Do atheists believe in the existence of friendship?

[Mister Agenda]

Humans aren't robots by definition.

robot
1. (especially in science fiction) a machine resembling a human being and able to replicate certain human movements and functions automatically.

Our brain functions being explainable electrochemically doesn't make us robots; robots are machines that emulate humans in some way. It also doesn't follow that we are 'programmed'. We are able to think about our actions and act accordingly, the opposite of 'being programmed'. When we don't arrive at decisions by thourght, we can fairly be described as 'acting according to our programming'.

"What is the meaning of being programmed?
From Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English to be programmed: if a person or an animal is programmed socially or biologically to do something, they do it without thinking.... All birds of this species are programmed to build their nests in the same way."

[The Valkyrie]

While trust is a component of friendship, I don't think that trust necessitates friendship. For instance, I can trust so-and-so to do me harm, it doesn't make him my friend.

Unconditional love is nonsense. ALL love is conditional.

Boru

"So-and-so"??

I have a name!!

[KerimF]

Oh My... Scientists proved that they are also preprogrammed to trust each other at work...

Unlikely to be programming.  If scientists (or any other group of professionals working in the same area) trust one another at work, it's usually because of knowledge and trustworthy behaviour.

I think I have now a clear picture on why a person becomes an atheist or theist... It is all about chemicals. Some of them make atheists and many others make the various types of believers.

Incorrect again.  Religion is largely driven by indoctrination in a religious environment.  There is no difference between dopamine in a believer's brain and dopamine in an atheist's brain.

What is true is that many religious leaders deliberately employ psychological manipulation to create emotional states in believers.

Yes, I wasn't referring to the powerless ordinary people (because it doesn't matter what their chemicals are) but to their powerful rich masters instead. Ordinary atheists have political atheist masters (in their various ruling systems). And the ordinary theists have religious masters (heading formal systems which also have their own rules). So, based on the so-called discoveries by some of our dear scientists, only the chemicals in the brains of these masters, theist or atheist, are responsible of creating the various types of groups in the world.
Anyway, I personally didn't need to be a member in any formal group; social, sportive, religious or political. I am just a neutral independent observer who is free to oppose even the preprogrammed instructions (chemicals) embedded in his own body. So, I guess, 'being not of the world' applies on my case

[KerimF]

Hi,

My first point from this question is that if an atheist believes in the possible existence of friendship between two humans, how does he define the best friendship? (Please be aware, it is a tricky question )

Thank you.
Kerim

Yes.  Just because we don't believe in gods it doesn't follow that we stop being human.

And objectively speaking, there is no such thing as a best friendship, as that is a subjective idea whose answer is unique to every person.

I am afraid that if two persons cannot trust really each other, they can call their relationship anything they like but being real friends.
In other words, we like it or not, the real 'mutual Trust' is a perquisite and the base in any real friendship.

[The Grand Nudger]

I trust them to bring the bag of lime.

[Angrboda]

Trust is a sliding scale and very context dependent, so it is difficult to attach any meaning to your absolutism on the subject. I may trust, to an extent, on one thing, and to a different extent on another. What are you suggesting we make of such things?

[KerimF]

Sorry, but it is your fault
You know in advance that friendship has nothing to do in your life.
And you have no time to read my posts seriously. 
But you insisted to waste your time and jumped onto this thread once a while to finally discover it is all about nonsense,


At school, some of my classmates saw Math study as being nonsense while I had to waste my time in studying History and Literature.
Humans are different by design; we like it or not.

So you claim to have gone to school?

Of course, I did. And my high studies gave me enough knowledge, as a start, to run a private business, since about 4 decades ago, in designing/producing various electronic products that the local consumers have needed in every period of time.

[Angrboda]

So you claim to have gone to school?

Of course, I did. And my high studies gave me enough knowledge, as a start, to run a private business, since about 4 decades ago, in designing/producing various electronic products that the local consumers have needed in every period of time.

Including those periods of time before men had ready sources of electricity?

[KerimF]

Trust is a sliding scale and very context dependent, so it is difficult to attach any meaning to your absolutism on the subject.  I may trust, to an extent, on one thing, and to a different extent on another.  What are you suggesting we make of such things?

Sorry for not being clearer. I am talking about trusting another person as you trust yourself.
Obviously, if someone cannot trust himself, 'trusting another person' should have no meaning at all to him.

[Angrboda]

Trust is a sliding scale and very context dependent, so it is difficult to attach any meaning to your absolutism on the subject.  I may trust, to an extent, on one thing, and to a different extent on another.  What are you suggesting we make of such things?

Sorry for not being clearer. I am talking about trusting another person as you trust yourself.
Obviously, if someone cannot trust himself, 'trusting another person' should have no meaning at all to him.

I don't trust myself in all things, either. But it becomes a bit of an incoherent standard as I cannot decide to exclude myself from some things as I would a friend, so it's not clear how a friendship could ever meet such a bar if for no other reason than that trust in myself is categorically different from trust in another.