If We All Became Atheists?

[firedragon]

My claim is simply new born's don't believe in gods.

Based on what research? Can you give me the research so that I could study it?

 

[SalixIncendium]

But that's not a position; it's the lack of a position. You said so yourself.

Where? I said it's a lack of belief, not a lack of position. If it was not a position, one would have no reason to identify as atheist. That being the case, the term would be meaningless.

Atheism is the lack of belief in gods, period. It doesn't require awareness on the part of the atheist that they lack belief in gods.

Sure it does. If one was unaware of the concept of gods and belief in them, the term 'atheism' would hold no meaning to them.

 

[RestlessSoul]

But that's not a position; it's the lack of a position. You said so yourself.

Atheism is the lack of belief in gods, period. It doesn't require awareness on the part of the atheist that they lack belief in gods.

At the very least, atheism is a label; one which individuals such as yourself assign to themselves. In accepting the label, you state your position. I don’t know why so many atheists have difficulty with that.

 

[firedragon]

Weak bluff.

Yeah? You mean the research is "bluff" or the atheist claiming people are born atheists with no research whatsoever is "bluff"?

 

[F1fan]

I disagree with that. People are not just moving images that are made to do something.

Like robotically adopting the dogma they are exposed to which says to worship their God?

But, doesn't that also show that in atheism people are animal level?

Animals live in groups just as religious congregations do. The difference is that other animals don't hold false ideas about the universe.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If no one had ever heard of a god, there would be no belief or lack of belief in a god
There would be no stance, opinion, or thought at all.

No, there definitely would be lack of belief.

It's a pretty binary thing. Either there is a belief or there is not. There is no "third way" here.

 

[Secret Chief]

Atheism is defined in Oxford languages as
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

I believe babies lack belief.

Do you not think such a definition presumes the entity lacking such belief is somewhat older than a baby? (And presumably a human?). The Encyclopedia Britannica couches atheism as a critique.

 

[ChristineM]

Do you not think such a definition presumes the entity lacking such belief is somewhat older than a baby? (And presumably a human?). The Encyclopedia Britannica couches atheism as a critique.

I make mo presumption on the definition, i take it (and all definitions in the OED) as written. It has landed me in trouble now and again but hey, thats who i am.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Indeed, it is. It is the position that holds that no God/gods exists in any way that effect the course of humanity.

No.
Sheesh people, how many times must this strawman be addressed?

 

[F1fan]

At the very least, atheism is a label; one which individuals such as yourself assign to themselves.

Largely untrue. Atheists is a category that exists because there are many categories of theist that most fall into. Those that have no religious affiliation or belief default into the atheist category. It's a fact, not a label that a non-believer identifies as, or with. I will affirm that I am an atheist when it is applicable to a conversation. I don't ever think about not being religious or a believer in religious ideas unless I'm in a debate.

In accepting the label, you state your position.

Atheists will state positions as part of debate, not as an identity or framework of mening. Some theists seem ashamed that they alone align to frameworks that have certain claims attached to it, and can't be defended as factual or true. They try to drag atheists into a similar way of thinking and believing, but it's not accurate or true. Some believers are incredulous that atheists can actually not see any value in even the most basic religious ideas.

I don’t know why so many atheists have difficulty with that.

Because it's something theists like yourself aren't being truthful about. And it's a curiosity why you are moved to believe it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Where? I said it's a lack of belief, not a lack of position. If it was not a position, one would have no reason to identify as atheist.

"atheist" is not something I "identify" as.
It rather is something I just am by default by virtue of not being a theist.

That being the case, the term would be meaningless.

Well, imo, the term IS quite meaningless.
In that it doesn't include any "positive" descriptions of somebody.
It's one of those words that tells you NOTHING about what a person is or believes or does or looks like or...
Instead, it tells you only what a person does NOT believe.


Kind of like the word asymmetrical. An asymetrical shape can be pretty much any shape, as long as it is not a symmetrical one.
The term doesn't tell you anything about the shape. It only tells you what the shape is NOT.

So how do you recognize an asymmetrical shape? There are no attributes that define it. Instead, it's what it is by default if it is NOT symmetrical.

Sure it does. If one was unaware of the concept of gods and belief in them, the term 'atheism' would hold no meaning to them.

Correct.
The only reason why the word exists, is because there are theists in the world.

Likewise, the term "asymmetrical" wouldn't have meaning if there wasn't such a thing as symmetry.
But at that point, everything would still be asymmetrical. Nobody would bother with the term because it would be redundant / meaningless only because there would be no "symmetry" to contrast it against.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Where? I said it's a lack of belief, not a lack of position. If it was not a position, one would have no reason to identify as atheist. That being the case, the term would be meaningless.

The term "atheist" is only meaningful in an environment where theism is common, but we live in such an environment.

It's kind of like "non-smoker" that way.

Sure it does. If one was unaware of the concept of gods and belief in them, the term 'atheism' would hold no meaning to them.

But you don't have to ascribe meaning to a term for it to apply to you.

 

[F1fan]

Where? I said it's a lack of belief, not a lack of position. If it was not a position, one would have no reason to identify as atheist. That being the case, the term would be meaningless.

I don't like the fuzzy phrasing of "identify as atheist". It's like saying "I identify as a person who didn't just eat a ham sandwich". I either ate a ham sandwich or I didn't. An exception would be one recent member who claimed to be an atheist but often mentioned beliefs that were oddly religious.

Sure it does. If one was unaware of the concept of gods and belief in them, the term 'atheism' would hold no meaning to them.

Well it still might have meaning, just not be relevant to them and their views. The theists will assign meaning to their religious ideas, and reject the mass majority of other religious ideas, just as atheists do, albeit nearly 100%.

 

[PureX]

"Atheist" is an irrelevant category. That term simply refers to someone that espouses atheism. Atheism is the defining determinant. And atheism is a theological position; antithetical to the theist position.

Who believes what has nothing to do with defining the terms 'theism' and 'atheism'.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Largely untrue. Atheists is a category that exists because there are many categories of theist that most fall into. Those that have no religious affiliation or belief default into the atheist category. It's a fact, not a label that a non-believer identifies as, or with. I will affirm that I am an atheist when it is applicable to a conversation. I don't ever think about not being religious or a believer in religious ideas unless I'm in a debate.

Atheists will state positions as part of debate, not as an identity or framework of mening. Some theists seem ashamed that they alone align to frameworks that have certain claims attached to it, and can't be defended as factual or true. They try to drag atheists into a similar way of thinking and believing, but it's not accurate or true. Some believers are incredulous that atheists can actually not see any value in even the most basic religious ideas.

Because it's something theists like yourself aren't being truthful about. And it's a curiosity why you are moved to believe it.

Well some atheists expend an awful lot of words explaining their position while simultaneously claiming not to hold a position. That doesn’t make much sense to me, but maybe I lack the critical thinking skills which you claim to be master of.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Atheist lack belief based on lack of evidence.
IOW they use lack of evidence as support of their lack of belief. That of course is my opinion.

That's certainly one path that could take someone from theism to atheism. It's probably a very common one.

... but it's not a defining characteristic of atheism. Anyone who does not believe in any gods is an atheist, regardless of what else is going on in their minds.

For an example involving adults, consider the Raëlians: they're an alien-based non-theistic religious movement. I would not consider their belief system to be evidence-based in the slightest, but they do not believe in any gods, so they're atheists.

 

[PureX]

Well some atheists expend an awful lot of words explaining their position while simultaneously claiming not to hold a position. That doesn’t make much sense to me, but maybe I lack the critical thinking skills which you claim to be master.

They want everyone to know how right they think they are without having to defend it. So they pretend they don't believe what they believe. That way they won't have to defend it the way they insist everyone else must defend their beliefs.

It's sad seeing so many folks fall into this kind of dishonest foolishness. So many that their dishonest nonsense has now been written into the dictionary.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Understanding atheism doesn't deny God. Atheism only recognizes man's ignorance about God.

That is half-way atheism. Unless existence of God and soul is denied, the illness will continue.

 

[SalixIncendium]

"atheist" is not something I "identify" as.

No? This is from your profile:

Do you not identify as "male" either?

Well, imo, the term IS quite meaningless.
In that it doesn't include any "positive" descriptions of somebody.
It's one of those words that tells you NOTHING about what a person is or believes or does or looks like or...
Instead, it tells you only what a person does NOT believe.


Kind of like the word asymmetrical. An asymetrical shape can be pretty much any shape, as long as it is not a symmetrical one.
The term doesn't tell you anything about the shape. It only tells you what the shape is NOT.

So how do you recognize an asymmetrical shape? There are no attributes that define it. Instead, it's what it is by default if it is NOT symmetrical.

Yes. This reinforces my point. The shape is identified as asymmetrical from the position of symmetry. Just as a person is identified as an atheist from the position of theism.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There is no evidence anywhere of any animals being theistic (or superstitious) in any way.

Err, no. There's plenty of research showing very clearly that most complex animals are prone to superstition (= the assumption of patterns where there aren't any, aka "magical thinking").

You should read up.

Yet among we humans, the evidence is commonplace and universal going back to the earliest days of human existence. So it would appear that whatever it is within us that causes us to experience the divine, is also that within us that sets us apart from all the other life forms of the Earth.

No, this is false thinking.
We are more intelligent / have more complex imagination. So our assumption of patterns follows suite and we tend to invent elaborate stories / scenario's around it. The basic underlying trait is the same though: superstition.

Your reasoning is somewhat fallacious also. Just because all humans tend to be prone to a certain type of superstition, doesn't by any means therefor mean that there is something there other then superstition.

It's just human psychology. Just because we are prone to gravitate towards certain types of beliefs, doesn't mean those beliefs are therefor true or accurate or even meaningful.