Why atheism is irrational

[Jackalope]

I couldn't care less whether your particular god (which no doubt is the true one) or any other exists.

Pretty much this. Wake me up when a god presents itself for consideration. Until then, I really could not care less - the gods humanity has dreamed up to date leave much to be desired.

[pocaracas]

Good, because it's not up for debate. It is what it is.

Most would be around 6... some of those would say they go all the way to 6.99... whatever that means!

Not that this scale has any real meaning.

Does anyone care about this scale?

Why is it relevant to me?

I could care less what some other guy thinks of my personal beliefs. That is sort of what makes them personal.

This scale seems like one of those personality tests that employers give you that can easily be faked to say anything you want if you are not mostly a moron.

Why should I listen to Dawkins?

A guy uses the Dawkins scale as an example, and everyone jumps the gun, due to some bias against Dawkins himself... sheeshhh

[Zen Badger]

In my case yes. But it is not essential.
I can have opinions without having to justify them.
I would also guess that most Christians are knee jerk Christians who really haven't thought about it.
I mean have you read the bible!

I actually have read the bible.

I'll grant you might not need external justification. But I imagine if you are rational you would need internal justification.

In other words, you don't have to prove that your beliefs are rational to me. But you must believe they are rational at minimum. And believing they are rational requires a reason to believe that they are.

If you have no justification whatsoever, you are worse off than kneejerk Christians who have weak justifications.

Here's a challenge for you Vincenzo.

Let us hypothetically accept that the existence of a creator god is a given.

Now prove that it is your particular god.(without using the bible)

[Tonus]

I am no more going to be neutral in relation to the nonexistence of god than I would be neutral toward the nonexistence of unicorns. No one is logically agnostic in relation to fairy tales. Rather they take the atheistic approach. In fact, they even take the atheistic approach toward every deity except the one in which the profess unreasonable faith.

This is a good point. Everyone is an atheist to some degree. Is a Christian "agnostic" when it comes to Allah, or Vishnu? If not, isn't Christianity irrational? Is a Muslim "agnostic" when it comes to Zeus, or Ceres? If not, isn't Islam irrational?

Everyone lacks a belief in all but one, or a few, gods. They take the "default" position for all but that one, or those few. Therefore only the theist can differentiate himself, and only if he chooses. Lacking that, he is necessarily an atheist.

[Doubting Thomas]

Here's a challenge for you Vincenzo.

Let us hypothetically accept that the existence of a creator god is a given.

Now prove that it is your particular god.(without using the bible)

Isn't it funny how when people presuppose the existence of a god, it's always their god?

[Simsim]

I had some time, so I came back to pay a visit to my friends over on this forum. Sup.

And I've been thinking about rationality lately. Let me just lay it on you like butter on toast.

Almost all atheism is irrational. Why?

A lot of us point to the supposed intelligence of atheists, but what I've come to realize is that most of us have become atheists at quite a young age. Too young, honestly, to have a full grasp of our logical faculties or the world around us. Age 13 or 14 is simply not when your mind is fully developed. This includes the vast majority of atheist intellectuals who become atheists at a young age and just engage in confirmation bias throughout their academic careers.

Atheists whine. A lot. If you spend time on internet forums, you notice 98% of their time is spent hating Christians and whining about Christianity. For a "rational", "skeptical" group of people, such lack of rationality is alarmingly hypocritical.

About matters of the intellect, atheists are very superficially educated. They have a basic foundation down "EVOLUTION RULZ, GOD SUX HAHA I HAVE BIBEL VURSES THAT SUX LOL" but fundamental nuances are often glossed over or missed because their interest is not in knowing things, but in confirming what they want to be true.

"Ah but Vinny Gabagool, atheists know more about the Bible, look at the stats!" You will say, no doubt pointing to some stats. "Nonsense!" I will reply. While most religions are entirely focused on knowing about their own religion, atheists, for the most part are anti-theists. So everything they need to know is anti-religious dogma. Biblical contradictions, the euthyphro dilemma, wise-ass sayings that are actually nonsensical- these are de facto atheist teachings. So of course, they would "know more" their entire existence depends on their hatred against people who believe in a God!

When I started off as a skeptic, I started with a sense of intimidation. I was scared of all the intellectuals. Now that I'm a little older, a little smarter, a little more educated....I feel sorry for them.

I didn't read except the first page of the thread. But at first I thought you were just mocking theists' ways of thinking and writing. Anyway, you don't have to be rational in this mad world so it is a very plausible choice to be atheist. Good luck !

[ManMachine]

---

I had some time, so I came back to pay a visit to my friends over on this forum. Sup.

And I've been thinking about rationality lately. Let me just lay it on you like butter on toast.

Almost all atheism is irrational. Why?

A lot of us point to the supposed intelligence of atheists, but what I've come to realize is that most of us have become atheists at quite a young age. Too young, honestly, to have a full grasp of our logical faculties or the world around us. Age 13 or 14 is simply not when your mind is fully developed. This includes the vast majority of atheist intellectuals who become atheists at a young age and just engage in confirmation bias throughout their academic careers.

Atheists whine. A lot. If you spend time on internet forums, you notice 98% of their time is spent hating Christians and whining about Christianity. For a "rational", "skeptical" group of people, such lack of rationality is alarmingly hypocritical.

About matters of the intellect, atheists are very superficially educated. They have a basic foundation down "EVOLUTION RULZ, GOD SUX HAHA I HAVE BIBEL VURSES THAT SUX LOL" but fundamental nuances are often glossed over or missed because their interest is not in knowing things, but in confirming what they want to be true.

"Ah but Vinny Gabagool, atheists know more about the Bible, look at the stats!" You will say, no doubt pointing to some stats. "Nonsense!" I will reply. While most religions are entirely focused on knowing about their own religion, atheists, for the most part are anti-theists. So everything they need to know is anti-religious dogma. Biblical contradictions, the euthyphro dilemma, wise-ass sayings that are actually nonsensical- these are de facto atheist teachings. So of course, they would "know more" their entire existence depends on their hatred against people who believe in a God!

When I started off as a skeptic, I started with a sense of intimidation. I was scared of all the intellectuals. Now that I'm a little older, a little smarter, a little more educated....I feel sorry for them.

---

Once you step beyond the point of an assertion that deities do not exist (even if it's to explain why you make that assertion) you are into the realms of opinion.

Anti-theism, for me, is characterised by an active opposition to theism and I do not agree is always a part of atheism. I am not anti-theistic, I am, perhaps (through reasoning) ante-theistic, in so much as I reason there was no god(s) before they were dreamt-up. Many of the on-line atheist who are so vociferous in their anti-theism think (wrongly) that an atheist has to be a believer in the absolute 'truth' of the results of scientific endeavour, this negates the debate on the nature and purpose of science and is slightly misrepresentative of what science can deliver.

Personally, I do not need god(s), I can reason my existence without their existance, but I am sympathetic to those who do need a god and I can reason that there are evolved mechanisms that make people predisposed to need to believe in one. Naturally, any coherent system of belief will fulfil that need, even if that system of belief is science. The atheists you speak of behave as if science is a religion, they become fundamentalist in their defence of what they percieve to be scientific 'truth', of course, the more enlightened among us know better.

A blanket fear of intellectualism is unfounded, at the end of it all nothing exists except atheism and empty space, everything else is just opinion.



MM

[downbeatplumb]

[quote='Vincenzo "Vinny" G.' pid='514690' dateline='1380564700']
[quote]
I actually have read the bible.

I'll grant you might not need external justification. But I imagine if you are rational you would need internal justification.
[/quote]

Or you might not think about it at all. Its not important after all.

[quote]
In other words, you don't have to prove that your beliefs are rational to me. But you must believe they are rational at minimum.[/quote]

No the minimum is not to consider it at all.

[quote] And believing they are rational requires a reason to believe that they are.[/quote]

Who is the best team in the NFL?

You know what, I don't care.

See how that works.

[quote]
If you have no justification whatsoever, you are worse off than kneejerk Christians who have weak justifications.
[/quote]

But I do have reasons.

The reason people used to believe in god is because they had no understanding of the way the universe really worked and injected dieties to try and pretend they weren't ignorant.
There is no need for this childish thinking anymore.

I am just pointing out that not every atheist has to have a reasoned argument to be so.

You seem to be one of those people who like to ladle attributes to atheism that aren't required.

[ManMachine]

The reason people used to believe in god is because they had no understanding of the way the universe really worked and injected dieties to try and pretend they weren't ignorant.

With all due respect, you don't know that to be a fact. There is no way anyone could know that to be a fact.

It seems to me that you have developed a notion that 'fits' what you understand. It makes sense to you given the limits of your understanding, even though it is completely unsubstantiated.

Sound familiar?


MM

[Vincenzo Vinny G.]

[quote='Vincenzo "Vinny" G.' pid='514252' dateline='1380488612']
But being an atheist is certainly not the same as being neutral.

I certainly don't speak for anyone else, but for me- this is kind of true (except when it comes to attempts to legislate faith). I couldn't care less whether your particular god (which no doubt is the true one) or any other exists.

I consider myself a warrior against legislation of hurtful dogma- like teaching creationism and abstinence-only education in public schools. If a god proved itself (how? I don't know) and said he was offended by unmarried sex- I'd be fighting that asshole. It a god showed up and said "all that genomics and fossil stuff was just misdirection," I'd be fighting that asshole. If a god showed up and said he wanted little girls' clitorises removed and their vaginas sewed up... well. 'Nuff said.

Keep your hurtful dogma to yourself, and then I just don't care. Most gods out there are so repugnant that learning of their existence would turn me in to a freedom fighter, not a worshiper.
[/quote]

So properly speaking you are not an atheist. You're more of an anti-theist. Or maybe more specifically, more of an anti-theocracist?

Of course, what you consider hurtful dogma is an open-ended question. I bet Assad up in Syria finds the idea of democracy "hurtful". But I'll leave that dead horse for someone else to beat.

---

[quote='Vincenzo "Vinny" G.' pid='514690' dateline='1380564700']
I actually have read the bible.

I'll grant you might not need external justification. But I imagine if you are rational you would need internal justification.

In other words, you don't have to prove that your beliefs are rational to me. But you must believe they are rational at minimum. And believing they are rational requires a reason to believe that they are.

If you have no justification whatsoever, you are worse off than kneejerk Christians who have weak justifications.

Here's a challenge for you Vincenzo.

Let us hypothetically accept that the existence of a creator god is a given.

Now prove that it is your particular god.(without using the bible)
[/quote]

Heyyyy arbitrary challenges that come from out of the blue!

I love those!!!

Just kidding. I don't know why you're throwing arbitrary challenges at me. I don't even see the point.

---

[quote='Vincenzo "Vinny" G.' pid='511307' dateline='1380078864']
I had some time, so I came back to pay a visit to my friends over on this forum. Sup.

And I've been thinking about rationality lately. Let me just lay it on you like butter on toast.

Almost all atheism is irrational. Why?

A lot of us point to the supposed intelligence of atheists, but what I've come to realize is that most of us have become atheists at quite a young age. Too young, honestly, to have a full grasp of our logical faculties or the world around us. Age 13 or 14 is simply not when your mind is fully developed. This includes the vast majority of atheist intellectuals who become atheists at a young age and just engage in confirmation bias throughout their academic careers.

Atheists whine. A lot. If you spend time on internet forums, you notice 98% of their time is spent hating Christians and whining about Christianity. For a "rational", "skeptical" group of people, such lack of rationality is alarmingly hypocritical.

About matters of the intellect, atheists are very superficially educated. They have a basic foundation down "EVOLUTION RULZ, GOD SUX HAHA I HAVE BIBEL VURSES THAT SUX LOL" but fundamental nuances are often glossed over or missed because their interest is not in knowing things, but in confirming what they want to be true.

"Ah but Vinny Gabagool, atheists know more about the Bible, look at the stats!" You will say, no doubt pointing to some stats. "Nonsense!" I will reply. While most religions are entirely focused on knowing about their own religion, atheists, for the most part are anti-theists. So everything they need to know is anti-religious dogma. Biblical contradictions, the euthyphro dilemma, wise-ass sayings that are actually nonsensical- these are de facto atheist teachings. So of course, they would "know more" their entire existence depends on their hatred against people who believe in a God!

When I started off as a skeptic, I started with a sense of intimidation. I was scared of all the intellectuals. Now that I'm a little older, a little smarter, a little more educated....I feel sorry for them.

I didn't read except the first page of the thread. But at first I thought you were just mocking theists' ways of thinking and writing. Anyway, you don't have to be rational in this mad world so it is a very plausible choice to be atheist. Good luck !
[/quote]

So "You don't have to be rational, therefore atheism."

That's what you're saying? That's a remarkable concession.

---

[quote='Vincenzo "Vinny" G.' pid='514690' dateline='1380564700']

I actually have read the bible.

I'll grant you might not need external justification. But I imagine if you are rational you would need internal justification.

Or you might not think about it at all. Its not important after all.

In other words, you don't have to prove that your beliefs are rational to me. But you must believe they are rational at minimum.

No the minimum is not to consider it at all.

And believing they are rational requires a reason to believe that they are.

Who is the best team in the NFL?

You know what, I don't care.

See how that works.

If you have no justification whatsoever, you are worse off than kneejerk Christians who have weak justifications.

But I do have reasons.

The reason people used to believe in god is because they had no understanding of the way the universe really worked and injected dieties to try and pretend they weren't ignorant.
There is no need for this childish thinking anymore.

I am just pointing out that not every atheist has to have a reasoned argument to be so.

You seem to be one of those people who like to ladle attributes to atheism that aren't required.

I would imagine you can't properly be an atheist then. You're just someone who doesn't know or care about what you believe.

But that raises the question of why you're in the atheist camp, as opposed to the "I don't know camp." or the "Indifferent camp".

There's obviously some anti-religious sentiment there somewhere that leads you to identify as an atheist when in fact you more like a non-theist, or irreligious. If we were using language properly, that is.