Argument against "lacktheism"

[Dan From Smithville]

The priests, by defining their Gods and humanity's relationship to them, have caged their Gods within paper cells ...

In addition, in my personal view, the Bible is only a part of the Word of God. The natural world is the other part. I can't believe in a God that lies by planting evidence that would mislead people. Therefore, certain ways to interpret must be wrong or very limited and incomplete.

 

[Little Dragon]

In addition, in my personal view, the Bible is only a part of the Word of God. The natural world is the other part. I can't believe in a God that lies by planting evidence that would mislead people. Therefore, certain ways to interpret must be wrong or very limited and incomplete.

I would have to agree, such a God would otherwise be either irrational or malevolent. In conclusion.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Unless one of us subscribes to the Gae/Gai hypothesis? I dunno...

I don't know either, but I do recognize their are extreme views that do obscure some of the lines.

 

[Little Dragon]

I don't know either, but I do recognize their are extreme views that do obscure some of the lines.

It's all a load of bollocks. As my grandad would stoically say in these kind of discussions.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It's all a load of bollocks. As my grandad would stoically say in these kind of discussions.

I'm more concrete and practical in my views. I recognize and make some effort to be aware of the existence of more esoteric positions that have been proposed, but I don't spend much time pursuing them as a goal.

 

[Little Dragon]

I'm more concrete and practical in my views. I recognize and make some effort to be aware of the existence of more esoteric positions that have been proposed, but I don't spend much time pursuing them as a goal.

It's not like we don't have much more pressing issues in our daily lives and in the broader scope of the physical reality we cling so tenuously and tightly to.
There's plenty of problems this world urgently needs sorting out. Right now.

 

[Revoltingest]

Happens often lately with RF having difficulty to process

Happens often lately with RF having difficulty to process posts. I usually delete them but these have both been frubed.

Well, we can't have a frubal count decline.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Happens often lately with RF having difficulty to process

Well, we can't have a frubal count decline.

Rating them shouldn't impact the ability to delete, but I don't know if that effects how they count to the recipient.

You can edit frubed posts as long as the edit window remains open.

 

[Heyo]

Happens often lately with RF having difficulty to process

Well, we can't have a frubal count decline.

Not again.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Not again.

I have been experiencing some very annoying issues with delays where I start a response that comes in above and below the line I'm quoting or there is a lag in loading the post I made. I've had an issue several times where the post I'm editing just disappears with my edits and the original remains.

 

[1137]

Jolly good. I hope your misrepresenting atheism makes you feel better

So do you have evidence to back up your claim?

Yes, there are no uncaused events so all beliefs must have a cause.

 

[1137]

Are the causal mechanisms for imagination traceable? Is it possible to trace down the exact causal mechanisms as to why someone comes up with a specific original idea? Can you trace the reasons why others don't come up with that same idea? Can you trace why some others come up with a parallel idea?

I get what you're saying, but isn't there a causal reason even if we can't determine it?

 

[1137]

True theism is an aesthetical inclination. As is atheism.

What do you mean?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I don't think anyone can escape religious indoctrination in this world

If you mean exposure to it, I agree. If you mean the ability to avoid indoctrination, I disagree. Critical thinking confers immunity to indoctrination.

Theism is a response to the lack of something. Some speak of a god shaped hole.

Agreed. Atheism can also be described as the absence of a need for a god belief or a religion.

The objective standard is in the book.

Holy books are evidence of nothing except that they were written. They're not evidence of gods, nor even evidence that the writers believed what they wrote. Nothing in such a book can believed except by faith or following empirical confirmation. We know David existed and was a Hebrew king three millennia ago thanks to empirical confirmation from archeologists. But Adam, Noah, and Abraham remain only characters in stories for lack of empirical confirmation.

You believe the theist believes in god because of indoctrination. This is a positive claim you must now defend.

Why? I believe that that is often the case, too, and feel no need to justify that belief to you. I can, but I have no reason to. For there to be a burden of proof for me, [1] I must be making a claim of fact, [2] I want to convince another, and [3] that other has the ability to recognize a sound evidenced argument and the willingness to be convinced by one.

I said often the case because not all theists were indoctrinated into theism even if they were subsequently indoctrinated with some denomination's dogma. Some, it seems, are just drawn to a god belief psychologically, and as soon as they hear about gods, are drawn to theism.

Incidentally, your definition of lacktheism would have been helpful (see below).

As for being "born" an atheist, let's not go down the nonsense rabbit hole of projection it takes to compare the intellect of one's position to a baby.

I was born an atheist and remained one until I was about 18. In between, I learned what people meant by a god, but wasn't asked to believe in such a thing and didn't. You would probably say that that is when I became an atheist.

So in order to believe in gods we must be taught about them, but we are all born atheists. Who's that leave to teach us about the gods.

The ones who become theists.

you would equate atheism with ignorance?

Au contraire. Atheism past the time of being told that others believe in gods is a result of learning critical thinking, which is why education and atheism correlate as do lack of education and theism. I experience my atheism and my ability to live comfortably outside of religion and without a god belief as an achievement to be proud of.

atheists get upset when asked to substantiate the universe being godless, divine experiences being delusions

Where? Most atheists are agnostic atheists, that is, they make no claim about gods existing or not existing. And they don't get emotional discussing religion beyond being snarky or condescending, and that's not their usual mood. Believers do. Believers frequently complain angrily about their beliefs and themselves not merely being disbelieved and their claims dismissed, but say that they are being attacked. My demeanor is typical for my demographic. Most atheists don't care what believers believe - just what they do that affects unbelievers.

R = it was invented and then spread. Do you have additional evidence of this besides what was already addressed though?

I don't know just what you are excluding here, but yes, religion was obviously invented and then spread. Otherwise, there's be no religions. But I'm not going to make the case here, because this is also something that I don't care if I'm believed or not. Also, when somebody asks me to prove something obvious, I already know that that won't happen. If someone asks me to prove to him that Trump committed crimes or that vaccines are safe, if he's above school age, I assume that he wears a faith-based confirmation bias, and there's no penetrating one of those (see condition [3] above regarding when there is no burden of proof).

Humans must be taught spiritual beliefs or they will not be spiritual

You said that you didn't believe that, and neither do I.

I wasn't taught spiritual beliefs, yet have a spiritual relationship with nature, one having nothing to do with spirits or belief in them. Education helps there as well. One can have a spiritual experience gazing at the night sky but probably not until they understand something about what they are seeing - the distance that droplet of sunlight travelled over years or eons to reach my retina, and the relationship of life and the existence of the periodic table to those stars living their lives fusing nuclei, exploding, and delivering their stardust so that we could live. That's exhilarating. That generates a warm sense of connection and belonging with the cosmos, one which also produces a sense of awe, mystery, and gratitude. Nobody taught me how to feel that way.

The atheists attachment to the axiom that: 'we get to judge you but you don't get to judge us' has become a chronic addiction.

Your perceptions and conclusions about atheists and atheism continually amaze me. I feel safe in saying that no skeptic has ever told you not to judge their ideas. If I'm wrong, you should be able to falsify my suspicion with examples from RF. If I'm right, you can't.

And you have it backwards. You are continually judging atheists as you just did, and always uncharitably. How many times have you used the words materialist and scientism scoffingly and disapprovingly in these threads? Would you like me to do a digital search for you?

It's why they fight so hard to maintain that "lacktheism" nonsense (the phantasm of 'unbelief').

Lacktheism? What's that? Another theistic apologetics meme like macroevolution and "kinds"? (same question for @1137)

I Googled it, but the only reputable hit (Free Inquiry Magazine) was behind a paywall, and one podcast from a philosopher, but he wasn't clear what he meant when using the term. He did seem to be arguing that there is no atheist that doesn't have some belief about gods, which I consider irrelevant.

I have opinions about gods, but continue to define atheism as a lack of belief in gods, and for those concerned that this includes infants, dog, or rocks, I say that an atheist is anybody who answers no to the question of whether he holds a god belief.

It doesn't preclude having opinions about gods. For example, I claim that the Abrahamic god has been ruled out by science. I also am apathetic about noninterventionist gods like the deist god. One may exist, but I wouldn't care either way what the answer was to that was if I knew it.

I did find one believer on Tik-Tok explain his position, but it was just a specious, semantic argument.

And yet again, what goes on in your head is not my reality at all. Fight hard to maintain that we have no god belief? Fight whom? People who say that's not possible? Why would I or any other atheist do that? For starters, if one doesn't accept that possibility, I don't mind.

Maybe that describes you. I have zero interest in the fact that you think that if you do. What does interest me is why anyone would think it impossible or care either way enough to argue what the atheist actually believes. I promise you that I don't care at all what you or anybody else actually believes about gods. Theologies are uninteresting and irrelevant to me.

My only interest is in why people have those beliefs, and the psychological mechanisms they employ to defend those beliefs from conflicting evidence, such as why you can't accept that atheism is nothing more or less than the absence of a god belief. I have no idea why that idea bothers you enough to argue against its possibility so passionately.

Incidentally, we already have a word for lacking a god belief - atheism. You've just changed the privative prefix "a-" to what it means, "lack." Atheism means lacking theism like asymmetric means lacking symmetry.

I wonder why unbelief in gods is impossible for you to accept?

All of existence is evidence of God's existence.

Not to a critical thinker. Remember, lightning and the sun moving through the sky were also once considered evidence for Thor and Apollo. The god of the gaps is now relegated to the as yet unresolved origins problems (the origin of the expanding universe and the origin of life), and we have naturalistic hypotheses for both of those as well.

 

[Little Dragon]

Yes, there are no uncaused events so all beliefs must have a cause.

The cause of atheism, is theism.

 

[Little Dragon]

All of existence is evidence of God's existence.

A statement of opinion.

Not a statement of verifiable fact.

 

[1137]

The cause of atheism, is theism.

What is the cause of theism?

 

[Little Dragon]

What is the cause of theism?

An attempt to rationalize the external and internal worlds.

 

[1137]

An attempt to rationalize the external and internal worlds.

Perfect, can you show this is the case?

 

[crossfire]

I get what you're saying, but isn't there a causal reason even if we can't determine it?

If we can't trace it, we can't trace it, no matter how much we try to rationalize it or speculate on it. It doesn't mean that it's not there.