Are atheists arrogant? immoral? angry?

[shunyadragon]

Did it look good?


That’s a falsehood. They didn’t want “theistic god” believers… they wanted a nation “without a god”.

You are continuing the vendetta slandering today's atheists by association dragging up dead Nationalist Manifest Destiny dictators that relied on the support of Christians to carry out their pogroms.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Nice try, but no cigare.
The motivation here, once again, is not mere non-belief in god claims.

It is whatever reasoing underpins the belief that religion must be eradicated and / or that people shouldn't have freedom of beliefs.






The difference is that there is a direct link between a jihadi's god beliefs and his violence as a jihadi.
While there is no such direct link between atheism and violence against theists in countries like the USSR. The link there is between the state ideology and the violence.

Their more nonbelief isn't what motivated the violence.





Yes, anti-religious views.

Mere non-belief isn't an anti- view.
The state ideology was, though


I would not.



Ow I very much disagree.
Unlike atheism, theism comes with sets of instructions on how to live, declaration of what it deems right and wrong, instructions on what one should do in the face of such rights or wrongs, etc.

This collection of instructions, and in some cases actual commandments, most definitely can directly and by itself cause people to do all kinds of things.

Atheism doesn't come with such instructions, commandments or declarations. So whatever a person who happens to be atheist does, that person will have found his motivation somewhere in a worldview or ideology that DOES lean itself to such instructions, commandments and declarations.

Such beliefs is what is going to underpin your reasoning, justification for your actions.
"Atheism" simply can not provide such.



First, this went from mere non-belief of a claim to positively believing the opposite claim - which is not the same thing.

Secondly, it depends on how the problems are caused, now doesn't it?
The way I consider god beliefs to cause problems, when they do, is when the beliefs include gods (= ultimate authorities) that make faith-based, unreasoned, bare declarations about right and wrong, about how to live, about the world,.... And even then it depends what the instructions / declarations are.

But if the entire idea is that gods are unquestionable moral authorities and if they ask you to do something, the only moral thing to do is to obbey, then this will potentially cause problems. That's when otherwise sensible people press a button in a crowded market to detonate their suicide vest. It's when people get stoned to death for having sex. It's when gay people are hanged, or otherwise discriminated against or shunned or what-have-you, simply for being gay. It's when people aren't allowed to get the medical aid they need "cause blood transfusions are of the devil" or whatever.

This is the potential danger I see in god beliefs.
And yes, fortunately most people tend to have a proper moral compass and are reasonable enough to cherry pick there religion to ignore those nasty bits, or they "explain it away" with some humanisticly inspired "interpretation" of the texts, or by saying that this was from another time and it doesn't apply for us today or whatever excuse they come up with.




Having said all that....
The above is why I said that there is, at least potentially, a direct causal link between god beliefs and nasty behavior.
The same can not be said about atheism. Simply because atheism doesn't meet any of the criteria required to culminate in such: it provides no instructions on how to live, it provides no declarations on right and wrong,... it is a single position on a single issue. Whatever people wish to add to that, necessarily comes from other sources.




No.

Theism is no less a single belief than atheism. It does not come with any further instructions, does not regulate moral frameworks or behavior sets. It makes no declaration but about belief in the existence of a god or gods. If someone tells you they're a theist that tells you absolutely nothing about their sociopolitical stances or philosophies. All it tells you is that they believe in some kind of god or gods. Just like all atheism tells you is not believing in some kind of god or gods.

Theism =/= Religion, even though theists are often religious.
Just like atheism =/= Religion, even though atheists can be religious.

Theism definitely isn't an interchangeable word with fundamentalist Christians and Muslims.

 

[Revoltingest]

One of the symptoms....

I stopped reading there.

 

[Augustus]

The difference is that there is a direct link between a jihadi's god beliefs and his violence as a jihadi.
While there is no such direct link between atheism and violence against theists in countries like the USSR. The link there is between the state ideology and the violence.

Their more nonbelief isn't what motivated the violence.

The jihadi ideology is what motivated the violence.

The “more belief in the existence of a god” didn’t make them kill anyone.

It was the idea that god exists and this god thinks killing infidels is virtuous therefore…

Similar to “no gods exist and god beliefs are false and harmful therefore…”

There are always multiple beliefs involved for either the jihadi or Communist, and belief in god’s existence/non-existence plays a key role in both.

Yes, anti-religious views.

When I was an anti-theist there was certainly a direct connection between my anti-theism and my atheism.

When you believe there are no gods, you generally form an opinion on god beliefs too.

Unlike atheism, theism comes with sets of instructions on how to live, declaration of what it deems right and wrong, instructions on what one should do in the face of such rights or wrongs, etc.

No they don’t, not always anyway. None of this is intrinsic to theism though. They relate to a specific religions i.e. ideologies.

You are comparing religion to atheism which is a false comparison.

The correct comparison is religion to whatever ideology the atheist holds be it secular humanism or Communism.

Such beliefs is what is going to underpin your reasoning, justification for your actions.
"Atheism" simply can not provide such.

Neither can theism.

Try to explain it without conflating theism with religion or adding additional beliefs to the god belief and you’ll see.

In reality we don’t give up a religion or ideology, we replace it with something else so atheism always forms part of a broader worldview (at least for anyone who is familiar with the idea that other people are theists). Atheism may play a major role in that worldview or a minor one, but it is part of the matrix.

The above is why I said that there is, at least potentially, a direct causal link between god beliefs and nasty behavior.
The same can not be said about atheism. Simply because atheism doesn't meet any of the criteria required to culminate in such: it provides no instructions on how to live, it provides no declarations on right and wrong,... it is a single position on a single issue. Whatever people wish to add to that, necessarily comes from other sources.

So is theism a single belief on a single issue. Comparing atheism to religion is comparing apples to oranges.

No belief is inert and monadic though, surely you must accept that atheism (at least for some people) forms a consequential part of their worldview?

My non-belief absolutely influences my worldview. It is therefore consequential to at least some decisions I make and beliefs I hold.

This is what the leading Soviet Communists thought too.

“For man, man is the supreme being” and should therefore play the role of a god in remaking the world according to their will. Also, in a godless, materialistic world human life has no intrinsic value so all that matters is the greater good. Given that a communist utopia free of human suffering offers and almost unlimited good, revolutionaries should be willing to sacrifice as many lives as needed in order to speed up its arrival. In addition, as religion as a false belief prevents man from reaching his true potential, such beliefs should be eradicated by any means necessary.

None of this emerges from just atheism, but atheism plays a key role in underpinning such beliefs, and people like Lenin acknowledged this explicitly.

In a world shaped by theistic belief systems that many deem harmful, atheism may certainly be directly connected to hostility towards religions if they are perceived as false and harmful beliefs.

No

I find that remarkable.

I can’t imagine you really think that unique among all beliefs, the belief that gods don’t exist can play no part in a broader worldview, even though many atheists insist their worldview is indeed influenced by their disbelief in gods.

Your disbelief in gods plays no role in how you evaluate theistic religions? Mine certainly does.

If atheism plays no role, then Atheist 5 Year Plans must have nothing to do with atheism, and leading Marxists must all have been lying or mistaken when they drew on 200 years of explicitly atheistic philosophy to create their worldview.

I find the idea that they were all just coincidentally atheist to remarkably implausible, when they all argued they were necessarily atheist and their philosophy necessarily atheistic.

 

[Kenny]

You are continuing the vendetta slandering today's atheists by association dragging up dead Nationalist Manifest Destiny dictators that relied on the support of Christians to carry out their pogroms.

I’m just using the same argument in reverse.

I didn’t start the argument.

 

[shunyadragon]

I’m just using the same argument in reverse.

No, you came up front early with the association of atheists today with dead dictators,

Neither is valid.

I didn’t start the argument.

Yes you did concerning the association of atheist today with dead dictators

 

[shunyadragon]

The jihadi ideology is what motivated the violence.

The “more belief in the existence of a god” didn’t make them kill anyone.

It was the idea that god exists and this god thinks killing infidels is virtuous therefore…

Similar to “no gods exist and god beliefs are false and harmful therefore…”

There are always multiple beliefs involved for either the jihadi or Communist, and belief in god’s existence/non-existence plays a key role in both.




When I was an anti-theist there was certainly a direct connection between my anti-theism and my atheism.

When you believe there are no gods, you generally form an opinion on god beliefs too.




No they don’t, not always anyway. None of this is intrinsic to theism though. They relate to a specific religions i.e. ideologies.

You are comparing religion to atheism which is a false comparison.

The correct comparison is religion to whatever ideology the atheist holds be it secular humanism or Communism.



Neither can theism.

Try to explain it without conflating theism with religion or adding additional beliefs to the god belief and you’ll see.

In reality we don’t give up a religion or ideology, we replace it with something else so atheism always forms part of a broader worldview (at least for anyone who is familiar with the idea that other people are theists). Atheism may play a major role in that worldview or a minor one, but it is part of the matrix.



So is theism a single belief on a single issue. Comparing atheism to religion is comparing apples to oranges.

No belief is inert and monadic though, surely you must accept that atheism (at least for some people) forms a consequential part of their worldview?

My non-belief absolutely influences my worldview. It is therefore consequential to at least some decisions I make and beliefs I hold.

This is what the leading Soviet Communists thought too.

“For man, man is the supreme being” and should therefore play the role of a god in remaking the world according to their will. Also, in a godless, materialistic world human life has no intrinsic value so all that matters is the greater good. Given that a communist utopia free of human suffering offers and almost unlimited good, revolutionaries should be willing to sacrifice as many lives as needed in order to speed up its arrival. In addition, as religion as a false belief prevents man from reaching his true potential, such beliefs should be eradicated by any means necessary.

None of this emerges from just atheism, but atheism plays a key role in underpinning such beliefs, and people like Lenin acknowledged this explicitly.

In a world shaped by theistic belief systems that many deem harmful, atheism may certainly be directly connected to hostility towards religions if they are perceived as false and harmful beliefs.



I find that remarkable.

I can’t imagine you really think that unique among all beliefs, the belief that gods don’t exist can play no part in a broader worldview, even though many atheists insist their worldview is indeed influenced by their disbelief in gods.

Your disbelief in gods plays no role in how you evaluate theistic religions? Mine certainly does.

If atheism plays no role, then Atheist 5 Year Plans must have nothing to do with atheism, and leading Marxists must all have been lying or mistaken when they drew on 200 years of explicitly atheistic philosophy to create their worldview.

I find the idea that they were all just coincidentally atheist to remarkably implausible, when they all argued they were necessarily atheist and their philosophy necessarily atheistic.

My previous assessment of your acride vendetta against atheists today stands, based on this post

 

[Kenny]

No, you came up front early with the association of atheists today with dead dictators,

Neither is valid.

Yes you did concerning the association of atheist today with dead dictators

nope - I never open up with an attack on atheist… it is always in context of a response

 

[Augustus]

My previous assessment of your acride vendetta against atheists today stands, based on this post

My previous assessment that you struggle mightily with basic comprehension and that this is compounded by your hallucinations and irrational biases resulting in the quite remarkable ability to get every single post you reply to wrong still stands.

How can you manage to be so wrong so often?

It’s amazing anyone could fail so miserably and so consistently at understanding simple concepts and responding appropriately.

 

[shunyadragon]

My previous assessment that you struggle mightily with basic comprehension and that this is compounded by your hallucinations and irrational biases resulting in the quite remarkable ability to get every single post you reply to wrong still stands.

How can you manage to be so wrong so often?

Easy based on your agenda

It’s amazing anyone could fail so miserably and so consistently at understanding simple concepts and responding appropriately.

You previous post speaks for itself, and your agenda.

 

[shunyadragon]

I stopped reading there.

. . and failed to respond without an emotional rant of falsely accusing me of anti-everything your could come up with

 

[Augustus]

Easy based on your agenda

You previous post speaks for itself, and your agenda.

Try explaining, with direct quotes, anything that would support your claims.

Just repeating baseless ad hominem is your MO though as you obviously can’t rationally defend what you say.

Put up, or shut up as your schtick is getting very boring.

I’d get more sense out of conversing with a mackerel than your childish nonsense.

 

[Augustus]

. . and failed to respond without an emotional rant of falsely accusing me of anti-everything your could come up with

Haha now you are complaining about folk “falsely accusing” of you being anti stuff

Your complete absence of self-awareness is hilarious

 

[Revoltingest]

. . and failed...

That portends more dumb bickering.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Theism is no less a single belief than atheism. It does not come with any further instructions, does not regulate moral frameworks or behavior sets.

When we talk about "theism", we are talking in general. The specific practical application of that in the real world, takes the form of specific religions like christianity and islam.

These most definitely come with instructions on how to live, moral frameworks, do's and don'ts, etc.

It makes no declaration but about belief in the existence of a god or gods. If someone tells you they're a theist that tells you absolutely nothing about their sociopolitical stances or philosophies. All it tells you is that they believe in some kind of god or gods

When staying on that abstract level... sure.
But then you get to ask further questions: "which god or gods"
And that's when the specific form of theism will be revealed.

In my experience, people almost never come out into discussions like this and identify themselves with the abstract label "theist". Mostly they will just say they are "christian" or "muslim" or what-have-you.

Just like all atheism tells you is not believing in some kind of god or gods.

Yep. And there is nothing further to ask about...

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The jihadi ideology is what motivated the violence.

And what is the jihadi ideology?
Might it have something to do with their god beliefs, by any chance?

The “more belief in the existence of a god” didn’t make them kill anyone.

I didn't say otherwise.
God beliefs, especially in context of theistic religion, never exist in a vacuum.
They always come with all kinds of instructions, moral proclamations, commandments...

And more often then not, in context of the theistic religion, they aren't debateable or questionable either.
And the more fundamentalist the religious belief, the less debateable and questionable it is.

It was the idea that god exists and this god thinks killing infidels is virtuous therefore…

Yes. It flows from the specific god beliefs.

Similar to “no gods exist and god beliefs are false and harmful therefore…”

Not similar. Just because you attached both with the word "and" doesn't make them similar. In this case, it does NOT flow from the non-belief. It comes from elsewhere. That's my only point.

Not sure why it is being debated. Seems rather obvious.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

When we talk about "theism", we are talking in general. The specific practical application of that in the real world, takes the form of specific religions like christianity and islam.

These most definitely come with instructions on how to live, moral frameworks, do's and don'ts, etc.



When staying on that abstract level... sure.
But then you get to ask further questions: "which god or gods"
And that's when the specific form of theism will be revealed.

In my experience, people almost never come out into discussions like this and identify themselves with the abstract label "theist". Mostly they will just say they are "christian" or "muslim" or what-have-you.



Yep. And there is nothing further to ask about...

Sure there is, because all atheists have ideologies and plenty have religions. Just like being a theist does not mean you are religious (for hundreds of years that's what deism was, an irreligious theism.)

It's not 'general' to think you know what someone is because they're a theist, it's a *generalization.* And while it's true that most people don't identify first as theist, they identify with the more informative religion they belong to, there's still a huge amount of spiritual theist not religious people out there, so it's important to understand the words we're using.

Atheism and theism are both not descriptors of morals, ethics or behaviors. But plenty of ideologies, including violent ones, include atheism or theism.

 

[Augustus]

And what is the jihadi ideology?
Might it have something to do with their god beliefs, by any chance?

If this belief plays a significant role in jihadi ideology then the belief for doesn’t exist plays a significant role in Leninist ideology.

Both play an important foundational role and are a basis for supporting other beliefs that justify violence. Neither are necessary or predetermined consequences, they are just potential consequences as part of larger belief systems.

They were explicit in how atheism underpinned their moral worldview and how it meant individual human life didn't really matter in pursuit of the greater good.

So might the idea that religion is a form of false consciousness that prevents people achieving their true happiness and thus needs to be eradicated from society have something to do with the idea that gods don't exist? Hmm, I wonder...

God beliefs, especially in context of theistic religion, never exist in a vacuum.
They always come with all kinds of instructions, moral proclamations, commandments...

And more often then not, in context of the theistic religion, they aren't debateable or questionable either.
And the more fundamentalist the religious belief, the less debateable and questionable it is.

No beliefs exist in a vacuum, including the belief gods don't exist.

You key error is you conflate theism with Abrahamic monotheism and things that loosely resemble it. This is a common mistake.

Deism, pantheism, etc. don't come with doctrines or commandments.

You are also special pleading that god beliefs when given as specific reasons for ideological tenets are important, yet atheism, when explicitly given as a specific reason for ideological tenets is not important.

If people reason from Principle X to Principle Y & Z, then Principle X is consequential whether or not principle X is a positive or negative belief.

It matters if you believe your wife loves you or if you believe she does not.

Yes. It flows from the specific god beliefs.

No, it flows from specific religious principles that are ultimately underpinned by the god belief. Theism is generic god belief, not any specific one.

Just like Soviet anti-religious persecution flowed from specific ideological beliefs about the negative effects of religion that were ultimately underpinned by the idea that no gods exist (Lenin considered it traitorous to even be agnostic).

Not similar. Just because you attached both with the word "and" doesn't make them similar. In this case, it does NOT flow from the non-belief. It comes from elsewhere. That's my only point.

It is underpinned by atheism to the same extent jihadism is underpinned by generic theism. As you accept, neither exists in a vacuum, but both can influence subsequent beliefs.

"One or more gods exist" does not motivate jihadism or push anyone towards any specific behaviour positive or negative. Everything depends on additional beliefs that are reasoned from this principle that may include the characteristics that you ascribe to that god and its relationship to you, humans, the world, etc.

"No gods exist" does not drive behaviour directly either. For many, it will influence how they view the world though. Everything depends on additional beliefs that are reasoned from this principle. These may include views on false theistic beliefs and their role in society.

I'm sure you will agree that your disbelief in gods does influence your thought regarding gods and theistic religions, etc. It's not that your atheism is inert and monadic and influences no other aspect of your worldview.

Not sure why it is being debated. Seems rather obvious.

Probably because you are confusing generic theism with Abrahamic monotheisms and religions that are similar.

I'm not sure why people feel the need to try to persuade themselves that atheism was completely unconnected to Soviet Ideology when the Soviets were absolutely explicit in their ideological reasoning and they built on a couple of centuries on atheistic philosophy to form their worldview.

(Actually I do understand perfectly well why they would want to do this as I used to make the same arguments , but that's another story)

 

[shunyadragon]

If this belief plays a significant role in jihadi ideology then the belief for doesn’t exist plays a significant role in Leninist ideology.

Both play an important foundational role and are a basis for supporting other beliefs that justify violence. Neither are necessary or predetermined consequences, they are just potential consequences as part of larger belief systems.

They were explicit in how atheism underpinned their moral worldview and how it meant individual human life didn't really matter in pursuit of the greater good.

So might the idea that religion is a form of false consciousness that prevents people achieving their true happiness and thus needs to be eradicated from society have something to do with the idea that gods don't exist? Hmm, I wonder...



No beliefs exist in a vacuum, including the belief gods don't exist.

You key error is you conflate theism with Abrahamic monotheism and things that loosely resemble it. This is a common mistake.

Deism, pantheism, etc. don't come with doctrines or commandments.

You are also special pleading that god beliefs when given as specific reasons for ideological tenets are important, yet atheism, when explicitly given as a specific reason for ideological tenets is not important.

If people reason from Principle X to Principle Y & Z, then Principle X is consequential whether or not principle X is a positive or negative belief.

It matters if you believe your wife loves you or if you believe she does not.



No, it flows from specific religious principles that are ultimately underpinned by the god belief. Theism is generic god belief, not any specific one.

Just like Soviet anti-religious persecution flowed from specific ideological beliefs about the negative effects of religion that were ultimately underpinned by the idea that no gods exist (Lenin considered it traitorous to even be agnostic).




It is underpinned by atheism to the same extent jihadism is underpinned by generic theism. As you accept, neither exists in a vacuum, but both can influence subsequent beliefs.

It also plays a significant role in Christian Theology in history based on the guidance of ancient tribal scripture.

"One or more gods exist" does not motivate jihadism or push anyone towards any specific behaviour positive or negative. Everything depends on additional beliefs that are reasoned from this principle that may include the characteristics that you ascribe to that god and its relationship to you, humans, the world, etc.

Of course. one ot more Gods does not in and of itself motivate jihadism, but the additional beliefs in ancient tribal scripture of the Bible that indeed inspire jihadism.

"No gods exist" does not drive behaviour directly either. For many, it will influence how they view the world though. Everything depends on additional beliefs that are reasoned from this principle. These may include views on false theistic beliefs and their role in society.

I'm sure you will agree that your disbelief in gods does influence your thought regarding gods and theistic religions, etc. It's not that your atheism is inert and monadic and influences no other aspect of your worldview.

As above, likewise the ancient tribal scripture does drive this behavior of Christians and Muslims directly.

There is no scripture, doctrines nor specific beliefs that would drive the jihadism of Theistic religions. It based on actual history that the driving force of atheists and Christian despotes of Europe was and is today a Nationalist tribal Manifest destiny. The added motivation of Christian
despotes and believers of their ancient tribal scripture despotes and believers. This motivation extends to specific efforts to ethnic cleansing of Jews, atheist and homosexuals,

Probably because you are confusing generic theism with Abrahamic monotheisms and religions that are similar.

It is specifically the ancient tribal scripture that motivates Theist jihadism, and not any concept pf a generic justification.

I'm not sure why people feel the need to try to persuade themselves that atheism was completely unconnected to Soviet Ideology when the Soviets were absolutely explicit in their ideological reasoning and they built on a couple of centuries on atheistic philosophy to form their worldview.

It is not completely unconnected from Soviet ideology any more than Theist jihadism can be disconnected from the inspiration of Christian tribal scripture. What you call Soviet and the ideology of Hitler is NAtionalist Manifest Destiny.

In fact, after the fall of the Soviet Union the Russians threw away the Hammer and Sickle, and put on the Cross justifying the invasion of Ukraine and jihadism based of Czarist and Greek Orthodox claims of Manifest Destiny over Eastern Europe under Putin's leadership.

(Actually I do understand perfectly well why they would want to do this as I used to make the same arguments , but that's another story)

Your neglecting the history of Christianity justifying jihadism and the ethnic cleansing of Jews, atheists and nomosecuals bas on the guidance of ancient tribal scripture.

 

[Augustus]

What you call Soviet and the ideology of Hitler is NAtionalist Manifest Destiny.

You seem to love that catchphrase "nationalist manifest destiny", not sure you have a clear idea what it means though.

Manifest Destiny has a very speciifc meaning, and you are conflating irredentism (i.e. the desire to reclaim former lands, with MD which was expansion into new territory based on a very specific historical circumstance that is not remotely analogous to irredentism).

Hitler, Putin etc. are irredentists.

The idea that Marxism-Leninsm was simply "nationalist" is beyond inane, it was the opposite, at least at the start and the atheist policies existed from the start. It was nationalism that pulled the USSR apart though.

In the USSR, religion was targeted on 3 levels: political, ideological and spiritual/moral. At first they attacked the political which is why theyt destroyed so many churches and killed so many clergy, during WW2 they rolled this back a bit. The ideological was attacked with propaganda and education. Kruschev attacked the political again after WW2 and closed manyof the churches that had been reopened.. He also focused on the ideological and the spiritual as Soviets realised removing religion just left a hole, and unless they filled it with something, then they'd never be successful. They never really were able to fill this hole.

After the collapse of the USSR, Russian nationalists who were former communists and well aware of the failings to fill these gaps seized on to the potential for the Church to fill political, ideological and spiritual holes started to promote it again.

Putin may be a sincere believer or he may be an opportunist. Integrating the church into the state is the precise thing you would expect from any nationalist well versed in the communist failure to eradicate religion though.

Your neglecting the history of Christianity justifying jihadism and the ethnic cleansing of Jews, atheists and nomosecuals bas on the guidance of ancient tribal scripture.

It's quite remarkable that you can't make a single post where your irrational hallucinations and biases lead you to say something completely irrelevant or that wildly misses the point. You'd seem much less foolish if you just accepted you were wrong and put your childish fantasies about secret hidden Christians to bed.

Augustus: Both theism and atheism can underpin violence in conjunction with other beliefs
SD: You are neglecting Christian jihadism!!!!!!! Why aren't you talking about nationalist manifest destiny ethnic cleansing Christian jihad against atheists and nomosecuals!!!!!!

What ethnicity are "atheists and nomosecuals" btw?