Science of Atheism

[brewer]

JFC, I'm not out to destroy religion or god(s), I don't persecute the religious or believers. I simply don't believe, theists have not provided anything to change my mind. Data, you're more than welcome to believe what you choose, it's no skin off my teeth. Just don't expect me to validate that god(s) exist as anything more that a product of human minds.

Data, do you even understand how much you benefit from science and technology?

[Silver]

Science isn't atheism and atheism isn't science. Those who prefer to wear their worldviews on their sleeves in the scientific setting are just being absurd.

[zebo-the-fat]

He doesn't like science, but I think there is a good chance that his house has electricity and that he has a phone!

[Silver]

Well, that's more industrial technology than science.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Well, that's more industrial technology than science.

Industrial technology is the practical application of scientific principles.

I’m always amused when people use ELECTRONICS in the form of COMPUTERS equipped with a MODEM to access the INTERNET just to tell us how awful science is.

Boru

[Belacqua]

The unnecessary struggle between theism and atheism is a social and political struggle that has very little to do with God or the Bible or any other religion.

Good journal article here on cognitive biases.

The commitment "my group good their group bad" is a consistent block to clear thinking.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177...6221148147

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Science can ignore religion. Religion is afraid of science.

[Data]

@Data

Thanks for doing that, it made it much easier for me.

"The unnecessary struggle between theism and atheism is a social and political struggle that has very little to do with God or the Bible or any other religion."

Disagree.  Whilst it is a social and political struggle, it also has a lot to do with arguments for/against God, and the teachings/actions of specific religions.

Not really. Think of a Gay Pride parade in a city where a homosexual lifestyle isn't typically accepted my a sizable portion of the citizens. Do objectors invite the parade participants to a civil debate or do they come to the parade itself and shout insults and try to intimidate? So, likewise what you have here on this forum is the majority of atheists "shouting" insults. They aren't up for debate.

On the other hand you do have civil debates between atheist and theists, and you can see a little bit of that here with @Bucky Ball and myself, though I don't really care for those types of debate, they bore the left tit right off me. He has a lot of that aggression I referred to in the Gay Pride example. Unironically. But he also has the tradition which is always prevalent in the atheist vs theist or even the theist vs theist debate. By tradition and interpretation I mean he and I will (apparently unknown to him) use the same theological sources of the same text but interpret them differently. Thus the debate. With the ideological world view debate (Gay Pride example) that isn't really relevant at all.

The down side of all of this is that the average theist and atheist, in their ideological struggle are really doing theology and science a tremendous disservice. And really, they don't care. They gladly sacrifice those things for their ideology. That comes from xenophobic ignorance as those sorts of conflicts always do. Whether they be political, religious, race, sexual orientation, or anything else. One of the resident idiots here has a "Black lives Matter" icon in their sig. BLM is an excellent example of a parallel struggle where the leaders are not what they seem and the adherents are emotionally motivated through ignorance and xenophobia. Race relations pays the price just as science and religion does in the war between atheist vs theist. The militant atheist isn't interested in debate. Neither am I, I just enjoy it the same way they do even though my motivation isn't social or political, it's entertaining myself and exploring how fucking stupid they can be.

"That's why I use the term militant. It's a world view war."
OK.  Up to you.

Thanks, but I should clarify due to some apparent confusion earlier by other members of the forum, that posting on an atheist forum isn't what constitutes militant atheism but rather is a small portion of the result of militant atheism.

"What happens when a revolution replaces one power with another of equal or worse destructive behavior?"
Bad things, I guess. 

The same things only with more destruction.

"The result of all of this is that atheists, who have been taught not to believe or think for themselves"
Which atheists are these?  I don't include myself in that group.

It's a product of our educational system, with atheist, theist, whatever. From what I understand the public education isn't as bad in the UK as it is in the USA. Probably very few places are as bad as the USA, but I digress. Since Rockefeller at the turn of the century it has successfully spread throughout occidental cultures and China.

"but to appeal to another "god" fail to see they not only have become their enemy and are repeating the history of their enemy, but they do so with far more potential for that destructive behavior."
I assume you mean atheists who are scientistic and/or Marxist?  Hard to tell exactly what you mean here.  But ok, authoritarians of various stripes aren't great.  I agree.  Not a big fan of illiberal societies whether communist or theocratic.

I wouldn't limit my application by scientism or any political markers even though those sorts of ideologies may be closely associated with militant atheism. Science isn't really important to them as my Holocaust example demonstrates - or I could have used 9/11 (USA) 7/7 (UK) examples.

"The crusades and inquisition got nothing on chemical, biological, and technological warfare and the people are too indoctrinated with materialism and separate from nature, the world and themselves to see it happening. In fact, just like the ignorant peasants of the past they support it."
Who supports biological warfare?  I don't see a divide between war mongering theists and war mongeringt athiests.  I'm more scared of Russian Orthodox Christians or Iranian Muslims having WMD than Danish atheist secularists.

Science creates those types of weaponry for political and primarily financial reasons. Like the atheist vs theist debate it actually has little to do with politics. Politics is only a vehicle to achieve the financial goal. And power, too. People with such vast amounts of wealth don't care as much about money as they do power, although, ultimately the power is used to increase wealth. Adherents are whipped into a fearful frenzy in order to support those efforts.

So, in short, I still don't really get what you're on about.

Specifically I'm talking about ideological fixation as a vehicle for blind adherents and the people who take advantage of the blind ignorance it must perpetuate. Divide and conquer and the atheist vs theist conflict being more a product of that than anything else.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

@Data

Thanks for doing that, it made it much easier for me.

"The unnecessary struggle between theism and atheism is a social and political struggle that has very little to do with God or the Bible or any other religion."

Disagree.  Whilst it is a social and political struggle, it also has a lot to do with arguments for/against God, and the teachings/actions of specific religions.

Not really. Think of a Gay Pride parade in a city where a homosexual lifestyle isn't typically accepted my a sizable portion of the citizens. Do objectors invite the parade participants to a civil debate or do they come to the parade itself and shout insults and try to intimidate? So, likewise what you have here on this forum is the majority of atheists "shouting" insults. They aren't up for debate.

On the other hand you do have civil debates between atheist and theists, and you can see a little bit of that here with @Bucky Ball and myself. In that particular case I don't really care for theological debates, the bore the left tit right off me and he has a lot of that aggression I referred to in the Gay Pride example. Unironically. He also has the tradition which is always prevalent in the atheist vs theist or even the theist vs theist debate. By tradition I mean he and I will (apparently unknown to him) use the same theological sources of the same text but interpret them differently. Thus the debate. With the ideological world view debate (Gay Pride example) that isn't really relevant at all.  

The down side of all of this is that the average theist and atheist, in their ideological struggle are really doing theology and science a tremendous disservice. And really, they don't care. They gladly sacrifice those things for their ideology. That comes from xenophobic ignorance as those sorts of conflicts always do. Whether they be political, religious, race, sexual orientation, or anything else. One of the resident idiots here has a "Black lives Matter" icon in their sig. BLM is an excellent example of a parallels struggle where the leaders are not what they seem and the adherents are emotionally motivated through ignorance and xenophobia. Race relations pays the price just as science and religion does in the war between atheist vs theist. The militant atheist isn't interested in debate. Neither am I, I just enjoy it the same way they do even though my motivation isn't social or political, it's entertaining and exploring how fucking stupid they can be.

"That's why I use the term militant. It's a world view war."
OK.  Up to you.

Thanks, but I should clarify due to some apparent confusion earlier by other members of the forum, that posting on an atheist form isn't what constitutes militant atheism but rather is a small portion of the result of militant atheism.

"What happens when a revolution replaces one power with another of equal or worse destructive behavior?"
Bad things, I guess. 

The same things only with more destruction.

"The result of all of this is that atheists, who have been taught not to believe or think for themselves"
Which atheists are these?  I don't include myself in that group.

It's a product of our educational system, with atheist, theist, whatever. From what I understand the public education isn't as bad in the UK as it is in the USA. Probably very few places are as bad as the USA, but I digress.

"but to appeal to another "god" fail to see they not only have become their enemy and are repeating the history of their enemy, but they do so with far more potential for that destructive behavior."
I assume you mean atheists who are scientistic and/or Marxist?  Hard to tell exactly what you mean here.  But ok, authoritarians of various stripes aren't great.  I agree.  Not a big fan of illiberal societies whether communist or theocratic.

I wouldn't limit my application by scientism or any political markers even though those sorts of ideologies may be closely associated with militant atheism. Science isn't really important to them as my Holocaust or I could have used 9/11 (USA) 7/7 (UK) examples.  

"The crusades and inquisition got nothing on chemical, biological, and technological warfare and the people are too indoctrinated with materialism and separate from nature, the world and themselves to see it happening. In fact, just like the ignorant peasants of the past they support it."
Who supports biological warfare?  I don't see a divide between war mongering theists and war mongeringt athiests.  I'm more scared of Russian Orthodox Christians or Iranian Muslims having WMD than Danish atheist secularists.

Science creates those types of weaponry for political and primarily financial reasons. Like the atheist vs theist debate it actually has little to do with politics. Politics is only a vehicle to achieve the financial goal. And power, too. People with such vast amounts of wealth don't care as much about money as they do power, although, ultimately the power is used to increase wealth. Adherents are whipped into a fearful frenzy in order to support those efforts.  

So, in short, I still don't really get what you're on about.

Specifically I'm talking about ideological fixation as a vehicle for blind adherents and the people who take advantage of the blind ignorance it must perpetuate. Divide and conquer and the atheist vs theist conflict being more a product of that than anything else.

The scientists would be glad to leave the theists alone, but the theists can't stand the thought of someone not believing in their hokum.

[Data]

Science can ignore religion. Religion is afraid of science.

Science should ignore religion. I ignore science and religion.