"There is nothing that atheism (on its own) claims is 'right.' "?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Could be any number of things - but collecting or not collecting stamps is an act - atheism is not.

I'm not sure why not collecting stamps would be considered an act.

In any case, if you want to see things from my perspective, imagine an avid stamp collector asking you what meaning you get from not collecting stamps or what purpose not collecting stamps serves. You asking about atheism comes off like this to me.

Your god may be the centre of your worldview, but to me, the question of whether your god - or any god - exists just isn't that important.

Don't get me wrong: religion imposes itself on society in all sorts of ways that I care about quite a bit, and I find theism and religion interesting as social phenomena, but I don't really care about your god.

 

[paarsurrey]

@A Vestigial Mote is of course correct.

Atheism makes no claims about anything except the existence of deities. It no more makes claims about morality or any other judgement calls than, say, disbelief in the literal existence of dragons.

"It (Atheism) no more makes claims about morality"
Can then Atheism and people belonging to it be immoral? I don't believe that, please.

Regards

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Out to be right is different than to be right. If one belongs to Atheism, it does not come automatically for him to right. There are no positive evidences for him to be "ought to be right", simply rejecting others does not make one right, one could be as wrong as are others.
Regards

This is absolutely true. Rejecting what others believe does not make one "right." Just as you possibly rejecting Christianity, or rejecting belief in the old Greek pantheon of gods, or rejecting belief in the tennets of Scientology does not make you "right."

But where does this fact get you? We are in the same boat. You're not "right" simply because you don't believe others either. This doesn't strengthen the position you hold with all of the positive claims you may try to make.

 

[Nakosis]

Out to be right is different than to be right. If one belongs to Atheism, it does not come automatically for him to right. There are no positive evidences for him to be "ought to be right", simply rejecting others does not make one right, one could be as wrong as are others.
Regards

I know myself. If can't be right about what I say about myself, then probably not much point in talking to me or anyone else.

It'd be like me telling you that you were an actually an atheist but have managed to deluded yourself into believing that you actually believe in a God.

 

[paarsurrey]

I know myself. If can't be right about what I say about myself, then probably not much point in talking to me or anyone else.

It'd be like me telling you that you were an actually an atheist but have managed to deluded yourself into believing that you actually believe in a God.

Sorry.
I was not talking about you as an individual, please take it in general terms. You might be believing that you are right and it is one's right to believe that, yet without positive evidences simply based on rejection of others.

Regards

 

[Shushersbedamned]

False. Not collecting stamps is something that fish "participate" in. There was no will involved on the part of the fish-- they simply do not collect stamps.

Being an atheist simply means not-theist. NOT believing in one or more gods.

You're not making much sense here.

 

[james blunt]

No, I really wouldn't call it a belief but I don't see why the universe couldn't have always existed. I'm not really making a claim about this. I just see it as one of the many possibilities.

I put to you that evidently space has always existed and is ''omnipresent''. Space being independent of substance/matter, substance/matter being quantum formation that manifests independent of space , becoming the space-time occupancy of space. Evidently space-time energy can dissipate out of negligible existence.

The universe is the whole , not the details.

 

[Shushersbedamned]

hey Shush,
A soundless radio...
Kinda like the sound of your `God` !

The universe makes a lot of sounds.

 

[`mud]

hey Shush,
A lot of sounds from the Cosmos, and none from your `God`.
We're waiting to hear of the sound of `God`, and `His` trumpet !

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

You're not making much sense here.

The post made complete sense. I would suggest re-reading, but I'm seeing a trend in your posts and replies that has me lacking confidence in that making a difference for you.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

The universe makes a lot of sounds.

Yes it does. Care to elaborate on what you think that tells us?

 

[Shushersbedamned]

Yes it does. Care to elaborate on what you think that tells us?

Not with that tone of yours.

 

[Shushersbedamned]

hey Shush,
A lot of sounds from the Cosmos, and none from your `God`.
We're waiting to hear of the sound of `God`, and `His` trumpet !

Move to the poetry section, please.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Not with that tone of yours.

Ahh yes... let the dodging begin. What fun!

 

[Nakosis]

Sorry.
I was not talking about you as an individual, please take it in general terms. You might be believing that you are right and it is one's right to believe that, yet without positive evidences simply based on rejection of others.

Regards

Atheism, in my view, in my usage of it is a personal claim.

It's not necessary for me to reject anyone else's personal view.

If I wanted a God belief I could create one. Or join any of the various premade beliefs. It's just a decision on my part not to do so.

Do you think you can decide for yourself whether to believe in any God or any number of gods? Or do you believe this to be something you have no choice in?

I see atheism as a personal choice, just like a belief in any of the various concepts of God. Saying I am an atheist is just a statement about my choice. It says nothing about your choice.

We can discuss why I chose to be an atheist, Your choice to be a theist is and will always remain up to you.

 

[`mud]

hey Shush,
If one hears poetry in my words,
it's the sound of truth, and honesty,
and the obliqueness of the Cosmos.
Not a whisper from the `gods` however.

 

[Nakosis]

I put to you that evidently space has always existed and is ''omnipresent''. Space being independent of substance/matter, substance/matter being quantum formation that manifests independent of space , becoming the space-time occupancy of space. Evidently space-time energy can dissipate out of negligible existence.

The universe is the whole , not the details.

When we talk about the universe we kind of both know what we are referring to. When folks talk about God, it could be any of a numerous of things.

I know red balloons exist, I've seen them. Even played with my grandson with red balloons.

If you want to call red balloons God, well I guess you got me.

 

[Shushersbedamned]

hey Shush,
If one hears poetry in my words,
it's the sound of truth, and honesty,
and the obliqueness of the Cosmos.
Not a whisper from the `gods` however.

I didn't want to take it this far, but I think your poetry has very little potential of making you rich or wise.

 

[Shushersbedamned]

If you want to call red balloons God, well I guess you got me.

What would we call red balloons then?

 

[`mud]

hey Shush,
I agree with you on that,
I'm not poetic at all,
I just like commas,
and it keeps my posts shorter.
Soooo......NuffStuff,
bye.