[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 87 KB, 540x720, atheist contemplating.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309127 No.6309127 [Reply] [Original]

Has atheism lost all its credentials as a system of thought?

>> No.6309131

It's not a system of thought. It never had any credentials because it's not based on substance. Do people really still not understand this shit?

>> No.6309133

>>6309131

>Dawkins, Harris and their book empire agrees with you

Sure.

>> No.6309136

>>6309127
/lit/ - literature

>> No.6309138

>>6309127
Credentials?

>> No.6309141
File: 48 KB, 479x720, atheism is a religion as much as bald is a hair color.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309141

>>6309131

>I don't know what postulations are

Atheists of this kind are insufferable dickwards.

>haha it's up to you to show me proof of your claims xD atheism is true by default unless proven otherwise because le I reject le untrue beliefs

>> No.6309153

Moral atheism has certainly

God isn't real hurr durr but sexism and racism are wrong be nice to everyone for some reason.

>> No.6309166

>>6309153
This. God is a spook, and so is morality.

>> No.6309167

>>6309141
How is this not true?

This is the most defensible point of atheism, not its weakest spot.

I think theism continues to be a failure out of an inability to offer up a reasonable proof for god that also satisfies the semantic burden we place on that word.

Even those atheists (like myself) with a reasonable and non-hostile approach to theology and religion remain atheist for exactly this reason. There simply is no positive reason for me to believe in god, so why would I?

>> No.6309169

>>6309167

* tips fedora *

>> No.6309172

>>6309153
>implying theism answers these questions
>god edicts it therefore it's good
>Why?
>because i defined it that way duh
>Why should we do what's good?
>because i defined it that way duh

>> No.6309173

>>6309169
Are you going to do anything else besides shitposting?

>> No.6309176

>>6309141
So I have to prove to you that my lack of belief is valid? Why? I can't just believe what I want to?

>> No.6309178
File: 255 KB, 1162x850, 1402015747709.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309178

>>6309127

>> No.6309180

>>6309173
>is on /lit/
>doesn't want shitposting
Werethefuckdoyouthinkweare.png

>> No.6309181
File: 433 KB, 1600x1307, Bosch-Hell - kopie.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309181

>>6309172

>not obeying the lord

It's like you just wanna burn in hell for being a contrarian edgelord.

>> No.6309182

>>6309127
A system of thought?

>>6309141
It's true, YOU have to show your proof. Otherwise, The Flying Spaghetti Monster IS the one true lord and savior.

Yes, it's that silly.

>> No.6309185
File: 24 KB, 261x400, 1374265603041.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309185

>>6309180
Not on fucking /b/, that's for sure

>> No.6309188
File: 157 KB, 992x880, sure hope you guys don't spook this.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309188

>>6309176

>beliefs

>> No.6309189

>>6309185
That's like saying I go to a brothel because they give great massages. That may be true and the primary reason you go, but your still getting tugged at the brothel.

>> No.6309192

>>6309182

>durr let me depict god as a bunch of pasta that'll show religious folks

>> No.6309193
File: 705 KB, 1414x1059, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309193

>Whatever begins to exists must have a cause
>The universe began to exist, thus it has a cause
>Causality cannot regress to infinity (since it's impossible to traverse an infinite series by it's definition)
>Therefore an uncaused first cause must have caused the universe to exist.
>Since this first cause is uncaused, it is uncreated.
>Since this first cause is uncreated, it is eternal.
>Since this first cause is eternal, it must exist.
>God is an uncreated, eternal being
>Therefore God exists.

>> No.6309196

It's not a system of thought and you spend too much time on /lit/ and/or are American. Most educated people in the world don't believe in god for obvious reasons.

>> No.6309202

>>6309196

I don't think any idea in this world is self-evident.

>> No.6309206

>>6309193
>nothing can be infinite
>except god lol

>> No.6309207

>>6309193
>Since this first cause is uncreated, it is eternal.
Needs justification

>Since this first cause is eternal, it must exist.
Needs justification, and also is redundant. You've already established that a first cause must exist in premise 4.

>God is an uncreated, eternal being
>Therefore God exists.

A conception of God merely as a thing that started everything (like some kind of cosmic matchstick) is useless without the next step: a way to investigate God's other characteristics. An appeal to divine revelation will not receive full points.

>> No.6309211

>>6309127
The modern push towards the idea that religion is justifiable by reason is what is destroying religion. Some of the simpler religious devotees will even claim that it is the "obvious" truth, and portray their potential opponents as cringe thread material. Faith is religion's only hope. Most vocal Christians have abandoned faith. Christianity continues to decline. It was once a paradigm, then it became a world view. Now it is quickly becoming a political ideology. The next step, if there is one, will be something even more fleeting.

>> No.6309215

>>6309181
So if there was no hell there would be no reason to follow these morals?

This means that you believe that (the compulsive nature of) morality is determined by its consequences.

This means that a completely atheistic morality is perfectly consistent. Society already punishes what is bad for society-at-large. Hence the modern technology-as-god morality.

>> No.6309216

>>6309172

You know the meaning of the word "good" means "towards god" and "bad" means "against god"

there is no misconception about this by theists.
doing what the all powerful omni-everything creator/ender all encompassing soul-power godhead tells you to do is all that matters or could matter in a world where he exists.


Are you trying to assume that in a universe where there is literally an absolute point that you could not make reference to that point?

God's not real, but your a real fucking retard.

>> No.6309217

>>6309207
Hi, Amazing Atheist.

>> No.6309219

>>6309192
Would you prefer Cthulhu? It's all Russel's teapot.

But go on, tell me again how the lode transcends all known physics and is impenetrable, and that we know all this because *he* gave some guys in the desert some divine inspirations.

>> No.6309222

>>6309217
Right back atcha Oral Roberts

>> No.6309224
File: 99 KB, 600x375, science brings us aliens while religion brings us god, so what do you pick.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309224

>>6309215

Unless you wanna live in a Hobbesian world, punishment is the only shit keeping MOST of us apes in line.
Hoping for an intrinsic morality is a shitty dream.
A metaphysical warden seems like a good idea to keep us all in check.

>> No.6309225

>>6309219

Aren't you the tripfag who comes to Islam's defense in other threads?

>> No.6309226

>>6309127
I suppose we make other basal assumptions about the universe but isn't atheism doomed from the start because it's stating absolutely that there is no God or gods? Isn't the only truly objective stance agnostic?

>> No.6309227

>>6309216
So why does the Binding of Isaac inspire such revulsion in us? By your account, we should feel nothing when we recount that God told Abraham to kill his own son. Yet we feel inside that it would be morally wrong, and we breathe a sigh of relief when the angel tells them lol j/k I was testing you

>> No.6309228
File: 1.66 MB, 243x316, 1424848651272.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309228

>atheism
>a system of thought
Wat
Damnit, /lit/ is full of cancer these days.

>> No.6309229

>>6309227
It matters literally 0 what you "feel" about anything God tells you to do.

If God existed what he says is right period.

>> No.6309233
File: 22 KB, 400x400, Agnosticism-Atheism.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309233

>>6309226
In this particularly woolly semantic area, I'm just going to post my preferred definitions and let people who have alternative definitions think whatever they want

>> No.6309236

>>6309229
Different anon here, wouldn't this turn his omnibenevolence into a completely meaningless concept

>> No.6309237

>>6309153
>>6309166
You're either baiting or dumb. In the case of stupidity, religion was invented partially because of dummies like you that don't understand the simple concept of "treat others the way you want to be treated".

"Hey, these morons don't understand that it's more beneficial to be nice than to be mean. Why don't we invent a religion that makes them think they'll live forever if they're nice? Sounds good to me."

I'm glad religion exists. Without it, the south would implode on itself.

>> No.6309238
File: 51 KB, 250x250, wrong thread.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309238

>all this apostasy
>all this "give me a rational reason to believe in god"

>> No.6309242

>>6309216
>You know the meaning of the word "good" means "towards god" and "bad" means "against god"
>because i defined it that way duh
>doing what the all powerful omni-everything creator/ender all encompassing soul-power godhead tells you to do is all that matters or could matter in a world where he exists.
>because i said so duh

I'm saying the quest for an absolute moral code does not solve the questions that those who seek it want. An absolute moral code provides nothing but itself. It does not even compel itself to be followed.

One could just as well define an atheistic moral code and define it as absolute. The code means nothing on its own.

>your a real fucking retard

>> No.6309243

>>6309233
Shit graph, doesn't even account for the possibility of certainty being possible without being actual.

>> No.6309249

>>6309243
Let's not get into strong and weak agnosticism, people have enough trouble separating certainty from belief already without throwing possibility in there

>> No.6309251
File: 55 KB, 442x332, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309251

>>6309237
>p-please be nice to me
Weakling.

>> No.6309258

>>6309242
nigger what the fuck are you talking about,

are you equating a universe where god is real to an arbitrary reference point you choose?

read the quote line you fucking monkey, the context is that he was saying "why is what god says good"

fuck off
YOU'RE a real fucking retard.

>> No.6309261

>>6309233
I can see how this can allow for a wider range of representation amongst individual differences in ideology. Even so, I was mainly talking about atheism and agnosticism in the basic definition of the word. I don't doubt we can segment people up into varying levels of belief and non-belief.

>> No.6309265

>>6309236
Yet a different anon here, I don't believe in god but that's my preferred solution to the problem of evil - that god is not omnibenevolent insofar as benevolence is a human concept. Course I could be biased.

>> No.6309266

>>6309258
>nigger
get out

>> No.6309274
File: 335 KB, 500x500, 1391325497105.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309274

>>6309266
what are you even doing on 4chan

>> No.6309276

>>6309236

Its not meaningless because he owns your soul and nothing on earth matters because everything in heaven blows earth the fuck out of the water.

So if god exists its not meaningless. Your soul depends on doing what he says and he is always right by definition.

I know its "retarded' im not arguing for it, im just saying its fucking retarded to pretend that if god existed he would not be the pure definition of "good"

>> No.6309283

>>6309266
ass-blasted moral atheist detected.

You faggots are by far the most hilarious because you are just as fucked as the Christians but pretend just because you dont believe in god the other 99% moral nonesense you believe in is OKAY

>> No.6309284

I think the loss of credence for the atheist movement, beyond the cutting memes, mostly reflects the simultaneous waning of religion. Participation and identification rates in religion have plummeted, and, today, if you live in an area that's relatively educated or metropolitan (ignoring Americans, who are slightly behind in the trend, although they are heading this direction too), religion is just not a factor. The only people who actually go to church are the old, the impoverished, the infirm, and the crazy, and so a young person showing any great fervour around the issue, be them pro or anti-religious, automatically betrays themselves as atypical.

The modern mindset is near indifference, quickly moving towards utter indifference. It's similar to how, today, a neurotypical person who's had the blessings of education should no longer derive a whole lot of life guidance from astrology or their local witchdoctor, although not quite to that same degree (yet).

>> No.6309288

>>6309258
>the context is that he was saying "why is what god says good"

The answer appears to still be

>because i defined it that way duh

How are you still not getting this? This is basic as fuck.

Whether or not morality is *arbitrary* or *absolute* there is still no ultimate reason to be compelled to follow it. No ought from is. So, in practice atheist and theist morality are in the same position.

Even if god single-handedly passes you down an order, there is no real reason to listen to him.

Unless of course, you define good as "towards god" and also as "that which should be followed". That's nice, but ultimately you're just playing with words, and furthermore any theological argument in support of god would now also have to prove *that*, otherwise you're just asserting baseless claims.

>Why am I still responding to theist shitposting?

>> No.6309291

>>6309283
>he's never read The Moral Landscape

>> No.6309293

>>6309225
No.

Wasn't me.

>> No.6309297

>>6309288

>there is still no ultimate reason to be compelled to follow it

the soul you fucking retard

you ARE a SOUL and the ESSENCE of your SOUL has OUGHT INSIDE IT

you are literally a thing that ought to serve god under christian theology. Its the primordial relation, its unbreakable.
Its Tautological

you are so fucking retarded i cant even believe you can turn your computer on.

>> No.6309300

>>6309291
>same harris

kek

>> No.6309315

>>6309297
>playing more word games

So you added another object (soul) and attached another completed unfounded definition to it (ought to follow god). Again, this is basically just the game of definitions I already predicted in my post you responded to. You have basically said "good is defined by god who we are compelled to follow". What a nice and completely baseless statement you are making.

Untwist you panties and think like you were blessed with a frontal lobe. This is just the kind of "i defined it that way duh" bullshit I was talking about.

My point was that god alone is not enough to establish an absolute morality which we are compelled to follow, and you've basically proved my point.

>> No.6309317

>>6309315
shhh

>> No.6309321

>>6309127
No, it's honestly very strange to me that so many people today -- even people from educated, developed nations -- believe in a god. I suppose they find it comforting, but whatever mental gymnastics they have to do to actually believe the stuff I don't think I'll ever fully apprehend. I study someone like Aquinas and can't help but shake my head -- and in some cases laugh -- at the fact that people still find his arguments convincing. Reading these old, yet still widely read theologians, I'm struck by how much more I know than them, how much more educated I am than them, how much better I am at reasoning, and so on. I'll concede they're better writers than I am, and I think that is largely why people still find them convincing (style goes a long way in arguments), but I'm just so much more educated than they are. This, of course, isn't to say these men were stupid. In fact, had I lived during their time I'm sure I'd have been religious. What's odd to me is how so many people today, people with access to endless resources, still believe in a god.

I am grateful for all of the beautiful art and architecture religions have afforded us, but I don't think I'll ever join any religion -- at least not while I have all my marbles. A quick study of the conditions under which each religion was invented is enough to realize that no religion was divinely inspired, and that all were the obvious products of their specific time and location.

>> No.6309335

>>6309321
read the bicameral mind pleb.

>> No.6309341

>>6309321
Well well well guys, looks like the smartest man in the world just graced us with his presence.

>> No.6309388

>>6309335
I will, thanks.

>> No.6309401

>>6309185
Sartre is a shitpost in human form.

>> No.6309403

BANANA
A
N
A
N
A

>> No.6309406

>>6309403
ʕ ͡·ᴥ ͡· ʔ

>> No.6309414

Yes, it assumes non-instrumental rationality.

>> No.6309430

>>6309341
I wouldn't go that far. There are several irreligious people who are smarter than me.

>> No.6309439

>>6309196
>most of the educated people
notice: "educated," not smart
Showing that people educated by a system that doesnt believe in God exist does not aid your argument in any way. Their atheism isn't a result of smarts.
Never forget Newton was a Christian who died a virgin.

>> No.6309445

Yep
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/psyched/201205/does-autism-lead-atheism

>> No.6309450

>>6309439
Never forget that Newton was an alchemist who thought time was linear.

>> No.6309456

>>6309439
Believing in God is one thing. Being a Christian is considerably different. I can accept the possibility, even probability, of an ultimate creator. But the Bible, even if the OT can be discarded as entirely figurative, is hard to swallow, because you're still left with the NT which you're expected to take literally.

Christians who try to equate their belief with theism itself are somewhat annoying. Theism is rational, Christianity is fucking nuts.

>> No.6309461
File: 11 KB, 205x268, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309461

>> No.6309467

If anything, the decline of new atheism just shows the awesome power of the SJW movement.

>> No.6309471

>>6309456
>protestants

>> No.6309500

>>6309401

Best thing in this thread.

>> No.6309502

>>6309467

This is scary.
But this.

SJW has such a huge power. They're winning every fight.
I bet they could check priv ISIS into submission.

>> No.6309507

I don't know, have you found evidence for the existence of god?

>> No.6309540

I want this meme to stop.

>> No.6309545

>>6309188
Well meme'd, i want to see this pic posted more often anon

>> No.6309575

>>6309192

it's called reductio ad absurdum and it's older than jesus

read a book, nigga

>> No.6309602
File: 11 KB, 228x221, the golden lel.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6309602

>Atheist morality

>> No.6309647

>>6309127
Atheism is not a system, it's solely a lack of belief in god(s).

>> No.6309651

>>6309602
>there are theists who still subscribe to divine command theory
Leibniz had it right, bro.

>> No.6309654

>>6309176
You should be interested in having justified beliefs, at least if you want anyone to take you seriously.

>> No.6309719

>>6309602
You can't have a legitimate moral system based on faith, morals need to be rationalized with reason. Otherwise you would lose your morals with your faith, which is an untenable position.

>> No.6309722

>>6309719
Why?

>> No.6309735

>>6309647
It's a belief in the nonexistance of god(s).
A lack of something in terms of views here doesn't exist. You have a lack of belief if you don't give any fucks about it.

>> No.6309747

Religion/atheism threads on page one are like a turd that won't flush.

>> No.6309753

>>6309722
Because you cannot reason yourself in or out of a position that depends of belief alone. Thus reason-based morals are stable and can be held by anyone, but faith-based morals change at a moment's notice with the amount of belief the person has.

>> No.6309761

>>6309193
I never understood this argument, you could easily claim that a single piece of matter is eternal and uncreated.

>> No.6309790

>>6309761
Or why you couldn't just as well say that the universe is uncreated and eternal? That argument isn't very good.

>> No.6309795

>>6309790
> uncreated and eternal
because we've moved away from aristotelian phisycs, you know, big band and all that shit.
And matter by definition and its nature cannot be eternal due to entropy.

>> No.6309799

>>6309790
>Or why you couldn't just as well say that the universe is uncreated and eternal
I wouldn't be going that far.

>> No.6309800

>>6309795
Unless you have a cyclical view of the time, and see Big Bang and Big Crush an endless and eternal cycle of death and rebirth, of course.

>> No.6309801

>>6309795
>due to entropy

I think you're probably mistaken about what entropy is and entails.

>> No.6309802

>>6309799
I just don't see how the argument "something outside this reality is uncreated and eternal" is in any way stronger than "this reality is uncreated and eternal", is all.

>> No.6309812

>>6309802
Because we assume with much more certainty that matter is not eternal. If you will go atheist don't go full retard.
>>6309800
That model cannot be theoreticaly sustained as far as I know.

>> No.6309821

>>6309812
Matter is not eternal, but the substance the reality consists of i.e. space-time may very well be.
>That model cannot be theoreticaly sustained as far as I know.
Only because our understanding of the universe is limited.

>> No.6309889

>>6309821
>Only because our understanding of the universe is limited.
Thanks, I was almost taking for absolute what people think that has happened billions of years before human thought.

>> No.6309894

>>6309141
>you have to prove a negative

That is not how it works.

>> No.6309903

>>6309226
People do not go through life being 'agnostic' about fairies or werewolves. Why would a deity be any different?

If there is no evidence for something the default state is not believing it exists.

>> No.6309909

>>6309735
No, it is by definition a lack of belief. Not active disbelief.

>> No.6309930

>>6309321
>In fact, had I lived during their time I'm sure I'd have been religious.

So you're a trendy whore then

>> No.6309935

>>6309127
Atheism isn't a system of thought. There are systems of thought that are atheistic, but you'd need to address them specifically.

>> No.6309943

>>6309127

No, although christfags around here would really like it.
I mean, without atheistic objections their arguments wouldn't look half as bad as they actually are.

>> No.6310015

>>6309722
Religious people already define good and bad for themselves. Do you know how many interpretations of the bible there are? Religious people still cherry pick the morals that they agree with and ignore the rest.

>> No.6310182

>>6309909
By whose definition? I have a lack of belief in Kantian ideas. Does that mean I call myself an akantian?

>> No.6310187

>>6310015
>Do you know how many interpretations of the bible there are?
Not that many, at least not official, well defended and recognised. Major churhes have a largely similar, same in most important departments.

>> No.6310205

>>6309233
That's not what "gnostic" means you retard.

>> No.6310210

>>6310205
It's a reddit way to split belief in 4 sections, what do you believe.

>> No.6310232
File: 260 KB, 474x750, average christian.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6310232

>> No.6310247

>>6310182
So you do not know any atheists then? Because an atheist is not actively disbelieving in all the deities invented by humans all day every day, they simply do not believe in them. Most do not even think about it unless someone else brings it up.

>> No.6310254

>>6310210
>reddit

You cannot just blame reddit for everything you disagree with or dislike you know.

>> No.6310258

>>6310254
Or can I...

>> No.6310263

>>6310254
I can.
>>6310247
I know people who don't care and I know people who profess their disbelief in God in the same way a Christian would profess his belief. Those who don't care don't really label themselves and if asked will say agnostic.

>> No.6310271
File: 150 KB, 468x528, 1402646341881.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6310271

>>6309127
y e s
e
s

>> No.6310272

>>6310263
>Those who don't care don't really label themselves and if asked will say agnostic.

That's because they're intellectual-cowards afraid to own their Atheism; so, instead, they perpetuate the false middle-man of Agnosticism because of the vitriolic-feelings people have about Atheism.

Every time someone claims to be "Agnostic" with the question of belief, it only goes to show a lack of understanding and succumbing to a meme.

>> No.6310288

>>6310272

>Claiming atheism isn't a fedora-meme

Agnosticism is philosophy. Atheism, at one point, was legitimate--but Dawkins et. al. have changed that.

Embarrassing.

>> No.6310289

>>6310272
I always call myself agnostic, it is guaranteed to antagonise the greatest number of people.

>> No.6310290

>>6310272
>That's because they're intellectual-cowards afraid to own their Atheism
Nope, those are very often philosophy students or other educated people. Why the fuck would someone be afraid of being an atheist?

>> No.6310306

>>6310263
I do not 'profess my disbelief' and I am an atheist, what is your point?

>>6310290
Plenty of people are worried about the so called negative perception of atheism so call themselves agnostic instead. Which only exists in America and on this stupid website when it comes to the developed world. You even get idiots like this >>6310288 who think Dawkins has somehow 'delegitimised' atheism. Which makes no sense and is untrue in any case.

>> No.6310365

>>6309654

m89 u need to get ghostbusted this post is spooky as all get out

>> No.6310372

>>6309193
>>Since this first cause is eternal, it must exist.
>>God is an uncreated, eternal being
>>Therefore God exists.

here's where that falls apart. why is god the only uncreated eternity that can defined as existing by that premise?

>> No.6310380

i dont believe in god because i choose not to. belief in a being beyond the mortal coil denies life and that is not conductive to my progress as an individual yet loving human being

>> No.6310390

>>6310306
>Plenty of people are worried about the so called negative perception of atheism so call themselves agnostic instead.
Plenty of people worried about calling themselves a christian, so fucking what? And I don't live in America.

>> No.6310392

>>6310380
>muh life + 'something beyond mortal coil' mutually exclusive

>> No.6310394

>>6310372
>here's where that falls apart. why is god the only uncreated eternity that can defined as existing by that premise?
Because it doesn't end there.

>> No.6310453

>>6309193
The bogus explanation within the parentheses of premise 3 is bullshit. The premise is thus dubitable, which in turn undermines the whole argument.

Premise 5 is more or less a tautology (not the logical kind, mind you). "Uncreated" already conceptually suggests "uncaused", there is no need to repeat it.

The argument goes downhill from here. Premises 6-8 are unanalysable (in virtue of their obscurity) unless you provide additional definitions of some of the key terms therein contained.

>> No.6310475

>>6309141

Surely I'm getting meme'd on.

>> No.6310532

>>6309180
/lit/ culture is a spook

>> No.6310564

so we aren't atheists anymore because a lot of them look embarrassing?

what the fuck is a matter with you /lit/?

>> No.6310581

>>6310564
Are you kidding?

This idiocy is all over 4chan now, you cannot even mention atheism or the idea that religion might not be true regardless of context without being called a fedora tipper.

Even objectively true statements such as 'all deities are invented by humans' that should not be controversial to anybody here get mindless tipper replies.

>> No.6310590

>>6310564
A lot of people in this website are insecure as fuck, in case you haven't noticed it

>>6310306
I live in a third world country, surrounded by theists at every corner. I always refer myself as agnostic when some shithead brings the topic up.

>> No.6310596

>>6310564
We're not atheists in the same way we are not awaterskiers.

>> No.6310609

>>6310306
>I do not 'profess my disbelief' and I am an atheist, what is your point?
Which doesn't mean your atheism isn't a belief. A deist doesn't press it maybe, which doesn't make him less deist.

>> No.6310628

>>6310609
Why do you people feel the need to keep trying to discredit atheism by calling it a belief or claiming its just another religion?

Atheism is the lack of belief in deities, its not an active belief.

>> No.6310633

>>6309127
>Even objectively true statements such as 'all deities are invented by humans'
That's not even a objectively true statement. Invention is related to existence, and there is this one thesis that existence is not a predicate which makes it over the domain of a priori reason (see nietzche or what ever)

>> No.6310636

>>6309127
is "to lose credentials" correct?
did you mean "lose credibility"?

>> No.6310644 [SPOILER] 
File: 40 KB, 407x405, 1427214112325.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6310644

itt

>> No.6310658

>>6310628
It's an active belief in the nonexistance of deites. And it is a belief just as any religion, regalrdless of it being right or not.

>> No.6310660

>>6310644
It would blow your mind to go to a country where being an atheist is entirely normal. What even caused this absurd stereotype? It and the fedora thing have no relation to reality beyond a few idiots on Facebook and Youtube.

>> No.6310687

>>6310658
So again, you have never talked to an atheist and its extremely obvious from your posts.

The vast majority of atheists simply lack belief, they are not 'actively disbelieving' at all times because that would be absurd. Are you actively disbelieving in ghosts or vampires?

>> No.6310721

>>6310644
World of Warcraft ∈ The world
Fantasy world = O
∴ World of Warcraft ∉ Fantasy world

>> No.6310729

>>6310721
O = O

>> No.6310738

>>6310729
O = the empty set.

Go fuck yourself, m00t.

>> No.6310745

>>6310687
>So again, you have never talked to an atheist and its extremely obvious from your posts.
Which is impossible. A lot of my good friends are atheists (and yes, they are active in it in the same way religious people are when the topic comes up.)
>The vast majority of atheists simply lack belief
They don't lack anything.
> Are you actively disbelieving in ghosts or vampires?
Are vampires something that you base your beliefs and moral stances on? If so, yes, I actively disbelieve vampires.

>> No.6310786

Among SJWs, yes.

But what does that matter?

>> No.6310790

>>6310745
Why does the fact that some people base their morals on religion have any relevance whatsoever to this point? That has no bearing on the actual existence or not of a deity. Are you really trying to implying you can lack belief in vampires but must actively disbelieve in gods?

>> No.6310792

>>6310660
It was a simple joke at first, then somewhere along the line people started taking it way too seriously. Happens all the time.

>> No.6310794

>>6310786
Oh so they have all started going to church instead?

>> No.6310808

I really wish I got the whole God thing. I want to understand why so many people are so adamant in their defense of God. I see the whole "first cause" thing brought up, but it all seems like different degrees of the same shit people have been ascribing to deities since the dawn of time. Weather used to be the work of gods, now we know how it works. Naturally. The stars, planets, sickness, tons of things that have been ascribe to God/gods are now explained without them.

Why can't this first cause argument and other things be similar? You really think people back then could have even comprehended the technical side of all the things they put on God? I don't. I think we're in the same boat now. We have this Big Bang theory, but our understanding is still woefully inadequate, so we attribute the mystery to God.

In the future people may look back on us the same way we look back on the Greeks, so sure that Zeus himself was sending lightning down from the sky.

I don't know. I really don't. I wish we could just get away from this meme shit though. le fedora atheist! Yes, atheists can be as annoying as religious people. We get it. Every time I see someone post the fedora all I can think is, this person is deliberately going against the grain just to seem cool. Just like some atheist kid who doesn't know jack shit and just wants to rebel against his parents, these people see that atheism is growing in popularity and thus want to be contrarians and/or hearken back to the "good ole days" before they were even born, the type of le wrong generation cunt that wears clothes from a different time period. Like a fedora, ironically.

>> No.6310815

>>6310794
They're being religious in a politically serious/ironic fashion. Not just Christianity either.

>> No.6310826

>>6310792
Nothing SJWs ever do is a simple joke.

They're dadaists like that. The dadaists never laughed. Their work was very serious to them.

>> No.6310828

>>6310372
>here's where that falls apart. why is god the only uncreated eternity that can defined as existing by that premise?
BECAUSE THIS HYPOTETHICAL THING THOSE CRISTIIANS CALL GOD IS FUCKING MAGIC
NOT SCIENCE, MAGIC; AND NOT ONLY FUCKING MAGIC BUT OMNICIENT MAGIC

>>6309206
wait, you dont know the thing called by the name of christian god is omnipotent?


WTF, atheists dont even know god is omnicient?

Thats the equivalent of saying moon landings are fake but not knowing moon is a place outside earth

>> No.6310835

>>6310828
ps: i am not telling people to know about every hypotetical god ever.
the point is that christian god is ultra mega famous

>> No.6310838

>>6310808
>Weather used to be the work of gods, now we know how it works.
>now we know how it works.
Are you high? No, we don't fucking know how the weather works. Even a primitive thing like tomorrow's weather forecast has no higher rate of accuracy than geomancy based on the color of the night sky and the sound of the chirping bird.

>> No.6310861

>>6310838
We know how weather works. But you need more than that to accurately predict it long term, because its a chaotic system. You'd need to measure it to almost infinite precision, almost constantly.

>> No.6310871

>>6310826
I am pretty sure it was tongue in cheek at first.

>> No.6310875

>>6310861
>We know how weather works.
No we fucking don't. "Knowing how something works" means being able to predict and control it. We're no closer to predicting and controlling the weather than we were 2000 years ago, despite the technobabble just-so stories in your elementary school science textbook.

>You'd need to measure it to almost infinite precision, almost constantly.

A retarded cop-out argument that's literally no different from the retarded "the ways of God are inscrutable" argument.

>> No.6310884

I sometimes forget religion exists for weeks on end only to be abruptly reminded by someone saying something about "jesus" or "giving it up to god" and I'm struck with the sudden recollection that "Oh yeah, there are people that never go a day without thinking about this. That's an interesting social phenomenon." Then I go back to my daily life until one of these comments ambushes me in another week.

>> No.6310889

>>6310838
You realise you are claiming that hundreds of thousands of people across the globe are involved in a conspiracy to make people think they can predict the weather right? Do you think all those supercomputers and weather satellites are actually being used for some secret project? And that all meteorology students are brainwashed or threatened into keeping silent once they enrol?

Just because it cannot be predicted with absolute certainty does not mean short term predictions are not accurate most of the time. And calling an objective fact a 'retarded cop out' does not help your argument.

>> No.6310901

>>6310838
>>6310875

You are absolutely retarded, and being a deliberate sophist/troll. And a bad one.

>> No.6310917

>>6310875
Actually you can both predict and control something without knowing how it works. For instance, animal breeding before discovery of DNA.

>> No.6310933

>>6310884
That's rather euphoric of you.

>> No.6310939

>>6310933
Explain.

>> No.6310953

>>6310939
Why, it's a meme, friend. Another so-called "social phenomenon."
It stems from the type of stereotypical 'enlightenment' and condescension associated with atheists, which our tripfriend here has blatantly demonstrated in his post, hence 'euphoria.'

>> No.6310954

>>6310889
>if we already payed for the initial technology we must have mastered it
And game theory perfectly applies to international economies.

>> No.6310960

>>6309127

Threads like this always convince me that the majority of Atheists don't even have a basic understanding of the history of philosophy or any philosophical understanding or training.

Most of their 'points' or 'arguments' have been sufficiently answered by MUH GREEKS and the major Christian theologians (Augustine, Aquinas, et al).

Also

>Moral Atheists
>Secular Humanism

These are meme-tier oxymoron's.

>> No.6310980

>>6310953
I don't imply the importance of my position, In fact it's quite the opposite. I see the question as being of such little consequence that I plainly don't consider it unless someone else directly confronts me with it. The idea of a god and afterlife is profoundly comforting. I wish it were possible for me to believe in it sometimes. It's and incredibly useful social phenomenon. Atheism is a less useful social phenomenon in all honestly.

I hold nothing against the religious in general, I just find it curious that they put so much effort into contextualizing their lives according to that belief system. I suppose we all do it though in one way or another.

>> No.6310982

>>6310954
Please point to where I said it was 'mastered',.

You claimed modern weather prediction is no more reliable than asking a farmer what his cows are doing which is just absurd.

>> No.6310988

>>6310960
>Mentions no points
>Mentions no posts
>le Greek meme

Is this a performance piece?

meh/10

>> No.6310991

>>6310982
>Do you think all those supercomputers and weather satellites are actually being used for some secret project
they are used for tests, maybe in 50 years we'll be closer to understanding it but just abrely having the technology started isn't proof of anything
I'm not the other anon, though, I just dsliked your post.

>> No.6310993

>>6310960
Most religious people and most people in general have no philosophical training, what is your point. There are thousands of religions, many mutually exclusive and none has any more validity than any other.

>Moral Atheists
>oxymoron

Are you actually trying to claim religion is the source of morality or that you need religion to have morals? Religion just serves as an excuse to justify the same basic morals most societies come up with to make group living possible.

>> No.6310998

>>6310991
>tests

They are also used to predict the weather, something they are quite good at. The weather forecast is correct most of the time.

>> No.6310999

>>6310980
Everybody contextualizes their lives somehow. If you actually understand this, I don't get how you think religion is a social phenomenom born from a lack of thinking. Implying it's a lack of thinking like you did is indeed condescension. There have been numerous christian thinkers that have done nothing but think and concluded in religion. I don't get the point of your original post. If it wasn't to demonstrate your euphoria then it was just a blog post.
I'm an atheist, btw

>> No.6311006

>>6310993
>Are you actually trying to claim religion is the source of morality or that you need religion to have morals? Religion just serves as an excuse to justify the same basic morals most societies come up with to make group living possible.

No. I'm saying (most) atheists deny the existence of transcendent realities. An empirically unobservable objective morality is inconsistent within the framework of an (materialistic) atheist worldview.

Also, way to twist my argument to spin it into a polemical attack on religion. No claim on religion was made in my prior post. This is why the New Atheist movement is fucking cringeworthy.

>> No.6311023

>>6310999
>social phenomenom born from a lack of thinking
I don't think it is born from a lack of thinking. It's born out of confirmation bias just like any other conviction. We all have them, things that we adhere to religiously in opposition to the "facts". The main reason is the multiplicity of "facts" available and the way you can order them to form a favorable narrative.

> If it wasn't to demonstrate your euphoria then it was just a blog post.
It was meant to characterize atheism in a different light. Most Christians I've talked to about this seem to think that all atheists are militant and spend their days hating god instead of loving him. The assumption being that everyone still thinks about god daily. I've actually had a Christian person ask why if I'm going to think about god for so long am I going to hate him. They were surprised when i said that i don't think about god or religion every day. it's a misconception that seems somewhat common as I've had other Christians react that way when I explain what i stated in my post. I suppose it is still technically condescending but this is 4chan after all.

>> No.6311034

>>6311006
Point to where I 'attacked' religion.

The vast, vast majority of people who try to reference the medieval philosophers to criticise atheism are Christians trying to say this proves their god is the one that exists and should be worshipped.

And there is absolutely nothing 'cringeworthy' about people pointing out no religion has any evidence to support it being true and that all were created by people for well understood social reasons. Nor is there anything wrong with refusing to believe in a deity without actual evidence.

>> No.6311043

>euphoric

Its great to have terms that instantly let you know whoever used them is an idiot or a troll.

>> No.6311092

>>6309176
>..that my *lack* of belief is valid?
>I can't just believe what I want to
nothing wrong here

>> No.6311113

>>6311043
>no one can use terms as a joke
>you either want to hurt me or you're dumb
>stop triggering me
4chan is worse than tumblr

>> No.6312574

Jesus is truth.
I have more brains in my big toe than all of you stupid dumb idiots put together.

>> No.6312604
File: 70 KB, 512x290, RAVI-ZACHARIAS_NATIONAL-DAY-OF-PRAYER1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6312604

You will never find a more charming man.
Look no further. This is what it means to truly live.

>> No.6312699

>>6309215
Aren't morals always based on consequences. Whether it's hell or social implications. Morals don't inherently exist without the necessary consequence.

>> No.6312714

>>6309141
spot the jew worshipping /pol/lock!

>worshipping a dead jew on a stick
lelelelelelelelelelelelelel

>> No.6312863

>>6309127
No, it's just not as cool to believe anymore

>> No.6313918

how is this board so fucking shit that people respond to this thread

>> No.6313943

The "lack of belief" in a God can easily be rephrased as a positive belief in an uncaused universe.

>> No.6313956

>>6313943
>I believe the universe was caused/created by something other than God

>> No.6313957

>>6313956
then you have a serious problem with definitions

>> No.6313963

>>6313957
so is god just another word for creator?

>> No.6313985

>>6313918
/lit/ is now just /b/ with slightly higher literacy rates.

>> No.6314235

>>6313985

>tfw you only go to /lit/ because you like shittposting with people with higher literacy rates

>> No.6314245

>>6309167
>he don't understand faith vs. science

>> No.6314259

>>6309225
No, but it's a retard nonetheless.

>> No.6314297

the question of a (god)s existence is dumb anyway, If anyone bothers with an actual fucking set definition of it during a discussion of it said existence (which people seem to be fuck all bothered to) it gets defined as some barely definable omnipotent thing, doing omnipotent stuff. As to why humans are so fucking concerned with such a thing that's only definable as omnipotent and is in some plane of existence that isn't empirical in any way other than existing in humans as an idea, beats me. the people who seem to be concerned and vocal about it, are pretty fucking annoying though, not to mention dull

>> No.6314689

>>6309321
This this this

>> No.6314696

>>6309502
SJW is just the new slave morality

>> No.6315211

>>6309127
xD EPIKKK FUCKIN TRAWL BRO!! YOU SURE TROLED US GOOD!

>> No.6315532

>>6309795

Entropy supports an eternal universe. True, all things tend to entropy over time, but that very same law also says given a large enough or infinate ampunt of time, any system will go through all possible configurations endlessly. Once the Universe reaches heat death, there is nothing in the laws of entropy which stop it randomly undergoing a big bang again because of quantum fluctations.