Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: September 19, 2019, 9:45 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
When and where did atheism first start ?
#41
RE: When and where did atheism first start ?
Yeah OK. But there's no intent or reasoning if one doesn't know what a theist is?
Don't we actively proclaim our atheism? Otherwise it loses all meaning.

eg:
Are you an atheist? Sure? What's an atheist? Someone who doesn't believe in theism. What is theism? I have no idea? Why are you an atheist then? Because I'm not a theist? How do you know? Well I can't be a theist if I don't know what one is? So I'm an atheist!
Reply
#42
RE: When and where did atheism first start ?
(June 25, 2019 at 7:18 am)Losty Wrote:
(June 25, 2019 at 6:01 am)ignoramus Wrote: Dumb question ... probably just semantics.
Can one be an atheist without understanding the "theist" portion?

Are we all a-jgkrtgkje45o6tu954 -ists?

That’s the question, though, isn’t it?
It seems like in order to be an atheist there has to first exist a theist.
But going by definitions alone atheism doesn’t really have anything to do with theism. Looking at the word you would expect the definition to be “A person who is not a theist”, but that’s not it at all. In that case everyone who didn’t prescribe to a specific religion would be an atheist, but actually some people are deists. The only actual qualification for being an atheist is not having a belief in god. I feel like it’s possible to not believe in a god even if no one else has ever believed in a god.

I think there's a legitimate gray area involving the difference between not believing and disbelieving that is largely a product of the different ways we think about what belief and such behaviors is. Such things aren't a science, and most such notions are based upon "folk psychology" which is nothing more than a common, uneducated intuitive attempt to give a mechanistic account of how thoughts arise and interact with things like desires and fears. It's little more than an evolved just-so story. We don't have any real notion of what belief literally is as a fact of the complex physical system we call the brain, or how it works, so that gray area exists largely because of the inconsistencies between various accounts of the nature of belief and mental causation, all or most of which is underwritten by accounts of "the physics of thought" that are largely derived ex culo.



I don't think Belaquaa has well identified the underlying argument behind his complaint. He seems to be suggesting that a normative judgement about belief is unwarranted solely on the fact that it is something learned just as other learned things do not receive similar treatment. There is a tendency to be fooled into thinking that because something is in some sense natural that it is therefore good, right, or appropriate and that further justification of making it a norm is unnecessary. I'm too lazy to go back and read what he was responding to, so off the top of my head, I don't recollect how that would fit into the previous discussion. Failing an obvious connection, which I may simply be missing, this seems something of a red herring as I'm not sure the point the original author he was replying to was arguing that a normative judgement about belief should be made simply because it was learned. If not, well then Bel may have a valid point.
[Image: ak_botan_saionji_005.jpg]
Reply
#43
RE: When and where did atheism first start ?
(June 25, 2019 at 7:23 am)ignoramus Wrote: Yeah OK. But there's no intent or reasoning if one doesn't know what a theist is?
Don't we actively proclaim our atheism? Otherwise it loses all meaning.

eg:
Are you an atheist? Sure? What's an atheist? Someone who doesn't believe in theism. What is theism? I have no idea? Why are you an atheist then? Because I'm not a theist? How do you know? Well I can't be a theist if I don't know what one is? So I'm an atheist!

I surely don’t actively proclaim my atheism outside of the internet and I don’t think it loses its meaning.

I don’t like your example because my dictionary doesn’t mention theism in the definition of atheism. The name might make you think that’s what it is. And the label likely came about in response to theism. But the definition is a simple lack of belief in gods.

eg:
Do you believe in any gods? What’s a god? I dunno. Well, I guess we both don’t believe then heh.
*These people, while not having, using, knowing, or needing the word atheist we’re technically atheists as per the current definition of the word because they did not believe in any gods.


*just to clarify: I’m mostly just trying to look at this from a different perspective. Not really arguing that you’re wrong. Clearly, atheism was never a thing until after theism was a thing. But I do find it amusing that the definition of atheism is not “someone who is not a theist” as the word itself suggests it should be.
(August 21, 2017 at 11:31 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: "I'm not a troll"
Religious Views: He gay

0/10

Hammy Wrote:and we also have a sheep on our bed underneath as well
Reply
#44
RE: When and where did atheism first start ?
(June 25, 2019 at 7:33 am)Jörmungandr Wrote: He seems to be suggesting that a normative judgement about belief is unwarranted solely on the fact that it is something learned just as other learned things do not receive similar treatment.  

But I'm not suggesting that.

Quote:There is a tendency to be fooled into thinking that because something is in some sense natural that it is therefore good, right, or appropriate and that further justification of making it a norm is unnecessary.  

I would certainly never argue something like that. 

Quote:I'm too lazy

Yes.
Reply
#45
RE: When and where did atheism first start ?
(June 25, 2019 at 5:03 am)Belaqua Wrote:
(June 25, 2019 at 1:27 am)Fake Messiah Wrote: No it's not like language or math because atheism is free thinking

I am assured that the only thing atheists have in common is a lack of belief in God. So there is nothing intrinsically free-thinking about atheism. Some atheists may be parroting people they have heard. Sad but true. 

But the point I was making holds: people aren't born with language, math, religion, or knowledge of how to behave in groups. All these things are learned. 

Quote: and imposing religion on a child is transforming that child from a natural question-poser to a socialized question-rejecter. It is attack on human mind and its capacity to ask and know altogether.

It depends on who is doing the teaching. Do you think that no religious person asks questions or seeks new knowledge? 

If you say it is always true, in the case of every religious family, I think you are making an overly general statement, and it appears that you have shut down your ability to think questioningly about this issue.

When someone is in some religion or is ideological follower of some person means that he or she accepts certain things from that person that he never analyzes or puts under any scrutiny - things that are easily proven as lies and easily checkable but this person doesn't bother to research them as well as properly rationalize ideas that are insane.
That is true for every religion and/ or cult following, like Trump's followers.
That's why we have situations like this
[Image: abe.png]

And the difference between them and your hypothetical atheist that is "parroting people they have heard" is that that atheist researched what he/ she heard, while religious person is always parroting and then ignoring when it is wrong what they are saying.
Reply
#46
RE: When and where did atheism first start ?
Bels complaint is simpler. Atheism doesn’t mean what he needed it to mean for some previous and similarly doomed argument, and remains irritated by the fact that some people have always been atheists, which...to him, is something akin to “the mind of a child”.
When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for a battle to commence then KPLOW, I hit em with the illness of my quill, Im endowed..with certain unalienable skills....  

-ERB


Reply
#47
RE: When and where did atheism first start ?
(June 25, 2019 at 7:58 am)Belaqua Wrote:
(June 25, 2019 at 7:33 am)Jörmungandr Wrote: He seems to be suggesting that a normative judgement about belief is unwarranted solely on the fact that it is something learned just as other learned things do not receive similar treatment.  

But I'm not suggesting that.

Quote:There is a tendency to be fooled into thinking that because something is in some sense natural that it is therefore good, right, or appropriate and that further justification of making it a norm is unnecessary.  

I would certainly never argue something like that. 

Quote:I'm too lazy

Yes.

All the same, you still haven't made any actual point. Val was quite correct that if X were natural for humans then they wouldn't need to be taught it. And your examples of math, language, and how to behave in a group do not "have" to be taught, though specific skills, elaborations upon our native ability, or refinements of our natural talents may be taught. Regardless, I'm still not seeing what you were suggesting, and as far as I can see, you were both wrong as well as irrelevant. That you saw fit to be an ass and engage in insult given your errors and the relatively open and charitable way I was responding to you and your comments suggests that you do not possess good judgement in addition to being an ass.



(June 25, 2019 at 8:27 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: Bels complaint is simpler.  Atheism doesn’t mean what he needed it to mean for some previous and similarly doomed argument, and remains irritated by the fact that some people have always been atheists, which...to him, is something akin to “the mind of a child”.

Which could be ably shortened to "Bel has a stick up his ass" without loss of accuracy or relevance.



Oh, and as a final comment upon Bel's asshattery, I was entirely correct in my comments, though I thank Bel for his somewhat unsuccessful attempt to clarify his point by attacking me and my suggestion.
[Image: ak_botan_saionji_005.jpg]
Reply
#48
RE: When and where did atheism first start ?
Why would language, math, or how to behave in a group not have to be taught?
Especially math lol that definitely has to be taught. But language and social skills are also taught. If a person was raised completely secluded from other people they would not know how to act in a group and at the very least their behavior would be considered weird by other people. If you never talked to or around a baby they would not learn your language. If language does not have to be taught, then why doesn’t everyone speak every language?
(August 21, 2017 at 11:31 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: "I'm not a troll"
Religious Views: He gay

0/10

Hammy Wrote:and we also have a sheep on our bed underneath as well
Reply
#49
RE: When and where did atheism first start ?
(June 25, 2019 at 8:40 am)Jörmungandr Wrote: Val was quite correct that if X were natural for humans then they wouldn't need to be taught it.
It is natural for children to acquire language. 
They are born without it. They get it through a combination of just picking it up and people actively teaching it to them. 
It is natural for a baby to have no language. It is natural for a 5-year-old to have language. 

I don't think that religion is some evil and unique category. We could say that it is natural for babies to be born with no idea of how the world works. As with language, it is natural for them to develop ideas about how the world works. Partly through experience, and partly through being taught. 

Now suppose a little kid asks why his grandma has a picture of an old man on her wall, over a gold box (which we know is a Buddhist altar, though the child doesn't know this). The answer might be:

1) because it's a nice way for her to remember her late husband, or 
2) because she's talking to her husband in heaven. 

In this way the child develops an idea about how the world works -- either with or without a "religious" idea. 

I am NOT saying that it is good for a child to be taught religious ideas. I do think it's good AND natural for a child (who is born without such knowledge) to acquire knowledge of language, math, how to behave in groups, and how the world works. The details he or she learns about all of these subjects will depend on the kind of society he or she is born into. 

When that child is grown up, it would be unnatural for him or her to have no knowledge of language, math, how to behave in groups, or how the world works. We may wish that his thoughts about that latter category weren't religious, but that's not something we usually get to decide.

(June 25, 2019 at 8:56 am)Losty Wrote: Why would language, math, or how to behave in a group not have to be taught?
Especially math lol that definitely has to be taught. But language and social skills are also taught. If a person was raised completely secluded from other people they would not know how to act in a group and at the very least their behavior would be considered weird by other people. If you never talked to or around a baby they would not learn your language. If language does not have to be taught, then why doesn’t everyone speak every language?

Thank you, this is what I'm saying. 

Just because a baby is born without something, doesn't mean it is natural for humans to remain without it.
Reply
#50
RE: When and where did atheism first start ?
(June 25, 2019 at 8:58 am)Belaqua Wrote:
(June 25, 2019 at 8:56 am)Losty Wrote: Why would language, math, or how to behave in a group not have to be taught?
Especially math lol that definitely has to be taught. But language and social skills are also taught. If a person was raised completely secluded from other people they would not know how to act in a group and at the very least their behavior would be considered weird by other people. If you never talked to or around a baby they would not learn your language. If language does not have to be taught, then why doesn’t everyone speak every language?

Thank you, this is what I'm saying. 

Just because a baby is born without something, doesn't mean it is natural for humans to remain without it.

Ah...I missed something in there somewhere and thought someone was saying those things did not have to be taught.

I went back and found Beccs’ comment. Unless I’m missing something, I don’t agree with the reasoning.
If that were correct it would be unnatural for humans to know anything beyond basic human instinct.
(August 21, 2017 at 11:31 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: "I'm not a troll"
Religious Views: He gay

0/10

Hammy Wrote:and we also have a sheep on our bed underneath as well
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  First order logic, set theory and God dr0n3 293 7051 December 11, 2018 at 11:35 am
Last Post: T0 Th3 M4X
  "How do I know God exists?" - the first step to atheism MysticKnight 51 19714 April 23, 2018 at 8:44 pm
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  Atheism VS Christian Atheism? IanHulett 80 18930 June 13, 2017 at 11:09 am
Last Post: vorlon13
  How not to start a conversation with a skeptic...I think Astonished 43 3472 February 1, 2017 at 11:57 pm
Last Post: Astonished
  Why and How Did you Kill God? ScienceAf 67 6249 August 28, 2016 at 11:19 pm
Last Post: Arkilogue
  Did Adam and Eve have belly buttons? Heat 15 1867 January 10, 2016 at 11:31 am
Last Post: JuliaL
  When, Where, How and Why did you become Atheist? bambi_swag 122 11277 October 18, 2015 at 6:26 pm
Last Post: robvalue
  Two Undeniable Truths Why Theism is True and Atheism and Agnosticism are Not True HiYou 49 7961 July 21, 2015 at 6:59 am
Last Post: KUSA
  So did Atheism + bite the dust? TheMessiah 288 24181 February 20, 2015 at 4:37 am
Last Post: Humanoid Escapee
  Atheists: have you ever had a religious experience and what did you make of it? tantric 110 11806 January 22, 2015 at 11:08 pm
Last Post: dyresand



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)