Shifting more towards atheism

[Koldo]

You have repeatedly done so in this thread just using different phraseology.

For anyone who can comprehend the word god, there is no cognitive difference between not believing gods exist and believing they don’t exist. The difference is purely grammatical.

But there is a difference...
I am pretty sure certain gods don't exist, however I have no idea if some others don't exist to the point I have no belief one way or another. Just to clarify: I see godhood as a measure of power meaning that an uber powerful alien could be called a god, and I have no way of determining if such a being exists somewhere in the universe, I am so clueless that I don't even have a belief one way or another concerning it's existence.

Curiously, it is not the belief that certain gods don't exist that is actually characteristic of atheism, since even theists often hold that many gods don't exist, but rather the absence of belief in the existence of any god.

 

[Augustus]

But there is a difference...
I am pretty sure certain gods don't exist, however I have no idea if some others don't exist to the point I have no belief one way or another. Just to clarify: I see godhood as a measure of power meaning that an uber powerful alien could be called a god, and I have no way of determining if such a being exists somewhere in the universe, I am so clueless that I don't even have a belief one way or another concerning it's existence.

Curiously, it is not the belief that certain gods don't exist that is actually characteristic of atheism, since even theists often hold that many gods don't exist, but rather the absence of belief in the existence of any god.

The idea that a very powerful alien exists is quite likely.

Most atheists are not adopting a position where they consider it quite likely a god exists

 

[Koldo]

The idea that a very powerful alien exists is quite likely.

Most atheists are not adopting a position where they consider it quite likely a god exists

How did you reach the conclusion that it is very likely that a very powerful alien exists?

I certainly do not hold this perspective. I would say the likelihood simply can't be estimated.

 

[Augustus]

How did you reach the conclusion that it is very likely that a very powerful alien exists?

I certainly do not hold this perspective. I would say the likelihood simply can't be estimated.

The sheer size of the universe makes it a reasonable possibility.

Also there is a decent chance humans will become exponentially more technologically advanced in the future and would thus meet your definition of being gods.

If being a god is about power, at what point of power would you say a human would become a god?

 

[Anne1]

Uh, no, they don't. Only words for things that can be experienced have real referents. This is the fundamental difference between wolves and werewolves, for example, assuming that the latter don't exist. It's strange that you would claim otherwise.

It doesn't matter what it means to others if they don't mean something that can be experienced somewhere at sometime. It's the same with your sage of the words truth and atheist. If by truth you don't mean the quality that demonstrably correct ideas possess, and if by atheist you don't mean a person with no god belief, then it really doesn't matter what it is that you DO mean when you use those words.

No, it means that a belief in god is based in nothing. The belief has no foundation.

Atheists don't need to pretend anything. They simply ignore the god claims of theists. It's the theist who is pretending.

That's either a defect in every atheist or one in your understanding of them. Occam can tell us which it is.

Atheists know that believers have no proof or evidence for their god beliefs. I've told you this before, but in every case, you've failed to acknowledge seeing it much less attempt to rebut it. That makes you wrong until you do, and you know you can't successfully rebut that.

 

[Anne1]

- if there is no God then there is no absolute truth, no absolute wrong.

With atheism, morality can only be a cultural belief, a personal choice, a law proposed by the government, but nothing more. Might makes right, if you want. Evil is a much a nothing as is kindness in the blank, icy indifference of a meaningless universe.

Significantly, the very first atheist regimes slaughtered millions within living human memory. Russia killed maybe 40 million. Mao exterminated 70 million human beings. Pol Pot killed one out of every four people in his country.

Rivers of blood.

 

[Koldo]

The sheer size of the universe makes it a reasonable possibility.

Sheer size doesn't mean much when the universe is nearly entirely hostile to life.

Also there is a decent chance humans will become exponentially more technologically advanced in the future and would thus meet your definition of being gods.

I don't consider the use of technology as god material though. Otherwise, any individual with access to a hundred nukes would be a god.

If being a god is about power, at what point of power would you say a human would become a god?

Superman.

 

[Augustus]

Sheer size doesn't mean much when the universe is nearly entirely hostile to life.

It makes it reasonable to consider there is a decent chance of advanced life forms existing though.

If you consider sufficiently powerful aliens to be gods, this seems categorically different from having a degree of philosophical doubt about the non-existence of gods.

The chance of powerful aliens existing is something that humans should consider.

For example, when humans do things to try to contact aliens, they should consider that these aliens may be far more powerful and hostile.

Once something becomes a factor in your decision making, then this is different to accepting the theoretical possibility of something existing but assuming it does not until evidence is presented for it’s existence.

Superman

What about a human cyborg with these powers?

 

[Koldo]

It makes it reasonable to consider there is a decent chance of advanced life forms existing though.

If you consider sufficiently powerful aliens to be gods, this seems categorically different from having a degree of philosophical doubt about the non-existence of gods.

Considering I have a major degree of doubt about the existence of uber powerful aliens, I don't see any distinction.

The chance of powerful aliens existing is something that humans should consider.

For example, when humans do things to try to contact aliens, they should consider that these aliens may be far more powerful and hostile.

Once something becomes a factor in your decision making, then this is different to accepting the theoretical possibility of something existing but assuming it does not until evidence is presented for it’s existence.

I am not sure what you mean by this. Isn't the same applicable to God? Considering I may end up burning in hell for all eternity...

What about a human cyborg with these powers?

Nope. Not god material.

 

[F1fan]

- if there is no God then there is no absolute truth, no absolute wrong.

Those who claim absolute truth are the ones we worry about the most. Look at the 9-11 hijackers. They don't do that without being absolutely certain they are correct, and God approves. Notice how God always agrees with the believer, even when believers disagree.

With atheism, morality can only be a cultural belief, a personal choice, a law proposed by the government, but nothing more.

Right, just like with religions. Notice how religions don;t agree what morality is. Even among Christians there is disagreement, just look at the abortion issue.

Might makes right, if you want. Evil is a much a nothing as is kindness in the blank, icy indifference of a meaningless universe.

Significantly, the very first atheist regimes slaughtered millions within living human memory. Russia killed maybe 40 million. Mao exterminated 70 million human beings. Pol Pot killed one out of every four people in his country.

Rivers of blood.

Yup, authoritarian politics gets ugly whether led by religion or not. Of course, theocracies have a significant body count, too. In the 17th century Christians executed some 30,000 for witchcraft. That would be about 500,000 today adjusted for population. And your list above didn't mention the Holocaust. That was committed by Catholics and Lutherans, and I wonder how that happened if religion inspires morality.

 

[McBell]

- if there is no God then there is no absolute truth, no absolute wrong.

With atheism, morality can only be a cultural belief, a personal choice, a law proposed by the government, but nothing more. Might makes right, if you want. Evil is a much a nothing as is kindness in the blank, icy indifference of a meaningless universe.

Significantly, the very first atheist regimes slaughtered millions within living human memory. Russia killed maybe 40 million. Mao exterminated 70 million human beings. Pol Pot killed one out of every four people in his country.

Rivers of blood.

How many have Christians killed off?

I mean, if the number killed is your standard, then you need to present how many fewer Christians have killed than atheists, right?

 

[McBell]

I wonder how that happened if religion inspires morality.

apparently killing is immoral unless Christians are the ones doing the killing.

 

[1213]

Natural Laws, the chain of your decisions in the past, culture, your religion, education, family and peer pressure.

I don't think those limit me.

More of a problem: The dominate belief in Islam and Fundamentalist Christianity is the reject of the sciences of evolution. These are the only religious beliefs that that consistently reject science.

The evolution theory is mostly pseudoscience, modernized mother earth cult.

 

[Augustus]

Considering I have a major degree of doubt about the existence of uber powerful aliens, I don't see any distinction.

Would you say the existence of powerful aliens is something that humans should or may need to factor into their decision making?

Or would it require evidence that they do exist before we should ever give it any consideration?

I am not sure what you mean by this. Isn't the same applicable to God? Considering I may end up burning in hell for all eternity...

Do you factor avoiding hell into your decision making?

 

[joelr]

You make a good distinction between strong and weak. However, although you cannot prove a negative, that is, you cannot prove God does NOT exist, you can draw a strong conclusion based on induction. Since there has not been any clear and decisive evidence for the existence of God, then by induction, there will continue not to be any clear and decisive evidence for the existence of God.

Yeah. There could be evidence, a god could show up, but as of now there isn't good evidence to warrant belief.

 

[PureX]

Then tell us what atheism really is. Define it in your terms.

Why? You're clearly not going to listen, and neither are your atheist cohorts.

 

[shunyadragon]

I don't think those limit me.

Think!?!!? Does not work facing reality. Delusions of self immenance does not resolve the may documented limitations on your freedom of choice you fail to respond to,

The evolution theory is mostly pseudoscience, modernized mother earth cult.

This reflects your ancient tribal worldview with your intentional ignorance of science.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Why? You're clearly not going to listen, and neither are your atheist cohorts.

And why would we? Your ridiculous presumption in supposing that you know what we think and believe better than we do ourselves is laughable, but not particularly edifying.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Why? You're clearly not going to listen, and neither are your atheist cohorts.

For your definition to be taken seriously, it would need to reflect how the word "atheist" is generally used. Theists with agendas are usually bad at coming up with a definition that passes this basic test.

 

[shunyadragon]

- if there is no God then there is no absolute truth, no absolute wrong.

From the fallible human perspective there is obviously no absolutes whether God exists or not. The many conflicting religious beliefs demonstrates, Humility of belief is distinctly lacking in ancient tribal worldviews.

With atheism, morality can only be a cultural belief, a personal choice, a law proposed by the government, but nothing more. Might makes right, if you want. Evil is a much a nothing as is kindness in the blank, icy indifference of a meaningless universe.

As the witness of history of the many variable conflicting belief by Theists clearly demonstrate that ancient cultural beliefs, personal choices, and of course Tribal Might makes right. The universe is not meaningless regardless of what we believe. The universe simply exists regardless of what we subjectively assign meaning to it. I actually believe atheist have a better perspective on the universe than ancient tribal beliefs.

Significantly, the very first atheist regimes slaughtered millions within living human memory. Russia killed maybe 40 million. Mao exterminated 70 million human beings. Pol Pot killed one out of every four people in his country.

Your vain effort at body count does not reflect the reality of the 2000+ years of the history of Christian atrocities against those that do not believe. This exemplified today with the aggressive hostile view toward those that believe differently.

Rivers of blood.

. . . and many heads roll in the history of Christianity.