*[I believe] Atheism is an absurd worldview

[Willamena]

Atheistic existentialism is quite aware that the atheistic worldview entails nihilism and absurdism.

Some atheists don't even know what existentialism means.

 

[Curious George]

Hitherto, no atheist has been able to refute my argument.

Your first post was a lesson in bad logic. Either you are unaware of the mistakes or you are aware and pretending they are not there.

But the lesson here should be that when other people explain your faulty reason, that you analyze it. We all have logical missteps from time to time. But failing to analyze them or pretending they are not there discredits your other posts.

 

[dgirl1986]

Some atheists don't acknowledge non-existence.

Rather, gods are imaginary.

This is true.

 

[averageJOE]

The God of classical theism.

So if someone who believes in god but one that does not fit into that definition does that make them an atheist?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

They make their own meaning.
For whatever that's worth.

As do we all...

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Atheistic existentialism is quite aware that the atheistic worldview entails nihilism and absurdism.

Existentialism is not synonymous with nihilism. To the contrary, many existentialist philosophers could be said the be shields against nihilism, many of them denounce nihilism, and Nietzsche even went as far to argue that religion is inherently nihilistic because it has people not living their purpose because they are constrained to the shackles of religious dogma.
Atheism can be existentialist or nihilistic, but atheism is inherently either. There is actually much more to atheism than just a "disbelief in god."

 

[Buttercup]

Correction. The theist believes that life is ultimately purposeful and meaningful. In fact, the theist believes that each and every one is serving a greater purpose (regardless of whether one is consciously aware of that). The atheist does not.

I'm basically atheist and this sentence below is almost exactly what I believe. All I had to do was add an 'a' twice to your sentence.

The atheist believes that life is ultimately purposeful and meaningful. In fact, the atheist believes that each and every one is serving a greater purpose (regardless of whether one is consciously aware of that).

BAM. I have an meaningful, purposeful life, according to me. I'm the only one who gets to claim my life has purpose, not you or anyone else has the authority to do so.

 

[outhouse]

The God of classical theism.

That is not a real god.

That is a god created in a classroom where philosophers debate the mythology.

In modern philosophy, classical theism is a theism in which God is characterized as the absolutely metaphysically ultimate being


You notice the CONTEXT there? IN MODERN PHYLOSOPHY it does not say in reality.

In a classroom only.

 

[outhouse]

It's a blindness based on willful ignorance.

Is it ignorant to understand men create gods and redefine them whenever they want?


How does your god differ from the god of christianity?

How does your god differ from judaism?

Only men wrote about those gods and those definitions factually evolved at mans hands.

 

[outhouse]

When are you going to start debating?

He has been proselytizing IMHO

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If you don't trust that there is a Creator then situation is that you are the creator which you are not. Thereby atheism is a pure blindness.

What part of life are atheist missing by their blindness?

What can they gain without being forced that will give them more purpose than what they have now?

How does not knowing Your creator lead to the blindness defined by your faith alone and not fact?

 

[McBell]

As do we all...

I have to disagree.
Some people merely parrot some one elses.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I have to disagree.
Some people merely parrot some one elses.

Oh yes, I agree, that is a good point well made.

I guess what I meant was more that whenever multiple people are claiming they have the 'real' meaning of something, and there is variance, it's pretty obvious that 'real' meaning is almost always a delusion.

I put 'real' in quotes, since it seems to conflate with 'absolute' in some people's mind as opposed to simply meaning genuine.

 

[Yerda]

Without purpose there is no meaning.

Ok. What is the purpose of this sentence?

 

[Willamena]

I have to disagree.
Some people merely parrot some one elses.

There is nothing new under the sun.
That doesn't preclude each instance of discovery being something new.

 

[Willamena]

Ok. What is the purpose of this sentence?

It's an essential interrogative.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Admittedly, I did not read through 3 pages of new posts before this. Frankly, this topic is so devoid of discussion, I simply didn't want to. But I will pick up where I left off.

No free will, no creative agent. It's that simple. (Atheists may believe in free will, but they cannot rationally justify that belief based on their Godless worldview.)

I stated to you that you have failed to produce evidence that free will is necessary for the creative process. Until you have done so, the discussion progresses no further. Provide evidence that free will is necessary for the creative process. If your evidence is strong enough, I will endeavor to find evidence contradicting your claim; and failing that, I will be forced to agree with you. Simply stating the same argument again: "No free will, no creative agent" does not strengthen your assertion; in fact, as it is now "argument by declaration", it weakens it.

Your second point: "Atheists may believe in free will, but they cannot rationally justify that belief based on their Godless worldview" says to me that you have completely neglected to look into what DANIEL DENNETT has to say on the matter. As you have failed to do so, reasserting the same argument in spite of new information available to you, I will once again assist:

So yes. Atheists can (and often do) believe in free will and do so rationally.

What does this implies? It implies that human artifacts (e.g. pocket watches) are as much the result of blind mechanisms at play as are natural artifacts (e.g. eyeballs). On the atheistic worldview, there is no intelligent activity in the world whatsoever (human, divine, or otherwise). All appearances of intelligent activity in the world must be attributed to blind mechanisms at play and therefore deemed as purely illusory.

This has been rebuffed many, many times; yet once again, you reassert the same argument with no new information and no new points. Argument by declaration is so very weak. Creationists have failed consistently to prove the idea of "design". Creationists have failed consistently to prove it; or even find compelling evidence for it.

When someone presents ideas that counter your ideas, the productive form of discussion is to address the new ideas as it relates to the point being addressed. That's how a discussion works. That is how we learn. And as you have failed to do so, I can only conclude that you have chosen not to learn. As you have chosen not to learn, you have willfully chosen ignorance.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The atheistic worldview is an absurd one. Why? Because the atheist views the world as ultimately meaningless and therefore as absurd.

Nothing is more absurd than creating meaning where none is meaningfully present.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

... you're just a pack of blind mechanisms aimlessly playing themselves out.

I'll ask again (since you seem to be ignoring my particular questions - why is that, exactly?), is this how you would feel about yourself minus God's influence?

 

[leibowde84]

On the atheistic view, all purpose-driven behavior must be deemed purely illusory.

Again, you are erroneously equating atheism with materialism/nihlism. God is not the only source of meaning/purpose. And, an afterlife is not necessary for meaning/purpose either.