion. And then you would trust it more? Fool!

You wish our schools didn't teach morality and ethics? What a fool you must be. I went into this charter school where a bunch of poor kids go. Many of them don't have 2 parents teaching them right and wrong. So on the wall of the school read words like Honesty, Respect, Empathy, etc. You object to that? Well I object to all the lies your religion tells before it gets to the good stuff like love thy neighbor, feed the poor and heal the sick. Must be why you guys ignore that stuff.

First of all I'm not a Christian, though I'm cosmologically more closely related to the Christian than to the atheist. I'm a Druid, as I said, a pagan, and a polytheist. I would trace the general heritage of my beliefs back to Pythagoras.

You say that the future of the world hinges upon nothing that we might name 'Destiny', or 'Providence', or 'Divine Will'. Why can't we have a respectful disagreement on that?

I have no problem, per se, with public schools fostering values such as honesty, respect and empathy. Yet, where do those values come from? These are not values that can be derived from logic, beyond the argument of practicality and our material needs for security and comfort. Even the complete nihilist can come to some agreement about how to run an efficient society, if he is utilitarian.

But, most atheists are not nihilists. They just don't recognize that the things that truly matter to them are not discovered through positivism/empiricism. A machine can follow logic. A machine can calculate 2+2, and can predict what will happen when 100 degree water is poured over ice. It takes much more to be human. Humans are filled with meaning, and in fact starve without it.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Even today, however, the self-proclaimed atheist incurs a stigma of being evil, a heretic who deserve to be a pariah in a society that ostensibly adulates freedom of speech, thought, and religion.

you forgot "irrational"......that's the primary characteristic of atheists......

Atheism is irrational only to the extent it is based upon belief. It is no more irrational than Theism.

I consider it irrational to condemn accepting unproven things while professing something unprovable......

I agree. Again, no more irrational than Theism.

not true......we don't condemn accepting unproven things......

 

[PostmodernProph]

I find it amusing when folks on the left find it impossible to distinguish between religious and political issues......not to mention simply being wrong about both......

it isn't the left that has that problem. it's the right... hence the pollution of our courts with theocratic judges and legislatures with theocratic, misogynist, gay bashing legislation.

you should move to the US.....things are different here.....

you mean the part of the US that twice elected a democratic president with 52% of the vote? I already live here.

thanks for proving my point.

ah, I assumed since you were listing things that only happened in the US during some liberals imaginary day-dream, that you were referring to some place where they actually happened......

i guess you haven't been paying attention to the misogynist efforts of the rightwing religious zealots to interfere with women's control over their own body.

if you mean being opposed to abortion I suggest you keep in mind that you don't have to be religious to think its a mistake to kill our unborn children.......however, ignorance does seem to be the primary cause of believing its misogynistic........

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Even today, however, the self-proclaimed atheist incurs a stigma of being evil, a heretic who deserve to be a pariah in a society that ostensibly adulates freedom of speech, thought, and religion.

you forgot "irrational"......that's the primary characteristic of atheists......

Atheism is irrational only to the extent it is based upon belief. It is no more irrational than Theism.

I consider it irrational to condemn accepting unproven things while professing something unprovable......

That would make you an atheist.

Congrats.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Even today, however, the self-proclaimed atheist incurs a stigma of being evil, a heretic who deserve to be a pariah in a society that ostensibly adulates freedom of speech, thought, and religion.

you forgot "irrational"......that's the primary characteristic of atheists......

Atheism is irrational only to the extent it is based upon belief. It is no more irrational than Theism.

I consider it irrational to condemn accepting unproven things while professing something unprovable......

That would make you an atheist.

Congrats.

how so, my dear simple minded friend?.......

 

[sealybobo]

The atheist is not a romantic, and that has real world consequences. Or, he suspends his true beliefs in order to indulge himself is the frivolities of romanticism.

Can the atheist stand aside and leave the future of the human race to a crap-shoot? 'Eugenics' is a bad word now, after the horrors of the 20th century. 'Bio-engineering' is less of a dirty word.

Politically speaking, the role of government must play a larger part for the atheist. Hobbes' Leviathan becomes more of a political beast. Once again, without Providence, and without vertical truth illuminating Man from a higher plane, good government is key. Social engineering is key. Our education system must indoctrinate the children on issues of morality and ethics rather than simply teaching reading, writing and math.

We aren't? Could have fooled every woman I've ever been with. We also feel love. So do dogs. Did you see the latest report on "Do Dogs Really Love Us?" Turns out they do. When you look them in the eyes the love pharamone goes off.

What beliefs do we have to "suspend" in order to "fake" love?

It isn't on God to save this planet. This is on us. Butt fucking isn't destroying the planet, man made global warming and plastic are. The future of the human race is on us not god.

You guys love big government more than we do. In fact if you could you'd impose your Christianity on us just like the Muslims force it on their citizens. And in your world, the line is blurred between government and religion. And then you would trust it more? Fool!

You wish our schools didn't teach morality and ethics? What a fool you must be. I went into this charter school where a bunch of poor kids go. Many of them don't have 2 parents teaching them right and wrong. So on the wall of the school read words like Honesty, Respect, Empathy, etc. You object to that? Well I object to all the lies your religion tells before it gets to the good stuff like love thy neighbor, feed the poor and heal the sick. Must be why you guys ignore that stuff.

First of all I'm not a Christian, though I'm cosmologically more closely related to the Christian than to the atheist. I'm a Druid, as I said, a pagan, and a polytheist. I would trace the general heritage of my beliefs back to Pythagoras.

You say that the future of the world hinges upon nothing that we might name 'Destiny', or 'Providence', or 'Divine Will'. Why can't we have a respectful disagreement on that?

I have no problem, per se, with public schools fostering values such as honesty, respect and empathy. Yet, where do those values come from? These are not values that can be derived from logic, beyond the argument of practicality and our material needs for security and comfort. Even the complete nihilist can come to some agreement about how to run an efficient society, if he is utilitarian.

But, most atheists are not nihilists. They just don't recognize that the things that truly matter to them are not discovered through positivism/empiricism. A machine can follow logic. A machine can calculate 2+2, and can predict what will happen when 100 degree water is poured over ice. It takes much more to be human. Humans are filled with meaning, and in fact starve without it.

1. I was just having that conversation with my parents this weekend. My mom said Karmanos the rich cancer guy wanted to date her. I called her an idiot and said if she would have married him my name would be Sealybobo Karmanos. LOL. Of course I was joking because had she married him I wouldn't have been born. So was it my destiny to be born? Was it an abortions destiny to be aborted?

I asked them if the date of their death has already been determined or can they change their fate? Because they're always telling me to watch my weight and not smoke. Why? Isn't the date of my death already pre determined?

2. We can have a respectful disagreement on all this. I know somietimes I need to chill but you guys need tough love too. LOL.

This site answers almost everything Why there is no god

Number 4

Morality is a cultural concept with a basis in evolutionary psychology [2] and game theory [2]. Species whose members were predisposed to cooperate were more likely to survive and pass on their genes. Reciprocacy, altruism and other so-called ‘moral’ characteristics are evident in many species [2]. The neurochemical thought to regulate morality and empathy is oxytocin [2].

Religious texts are simply part of many early attempts to codify moral precepts. Secular law, flexible with the shifting moral zeitgeist, has long since superseded religion as a source of moral directives for the majority of developed societies. Secular ethics offers a number of competing moral frameworks which do not derive from a purported supernatural source.

See also: Dawkins – Source of Morality, Babies can tell right from wrong, Moral behaviour in animals, Altruism in Chimps and Toddlers, Trust, Morality and Oxytocin (a must watch), Evolution of Cooperation, Science of Morality. Animals Cooperating: Monkeys, Birds, Chimps.

The god character of the Bible is a misogynistic tyrant that condones and even orders the practice of slavery, rape of women and murder of children. The moment you disagree with a single instruction of the Bible, such as the command to kill any bride who is not a virgin or any child who disrespects their parents, then you acknowledge that there exists a superior standard by which to judge moral action and thus no need to rely on an ancient, primitive and barbaric fantasy.

See also: the Euthyphro dilemma, Epicurus Trilemma, Problem of Evil, Morality – Good without Gods (a must watch), Dawkins on Absolute Morality (a must watch), The West Wing (a must watch), Deconversion: Morality (a must watch).

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” – Epicurus

 

[sealybobo]

it isn't the left that has that problem. it's the right... hence the pollution of our courts with theocratic judges and legislatures with theocratic, misogynist, gay bashing legislation.

you should move to the US.....things are different here.....

you mean the part of the US that twice elected a democratic president with 52% of the vote? I already live here.

thanks for proving my point.

ah, I assumed since you were listing things that only happened in the US during some liberals imaginary day-dream, that you were referring to some place where they actually happened......

i guess you haven't been paying attention to the misogynist efforts of the rightwing religious zealots to interfere with women's control over their own body.

if you mean being opposed to abortion I suggest you keep in mind that you don't have to be religious to think its a mistake to kill our unborn children.......however, ignorance does seem to be the primary cause of believing its misogynistic........

Actually, this is a great example of how we have to stop letting the right control the message. Do you see how wrong your thinking is?

You think that the millions of people who have consciously decided and the ones that will decide to have an abortion in the future are making a mistake? I think most all of those people would disagree with you and say fuck you. And for me an impartial pro choice person agrees with them.

And religious people get the most abortions. So stop with that shit. Seeing as how you guys say 95% believe in something greater, then it goes without saying it is yall that are the ones killing your babies. We are just terminating a seed before it becomes a baby. Stop worrying about the unborn and start taking care of the born you hypocrites. Sometimes I think the rich want more poor kids born because that keeps wages down. They only use the religion angle to con theists into voting for the moral party. HA! All they are doing is making it harder for poor women to decide if and when they have a child. How stupid is that? And you guys then turn around and complain because Shaiqua has too many kids on welfare. FU.

 

[sealybobo]

In Texas they went from something like 30 places you could get an abortion to 7. A rich white bitch will go drive to get an abortion. A poor people might not have a car or the $500 to get her abortion. Abortion is a necessary thing with us human breeders who can't stop doubling the population. STOP!

 

[Truman123]

Has anyone's soul left their body and watched in the operating room? Nope. That was a dream. The mind playing tricks on you.

 

[sealybobo]

Even today, however, the self-proclaimed atheist incurs a stigma of being evil, a heretic who deserve to be a pariah in a society that ostensibly adulates freedom of speech, thought, and religion.

you forgot "irrational"......that's the primary characteristic of atheists......

Atheism is irrational only to the extent it is based upon belief. It is no more irrational than Theism.

I consider it irrational to condemn accepting unproven things while professing something unprovable......

I agree. Again, no more irrational than Theism.

The primary psychological role of religion is rationalizing the tragedy of death as a good thing to alleviate the anxiety of mortality.

 

[sealybobo]

Has anyone's soul left their body and watched in the operating room? Nope. That was a dream. The mind playing tricks on you.

Great song! Haven't heard it in years. Is that 90's?

 

[Treeshepherd]

I can't watch 1000 videos on this device. I have studied the science of cooperation, which has to do with group selection. Natural selection applies to groups as well as individuals passing along genes. A group that contains cooperative and self-sacrificing individuals can outcompete a group of selfish individuals.
That's the science. Gregor Mendel was the father of genetics, but also a priest. Copernicus was a priest. Georges Lemaitre first proposed the Big Bang theory, and was a priest. Pascal was a Jesus freak. Pythagoras is one of my inspirations, certainly not an atheist.

Atheists often insist on the literal interpretation of scripture, in order to tear it up. They get more fundamentalist than fundamentalists in their scriptural interpretations.

But this thread is supposed to be about atheism, right? Am I the only one who has put forth ideas about the consequences of the atheist cosmology?

One that might not be as inflammatory would be this: the atheist is more likely to be sure that life exists elsewhere in the universe.

What other things can be said about how the atheist cosmology and how it directs adherents to certain conclusions?

 

[sealybobo]

I have studied the science of cooperation, which has to do with group selection. Natural selection applies to groups as well as individuals passing along genes. A group that contains cooperative and self-sacrificing individuals can outcompete a group of selfish individuals.
That's the science. Gregor Mendel was the father of genetics, but also a priest. Copernicus was a priest. Georges Lemaitre first proposed the Big Bang theory, and was a priest. Pascal was a Jesus freak. Pythagoras is one of my inspirations, certainly not an atheist.

Atheists often insist on the literal interpretation of scripture, in order to tear it up. They get more fundamentalist than fundamentalists in their scriptural interpretations.

But this thread is supposed to be about atheism, right? Am I the only one who has put forth ideas about the consequences of the atheist cosmology?

One that might not be as inflammatory would be this: the atheist is more likely to be sure that life exists elsewhere in the universe.

What other things can be said about how the atheist cosmology and how it directs adherents to certain conclusions?

Couple/Few thoughts after reading your post.

1. It is true being religious served a purpose and the religious gene was passed on. I agree with all that stuff. Same as today. Perfect example is guys who go to church to get married. They are there to meet women.

2. Dogs gave up a long time ago being able to pick their own partners and in exchange we feed them, house them, etc.