Why Debate the Existence of God with Non-believers?

[Sha'irullah]

Indeed. But there are lots wrong with misrepresenting atheism as a religion!

I expected better from you by now. I really did.

I am not saying all forms of atheism. You do know there are many many many types of atheism because primarily atheism is not a religion although it can be made to be one.

Excuse me?

Whatever you understand a "religion" as being, odds are that I have never met it.

Define religion

 

[Windwalker]

Is pantheism?

Yes. It relates the universe itself as God. So to know the word, is to experience the being of God.

 

[Windwalker]

That is a common reason, albeit probably not the only one.

So atheism is a faith based on a lack of experience? (I realized I used the word belief in the same context before, but I'm putting a point on it here).

The people who most often insist that we must believe usually make statements about reality that we can personally testify to be untrue.

Based on a lack of experience?

 

[Windwalker]

Why would you say that atheism is dualistic?

Because it views the world in terms of subject/object distinctions. Pantheism does not, or at least tries not to. It flattens everything to monism, that everything is the same, not distinct.

I mean, I suppose there might be some atheists who believe in a "spirit realm" or the like, but materialist atheists reject dualism.

They do not. Do you view yourself as that star up there in the night sky? Materialism sees the world outside themselves, something it can study as an object.


EDIT: I figured it out! You saw me use the word "monism" and thought I said monotheism! That's how you got that. Not the same meaning at all. Monism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monism

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Because it views the world in terms of subject/object distinctions. Pantheism does not, or at least tries not to. It flattens everything to monism, that everything is the same, not distinct.

"Subject/object distinctions" don't have anything to do with monism vs. dualism... at least not by the meanings I know for monism and dualism. Dualism is the belief that there is some separate hidden reality interacting with the visible: for instance, the belief that there's an incorporeal "soul" at the core of a person is dualist, while the belief that the mind is just our word for "what the brain does" is materialist and monist.

They do not. Do you view yourself as that star up there in the night sky? Materialism sees the world outside themselves, something it can study as an object.

I also disagree with how you're using the term "materialism".

EDIT: I figured it out! You saw me use the word "monism" and thought I said monotheism! That's how you got that. Not the same meaning at all. Monism. Monism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No, actually. A few posts back, Magic Man made a post where he talked about monotheism vs. pantheism as well as theism vs. pantheism. When you replied to his post, you said "both of them", but it was ambiguous which "both" you were referring to. I took "both" to mean "monotheism and pantheism", but it's become apparent that you meant "theism and pantheism".

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Windwalker,

I think this bit from your Wiki link might clear up some confusion here. I think you're talking about "thing monism" while I'm talking about "stuff monism":

One must distinguish "stuff monism" from "thing monism".[3]*According to stuff monism there is only one kind of stuff (e.g. matter or mind), although there may be many things made out of this stuff. According to thing-monism there exists strictly speaking only a single thing (e.g. the universe), which can only be artificially and arbitrarily divided into many things.

 

[LuisDantas]

"As a religious position, some describe pantheism as the polar opposite of atheism. From this standpoint, pantheism is the view that everything is part of an all-encompassing, immanent God. All forms of reality may then be considered either modes of that Being, or identical with it. (From Wiki) Pantheism embraces God, atheism rejects God.

Again however, you did not address my main point that atheism is dualistic, and pantheism is monistic. That is not the same. Atheism in this regard is closer to theism which is dualistic, than pantheism which is monistic. Please address this point.

I don't think atheism is usually dualistic, nor that it is very different from Pantheism in practice.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't think atheism is usually dualistic, nor that it is very different from Pantheism in practice.

That's what I was trying to get at. There's not really that much difference:

- materialism: there's only one reality.
- pantheism: there's only one reality, and we call it "God".

 

[LuisDantas]

That's what I was trying to get at. There's not really that much difference:

- materialism: there's only one reality.
- pantheism: there's only one reality, and we call it "God".

Yes, it really comes down to whether one feels like calling reality "God" or not.

And this is indeed a stance of "what is in a name?"

 

[LuisDantas]

I am not saying all forms of atheism. You do know there are many many many types of atheism because primarily atheism is not a religion although it can be made to be one.

I suppose so, but that is so at odds with what you just said...

Define religion

Discipline, practice or teachings aimed towards expressing and developing some set of moral values and associated behavior.

 

[LuisDantas]

So atheism is a faith based on a lack of experience? (I realized I used the word belief in the same context before, but I'm putting a point on it here).

Atheism in and of itself isn't at all a faith.

It may or may not be based on a lack of experience, it depends on the person.

Based on a lack of experience?

Based on a life experience that directly contradicts what we are (sometimes) told to believe in.

When a Christian comes to me and says (as has happened often enough) that "God wants me to accept him", I know for a fact that he is speaking nonsense.

 

[paarsurrey]

Or rather, why should Theists refrain from learning better?

I don't think Atheists are better off.

Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't think Atheists are better off.

Regards

Well, guess what? You are wrong!

 

[paarsurrey]

Well, guess what? You are wrong!

Sorry; if I got you wrong.
Will you please elaborate for me.

Regards

 

[Magic Man]

"As a religious position, some describe pantheism as the polar opposite of atheism. From this standpoint, pantheism is the view that everything is part of an all-encompassing, immanent God. All forms of reality may then be considered either modes of that Being, or identical with it. (From Wiki) Pantheism embraces God, atheism rejects God.

Atheism rejects the idea of an intelligent being controlling the universe. As I said, the only real difference between atheism and pantheism is that pantheism says that the whole universe is one big organism, which is not that different from just acknowledging the universe itself.

Again however, you did not address my main point that atheism is dualistic, and pantheism is monistic. That is not the same. Atheism in this regard is closer to theism which is dualistic, than pantheism which is monistic. Please address this point.

I don't understand why you think atheism has to be dualistic.

 

[Magic Man]

Atheism is a religion. It has figure heads, Dennet, Dawkins, and Harris.

Atheism is not a religion. Those are not figureheads, just prominent atheists.

It has established norms, belief in science.

Lack of believe in the supernatural(atheism just means no belief in a god).

To mock and tease religion(I do this part myself).

Nope, nope, nope and nope. All atheism has is the absence of belief in God. There are no other requirements. Some atheists like science, some don't. Some believe in supernatural things, some don't. Some mock and tease religion, some don't. None of those things indicate religion.

To use cliche and repetitive quotes like "atheism is not a religion" or "God of the gaps".

1) Not all atheists do these things either.

2) Whether or not they do is irrelevant to whether atheism is a religion. It is not. The two arguments you present here are legitimate rational arguments. Atheism and theism are not religions, and "God of the gaps" accurately describes how gods have been used throughout history.

I am specifically referring to New Atheism though although most atheists are "New Atheists". You seem to be one of them. Congratulations for figuring out you are religious

You're referring to a certain portion of atheists, and not making a valid case for them being religious, much less for atheism itself being a religion.

Also to have a religion you must have ethics, metaphysics, and orthodoxy. I shall sum it up to you briefly: Abortion, Big Bang, and science. I rest my case

You probably should rest your case, as it hasn't proved itself valid.

 

[paarsurrey]

Why Debate the Existence of God with Non-believers?

There is no harm in having peaceful dialogue with fellow human beings; even of they are atheists.

Regards

 

[steeltoes]

Why Debate the Existence of God with Non-believers?

There is no harm in having peaceful dialogue with fellow human beings; even of they are atheists.

Regards

Sure, but what's the point in it?

 

[adi2d]

Sure, but what's the point in it?

Conversation. Maybe a chance to learn something

 

[LuisDantas]

Sure, but what's the point in it?

Among others, seeking a good mutual understanding.

Acknowledgement and mutual understanding are prerequisites for respectful, productive relationships, after all.