Is atheism a belief?

[j1i]

Hi @j1i ,

I was looking only at the differences of religious affiliation between our countries. It was not intended as a statement about the respective levels of socioeconomic development. It is good to have a different cultural perspective.

Dear Friend
Thank you for your comment
I would also like to say that we have the busiest airport and mix with other cultures
Comes to Dubai and is the third largest airport in the world
Millions of visitors
We welcome them and we also launched a year of tolerance and you'll find it written on the page
Dubai In Figures

We mix with cultures very much more than ever

I do not think that determining the measurement of human culture is based on different religious cultures in the country

The UAE is very friendly to New Zealand and I have three Zealand friends

I am very happy with you and you are our brothers in humanity and we love you
and sure i'm really humble with all peoples with maximum respect

We are brothers by saying and deed and our consciences carry the feelings of compassion and kindness to all

god bless you dude
amen

 

[Audie]

FWIW I found a Pew study that identified 8% of atheists believing in God or some type of universal spirit.

Although the literal definition of “atheist” is “a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods,” according to the Merriam-Webs

ter dictionary, 8% of those who call themselves atheists also say they believe in God or a universal spirit.

10 facts about atheists

Being an example of why i referred to the topic
as a semantics game.

 

[Audie]

That's a lot of self-serving nonsense. It's also untrue. You are not an atheist. If you want to post what you think atheists believe, then you need to quote atheists. Since you don't/can't we can just take your comments as unsupportable male bovine feces.

The air is pretty thin up on the mountaintop , it makes thinking
diffivult.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I personally can't stand the terms "gnostic atheist" and "gnostic theist."

Gnosticism is a very specific religious movement. It isn't a general term for any and every person who claims knowledge about something.

There's no such thing as a gnostic atheist, and the only gnostic theists are actual Gnostics.

I disagree. For starters, the terms "gnostic" and "agnostic" aren't even exclusive to religious knowledge. They are applicable to all kinds of knowledge area's.

Case in point, in software engineering, there are several languages. Some languages are platform specific, others are not. Some are explicitly platform "unspecific". They work with "just in time compiling". Meaning that the code/application only realises what platform it runs on, when it is booted. Then the JIT compiler will compile the code into the machine language that the platform it is running on can understand. Java is such a language.

We call such a language a "platform agnostic language", since it has no knowledge of what platform it will run on.

A gnostic atheist is just a strong atheist. Someone who claims there are no gods.

I certainly agree that there is much confusion (or perhaps even abuse) of these terms in everyday usage. In a sense, you could say that the terms are being hijacked.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I disagree. For starters, the terms "gnostic" and "agnostic" aren't even exclusive to religious knowledge. They are applicable to all kinds of knowledge area's.

Case in point, in software engineering, there are several languages. Some languages are platform specific, others are not. Some are explicitly platform "unspecific". They work with "just in time compiling". Meaning that the code/application only realises what platform it runs on, when it is booted. Then the JIT compiler will compile the code into the machine language that the platform it is running on can understand. Java is such a language.

We call such a language a "platform agnostic language", since it has no knowledge of what platform it will run on.

A gnostic atheist is just a strong atheist. Someone who claims there are no gods.

I certainly agree that there is much confusion (or perhaps even abuse) of these terms in everyday usage. In a sense, you could say that the terms are being hijacked.

"Agnostic" doesn't mean "not gnostic."

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Do you think the statement “I don’t believe in god or Gods” is more reflective of strong atheism as opposed to weak atheism?

Neither. You'ld have to ask follow up questions to find out. Both strong and weak atheists can say that they don't believe the claim that a god or gods exist.

So you'ld have to ask the follow up question "do you believe that NO gods exist?"
And the answer will inform you on the weak/strong part.

Atheism may be a position on a single issue but is that position a belief?

No.

Just like not playing football, is not a sport.

Can I not claim to disbelieve or lack belief in god or Gods?

Sounds like pretty useless "claim".

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Not all religious beliefs are blind or lacking in facts.

Sure they are. That's, in fact, what makes them religious.

The discourse around the historicity of religious founders considers evidence using established methods rather than take religious text at face value.

History isn't religion.

I’ve never come across anyone whose seriously claimed the founder of my faith (Bahá’u’lláh) never existed

And neither does anyone seriously claim that Mohammed never existed.
But that Mohammed existed, is not a religious claim.

That he had "revelations" in some cave where nobody could witness it, however, IS a religious claim about Mohammed.

Whether or not these Religious Founders were Prophets of God is a different discussion.

Yes. And that discussion is where the religious claims come up

Using language such as ‘blind’ faith appears anti-theist and simply sets the scene for an adversarial theist vs atheist debate.

There isn't anything anti-theist about the concept of blind faith in religious beliefs - as theists are actually proud of the fact that they invoke faith to believe those religious claims. They consider it a virtue.


I consider it gullibility.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

"Agnostic" doesn't mean "not gnostic."

Sure it does. It's what the "a" means.

Gnostic / agnostic
Theist / atheist
Symmetrical / assymmetrical

As for your previous comment about Gnostic christians... note the capital letter.
Then Gnostic is being used as a noun.

I'm talking about the adjective instead.

 

[Martin]

Source?

I know a retired Church of England vicar who is an atheist.

 

[PureX]

That's completely unresponsive and is another example of your need to be evasive.

It's quite true, though.

Most atheists lie about their "unbelief" because they cannot reconcile their presumption (belief) that gods don't exist with their complete inability to produce any evidence to support it. Even as they constantly demand that theists produce evidence to support their presumption (belief) that God/gods do exist. They are hiding this blatant hypocrisy (from themselves) behind this lie about their "unbelief".

 

[PureX]

You post a lot. Most of your posts are criticisms of other people's positions.

I merely point out the flaws in reasoning that I see in the claims people propose or reject.

 

[Audie]

...........
There isn't anything anti-theist about the concept of blind faith in religious beliefs - as theists are actually proud of the fact that they invoke faith to believe those religious claims. They consider it a virtue.


I consider it gullibility.*

It is that, and more.

Another, is intellectual dishonesty.

Choosing to believe is self deception;
choosing a verdict before evidence
is worse.

Holding to a belief despite all evidence
to the contrary, despite any supporting
evidence leaves intellectual honesty so
far behind as to border on insanity.

No surprise that originators of religions
would see these problems in recruiting
followers, and build in countermeasures.

See Job, and other stories to glorify
faith as a highest virtue.

* Yes, I am preachin' to the choir.

 

[PureX]

More unsupported, unsupportable BS. You keep posting nonsense, I'll keep calling you out.

And you keep ignoring the rest of the posts. Perhaps if you would read the whole post, you would understand them, better.

 

[Ouroboros]

Atheism could be defined as:

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

Another way of phrasing it could be one who believes there is no God or gods.

I’m good with either definition but not everyone is. Maybe I shouldn’t be either.

What is the best definition of atheism and why can it be so difficult to define?

As soon as we define something, we do it out of conviction of what we think it should be. At least that's a form of belief. What I'm saying, having a definition is a belief in what the "proper" definition is supposed to be. Maybe the "true" atheist is the person who doesn't even try to define his/her own disbelief.

 

[Willamena]

A gnostic atheist is just a strong atheist. Someone who claims there are no gods.

The term is folk, though, and carries no philosophical sense. And, practically speaking, since the modifier adds nothing to the word it is modifying, it is redundant.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Sure it does. It's what the "a" means.

Gnostic / agnostic
Theist / atheist
Symmetrical / assymmetrical

As for your previous comment about Gnostic christians... note the capital letter.
Then Gnostic is being used as a noun.

I'm talking about the adjective instead.

Read up on the history of the word "agnostic" and what Huxley intended when he coined the phrase.

While he was describing an attitude that was in opposition to the attitude he saw among the Gnostics, it was never meant as a straight negation of the word "gnostic."

 

[Willamena]

The whole atheism vs agnosticism is another area that’s prone to differences of opinion and misunderstandings. Agnosticism as I understand it addresses another question, particularly in regards to whether or not its possible to know something. Atheism is about belief or lack of belief in God or gods. A common misunderstanding is agnosticism occupies a middle ground between theism and atheism. Perhaps we should hear from any agnostics as to how they see it?

It is unlikely that you will "hear from agnostics," since it doesn't describe a group of people but a way of thinking.

 

[Link]

Atheism is unjustified aversion from the truth of our nature, the proofs around us, the design of irreducibly complex systems in biology, earth, and universe, as well good philosophical proofs and reminders of God, and aversion from the holy books that prove God.

 

[LuisDantas]

It's quite true, though.

Most atheists lie about their "unbelief" because they cannot reconcile their presumption (belief) that gods don't exist with their complete inability to produce any evidence to support it. Even as they constantly demand that theists produce evidence to support their presumption (belief) that God/gods do exist. They are hiding their blatant hypocrisy (from themselves) behind this lie about their "unbelief".

Not "inability". Instead, lack of logical reason to even consider it.

And it would be nice of you to realize how unsustainable your attempt to brand atheists as liars is. It cheapens you.

 

[LuisDantas]

Atheism is unjustified aversion from the truth of our nature, the proofs around us, the design of irreducibly complex systems in biology, earth, and universe, as well good philosophical proofs and reminders of God, and aversion from the holy books that prove God.

About a half dozen claims there.

And every single one of those is entirely, utterly wrong.

Impressive.