| Celebaelin
|
| 911660. Fri May 25, 2012 12:04 pm |
 |
|
| PDR wrote: | | Do I have to meet *both* criteria or is one out of two sufficient for a positive classification? |
Dunno, you tell me bearing in mind that
| PDR wrote: | | I would still refuse to recognise his right of self-endeification"? |
|
|
|
|
 |
| bemahan
|
| 911662. Fri May 25, 2012 12:11 pm |
|
|
| I'll show the scale to bemason. I have a feeling he might be a 2.5. He has a strong interest in Theology; I'm not sure that this is necessarily because he believes in God. I think it may well be because he finds the wide-ranging in-class discussions so stimulating. I was rather surprised when he joined Theology club as it means losing a lunchbreak! I'm not sure where his faith has come from as we aren't churchgoers and don't pray or say grace etc. He's even talked of being a church minister when he grows up. |
|
|
|
|
| Moosh
|
| 911687. Fri May 25, 2012 2:10 pm |
|
|
| Jenny wrote: | | In sense 2 of Cele's definition posted above, belief that is not based on proof, you could describe atheism as a faith. Since you can't prove a negative, you can't prove that there is no god. However, since it all revolves around what you mean by god anyway, which is a very variable thing, it's a little tricky. |
You can't actually prove anything in the real world though. I believe that if I drop my pen it will fall to the desk then stop. This is a belief that's based on evidence, all evidence points to the existence of gravity, but it's not based on proof because there is not, and cannot be, any proof that gravity will cause my pen to be attracted to the Earth, but not so strongly that the desk won't stop it.
If you say that faith is belief without proof then that encompasses the entirety of human knowledge.
Now, if you were to say that faith is belief without evidence, or in spite of evidence, I'd agree, and say that atheism does not fit with that description.
Every atheist I know claims that given evidence for the existence of God they would believe. Whether that's actually true for all of them or not is by the by, but it's a very common position, and it's why I would not consider atheism to be a faith. It's a position based on evidence, or rather based on the lack of evidence for God, and if the evidence changes then the position changes. |
|
|
|
|
| mckeonj
|
| 911692. Fri May 25, 2012 2:24 pm |
|
|
Since I am at the centre of the known universe, which would not exist without me, therefore I AM GOD.
QED |
|
|
|
|
| mckeonj
|
| 911694. Fri May 25, 2012 2:26 pm |
|
|
| Incidentally, we have no evidence that the universe exists. |
|
|
|
|
| PDR
|
| 911707. Fri May 25, 2012 4:40 pm |
|
|
| Moosh wrote: |
Every atheist I know claims that given evidence for the existence of God they would believe. |
No they wouldn't believe - they would know. There is a world of difference.
PDR |
|
|
|
|
| Neotenic
|
| 911745. Fri May 25, 2012 9:51 pm |
|
|
I think I would say that it is a certainly mistake to say that atheism is a lack of faith. It is right to acknowledge that the atheist position is a belief without evidence - and those that overlook that point are the ones most likely to be utterly insufferable, on both sides of the argument.
However, while one must have faith in what we believe to be true about the absence of God, that does not make stheism a faith. To say you believe Christ died for your sins is to have faith, and Christianity is a faith. Indeed, you can have faith in the eventual outcome of an upcoming election, but that doesn't make Liberal Socialism a religion.
Atheism has no doctrine. It has no explanation for how things are, or prediction for how things will be. It has no rituals, traditions, sacraments, denominations or requirements for adherence by believers. It is not possible to be a 'bad atheist'. Or a good one, for that matter.
If atheism is a faith, then it will simply be a matter of deciding whether it is a lazy one, or a rubbish one. |
|
|
|
|
| PDR
|
| 911759. Sat May 26, 2012 3:34 am |
|
|
| Neotenic wrote: |
If atheism is a faith, then it will simply be a matter of deciding whether it is a lazy one, or a rubbish one. |
Or perhaps a subtly effective yet undemanding one?
PDR |
|
|
|
|
| mckeonj
|
| 911760. Sat May 26, 2012 3:38 am |
|
|
| Surely Marxism has all the hallmarks of a faith? |
|
|
|
|
| Celebaelin
|
| 911761. Sat May 26, 2012 3:43 am |
|
|
| Neotenic wrote: | However, while one must have faith in what we believe to be true about the absence of God, that does not make stheism a faith. To say you believe Christ died for your sins is to have faith, and Christianity is a faith. Indeed, you can have faith in the eventual outcome of an upcoming election, but that doesn't make Liberal Socialism a religion.
Atheism has no doctrine. It has no explanation for how things are, or prediction for how things will be. |
I'm not sure that's true, but it's the certainly the central point of the original question. Atheism explains how we should view spirituality with the opening assertion that there is no God; but that is an untestable (or according to some 'self-evident') premise.
If atheism of a specific kind (your own brand, or a more organised version like Buddhism) is an unprovable human response to the question of spirituality then why is any belief system based on it not a faith as well as something that people have faith in?
Since atheism is an attempt to rationalise spiritual and religious matters it is not atheism per se that is a faith; instead it is the methods by which people choose to live their lives consequent to their atheist stance that is their personal 'faith'. Atheists may not like the word and may prefer something like 'moral code' or 'lifestyle' but the concept is identical - it's how you believe you should approach life given what you hold to be true about the existence or non-existence of a spiritual higher power. |
|
|
|
|
| PDR
|
| 911789. Sat May 26, 2012 9:42 am |
|
|
Perhaps, but I would suggest that is more in the nature of a "set of values" than a "faith". A "faith" has postulates it holds to be true - a "set of values" identify principles which might guide decisions and actions in the direction of "good outcomes" rather than "not good outcomes" - these may be at the individual, family, group, nation, species or universal level of course.
PDR |
|
|
|
|
| djgordy
|
| 911799. Sat May 26, 2012 10:18 am |
|
|
| I'm a dyslexic atheist. I don't believe in dog. |
|
|
|
|
| NinOfEden
|
| 911806. Sat May 26, 2012 10:29 am |
|
|
| tetsabb wrote: |
5.5 or thereabouts. Should go to 11, like proper measurements.. |
I fluctuate between 2-6, depending on whether I have anything to pray about. |
|
|
|
|
| NinOfEden
|
| 911809. Sat May 26, 2012 10:50 am |
|
|
There is some faith involved in Atheism. Numerous times I've heard one Atheist or another being asked 'How do you think the Big Bang happened, then?' or 'So what IS moral conscience?' with 'We don't know everything yet, but one day scientists/psychologists will discover the answer.' which is just as much blind faith as when the Theist says 'I told you, GOD DID IT + we mustn't question His will!'
Also:
Questioner: How can you prove there's no God?
Atheist: I don't have to prove there isn't one, it's up to the believers to prove there is.
Q: How do you explain that so many people have had spiritual experiences?
A: They're lying/deluded/hallucinating.
Q: What do you think happens after you die?
A: Nothing, you just rot away.
Q: But what about your SOUUUUL?!
A: Don't be silly, there isn't one.
Another point I find interesting is that being an Atheist isn't the same as being a complete sceptic. Plenty of people who identify as Atheist also believe in theories/phenomena such as the afterlife, spiritual healing or fortune-telling + celebrate the cultural aspects of religious festivals. |
|
|
|
|
| Arcane
|
| 911883. Sat May 26, 2012 7:13 pm |
|
|
If atheism is an absence of faith or no belief in a faith, then surely it's an anti-faith, and therefore not a faith?
I don't believe in any god because I have had no calling deep in my soul that says "yes, that deity is for me". I do have an interest in a particular field but I wouldn't call it a religion (it's not Scientology don't worry). Its more of an abstract thing for me, elemental, not a male or female with a face and a name, and it's more about those elements and what they do rather than the figureheads. Almost scientific in a way, which works for me far better than having a rigid set of rules I must obey that may or may not be anything close to what the deity may or may not have said in any way, shape or form.
Oh, and theres no way I'd be a part of organised religion whilst inequality exists between the roles and rules of men and women. If the deity loved us all, then we can all be allowed the same rights (rites?) under that belief system. |
|
|
|
|
