Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
#51

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-07-2021, 07:13 PM)Free Wrote: Why the fuck would anyone think that atheists would be following a religious belief system?

Many Buddhists -- and Taoists -- are themselves atheists.
Freedom isn't free.
The following 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post:
  • Aegon
Reply
#52

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-01-2021, 02:04 AM)Phaedrus Wrote: With so many ways to do something, why should anyone follow a single way?
Mandalorian?
test signature
The following 1 user Likes skyking's post:
  • epronovost
Reply
#53

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
“Doing nothing is better than being busy doing nothing.”
― Lao Tzu
I am a sovereign citizen of the Multiverse, and I vote!


Reply
#54

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-08-2021, 01:47 PM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote: “Doing nothing is better than being busy doing nothing.”
― Lao Tzu

I'm doing it all wrong then. I am constantly busy doing nothing.
[Image: color%5D%5Bcolor=#333333%5D%5Bsize=small%5D%5Bfont=T...ans-Serif%5D]
Reply
#55

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-07-2021, 10:19 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:
(02-07-2021, 07:13 PM)Free Wrote: Why the fuck would anyone think that atheists would be following a religious belief system?

Many Buddhists -- and Taoists -- are themselves atheists.

Yabut a lot of Buddhists are into the chi woo-hoo and spiritual stuff.  I've never seen any evidence that humans have a spirit or a soul that is separate from the brain and body.

One time I was standing in a long line at a fabric store next to a Buddhist monk who was dressed in the bright orange garb they wear and he seemed like a sweet guy so I asked him the significance of the orange color of his robe.  He said it represented the fire and spirit of life and the giving of life from the sun and god.  Tee-hee, I happen to know that the preponderance of dye available in India is orange so that's mostly why they dye the fabric orange.   In Southeast Asia the monks wear a marroon color because that's the dye color more available but I wasn't going to make a fuss over the color of his robes.   He was a lovely person and didn't try push his worldview on me.   

Another time in the same fabric store I was standing in line again and a man and his wife were in front of me.  I can't remember how the subject came up, I think it was near easter time, anyway the man was talking about how blessed he was for some mundane thing and turned to me and asked if I believed in Jesus christ our lord and I said, "No."   He was flummoxed.  I don't think he could believe that anyone on the planet didn't believe in Jesus.  It's this entitlement Christian crap that I hate so much.  It's the assumption that they have the official designated religion and every other religion is bogus and fake.

Portland, unsuprisingly, has several Buddhist temples, one is about 2 miles from my house. I keep meaning to go inside to see what it's like.  I have never had a Buddhist monk knock on my door trying to sell their worldview, nor have I ever had a rabbi rap on my door, but goddam christians knocked on my door so frequently that I had to put up a "no soliciting" sign.    Muslims don't knock on doors either.  The extremist Muslims simply knock off heads instead of knocking on doors. 

Religious rant over.
                                                         T4618
The following 5 users Like Dancefortwo's post:
  • Dom, Dānu, TonyAnkle, mordant, Paleophyte
Reply
#56

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
Hey, proper application of chi can knock a person off their feet if they know it's coming and expect to be knocked off their feet. How could anyone doubt it?
  [Image: attachment.php?aid=31] Dog  
Reply
#57

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-08-2021, 04:37 PM)Dancefortwo Wrote:
(02-07-2021, 10:19 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:
(02-07-2021, 07:13 PM)Free Wrote: Why the fuck would anyone think that atheists would be following a religious belief system?

Many Buddhists -- and Taoists -- are themselves atheists.

Yabut a lot of Buddhists are into the chi woo-hoo and spiritual stuff.  I've never seen any evidence that humans have a spirit or a soul that is separate from the brain and body.

Yeah, I wasn't saying they were rational, only that many don't believe in gods.
Freedom isn't free.
Reply
#58

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-08-2021, 03:51 PM)Dom Wrote:
(02-08-2021, 01:47 PM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote: “Doing nothing is better than being busy doing nothing.”
― Lao Tzu

I'm doing it all wrong then. I am constantly busy doing nothing.

Consider the wisdom of the way of the cat.  Take a long nap.
I am a sovereign citizen of the Multiverse, and I vote!


The following 1 user Likes Cheerful Charlie's post:
  • Dom
Reply
#59

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-07-2021, 07:13 PM)Free Wrote: Why the fuck would anyone think that atheists would be following a religious belief system?

A religion can be atheistic.
[Image: nL4L1haz_Qo04rZMFtdpyd1OZgZf9NSnR9-7hAWT...dc2a24480e]

The following 1 user Likes Aegon's post:
  • Thumpalumpacus
Reply
#60

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-14-2021, 04:24 PM)Aegon Wrote:
(02-07-2021, 07:13 PM)Free Wrote: Why the fuck would anyone think that atheists would be following a religious belief system?

A religion can be atheistic.

Not in the terms of the context of this thread, no.

You can believe in something "religiously," as in ascribing a degree of importance to it. For example, many atheists ascribe a degree of importance to science, and are religiously devoted to it.

But if what you believe in is in of itself not officially or socially categorized or characterized as an organized religion or cult (such as the MAGA cult or Q-Anon) then there can be no comparison.
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply
#61

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-14-2021, 07:52 PM)Free Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 04:24 PM)Aegon Wrote:
(02-07-2021, 07:13 PM)Free Wrote: Why the fuck would anyone think that atheists would be following a religious belief system?

A religion can be atheistic.

Not in the terms of the context of this thread, no.

You can believe in something "religiously," as in ascribing a degree of importance to it. For example, many atheists ascribe a degree of importance to science, and are religiously devoted to it.

But if what you believe in is in of itself not officially or socially categorized or characterized as an organized religion or cult (such as the MAGA cult or Q-Anon) then there can be no comparison.

There are many atheist Buddhists and Taoists. It follows that atheists can be religionists.
Freedom isn't free.
Reply
#62

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-14-2021, 08:01 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 07:52 PM)Free Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 04:24 PM)Aegon Wrote: A religion can be atheistic.

Not in the terms of the context of this thread, no.

You can believe in something "religiously," as in ascribing a degree of importance to it. For example, many atheists ascribe a degree of importance to science, and are religiously devoted to it.

But if what you believe in is in of itself not officially or socially categorized or characterized as an organized religion or cult (such as the MAGA cult or Q-Anon) then there can be no comparison.

There are many atheist Buddhists and Taoists. It follows that atheists can be religionists.

Everyone is an atheist in terms of what, other than their own belief system, they claim to have no no beliefs in. A Christian is an atheist to Islam, for example.

Buddhists believe in a constant cycle of rebirth and the existence of other realms of existence. Taoism is based upon a philosophical belief system, not unlike many other religions.

Therefore, anyone who follows the ideology of Buddhism or Taoism cannot claim to be an atheist at all in terms of their own beliefs about it, since they believe in an ideology that involves philosophy and other unproven claims.
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply
#63

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-14-2021, 08:12 PM)Free Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 08:01 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 07:52 PM)Free Wrote: Not in the terms of the context of this thread, no.

You can believe in something "religiously," as in ascribing a degree of importance to it. For example, many atheists ascribe a degree of importance to science, and are religiously devoted to it.

But if what you believe in is in of itself not officially or socially categorized or characterized as an organized religion or cult (such as the MAGA cult or Q-Anon) then there can be no comparison.

There are many atheist Buddhists and Taoists. It follows that atheists can be religionists.

Everyone is an atheist in terms of what, other than their own belief system, they claim to have no no beliefs in. A Christian is an atheist to Islam, for example.

Buddhists believe in a constant cycle of rebirth and the existence of other realms of existence. Taoism is based upon a philosophical belief system, not unlike many other religions.

Therefore, anyone who follows the ideology of Buddhism or Taoism cannot claim to be an atheist at all in terms of their own beliefs about it, since they believe in an ideology that involves philosophy and other unproven claims.
Buddhism and Taoism don't have deities on offer, particularly if you follow the westernized versions. They are basically just self-help systems. The religious bits involving monks in robes have demigods and a florid cosmology and afterlife teachings that have to be accepted by faith, but that is not having a god; it is no different in principle than believing in ghosts or spiritualism.

A-theist = without god, not without ANY unsubstantiatable beliefs -- just that specific one.
The following 1 user Likes mordant's post:
  • Dom
Reply
#64

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-14-2021, 08:12 PM)Free Wrote: Buddhists believe in a constant cycle of rebirth and the existence of other realms of existence. Taoism is based upon a philosophical belief system, not unlike many other religions.

Therefore, anyone who follows the ideology of Buddhism or Taoism cannot claim to be an atheist at all in terms of their own beliefs about it, since they believe in an ideology that involves philosophy and other unproven claims.

Neither of those beliefs are gods by any normal definition of the word in the context of religion. You're making a false equivalence here.

Quote:Definition of atheism
1a: a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
b: a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
2archaic : godlessness especially in conduct : UNGODLINESS, WICKEDNESS

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism

Quote:Definition of theist
: a believer in theism : a person who believes in the existence of a god or gods
specifically : one who believes in the existence of one God viewed as the creative source of the human race

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theist

Atheism is simply the lack of any beliefs about, or the positive disbelief in, god(s). The definition of atheism says nothing about belief in doctrines except as they refer to gods.

Your argument is specious. People can follow a religious doctrine without believing in god(s). You're probably conflating atheist and rationalist, from the looks of it.
Freedom isn't free.
The following 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post:
  • mordant
Reply
#65

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-14-2021, 09:21 PM)mordant Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 08:12 PM)Free Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 08:01 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: There are many atheist Buddhists and Taoists. It follows that atheists can be religionists.

Everyone is an atheist in terms of what, other than their own belief system, they claim to have no no beliefs in. A Christian is an atheist to Islam, for example.

Buddhists believe in a constant cycle of rebirth and the existence of other realms of existence. Taoism is based upon a philosophical belief system, not unlike many other religions.

Therefore, anyone who follows the ideology of Buddhism or Taoism cannot claim to be an atheist at all in terms of their own beliefs about it, since they believe in an ideology that involves philosophy and other unproven claims.
Buddhism and Taoism don't have deities on offer, particularly if you follow the westernized versions. They are basically just self-help systems. The religious bits involving monks in robes have demigods and a florid cosmology and afterlife teachings that have to be accepted by faith, but that is not having a god; it is no different in principle than believing in ghosts or spiritualism.

A-theist = without god, not without ANY unsubstantiatable beliefs -- just that specific one.

I have yet to meet a true atheist who accepts even the possible existence of spirits, spirituality, souls et al as they all imply the existence of the supernatural. Being an atheist is indeed correctly defined as simply existing in a state of disbelief in a god or gods as they also fall into the category of being supernatural.

Therefore, in a broader sense, atheism implies the state of being irreligious.
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply
#66

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-14-2021, 10:05 PM)Free Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 09:21 PM)mordant Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 08:12 PM)Free Wrote: Everyone is an atheist in terms of what, other than their own belief system, they claim to have no no beliefs in. A Christian is an atheist to Islam, for example.

Buddhists believe in a constant cycle of rebirth and the existence of other realms of existence. Taoism is based upon a philosophical belief system, not unlike many other religions.

Therefore, anyone who follows the ideology of Buddhism or Taoism cannot claim to be an atheist at all in terms of their own beliefs about it, since they believe in an ideology that involves philosophy and other unproven claims.
Buddhism and Taoism don't have deities on offer, particularly if you follow the westernized versions. They are basically just self-help systems. The religious bits involving monks in robes have demigods and a florid cosmology and afterlife teachings that have to be accepted by faith, but that is not having a god; it is no different in principle than believing in ghosts or spiritualism.

A-theist = without god, not without ANY unsubstantiatable beliefs -- just that specific one.

I have yet to meet a true atheist who accepts even the possible existence of spirits, spirituality, souls et al as they all imply the existence of the supernatural. Being an atheist is indeed correctly defined as simply existing in a state of disbelief in a god or gods as they also fall into the category of being supernatural.

Therefore, in a broader sense, atheism implies the state of being irreligious.

Wow there's a lot to unpack here. What is a "true atheist?" By whose definition of "true," yours? Who cases how you want it to be defined? There is a definition already with a long history of meaning "godless," "without god," etc. It has never meant an aversion to all things supernatural.

No Buddhist believes in a personal deity. It is an atheistic religion.
[Image: nL4L1haz_Qo04rZMFtdpyd1OZgZf9NSnR9-7hAWT...dc2a24480e]

The following 1 user Likes Aegon's post:
  • Thumpalumpacus
Reply
#67

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-14-2021, 10:05 PM)Free Wrote: I have yet to meet a true atheist who accepts even the possible existence of spirits, spirituality, souls et al as they all imply the existence of the supernatural. Being an atheist is indeed correctly defined as simply existing in a state of disbelief in a god or gods as they also fall into the category of being supernatural.

Therefore, in a broader sense, atheism implies the state of being irreligious.

I've met more than a few atheists who believe in woo while not believing in god(s). Your personal experience only defines your own world. Atheism has no implications regarding doctrinal beliefs, no matter how many times you repeat it.

Unimpressive argument, but more solid evidence that atheism and rationality aren't equal.

Also, I think I see a "No True Scotsman" there in your very first sentence.
Freedom isn't free.
Reply
#68

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-14-2021, 10:42 PM)Aegon Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 10:05 PM)Free Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 09:21 PM)mordant Wrote: Buddhism and Taoism don't have deities on offer, particularly if you follow the westernized versions. They are basically just self-help systems. The religious bits involving monks in robes have demigods and a florid cosmology and afterlife teachings that have to be accepted by faith, but that is not having a god; it is no different in principle than believing in ghosts or spiritualism.

A-theist = without god, not without ANY unsubstantiatable beliefs -- just that specific one.

I have yet to meet a true atheist who accepts even the possible existence of spirits, spirituality, souls et al as they all imply the existence of the supernatural. Being an atheist is indeed correctly defined as simply existing in a state of disbelief in a god or gods as they also fall into the category of being supernatural.

Therefore, in a broader sense, atheism implies the state of being irreligious.

Wow there's a lot to unpack here. What is a "true atheist?" By whose definition of "true," yours? Who cases how you want it to be defined? There is a definition already with a long history of meaning "godless," "without god," etc. It has never meant an aversion to all things supernatural.

No Buddhist believes in a personal deity. It is an atheistic religion.

Atheism is a state of being in the absence of belief in any gods. So what gods are we talking about and why do we do we not have beliefs in them? 

What is it about these gods that causes our disbelief? Could it be that these gods are proposed to exist in a supernatural state, and we have no evidence of anything whatsoever existing in a supernatural state? Therefore, to be atheistic about the proposed existence of any supernatural gods is based upon the lack of evidence of not just the gods, but the supernatural state they supposedly exist in.

Therefore, as atheists we are rejecting the existence of the supernatural whenever we reject the existence of these gods. You simply can't have one without the other.

Sure, you can run with the ancient definition of atheism as defined from the Greeks eons ago, but atheism has become more that just a mere lack of beliefs in gods in the modern age.
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply
#69

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-14-2021, 11:50 PM)Free Wrote: Sure, you can run with the ancient definition of atheism as defined from the Greeks eons ago, but atheism has become more that just a mere lack of beliefs in gods in the modern age.

Maybe in your mind, and your admittedly-limited experience.

There also seems to be a goalpost running around here somewhere.
Freedom isn't free.
Reply
#70

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-14-2021, 11:53 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 11:50 PM)Free Wrote: Sure, you can run with the ancient definition of atheism as defined from the Greeks eons ago, but atheism has become more that just a mere lack of beliefs in gods in the modern age.

Maybe in your mind, and your admittedly-limited experience.

There also seems to be a goalpost running around here somewhere.

Cherry picking? How about challenging the rest of it as shown below?

"What is it about these gods that causes our disbelief? Could it be that these gods are proposed to exist in a supernatural state, and we have no evidence of anything whatsoever existing in a supernatural state? Therefore, to be atheistic about the proposed existence of any supernatural gods is based upon the lack of evidence of not just the gods, but the supernatural state they supposedly exist in.

Therefore, as atheists we are rejecting the existence of the supernatural whenever we reject the existence of these gods. You simply can't have one without the other."
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply
#71

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-15-2021, 12:01 AM)Free Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 11:53 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 11:50 PM)Free Wrote: Sure, you can run with the ancient definition of atheism as defined from the Greeks eons ago, but atheism has become more that just a mere lack of beliefs in gods in the modern age.

Maybe in your mind, and your admittedly-limited experience.

There also seems to be a goalpost running around here somewhere.

Cherry picking? How about challenging the rest of it as shown below?

"What is it about these gods that causes our disbelief? Could it be that these gods are proposed to exist in a supernatural state, and we have no evidence of anything whatsoever existing in a supernatural state? Therefore, to be atheistic about the proposed existence of any supernatural gods is based upon the lack of evidence of not just the gods, but the supernatural state they supposedly exist in.

Therefore, as atheists we are rejecting the existence of the supernatural whenever we reject the existence of these gods. You simply can't have one without the other."

Category error. Try again.

Imagine your post as a Venn diagram and you'll get my point.
Freedom isn't free.
Reply
#72

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-15-2021, 12:15 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:
(02-15-2021, 12:01 AM)Free Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 11:53 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Maybe in your mind, and your admittedly-limited experience.

There also seems to be a goalpost running around here somewhere.

Cherry picking? How about challenging the rest of it as shown below?

"What is it about these gods that causes our disbelief? Could it be that these gods are proposed to exist in a supernatural state, and we have no evidence of anything whatsoever existing in a supernatural state? Therefore, to be atheistic about the proposed existence of any supernatural gods is based upon the lack of evidence of not just the gods, but the supernatural state they supposedly exist in.

Therefore, as atheists we are rejecting the existence of the supernatural whenever we reject the existence of these gods. You simply can't have one without the other."

Category error. Try again.

Imagine your post as a Venn diagram and you'll get my point.

I don't see how not believing in any gods means not believing in other things you can't prove. It doesn't follow. I could not believe in gods but believe in unicorns. Or reincarnation. Or whatever. Just not gods.

What you describe better fits the category of freethought. That explicitly rejects non scientific/provable things.
[Image: color%5D%5Bcolor=#333333%5D%5Bsize=small%5D%5Bfont=T...ans-Serif%5D]
Reply
#73

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-15-2021, 12:15 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:
(02-15-2021, 12:01 AM)Free Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 11:53 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Maybe in your mind, and your admittedly-limited experience.

There also seems to be a goalpost running around here somewhere.

Cherry picking? How about challenging the rest of it as shown below?

"What is it about these gods that causes our disbelief? Could it be that these gods are proposed to exist in a supernatural state, and we have no evidence of anything whatsoever existing in a supernatural state? Therefore, to be atheistic about the proposed existence of any supernatural gods is based upon the lack of evidence of not just the gods, but the supernatural state they supposedly exist in.

Therefore, as atheists we are rejecting the existence of the supernatural whenever we reject the existence of these gods. You simply can't have one without the other."

Category error. Try again.

Imagine your post as a Venn diagram and you'll get my point.

There is no error here.

Atheism began as a response to the claims of the existence of supernatural gods. This is at the exclusion of actual historical persons who were claimed to be gods, for how does one disbelieve in the existence of an actual historical person?

Therefore it is implicit that atheism is indeed a response to the claims of the existence of "supernatural" gods, not natural ones.

"SUPERNATURAL gods."

We are atheists because we do not believe in the supernatural existence of a god. 

So again, why do we not believe?

Answer that and you'll begin to understand my position.
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply
#74

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-14-2021, 10:05 PM)Free Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 09:21 PM)mordant Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 08:12 PM)Free Wrote: Everyone is an atheist in terms of what, other than their own belief system, they claim to have no no beliefs in. A Christian is an atheist to Islam, for example.

Buddhists believe in a constant cycle of rebirth and the existence of other realms of existence. Taoism is based upon a philosophical belief system, not unlike many other religions.

Therefore, anyone who follows the ideology of Buddhism or Taoism cannot claim to be an atheist at all in terms of their own beliefs about it, since they believe in an ideology that involves philosophy and other unproven claims.
Buddhism and Taoism don't have deities on offer, particularly if you follow the westernized versions. They are basically just self-help systems. The religious bits involving monks in robes have demigods and a florid cosmology and afterlife teachings that have to be accepted by faith, but that is not having a god; it is no different in principle than believing in ghosts or spiritualism.

A-theist = without god, not without ANY unsubstantiatable beliefs -- just that specific one.

I have yet to meet a true atheist who accepts even the possible existence of spirits, spirituality, souls et al as they all imply the existence of the supernatural. Being an atheist is indeed correctly defined as simply existing in a state of disbelief in a god or gods as they also fall into the category of being supernatural.

Therefore, in a broader sense, atheism implies the state of being irreligious.
You are talking about epistemology, not belief in deities. It's true that the same epistemological approach that makes one disbelieve in gods, if consistently applied, will also lead to disbelief in all things supernatural. But humans are not logically consistent beings and are perfectly capable of holding all sort of contradictory beliefs, or even of denying the beliefs they have to themselves. And the correct meaning and application of the label "atheist" remains what it is.

You can press my wife for example if she believes in any sort of god and she'll shake her head adamantly that she does not (or she will to me, because she knows her secret is safe with me). But she is not comfortable calling herself an atheist because to her it is equivalent to a closed / incurious mind (I suspect it is really just that it's too much of a social wet blanket, is the REAL problem she has with it). She continues to flirt with concepts like serendipity, and some sort of vague, overarching purpose or meaning such that any one thing in her mind is (or is not) "meant to be". She bases this on her intuitive feel of things and acknowledges that she can't prove it. But ... it feels "truthy" to her so she leaves space for it, not really believing it but half convinced that she (1) should and (2) eventually will. She does not, has not, never will understand organized religion, nor can she credit deities, but can't quite bring herself to call it horseshit, and she tends to think me doing so reflects some sort of bitterness over my experience with religion rather than a truly considered assessment. She has not, in short, arrived at the conclusion I have that not only is belief in a supreme being unsubstantiated at this time, but is inherently unsubstantiatABLE because its founded on inherently non-falsifiable premises.

With all due respect to my wife, I personally think my epistemology is sounder and more self-consistent and consistent with lived experience than hers and whatever pull people such as her feel toward the Divine is a product of how human mentation works (which is to say, in a way that's super vulnerable to confirmation bias absent a trained, relentlessly rational approach to thinking which many find personally distasteful and uninteresting). But for all that, my wife is no less an atheist than I for one simple reason: she does not believe in any sort of supreme being. There is no other requirement.

To me the only gray area is deism. Positing a god who is presently absent or hidden or non-interventionist is just playing with semantics because there's no practical difference between such a deity and no deity at all beyond providing you with an ersatz explanation for the origin of existence and, perhaps, of life. If you believe god made the clock, wound it up and walked away, then I suppose you could be said to have a belief in a former god or maybe even a currently disengaged god. But that heady belief runs contrary to what most people crave, which is for a sky wizard to have them in their back pocket in some way. I provisionally consider a deist to be a theist, but only by a whisker. I come down on the side of deism = theism because it is arrived at by the same epistemology as any other form of god-belief; it just disposes of all the inability to actually deliver on any benefits right up front instead of giving people false hope with pleasant lies. The only benefit is fitting in socially better than an atheist and the usual benefits of belonging to a private club.
The following 3 users Like mordant's post:
  • Free, Thumpalumpacus, jerry mcmasters
Reply
#75

Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯
(02-15-2021, 02:28 AM)mordant Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 10:05 PM)Free Wrote:
(02-14-2021, 09:21 PM)mordant Wrote: Buddhism and Taoism don't have deities on offer, particularly if you follow the westernized versions. They are basically just self-help systems. The religious bits involving monks in robes have demigods and a florid cosmology and afterlife teachings that have to be accepted by faith, but that is not having a god; it is no different in principle than believing in ghosts or spiritualism.

A-theist = without god, not without ANY unsubstantiatable beliefs -- just that specific one.

I have yet to meet a true atheist who accepts even the possible existence of spirits, spirituality, souls et al as they all imply the existence of the supernatural. Being an atheist is indeed correctly defined as simply existing in a state of disbelief in a god or gods as they also fall into the category of being supernatural.

Therefore, in a broader sense, atheism implies the state of being irreligious.
You are talking about epistemology, not belief in deities. 

In this context it's actually both since both are intrinsically entwined. Let me try to explain with a question and attempt to answer it.

Why do we disbelieve in supernatural deities?

It's not quite the same as merely disbelieving in a claim that an actual human being is a deity. The human being still exists without the godly attributes. But a "supernatural" deity? We reject the entire concept based upon the supernatural attribute. We reject the supernatural attribute based upon the lack of evidence.

"A deity or god is a supernatural being considered divine or sacred."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deity

Therefore, as atheists it is implicit that we reject the supernatural which is entwined with the deity.

Which brings me right back to my point that any belief system that proposes the existence of anything not found in nature falls into the category of belonging to the class of supernatural belief systems.
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)