"Humans are born as atheists"

[Sunstone]

Some people believe that babies are atheists.

Yes, but you can't argue that babies don't become atheists after atheists eat them.

 

[Sunstone]

Tell me more about this atheism religion and what it entails.

Why, there's an atheist church on nearly every street corner. Of course it's a religion!

 

[Skwim]

Again, a straw man. Atheists are denying nothing and need not have any knowledge of the concept of God to be atheists..

Seems the authorities don't agree with your special definition.

ATHEIST

noun
1. a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Source: Dictionary.com

n
(Philosophy) a person who does not believe in God or gods
Source: Collins English Dictionary

Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
Source: American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition

n.
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being.
Source: Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary,

n.
someone who believes that God does not exist
Source:Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary

noun
A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods:
Source: Oxford Dictionaries

​

And neither do I


.

 

[Skwim]

Don't block all images, just the ones you don't want to see again. I block all the animated ones at least.

Now that's cool. Got a source, or link, or something?


.

 

[sojourner]

Both of those are non-believers.

No they're not. The second are believers. They believe no deities exist.

 

[Valjean]

I was wondering how long it would take before someone started quoting dictionaries, Skwim.
We're not using everyday, colloquial or historical definitions here. In a technical discussion expect technical definitions ('theory' of evolution, anyone?).

Those claiming babies are born atheist have made their working definition perfectly clear. Pointing out other definitions doesn't change the concept they're proposing. Throwing new definitions into a discussion where the terms have already been defined is obfuscation at best. In this case it's constructing a straw man.

 

[Maponos]

Tell me more about this atheism religion and what it entails.

Jeez -- where do I start?
First, atheism is not a religion, any more than a lack of belief in martian unicorn herds is a religion.
Second, who's forcing anything on anyone? I'm an atheist, and the only people who are even aware of this are here online. The subject rarely comes up in normal conversation.
The only time 99% of atheists would ever preach to you is if you had brought up the subject.

I called atheism a religion specifically because many of you treat it as such.

Also, if you frequent any places where there are many atheists, they often times mock any form of spirituality and act vastly superior to those who do have faith in something.

I suppose Milo Yiannapoulos was right.

 

[Valjean]

I called atheism a religion specifically because many of you treat it as such.

How so? Who does this?

Also, if you frequent any places where there are many atheists, they often times mock any form of spirituality and act vastly superior to those who do have faith in something.

What places are these? How would we even recognise them?

I'm getting the impression that the concept makes you uncomfortable and that you're imputing non-existent traits on an innocuous group whose ideas threaten your ego-identity.

 

[Revoltingest]

Also, if you frequent any places where there are many atheists, they often times mock any form of spirituality and act vastly superior to those who do have faith in something.

Those types are annoying.
Most of us take great pains to hide our superiority.
Mine is undetectable.

 

[psychoslice]

Yes they are born and then condtioned by the parents and society, but even calling yourself an atheist is part of condtioning, we are what we are, once we label what we are we then lose who we are and again we become a label.

 

[Deathbydefault]

No, I'm sorry, but they aren't. I have no idea where this idea could have come from other then poor reasoning or ignorance of psychology. The entire concept of there being or not being a god is abstract, and requires abstract reasoning. An object that cannot think about such questions, such as plants, would never be considered atheists with intellectual honesty. Yet babies are the same way, entirely mechanistic and bound to conditioning et al, unable to even understand that their parents can be wrong about things. They can only even understand the concept of right and wrong, on their own, once abstract reasoning begins to develop (7-12). I'd go as far as to say a first grader rambling about Jesus is not even Christian, they're simply running on a program. If I make a program that always responds to questions from an atheistic perspective, the program and computer are still not atheists.

Beside the simple fact that kids have no idea what we're even really discussing, the fact is that atheism requires making a judgement call. I'm not saying anything more than atheists consciously weight evidence and arguments to decided there probably is no god, so please save the straw men. A baby cannot make a judgement call, as we said they can't even really grapple with morality and values anyway. If you explain the cosmological argument to a baby, and explain why it's invalid/valid, they won't understand. They're incapable. They're going to **** their pants then wander the room aimlessly. While I'd love to make a joke right now, this is not what the atheist does.

That argument is based on the logic of a person not being born with the ability to hold a belief in god(s) right out of the womb.
It's an argument that should only be valid strictly in philosophy, in a general debate it's a mute point.

I don't know why there's so much focus on it, there are several better arguments we atheists can make.

 

[Skwim]

I was wondering how long it would take before someone started quoting dictionaries, Skwim.

Wonder no longer.

We're not using everyday, colloquial or historical definitions here. In a technical discussion expect technical definitions ('theory' of evolution, anyone?).

Technical definitions is it. So, just what is the technical definition of "Atheist"?

THE TECHNICAL DEFINITION OF "ATHEIST"

Technically, an atheist is: _________________________fill in the blank____________________________.


.​

​

 

[Valjean]

Wonder no longer.


Technical definitions is it. So, just what is the technical definition of "Atheist"?

THE TECHNICAL DEFINITION OF "ATHEIST"

Technically, an atheist is: One who lacks belief in God or Gods.
This is the definition born atheist crowd is working from.


.​

 

[Katzpur]

Can't remember being an angel. How would you know you are one?

You can't even remember being born, can you? What makes you think you'd be able to remember something that took place prior to your birth?

 

[allfoak]

Just to clarify, how are you defining "source of knowledge?" Do you mean an innate capacity for knowledge, like Chomsky's Language Acquisition Device (LAD), or are you proposing an actual encyclopaedia-of-all-knowledge ensconsed somewhere in a newborn's brain?

I do not know how those in that camp define the source of knowledge.

 

[Jumi]

Now that's cool. Got a source, or link, or something?.

Depends what browser you are using. Here's one for Firefox and clones:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/image-blocker-jetpack/

Worked well so far for me. There used to be an even better one, but it's no longer maintained.

A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods

I called atheism a religion specifically because many of you treat it as such.

Isn't it more interesting that most don't? If atheism is a religion, then religion is meaningless as a term. Even when I identified as atheist it had zero religious quality to it, or about the same as my lack of interest in learning the Windows 8 interface. Though it was common for people on the forum to say I belong to this religion called atheism and claims that I liked various things about New Atheism which I don't. I think I was more religious about other things, being a mystic you know.

Also, if you frequent any places where there are many atheists, they often times mock any form of spirituality and act vastly superior to those who do have faith in something.

Anti-theism isn't a needed component of atheism though. Though it might be confusing, since many more vocal atheists are anti-theists.

 

[Skwim]

Technically, an atheist is: One who lacks belief in God or Gods.

As it stands, the feeble minded, and the long term comatose automatically qualify as atheists. More importantly, what is your source for this technical definition?

This is the definition born atheist crowd is working from.

Not understanding "definition born atheist crowd." Care to clarify?


.

 

[Skwim]

Depends what browser you are using. Here's one for Firefox and clones:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/image-blocker-jetpack/

Worked well so far for me. There used to be an even better one, but it's no longer maintained.

Got it and it works beautifully. Thank you so much.


.

 

[Valjean]

Wasn't "born atheist" the original assertion being proposed and countered?

This whole discussion comes up regularly, like clockwork, with atheists insisting that atheism, per se, is simply a lack of belief and opponents insisting it's a philosophical denial of God.

 

[Jumi]

You can't even remember being born, can you? What makes you think you'd be able to remember something that took place prior to your birth?

I'm sure there's a reason we don't remember much from our early years. We didn't have the framework to hold on to memories the same way we started holding them after around the same time as developing capacity for language.

Well I'm interested if someone can say they remember things before birth if they can claim to know those things?