[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If it is not inborn, the why has every separated major culture I’ve ever heard of have beliefs in the supernatural?[/quote]
Because man is born ignorant and comes to certain non-unique beliefs does not make those beliefs true. Certainly there is enough differences in man’s ideas that there has been vast conflicts over which ideas are the “right and true” ideas. Is it a possibility that none are correct?
Before modern science everything that could not be explained was attributed to the power of god. I do not see this a problem to explain. Man is “cursed” with the desire to understand the natural world why should it be surprising that he might imagine solutions to those problems?
Even some very bright theoreticians I know use these methods. Though, at some point they have to turn back to reason to provide solid foundations for what they imagine.
[quote]
By your logic anything you haven’t considered before you automatically believe it’s false. Before I studied Quantum I didn’t disbelieve it. Now that I’ve studied it, I disbelieve it. =0) And yes Quantum is a completely imaginary world (that’s what theory is).[/quote]
No, that is not what I am saying. All truth has to pass a test of logic. Since our understanding of god must ultimately come from imagination I simply question what place it has in reality? I believe it satisfies a purely emotional need. Though I cannot prove it.
disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
american heritage:
Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
You left this out from the wiki entry:
It is also[3] defined more broadly as an absence of belief in deities, or nontheism.[4][5][6][7]
Because I copied the explicit definition from each source. Explicitly it is a belief. The dictionaries don’t even mention anything else.[/quote]
What you are talking about is referred to as “strong atheism.” That is, the explicit claim that deities do not exist. All I’m trying to point out is that all people without belief in god (strong atheists, weak atheists, agnostics) fall under the broad umbrella of “atheism.”
The problem with these discussions is that no one can ever agree on the terminology used, so that is one point in favour of agnosticism (and by agnosticism, I mean the position that Thomas Henry Huxley held - he coined the term - that thelogical claims are unknowable).
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
If it is not inborn, the why has every separated major culture I’ve ever heard of have beliefs in the supernatural?
Because man is born ignorant and comes to certain non-unique beliefs does not make those beliefs true. Certainly there is enough differences in man’s ideas that there has been vast conflicts over which ideas are the “right and true” ideas. Is it a possibility that none are correct?
Before modern science everything that could not be explained was attributed to the power of god. I do not see this a problem to explain. Man is “cursed” with the desire to understand the natural world why should it be surprising that he might imagine solutions to those problems?
Even some very bright theoreticians I know use these methods. Though, at some point they have to turn back to reason to provide solid foundations for what they imagine.
By your logic anything you haven’t considered before you automatically believe it’s false. Before I studied Quantum I didn’t disbelieve it. Now that I’ve studied it, I disbelieve it. =0) And yes Quantum is a completely imaginary world (that’s what theory is).
No, that is not what I am saying. All truth has to pass a test of logic. Since our understanding of god must ultimately come from imagination I simply question what place it has in reality? I believe it satisfies a purely emotional need. Though I cannot prove it.[/quote]
Once again, arguing truth is a different subject I’m not willing to engage you on in this thread. Though, you even admit in this post at least some scientific understanding begins in imagination land. =0)
All I’m arguing is that neither Atheism nor religion is the natural state of the nature of man.
disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
american heritage:
Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
You left this out from the wiki entry:
It is also[3] defined more broadly as an absence of belief in deities, or nontheism.[4][5][6][7]
Because I copied the explicit definition from each source. Explicitly it is a belief. The dictionaries don’t even mention anything else.
What you are talking about is referred to as “strong atheism.” That is, the explicit claim that deities do not exist. All I’m trying to point out is that all people without belief in god (strong atheists, weak atheists, agnostics) fall under the broad umbrella of “atheism.”
The problem with these discussions is that no one can ever agree on the terminology used, so that is one point in favour of agnosticism (and by agnosticism, I mean the position that Thomas Henry Huxley held - he coined the term - that thelogical claims are unknowable).
[/quote]
Argue with Webster, not me. But it sounds like what you are talking about is weak atheism, not just plain atheism. =0)
I am curious as to why atheists feel they need to evangelize? Why do they feel the need to spread their belief?
People have said here that the atheist ideology never hurt anybody and because atheists carried out the greatest mass slaughters the world has ever seen, atheism itself wasn’t a factor because atheists are not required to spread their belief because they don’t have a belief…Atheism in essence is to be a lack of belief. You cannot spread a lack? Well apparently, either atheism is indeed a belief, not a lack of belief. You cannot spread a nothing.
Well many have died for the doctrine of nothingness.
[quote]pat wrote:
I am curious as to why atheists feel they need to evangelize? Why do they feel the need to spread their belief?
People have said here that the atheist ideology never hurt anybody and because atheists carried out the greatest mass slaughters the world has ever seen, atheism itself wasn’t a factor because atheists are not required to spread their belief because they don’t have a belief…Atheism in essence is to be a lack of belief. You cannot spread a lack? Well apparently, either atheism is indeed a belief, not a lack of belief. You cannot spread a nothing.
Well many have died for the doctrine of nothingness.
[/quote]
[quote]pat wrote:
I am curious as to why atheists feel they need to evangelize? Why do they feel the need to spread their belief?
People have said here that the atheist ideology never hurt anybody and because atheists carried out the greatest mass slaughters the world has ever seen, atheism itself wasn’t a factor because atheists are not required to spread their belief because they don’t have a belief…Atheism in essence is to be a lack of belief. You cannot spread a lack? Well apparently, either atheism is indeed a belief, not a lack of belief. You cannot spread a nothing.
Well many have died for the doctrine of nothingness.
[/quote]
Well, there is atheism and Atheism. If you analyze the word it is pretty staightforward, but since the word have become to mean Atheism, I feel it to be safer to use agnosticism instead of atheism.
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
…Since our understanding of god must ultimately come from imagination…
What if someone claimed that it is intuition that makes god known to us, would you accept the claim?[/quote]
I’ve been trying to avoid that argument. But yes, many people claim to experience god as the result of what is first imagination and theory. Much like a scientist. Even I myself don’t believe the supernatural is strictly provable though.
[quote]pat wrote:
I am curious as to why atheists feel they need to evangelize? Why do they feel the need to spread their belief?
People have said here that the atheist ideology never hurt anybody and because atheists carried out the greatest mass slaughters the world has ever seen, atheism itself wasn’t a factor because atheists are not required to spread their belief because they don’t have a belief…Atheism in essence is to be a lack of belief. You cannot spread a lack? Well apparently, either atheism is indeed a belief, not a lack of belief. You cannot spread a nothing.
Well many have died for the doctrine of nothingness.
[/quote]
Many have died for political doctrine.Organized religion has a very definite political
component,and where they were seen as political rivals or impediments,they were indeed put to the sword,as were many atheists who opposed the political system.
So please now feel free to take Stalin,Mao et al and use them as the basis for your fallacious argument.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
All I’m arguing is that neither Atheism nor religion is the natural state of the nature of man. [/quote]
Well this is a completely different argument needing its own thread. I believe the “nature of man” can only be defined by his actions.
However, I believe there is a natural state that exists which is unchanging and universal which correspondingly must have at least some discoverable laws to validate that truth.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
pat wrote:
I am curious as to why atheists feel they need to evangelize? Why do they feel the need to spread their belief?
People have said here that the atheist ideology never hurt anybody and because atheists carried out the greatest mass slaughters the world has ever seen, atheism itself wasn’t a factor because atheists are not required to spread their belief because they don’t have a belief…Atheism in essence is to be a lack of belief. You cannot spread a lack? Well apparently, either atheism is indeed a belief, not a lack of belief. You cannot spread a nothing.
Well many have died for the doctrine of nothingness.
I’m just curious. What mass slaughters?[/quote]
Lenin, Stalin, Mao Se Tung, etc. These people killed millions, many of which did not adhere to their belief in atheism as a reason for their deaths.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pat wrote:
I am curious as to why atheists feel they need to evangelize? Why do they feel the need to spread their belief?
The same reason the religiously devout feel the need to – the salvation of mankind.[/quote]
As of this moment,I have never been disturbed in my own home by some atheist looking to convert me to the “don’t believe” religion…
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
All I’m arguing is that neither Atheism nor religion is the natural state of the nature of man.
Well this is a completely different argument needing its own thread. I believe the “nature of man” can only be defined by his actions.
However, I believe there is a natural state that exists which is unchanging and universal which correspondingly must have at least some discoverable laws to validate that truth.[/quote]
You brought it up.
Truth of ideology wasn’t the topic of the thread either.
[quote]pat wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
pat wrote:
I am curious as to why atheists feel they need to evangelize? Why do they feel the need to spread their belief?
People have said here that the atheist ideology never hurt anybody and because atheists carried out the greatest mass slaughters the world has ever seen, atheism itself wasn’t a factor because atheists are not required to spread their belief because they don’t have a belief…Atheism in essence is to be a lack of belief. You cannot spread a lack? Well apparently, either atheism is indeed a belief, not a lack of belief. You cannot spread a nothing.
Well many have died for the doctrine of nothingness.
I’m just curious. What mass slaughters?
Lenin, Stalin, Mao Se Tung, etc. These people killed millions, many of which did not adhere to their belief in atheism as a reason for their deaths.[/quote]
I would consider communism a religion of government. Same way religion was paramount to Hitler’s national mobilization.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pat wrote:
I am curious as to why atheists feel they need to evangelize? Why do they feel the need to spread their belief?
The same reason the religiously devout feel the need to – the salvation of mankind.
As of this moment,I have never been disturbed in my own home by some atheist looking to convert me to the “don’t believe” religion…[/quote]
Evangelism is not a necessary component of religion. Which would seem argue that atheist evangelizing does not make them a religion. Unless you consider that you have to have an organized belief structure to evangelize.
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
…Since our understanding of god must ultimately come from imagination…
What if someone claimed that it is intuition that makes god known to us, would you accept the claim?[/quote]
I would argue that it can only be our imagination or sensibility that leads us to intuitions. I do not believe there are any such objects as “pure intuitions”. Meaning I do not believe that we can blindly intuit without perception – in the form of imagination or sensibility. Regardless, intuition does not guarantee truth anymore than imagination does. What if your intuition is false?