Sand Dancer
Currently catless
How do you have faith in no god? Since gods themselves are not proved by evidence, why would not believing be due to faith?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Isn’t Atheism a faith-based non-religion?
- Thread starter paarsurrey
- Start date
How do you have faith in no god? Since gods themselves are not proved by evidence, why would not believing be due to faith?
Never said it did.
I disbelieve that.
I disagree.
That's your opinion. The claim makes sense to me. Again, "I don't expect you to (yet) realize that everyone is a theist about something (and arguably all the time)."
Which is why the definition is perhaps not the first place to start.
Again, your opinion. Also pathetically weak on the intellectual side of things.
If you say so. It seems to me that it is a very bold and unrealistic thing to say, but your stance is your own.
Be happy then.
Thanks.
I stand by what I said.
We could certainly make a case for starting with the reasons why people even care for the concept.
Unfortunately for you, that is not a particularly convincing claim either.
Augustus
…
Of course they differ from many other atheists. The only thing that defines atheism is disbelief in god(s).
I'm confident that if someone offered you $1 million to try to describe some views Dawkins, Harris, et al shared in common then you would be able to make a pretty good fist of it.
Your stance is your own as well.
What you said was a bit on the nonsensical side. Like saying in order to use science, one must define the term first. Or the idea that everyone that utilizes things (allegedly) made possibly by science must first understand the definition of science. And that definition must be agreed upon by everyone, without any discrepancies.
Who's this "we" of which you speak?
Perhaps the concept is experiential, and whatever it is a person needs or thinks they need is what God is, or gods are (for them). If I think I need food (feel I need it), must I define it first, get everyone else's agreement on that definition before I partake in that food? If I make the claim that everyone eats food, must I provide definition of what food is and get everyone's agreement on that definition for the statement to be observed as plausibly accurate?
As if your claims are?
Sure. That still lends no meaning to the idea that there is such a thing as "new atheism".
I wish you stopped misrepresenting atheism.
Notanumber
A Free Man
If a person has a fully functional moral compass, they do not need to have faith in a religion.
Last edited:
Augustus
…
New Atheism = a proper noun.
You present it as new atheism = a description. Your arguments are against the term as a description.
If I say Bob is a Mason this is significantly different from saying Bob is a mason.
I wish you stopped misrepresenting New Atheism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism
It really matters not if you agree. It still holds accurate for your life, your experience. Again, I don't expect you to realize this (yet).
If truly not interested in it, then perhaps stop responding to my posts in this thread.
New Atheism is a phantom, a distraction. A misrepresentation.
You got that right. My opinion is weightless.
What does matter is that your conception of theism is absurd and useless.
Augustus
…
A 'phantom' term would have no meaningful referent, whereas New Atheism has a clear referent and is in common usage.
A proper noun would only be a misrepresentation if it didn't refer to whatever it was supposed to refer to. I've never had any problems with the term.
What is it supposed to be a distraction from?
And yet is used/experienced by you every single day you've walked this planet.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
You are an atheist. Period.
Bingo.
No, it actually doesn't, although many people seem to have convinced themselves otherwise.
Show me how or why.
Ha. You are a theist and have a little atheism going on as well, as is plausibly true for everyone.