Is atheism a belief?

[The Grand Nudger]

Personally, I'm convinced that adults states of belief in x y or z can be and are as commonly a-rational as any kindergartners. God beliefs...."natural atheism"....and this very thread.... are all wonderful examples of that.

Ad hoc rationalizations are not reasons in anything other than a low colloquial sense. We can say that the man skullfucked his neighbor because a neon flashing toucan told him to - that's the reason he did it, without implying (or even attempting to imply) that this is an example of reason at work.

I figure you'd be tickled pink to find someone who actually has considered their "reasons" and decided that reason was not at play in what made me an atheist. I'm not an atheist for any of the reasons that I might use to satisfy my confidence in knowledge claims (my gnostic atheism), it's just what I've always been. I'm unlikely to change my mind due to adult criteria and categorizations...but that didn't cause my atheism and if I wasn't totally in the tank for science, for example..that wouldn't impact my atheism. I'd just be an atheist who was no longer in the tank for science. Hell, I used to be one. I didn't know what science was. Curious george, man.

[Belacqua]

There are all sorts of non-reasoned determinants ... emotional, unspoken, unrecognized, partially recognized etc.
Do people fall in love with their partners due to "reason" ? Valuing reason is itself a criteria. Have you demonstrated it's a good one ?

Good! 

Yes, there are all kinds of reasons people have for reaching their conclusions. Many of these are, as you say, emotional or unrecognized, etc. 

So it's important for us to recognize that our current conclusions may be based on these reasons. A person's atheism may be based, not on nothing, but on unrecognized emotional causes which aren't really thought out.

[bennyboy]

Personally, I'm convinced that adults states of belief in x y or z can be and are as commonly a-rational as any kindergartners.  God beliefs...."natural atheism"....and this very thread.... are all wonderful examples of that.

SAd hoc rationalizations are not reasons in anything other than a low colloquial sense.  We can say that the man skullfucked his neighbor because a neon flashing toucan told him to - that's the reason he did it, without implying (or even attempting to imply) that this is an example of reason at work.

So let's say a person has very superstitious feelings of the category which others might call "superstitious"-- maybe, because they are very strongly ingrained from childhood.  So whenever they walk into a church they "feel there's something out there, though they don't really believe the Bible stories"  But intellectually, they'll agree with you that no god exists under any rational description they've ever heard.  Should they be said to believe, or not?


I'd say a person in conflict can definitely be unable to resolve the complexities of their brain function down to a binary answer-- i.e. they cannot be said to really understand whether they hold a belief or not.

[The Grand Nudger]

Personally, I'm convinced that adults states of belief in x y or z can be and are as commonly a-rational as any kindergartners.  God beliefs...."natural atheism"....and this very thread.... are all wonderful examples of that.

SAd hoc rationalizations are not reasons in anything other than a low colloquial sense.  We can say that the man skullfucked his neighbor because a neon flashing toucan told him to - that's the reason he did it, without implying (or even attempting to imply) that this is an example of reason at work.

So let's say a person has very superstitious feelings of the category which others might call "superstitious"-- maybe, because they are very strongly ingrained from childhood.  So whenever they walk into a church they "feel there's something out there, though they don't really believe the Bible stories"  But intellectually, they'll agree with you that no god exists under any rational description they've ever heard.  Should they be said to believe, or not?

B-mine, and there's the answer to that question.  I feel the sense of the numinous on a near constant basis, myself.

I'd say a person in conflict can definitely be unable to resolve the complexities of their brain function down to a binary answer-- i.e. they cannot be said to really understand whether they hold a belief or not.

Then they are telling us, as I mentioned in the very beginning... and as I mention every time I join this discussion...that they don't know the contents of their own beliefs. What month? Tuesday.

If they can't tell you that they have a positive belief in gods...that's pretty demonstrative. As demonstrative as telling you that they have an active disbelief. The answer is no. You could use "not that I'm aware of" in place of that, but with respect to the difference between atheism and theism that's atheism.

[Abaddon_ire]

Stoppit, guys.

Belaqua is slowly building a big "gotcha".

Don't fall for it.

[fredd bear]

Personally, I'm convinced that adults states of belief in x y or z can be and are as commonly a-rational as any kindergartners.  God beliefs...."natural atheism"....and this very thread.... are all wonderful examples of that.

SAd hoc rationalizations are not reasons in anything other than a low colloquial sense.  We can say that the man skullfucked his neighbor because a neon flashing toucan told him to - that's the reason he did it, without implying (or even attempting to imply) that this is an example of reason at work.

So let's say a person has very superstitious feelings of the category which others might call "superstitious"-- maybe, because they are very strongly ingrained from childhood.  So whenever they walk into a church they "feel there's something out there, though they don't really believe the Bible stories"  But intellectually, they'll agree with you that no god exists under any rational description they've ever heard.  Should they be said to believe, or not?


I'd say a person in conflict can definitely be unable to resolve the complexities of their brain function down to a binary answer-- i.e. they cannot be said to really understand whether they hold a belief or not.

 I think it was Carl Jung who wrote that our most powerful beliefs are based on experience.

With a lovely sense of superiority, we atheist like to claim our lack of belief has been reached rationally. eg due to a lack of proof. I'm not sure human beings are capable of that level of reason. As general principle, I think it may be argued that atheism is every bit as a-rational as any religious belief. Of course, I'm sure there are many exceptions.

In my experience, human beings can rationalise literally any action or intellectual/ philosophical position. The evil person does not usually see himself as evil. Nor, in my experience  does the truly good person usually consider himself thus.

I read somewhere, I forget where "Man is not so much a rational animal, as a rationalising one"

[The Grand Nudger]

Stoppit, guys.

Belaqua is slowly building a big "gotcha".

Don't fall for it.

It wouldn't matter.  Do adults accept or reject things for reason?  Not as a rule, no.  Is there some specific reason required for atheism?  No.  Is there any requirement of reason in general, child or adult, for atheism?  No.  

A thousand times no.

[Abaddon_ire]

There are all sorts of non-reasoned determinants ... emotional, unspoken, unrecognized, partially recognized etc.
Do people fall in love with their partners due to "reason" ? Valuing reason is itself a criteria. Have you demonstrated it's a good one ?

Good! 

Yes, there are all kinds of reasons people have for reaching their conclusions. Many of these are, as you say, emotional or unrecognized, etc. 

So it's important for us to recognize that our current conclusions may be based on these reasons. A person's atheism may be based, not on nothing, but on unrecognized emotional causes which aren't really thought out.

You really are transparent. I believe in no gods because there is no evidence for any gods. Think you have some? Bring it. Otherwise, shut up.

[Belacqua]

I'd say a person in conflict can definitely be unable to resolve the complexities of their brain function down to a binary answer

This is very important I think, and often overlooked. 

Our minds operate on many levels which are often incompatible. We are perfectly capable of holding conflicting views.

There is a danger of denying parts of ourselves which we don't want to recognize. People may have very strong motivations for reaching conclusions which they don't want to see as the real reason they reached that conclusion. As Bucky pointed out, our true reasons may be unrecognized.

---

I believe in no gods because there is no evidence for any gods.

You have strong commitments to your views of what constitutes evidence. I don't know what they are; they may be very good views.

[Bucky Ball]

Stoppit, guys.

Belaqua is slowly building a big "gotcha".

Don't fall for it.

Nah. It's not a big gotcha. It's very obvious, and it's NOT equivalent to religious belief.