Poll: Are all babies atheist?

[illykitty]

I am not saying the baby is atheist. I d say a baby is as much of an atheist as a dog or a rock. I just dont think they are in a stage capable of that kind of grasping of ideas.

I am merely telling you that you have either eaten bolon de verde or you have not eaten bolon de verde.

You cant "not eaten bolon de verde" but "not not eaten bolon de verde"

A better question would be do you like bolon de verde? How can someone answer if they don't know what it is and never tasted it?

 

[Me Myself]

A better question would be do you like bolon de verde? How can someone answer if they never had it?

We are not asking if they like the concept of god, we are asking if they believe in it.

 

[Me Myself]

I am done with the debate. I said my piece and gave my opinion and anything else I say will just be regurgitated of what I've already said.

I've never eaten bolon de verde. All I know is that verde is green.

I am sorry this verde is not green

I take it you havent eaten bolon de verde but you havent not eaten it either.

Doesnt make sense though

(Unless it is a zen koan, if it is, then you are likely way more enlightened than I am )

 

[Willamena]

I am merely telling you that you have either eaten bolon de verde or you have not eaten bolon de verde.

You cant "not eaten bolon de verde" but "not not eaten bolon de verde"

But you can "neither have eaten nor not eaten bolon de verde" if you snorted it up your nose.

 

[Me Myself]

But you can "neither have eaten nor not eaten bolon de verde" if you snorted it up your nose.

Yu would have still either eaten it or not.

Of you regard eating as ingesting it orally then you havent eaten bolon de verde. If you regard eating as passing it down your throat somehow then you have.

 

[illykitty]

We are not asking if they like the concept of god, we are asking if they believe in it.

I thought it was a better comparison than having something. You cannot have God. The question wasn't in the same way as to ask someone if they believe or not.

Fine if you want a specific question that is exactly the same, then it is like asking someone if they believe in potatoes if they never heard of it, never ate one and don't even know what they are. The best answer someone like that can say, is I don't know, what is it? Does that sound like an Atheist to you? Not to me.

 

[Willamena]

Yu would have still either eaten it or not.

Or neither.

 

[Me Myself]

I thought it was a better comparison than having something. You cannot have God. The question wasn't in the same way as to ask someone if they believe or not.

Fine if you want a specific question that is exactly the same, then it is like asking someone if they believe in potatoes if they never heard of it, never ate one and don't even know what they are. The best answer someone like that can say, is I don't know, what is it? Does that sound like an Atheist to you? Not to me.

Its not about having god is about having the belief in god.


Translate atheism | into German | into Italian | into Spanish
Definition of atheism
noun
[mass noun]
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Such person sounds like a potato atheists to oxford dictionary

 

[Me Myself]

Or neither.

Not a logical option.

 

[idav]

Atheism/theism being the answer to a yes or no question, it would depend on how it is asked on whether it is rejection. "Do you believe in God" being a bit different from "Do you believe in My God". When God is just an ambiguous term, lack of belief fits a lot better than when someone rejects a specific concept of God. In this type of debate, the ambiguity of the God term is what I have most of the problem with.

 

[Quintessence]

It doesn't seem to me that most folks consider atheism mere lack of belief in my culture. It is more commonly understood to be active disbelief, particularly when someone is self-identifying as an atheist. So, under the more common understanding, it's pretty absurd to claim a human baby is an atheist. Non-theist (lack of belief) sure, but not atheist (active disbelief).

 

[Me Myself]

It doesn't seem to me that most folks consider atheism mere lack of belief in my culture. It is more commonly understood to be active disbelief, particularly when someone is self-identifying as an atheist. So, under the more common understanding, it's pretty absurd to claim a human baby is an atheist. Non-theist (lack of belief) sure, but not atheist (active disbelief).

Thats mostly because it is very are to hear of someone who has never had some kind of contact with a god idea. The rare use of the term in that sense makes it be the less associated use to the point where many people dont even believe it is that.

 

[Breathe]

Babies are born ignorant of God-concepts, but I don't think calling them as atheists is entirely an accurate description of what to call it. Ignostic may be best, or possibly weak atheism by proxy of ignorance.

From my experience, it seems as though plenty of toddlers, even raised by the irreligious (a majority of people in my experiences) who may not even believe in God still tend to exhibit animistic, and/or pantheistic tendencies.

 

[Me Myself]

Babies are born ignorant of God-concepts, but I don't think calling them as atheists is entirely an accurate description of what to call it. Ignostic may be best, or possibly weak atheism by proxy of ignorance.

From my experience, it seems as though plenty of toddlers, even raised by the irreligious (a majority of people in my experiences) who may not even believe in God still tend to exhibit animistic, and/or pantheistic tendencies.

Thats why I said they are all animists

We naturally lean towards animism. Its what we do.

 

[Sha'irullah]

They are born Motherists. Their very first god(goddess) is their mother and they usually depend on her and adore her so they are born into the religion of Motherism. A beautiful religion I must say :yes:.
Not until further realization or future brainwashing do they move away from Motherism choose a religion alien to them.

 

[Me Myself]

They are born Motherists. Their very first god(goddess) is their mother and they usually depend on her and adore her so they are born into the religion of Motherism. A beautiful religion I must say :yes:.
Not until further realization or future brainwashing do they move away from Motherism choose a religion alien to them.

Thats actually an interesting propoosition

Kids do tend to believe whoever took care of them can do almost everything.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Thats actually an interesting propoosition

Kids do tend to believe whoever took care of them can do almost everything.

The parental figure is essentially god to a child and is capable of raising the dead as far as they know. So by the definition of god (an all powerful being) "Motherism" is the religion we are all born into .
It is quirky but my point is extremely valid

 

[Me Myself]

The parental figure is essentially god to a child and is capable of raising the dead as far as they know. So by the definition of god (an all powerful being) "Motherism" is the religion we are all born into .
It is quirky but my point is extremely valid

I know.

And to be honest, I raised it long ago in another one of this threads. Not with your catchy cool name for the form of adoration though

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Poll: Are all babies atheist?

Ask them.

That was a pretty babyish reply.

That displays a pretty babyish understanding.

 

[Badran]

I voted "No babies are atheist".

The word atheism describes more than one position towards the idea of god. The particular belief that there is no god(s), the rejection of the idea (on a variety of grounds), and the mere absence of belief in a god(s). Given that the word describes a worldview, a position, and as mentioned above differing ones at that, it's unhelpful to include people who have no knowledge or ability to embrace or reject a worldview in the first place.

Technically, including them can pass. But it's unhelpful because that's not what the word strikes me to be aimed towards. It's describing an embraced position. To include babies would also include everything and anything that does not believe in a god(s). This means that trees are atheists, insects are atheists, sand is atheist, earth is atheist, the sky's atheist etc... I think it's certainly reasonable to conclude that this is not what the word is supposed to be addressing.

The approach of including babies is similar to that of some religions which propose that babies by default fall under it's label because they're 'in accordance with god's creation' or anything to that effect. Neither positions is helpful because it doesn't actually say anything about the baby.