What is your belief?

Since everyone seems to converge in the Atheist forum, I figured I sould post this here.

I'm just currious as to who is what. Actually I'm just wanting to know who the Atheists are, but I'm wondering about the others, too.

(Sorry, I meant to make that "Atheist/Agnostic")

 

I'm an ignostic, which makes me an agnostic, which makes me an atheist.

 

I'm an atheist. Some people say there shouldn't really be any such thing as an atheist because no one can really know for sure, and that what 'atheists' really mean is that they are agnostic. There's a lot of things I can't know for certain, but if they are right, 'atheist' is a fictional term. I believe it does mean something, and is something different than someone who just doesn't think about religion much, or someone who is having difficulty deciding what to believe.

Although I certainly admit I cannot know everything, I have trouble mentally even thinking that a very very remote possibility of a god exists. It just seems so ludicrous.

 

I don't post here much, But I have been for about 15 years.

Heres a Christopher Hitchens lecture about Atheism that's very intresting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD0B-X9LJjs

 

You've been posting here since you were seven?

 

my belief is that no one knows what there is or isn't, but there do seem to be some things you don't have to even pretend to know in order to experience. one or more of which MAY be "close enough for government work" to bearing at least some resemblence to what is generally refered to as god or a god. and without requiring any form of belief to have the slightest idea what it's talking about.

(this is called agnosticism, as distinct from athiesm, which is the belief that nothing not objectively observable is capable of existing.)

and agnostic IS a TOTALLY seperate catigory then ANY of those three in the poll. it's believing that there doesn't HAVE to, be OR not be, anything.
yet entirely allowes for, and accepts, ALL possibilities (AS possibilities).

(i have experienced more then one nontangable friend, perhapse one way bigger then all the others, and many really no more then ourselves. and NOT any sort of conflict between them either)

=^^=
.../\...

 

An atheist since...

 

I believe Atheism (and Fundamentalism) misses the point entirely.

An Atheist is like an illiterate who "can't get into" Shakespeare, a Fundamentalist refuses to read anything but Romeo and Juliet.

Only Atheists and Fundamentalists believe they actually have a definition for "God." Regardless of whether one embraces or rejects it, their belief is an absurd reduction of the universally transcendent.

The problem is, both try to convince others their beliefs are true, and both refuse to listen to any suggestion that reality transcends their beliefs.

The tone-deaf doesn't hear music, the Atheist doesn't recognize transcendence. They are essentially the same thing.

Peace and Love

 

Interesting to finish off a diatribe slandering atheists in an atheist forum with...

'peace and love'

 

Slander?

It is not my intent to slander anyone. But if you are going to settle for an identity with a philosophy that actively refutes your (and my) highest ideals (and any inspired consideration about their source), then you should expect to be misunderstood.

If, as you seem to believe, there is no basis for humanity's highest ideals, then why be offended by behavior that deviates from those ideals.

If you don't want to be treated unfairly, then be respectful and think, act and speak compassionately.

If you don't want to be treated like an idiot, then be respectful and think, act and speak with wisdom.

If you don't want to be slandered, then be respectful and think, act and speak truthfully.

Think, act and speak as though you believe Love, Truth, Wisdom, Consciousness, Creativity, Harmony, Unity, Transcendence, etc. are real things that actually mean something.

Until one does this, one has no authority to criticize anyone.

Peace and Love
(or Harmony and Transcendence)

 

Just because I don't ascribe to any particular tribal beliefs and customs of gods, doesn't mean I don't find there is no basis to the ideals you mentioned proceeding that.

That assumption is what I mean by slander. You might not accept that this is a bias, but it certainly looks that way from here.

A comparison I could give would be me saying (if your from an abrahamic faith) you believe in a religion which advocates stoning to death disobedient children, so who are you to discuss morality?

I don't feel that way. But the comparison seems appropos.

 

The word "slander" seems a bit strong, and the reaction somewhat touchy. On the "Christian" forums, Christians are regularly bashed in much stronger language. If Varuna had called you an inbred idiot, insulted your mother and questioned your paternity, it would be comparable and the slander charge might have some validity. I think some believers associate morality with God, and assume that if a person rejects God, (s)he's also rejecting the basis for morality, or at least for our highest moral ideals. I know enough atheist saints to know that this isn't the case. I'm not convinced that God would prefer a world without atheists, or values atheists less than believers, particularly of the pharisaical variety.

 

Congratulations! This is the dumbest thing I read today, and that includes Mitt Romney's convoluted diatribe from a few days ago.

 

Fair enough. You are free to believe what you believe.

However, it is healthy to question the connections between one's beliefs and reality.

Like every word, slander actually has a specific, agreed-upon meaning. If you use that word to express any other meaning, you will always be misunderstood.

Slander is a destructive fiction, presented as fact, meant to destroy another's reputation (and, therefore, any authority they may have to present disagreeing arguments).

Disagreeing with your ideas, questioning your beliefs, presenting alternative arguments, this is not slander. It's just a couple of guys seeking clarity about some abstract ideas

Name me one person who has no "bias." It may be argued that Atheism is nothing more than a negative bias against the unknown.

If you see it another way, then you have every right to present your "bias."

What has led you to think you know anything about such a story?

Until you have read, studied and discussed any story, and understood it on its own terms, anything you conclude about what it actually means is, by definition, limited.

Why limit yourself with the belief that your conclusions are final, that you know are all there is to know?

Imagine a man who knows nothing about American culture. One day he finds himself in a theater where they are showing The Godfather. Obviously, he concludes, any story about The Godfather must be religious, and, also obviously, in this delusional American religion one is commanded to sleep with severed horse heads, and old cars are the cause of all suffering and death.

How would you suggest to him that he has misread the movie?

Do you know anyone who has stoned their children to death for disobedience? Have you ever even heard of anyone who has done so? Could it be that the story you refer to may mean something else?

Peace and Love

 

I agree.

However you identify yourself in terms of God/Atheism, if you think, act and speak with the belief that Love, Truth, Wisdom, Consciousness, Creativity, Harmony, Unity, Transcendence, etc. are real things that actually mean something, then we are on the same page.

I don't think it matters whether you choose to see it as a path to God or just nothing more or less than what it means to be a good human.

I don't know why it can't be both of these things.

Peace and Love

 

That's not fair . . . I didn't know we were competing for your dumbest experience.

Peace and Love (and much mirth)

 

Agreed.

What a silly thing to debate. The legal definitions and common use of words are different.

Slander connotatively refers to anything to defame a person, or group. A malicious assertion certainly fits the connentation. Even if you weren't aware of this common parlence it could have easily been inferred.

You followed up a verbose and rather condescending diatribe about denotive use of language followed by a lecture about symbolism.

If you feel the need to explain the moral homily if you is present in the passage I was refering to.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2021:18-21&version=9;

If not, that's okay too. I was using the obtuse metaphor in relation to what you said regarding there being no basis for my belief in 'ideals' without god. Both arguments share the same inconsistencies. They are non arguments.

If you feel that the bible is symbolism that can be useful to your life, fine, just don't tell me in the next breath that there is no basis for my own morality simply because I ascribe to a different belief then you.

 

Good. I think if everyone could identify and analyze reality the way you just did then humanity would be much saner and the world would be a much better place.

Thanks. I am sure there is a whole world of meaningful discussion to be had about the pros and cons of capital punishment, but . . . is this really an immediate issue?

For whatever it's worth, I am against capital punishment. Death does not solve problems.

If it isn't food, don't kill it.

Then we agree.

That's not what I was saying.

First of all, let's agree not to imagine a metaphysical puppeteer, a cosmic cop, a universal high-school principal who controls all who submit and punishes all who do not. I don't know why Atheists and Fundamentalists can't get past THAT. It is a false image of the Divine, rejecting it does not make you an Atheist, embracing it does not make you pious. Either way, it is a poor basis for morality - I believe this agrees with what you are saying. Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

What I AM saying is simply this - If your thoughts, acts and speach are expressions of Love, Truth, Wisdom, Consciousness, Creativity, Harmony, Unity, Transcendence, etc., if you live according to these "things" and respect the fact that they actually mean something, then I don't think it matters whether you choose to see it as a path to God or just nothing more or less than what it means to be a good human.

Peace and Love

 

I am monothesist. It's my choice and my opinion. I dont care what others believe in as long as they dont go around pressuring others to be involved in their religion or beliefs. If they want to join cool if not thats way cool too!

 

Atheist Nihilist Buddhist