We were all born atheists,

[shytot]

As we all know we were all born atheist, we were then indoctrinated, told about or brainwashed, [call it what you will] into a religion, usually our parents religion,
if they were Jews you will be brought up a Jew,
no 'may I' or 'do you want to be' you will be, because they are,
some religions will let you leave, and some will not, some mark you physically for life, others are not bothered if you leave or not,
if you decide not to remain a Muslim, you are liable to be killed.

So we should not ask why there are atheists, we should ask where did the idea
of God come from, because the first people could not tell their children about a God
they had no way of knowing even existed, could it be fear of the unknown,
complete ignorance of how the world worked, even the Sun setting and rising made
people afraid, so I suppose it was inevitable a higher intelligence came into being.
after all, someone or something must behind all of this, it makes perfect sense.

 

[Valjean]

Good points, Shytot.
You might also add that this indoctrination begins long before we develop the capacity for intelligent reason or critical analysis.
By the time we're intellectually capable of making a reasoned analysis of these claims, they're already firmly ensconced in our ROM. They're part of our operating system.

 

[Atheist_Dave]

Great points guys, frubals to you both x

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

As we all know we were all born atheist, ...

You trivialize the term: meaning is not constrained by etymology. Atheism is an ontological position, a decision.

 

[Valjean]

I see it as an ontological question only when theism is placed on the table for consideration, when it becomes a choice between options.
Without previous theological indoctrination, non-belief in God would be comparable to non-belief in Humpty-Dumpty.

 

[Ori]

As we all know we were all born atheist

Really? I was born naked and screaming.

 

[Valjean]

....and with no concept of God whatsoever. QED.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I see it as an ontological question only when theism is placed on the table for consideration, ...

If you wish to dilute the term so that it applies to babies (or rocks which, likewise, lack a belief in deity), that is your right.

 

[Halcyon]

If you wish to dilute the term so that it applies to babies (or rocks which, likewise, lack a belief in deity), that is your right.

How do you know what rocks believe?

I agree with earlier posts though, first you must have the concept of a theistic deity taught to you before you can reject the concept.

I reckon we are probably born with the programming to develop Animism as a default metaphysical belief system.

 

[mr.guy]

first you must have the concept of a theistic deity taught to you before you can reject the concept.

Hold on...why is that? To be an anti-theist, certainly that's true, but why is athiesm dependant firstly on rejection of presented theism? Doesn't this mean that an atheist is only described as such relative to what religions he/she has been (thouroughly?) exposed to?

I reckon we are probably born with the programming to develop Animism as a default metaphysical belief system.

Animism?

edit: needed more question marks.

 

[Halcyon]

Hold on...why is that? To be an anti-theist, certainly that's true, but why is athiesm dependant firstly on rejection of presented theism? Doesn't this mean that an atheist is only described as such relative to what religions he/she has been (thouroughly?) exposed to?

Pretty much. You can't be atheist if you have no concept of divinity to reject.

Animism?

edit: needed more question marks.

Yep Animism.

 

[mr.guy]

Pretty much. You can't be atheist if you have no concept of divinity to reject.

So what is one if their never introduced to theism?

 

[Halcyon]

So what is one if their never introduced to theism?

They don't exist, every culture has some theistic elements.

Children invent imaginary friends, these aren't any different to a theist's God - yet even children brought up in atheistic households have imaginary friends.
Its an inbuilt thing in the human brain to make gods and supernatural creatures, just as its our nature to find answers to the big questions, even if that means making up the answers.

A child brought up in a hypothetical civilisation that had absolutely no concept of anything supernatural would have no concept of god and so no concept of a lack of god - there is no name for this mindset.

 

[mr.guy]

Children invent imaginary friends, these aren't any different to a theist's God - yet even children brought up in atheistic households have imaginary friends.

So our base definition of theism is to be any existential and/or anthropormorphic use of imagination?

A child brought up in a hypothetical civilisation that had absolutely no concept of anything supernatural would have no concept of god and so no concept of a lack of god - there is no name for this mindset.

So atheism is always a relativist self-definition? That is to say, one cannot be an atheist without firstly having a god(s) to reject.

 

[Halcyon]

So our base definition of theism is to be any existential and/or anthropormorphic use of imagination?

So atheism is always a relativist self-definition? That is to say, one cannot be an atheist without firstly having a god(s) to reject.

Correct on both accounts.

You could have no concept of deity, but you wouldn't be atheist because you'd have no opinion on the concept of god.

 

[mr.guy]

You could have no concept of deity, but you wouldn't be atheist because you'd have no opinion on the concept of god.

What would one be then? How can one adequately call anyone an athiest without first acertaining whether or not they reject the appropriate god? For example, would your definition so far make a christian a "muslim athiest"?

 

[Halcyon]

What would one be then? How can one adequately call anyone an athiest without first acertaining whether or not they reject the appropriate god? For example, would your definition so far make a christian a "muslim athiest"?

I think you're misunderstanding me. Firstly a Christian believes in the same god as Muslims, so thats void.

Secondly, it doesn't matter which god they've not heard of - as soon as you've heard of any concept of deity they have the option of accepting it and becoming some form of theist, or rejecting it and becoming atheist. There is no name for what the person was before such a time.
A Christian and a Wiccan are not atheist of each others god, they just have differewnt concepts of divinity.

 

[mr.guy]

I think you're misunderstanding me. Firstly a Christian believes in the same god as Muslims, so thats void.

Plenty of christians might insist otherwise; even amonst and of their own ranks, so it's not entirely void. If athiesm is to be rejection of theism, then any theistic concept one has ever heard of demands acceptance to remain a theist; alternatively, anything one doesn't believe makes them a relative athiest in regards to such and such a concept. I don't think athiests are entirely defined or dependant on a prescribed rejection of a metaphysical worldview or divine ontology. I could be wrong, though.

Secondly, it doesn't matter which god they've not heard of - as soon as you've heard of any concept of deity they have the option of accepting it and becoming some form of theist, or rejecting it and becoming atheist.

Does this include the "imaginary friends" of your previous example?

 

[Halcyon]

Plenty of christians might insist otherwise; even amonst and of their own ranks, so it's not entirely void. If athiesm is to be rejection of theism, then any theistic concept one has ever heard of demands acceptance to remain a theist; alternatively, anything one doesn't believe makes them a relative athiest in regards to such and such a concept. I don't think athiests are entirely defined or dependant on a prescribed rejection of a metaphysical worldview or divine ontology. I could be wrong, though.

No, you either believe in some form of deity and are theist, or you don't believe in any form of deity and are atheist. Believing in one form of god and not another doesn't make you atheist in respect to the other god, it just means you don't accept that form of deity - but you still believe deity exists.

Does this include the "imaginary friends" of your previous example?

If you start worshipping them as gods, then yes. How do you think the concept of anthropomorphic deity got started in the first place?

 

[mr.guy]

Before we continue, there are two things i must be clear on:

1)diety: you've implied that "worshipping" is perhaps the qualifying factor of a god. To be fair, your reference to animism (which i'm only now aquainting myself with) is what i might actually suppose as your base of conceptual divinity. Would i be correct?

2) (pending your reply)