310 réponses à ce sujet

[Gotholhorakh]

I'm not an atheist, but a lot of apparently quite nice and intelligent people assume I am. I'm not alone in this, among my friends who are mostly scientists and engineers of one sort or another, a good few are religious and none of them mentions it at work because it's none of anyone's business - indeed I know of people lying to avoid stupid/hostile attitudes to it in the workplace.

People sometimes forget that not all atheists are intelligent or decent people, and vice versa.

I don't live in a country that has nutcases like the westboro baptist church, and the only people I ever see being fundamentalist, judgmental or grossly dogmatic in my life are what is called "proactive atheists". I've literally never met a religious person who would tell someone else YOUR BELIEFS ARE WRONG in contemptuous terms, but I understand lots of them exist. I see atheists do that heaps TBH.

chunkyman wrote...

Yep, I'm an atheist. Unpopular opinions FTW!

It's not really unpopular, I think it's pretty much only religious people who come in for any vocal harassment that I know of - but hey, that's just my neck of the woods, I guess it's different where there are fundamentalist Christians saying God hates this group or that one, or fundamentalist Muslims sawing people' heads off in the town square, etc.

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 07 juin 2012 - 08:29 .

[termokanden]

Siansonea II wrote...

Gnostic Theist = You believe in gods, and you feel that you have evidence to support the belief (yes, some people think religious scripture is "evidence").

Agnostic Theist = You believe in gods, though you don't necessarily think you have evidence to back it up.

Gnostic Atheist = You don't believe in gods, and you feel the evidence is 100% incontrovertible to support your lack of belief.

Agnostic Atheist = You don't believe in gods, but you don't think the evidence is 100%, that there is some room for a non-atheist reality (usually pantheism or deism is the alternative allowed, rather than theism).

While you're right, I don't particularly like those categories. I guess I'm an "agnostic atheist" as I don't think it's possible to prove that there's nothing supernatural. However, that category is also often used for pseudo-spiritual beliefs that "there's probably something out there". I'm not really leaving room for anything in particular because I have not been given the reason to do so (besides, if there's empirical evidence, isn't it actually just science?).

Gotholhorakh wrote...

It's not really unpopular, I think it's pretty much only religious people who come in for any vocal harassment that I know of - but hey, that's just my neck of the woods, I guess it's different where there are fundamentalist Christians saying God hates this group or that one, or fundamentalist Muslims sawing people' heads off in the town square, etc.

In certain environments and mostly in western countries, atheism is very popular. But you have to remember that on the grand scale of things, most people are still religious.

I can definitely follow your complaints about being harassed for your beliefs. When I was younger, I was very vocal about my atheism. I have become much more tolerant with age luckily as I have come to know more people of different beliefs. I will still speak out when I feel people are pushing their reilgions on others in an unreasonable way, but I have no right to interfere with other people's personal beliefs as long as they're not out there hurting someone.

I do think in particular superstition is used to take advantage of people though, and I'm not too fond of this.

Modifié par termokanden, 07 juin 2012 - 08:36 .

[OmegaXI]

greengoron89 wrote...

"Wise-sounding quotes, the truth does not make."

you win this thread

[RAF1940]

Gotholhorakh wrote...

I'm not an atheist, but a lot of apparently quite nice and intelligent people assume I am. I'm not alone in this, among my friends who are mostly scientists and engineers of one sort or another, a good few are religious and none of them mentions it at work because it's none of anyone's business - indeed I know of people lying to avoid stupid/hostile attitudes to it in the workplace.

People sometimes forget that not all atheists are intelligent or decent people, and vice versa.

I don't live in a country that has nutcases like the westboro baptist church, and the only people I ever see being fundamentalist, judgmental or grossly dogmatic in my life are what is called "proactive atheists". I've literally never met a religious person who would tell someone else YOUR BELIEFS ARE WRONG, but I understand lots of them exist. I see atheists do that heaps TBH.

chunkyman wrote...

Yep, I'm an atheist. Unpopular opinions FTW!

It's not really unpopular, I think it's pretty much only religious people who come in for any vocal harassment that I know of - but hey, that's just my neck of the woods, I guess it's different where there are fundamentalist Christians saying God hates this group or that one, or fundamentalist Muslims sawing people' heads off in the town square, etc.

I'm guessing that you are from... Sweden?

[Siansonea]

I personally don't care whether someone is atheist or theist. But to claim to be neither is disingenuous, it's clinging to a middle ground that doesn't exist. Some things are a binary, and this is one of them. You can't be neither alive nor dead, and you can't simultaneously believe and disbelieve something to be true. You either do believe it, or you don't. If you haven't made up your mind, if you're unsure, if you've got doubts, that's not a grey area—you don't believe. It's that simple. One can try to tell oneself that one straddles the knife's edge between belief and nonbelief, but it's silly and pointless to do so.

And claiming that one does not have knowledge and can therefore not pick a side is dodging the question. Of COURSE you don't have knowledge. If you had knowledge, well, it wouldn't be a question of belief anymore. I have knowledge that the moon is a sphere, rather than a flat disk, so I don't have to "believe" that the moon is a sphere. I know that gravity will affect an object if I let go of it, so I don't have to "believe" in gravity.

All agnosticism REALLY amounts to is a convenient way for atheists to not be hassled by theists. They avoid the dreaded Atheist label, and as long as they stick to the "Oh, I don't know, could go either way" story, the theists will think they've got a shot at converting them, or at least not counting them in the "enemy" camp. Let's be real here.

Modifié par Siansonea II, 07 juin 2012 - 08:31 .

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

@Siansonea II
The Prime God is incomprehensible. Reason and perception don't and won't ever have the ability to understand its purpose and quiddity. If everyone was gifted...

[Costin_Razvan]

Christian Orthodox. I believe in God, the ten commandments, Jesus as the son of God and his teachings. However I also believe that Mohammed was a prophet sent by God and I respect certain things in Islam as well.

I do not believe everything the Church tells us, nor in everything that is written in the Bible.

[RAF1940]

Siansonea II wrote...

I personally don't care whether someone is atheist or theist. But to claim to be neither is disingenuous, it's clinging to a middle ground that doesn't exist. Some things are a binary, and this is one of them. You can't be neither alive nor dead, and you can't simultaneously believe and disbelieve something to be true. You either do believe it, or you don't. If you haven't made up your mind, if you're unsure, if you've got doubts, that's not a grey area—you don't believe. It's that simple. One can try to tell oneself that one straddles the knife's edge between belief and nonbelief, but it's silly and pointless to do so.

And claiming that one does not have knowledge and can therefore not pick a side is dodging the question. Of COURSE you don't have knowledge. If you had knowledge, well, it wouldn't be a question of belief anymore. I have knowledge that the moon is a sphere, rather than a flat disk, so I don't have to "believe" that the moon is a sphere. I know that gravity will affect an object if I let go of it, so I don't have to "believe" in gravity.

All agnosticism REALLY amounts to is a convenient way for atheists to not be hassled by theists. They avoid the dreaded Atheist label, and as long as they stick to the "Oh, I don't know, could go either way" story, the theists will think they've got a shot at converting them, or at least not counting them in the "enemy" camp. Let's be real here.

Alright, but what about my approach?


It is as follows: IDEGAF.

Modifié par RAF1940, 07 juin 2012 - 08:32 .

[Siansonea]

Imperial Sentinel Arian wrote...

@Siansonea II
The Prime God is incomprehensible. Reason and perception don't and won't ever have the ability to understand its purpose and quiddity. If everyone was gifted...

Really? Prove it.

[Siansonea]

RAF1940 wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

I personally don't care whether someone is atheist or theist. But to claim to be neither is disingenuous, it's clinging to a middle ground that doesn't exist. Some things are a binary, and this is one of them. You can't be neither alive nor dead, and you can't simultaneously believe and disbelieve something to be true. You either do believe it, or you don't. If you haven't made up your mind, if you're unsure, if you've got doubts, that's not a grey area—you don't believe. It's that simple. One can try to tell oneself that one straddles the knife's edge between belief and nonbelief, but it's silly and pointless to do so.

And claiming that one does not have knowledge and can therefore not pick a side is dodging the question. Of COURSE you don't have knowledge. If you had knowledge, well, it wouldn't be a question of belief anymore. I have knowledge that the moon is a sphere, rather than a flat disk, so I don't have to "believe" that the moon is a sphere. I know that gravity will affect an object if I let go of it, so I don't have to "believe" in gravity.

All agnosticism REALLY amounts to is a convenient way for atheists to not be hassled by theists. They avoid the dreaded Atheist label, and as long as they stick to the "Oh, I don't know, could go either way" story, the theists will think they've got a shot at converting them, or at least not counting them in the "enemy" camp. Let's be real here.

Alright, but what about my approach?


It is as follows: IDEGAF.

Sounds like you're an apathetic agnostic atheist, but you don't care, so....

[Siansonea]

Erik Lehnsherr wrote...

@Siansonea II

Enough, I am what I have said, No Logic you can use will persuade me otherwise.

Spoken like a true zealot.

[C9316]

This picture is this thread in more ways than one...

[DarkDragon777]

Siansonea II wrote...

Imperial Sentinel Arian wrote...

@Siansonea II
The Prime God is incomprehensible. Reason and perception don't and won't ever have the ability to understand its purpose and quiddity. If everyone was gifted...

Really? Prove it.

Prove it wrong.

[Persephone]

Catholic gal here.

With several Pagan influences tossed in.

Make of that what you will.

[android654]

Imperial Sentinel Arian wrote...

@Siansonea II
The Prime God is incomprehensible. Reason and perception don't and won't ever have the ability to understand its purpose and quiddity. If everyone was gifted...

[Pordis Shepard]

Siansonea II wrote...
I personally don't care whether someone is atheist or theist. But to claim to be neither is disingenuous, it's clinging to a middle ground that doesn't exist. Some things are a binary, and this is one of them. You can't be neither alive nor dead... <snip>

Oooh.. don't tell that to Schrödinger's cat though...  just sayin.

Modifié par Pordis Shepard, 07 juin 2012 - 08:35 .

[RAF1940]

Siansonea II wrote...

RAF1940 wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

I personally don't care whether someone is atheist or theist. But to claim to be neither is disingenuous, it's clinging to a middle ground that doesn't exist. Some things are a binary, and this is one of them. You can't be neither alive nor dead, and you can't simultaneously believe and disbelieve something to be true. You either do believe it, or you don't. If you haven't made up your mind, if you're unsure, if you've got doubts, that's not a grey area—you don't believe. It's that simple. One can try to tell oneself that one straddles the knife's edge between belief and nonbelief, but it's silly and pointless to do so.

And claiming that one does not have knowledge and can therefore not pick a side is dodging the question. Of COURSE you don't have knowledge. If you had knowledge, well, it wouldn't be a question of belief anymore. I have knowledge that the moon is a sphere, rather than a flat disk, so I don't have to "believe" that the moon is a sphere. I know that gravity will affect an object if I let go of it, so I don't have to "believe" in gravity.

All agnosticism REALLY amounts to is a convenient way for atheists to not be hassled by theists. They avoid the dreaded Atheist label, and as long as they stick to the "Oh, I don't know, could go either way" story, the theists will think they've got a shot at converting them, or at least not counting them in the "enemy" camp. Let's be real here.

Alright, but what about my approach?


It is as follows: IDEGAF.

Sounds like you're an apathetic agnostic atheist, but you don't care, so....

To quote Jon LaJoie, "I don't even give a f*** about not giving a f***."

[Volus Warlord]

Persephone wrote...

Catholic gal here.

With several Pagan influences tossed in.

Make of that what you will.

What are ya, a Catholic Druid or something? 

This subject never ceases to be interesting.

[RAF1940]

C9316 wrote...



This picture is this thread in more ways than one...

Jack could've survived if Rose wasn't such a ****...

[Siansonea]

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Imperial Sentinel Arian wrote...

@Siansonea II
The Prime God is incomprehensible. Reason and perception don't and won't ever have the ability to understand its purpose and quiddity. If everyone was gifted...

Really? Prove it.

Prove it wrong.

That's not how it works. If someone puts forth a proposition, the burden of proof is on them to prove it to be true. Until they prove their case, it doesn't get to be afforded the status of a "true" thing.