Can atheists prove that atheism is based on facts and not fantasy?

[JimJimmers]

I appreciate the help. Is there any way I can return the favor?

 

[kenisyes]

1: [insert personal experience] -> a)Supernatural and spiritual claims, fail or avoid skeptical inquiry or testing. (Premises)
-> This reduces my options to non-theistic positions 'atheism (gnostic / agnostic), agnosticism, deism'.
-> Many common theologies have claims I can test. Of the theologies I know of, some claims can be supported but only to the extent of needing natural explanation, other claims can be considered against scientific understanding or contradictory. [I justify disbelief in those theological Gods aka atheism... however just because something is against scientific understanding does not rule out it may be true... hence agnostic atheism]
-> addendum: The deistic aspect of God is not contradictory or against scientific understanding. However as a rule of not appealing to ignorance, agnosticism becomes default; secondly, with my understanding of quantum physics and occams razor, I consider a higher being unlikely to have created the universe in contrast to an unconscious reason for the existence of the universe.

2. A shrewd question. Evidently a presence in a Christian forum leads to more chances of responding to questions. Why? I think a human desire to be acknowledged, the opportunity to do so is convenient in lieu of my common chatroom loitering.

This is more agnosticism or agnostic atheism, right? I understand the logic of being agnostic, and that seems to be what you are saying. I think it summarizes that, you have had no experiences to convince you of God, and no one has yet shown you a satisfactory theology to believe in something outside nature. Are you atheist, that is, are you convinced God does not exist? I do not really see a reason for being convinced He does not exist in these statements, and I would like to know what convinced you. Unless of course, you consider highly unlikely to be the practical equivalent of impossible, which would make sense.

I also would not be surprised if most atheists answered they have done nothing in response to their belief, and hence many will not address question 2. Many Christians do nothing in response to their beliefs either. So that question is not aimed at everyone.

 

[Tethered]

I identify with agnostic atheism.
This is fairly accurate in summary
I am gnostic atheist towards complete literal interpretations of Christianity, as this leads to contradictory statements. Remove or resolve those in a different interpretation and I move to 'highly unlikely is the practical equivalent of impossible'. Simplify further into 'a loving God that you can ask for guidance' and i'll go into highly unlikely but conceivably testable... then lastly the deistic God which is pretty darn difficult to test at which point I use intuitions rules of thumb (which still puts my feelings at around 95% in convincement for agnostic atheism)

This is more agnosticism or agnostic atheism, right? I understand the logic of being agnostic, and that seems to be what you are saying. I think it summarizes that, you have had no experiences to convince you of God, and no one has yet shown you a satisfactory theology to believe in something outside nature. Are you atheist, that is, are you convinced God does not exist? I do not really see a reason for being convinced He does not exist in these statements, and I would like to know what convinced you. Unless of course, you consider highly unlikely to be the practical equivalent of impossible, which would make sense.

 

[danschance]

I guess the best way to sum up how I feel is that I don't have "beliefs." I try to determine
what it most likely true and go from there. A probability scale, so to speak. I don't say
"There is no God." But I do think there is no convincing evidence for God. Most people
just assume God exists but when I actually investigate the matter it makes more sense
to me that there probably is no God or at least there's no God who interferes in human
lives. That's just my own interpretation of reality. But yes, there could be a God. I will never
count that out.

Assuming you are being honest, then you are not an atheist. My two part question is very simple. I have asked Atheists to explain what they believe and why. I assumed they would love to answer this but I was wrong.

 

[danschance]

1: [insert personal experience] -> a)Supernatural and spiritual claims, fail or avoid skeptical inquiry or testing. (Premises)
-> This reduces my options to non-theistic positions 'atheism (gnostic / agnostic), agnosticism, deism'.
-> Many common theologies have claims I can test. Of the theologies I know of, some claims can be supported but only to the extent of needing natural explanation, other claims can be considered against scientific understanding or contradictory. [I justify disbelief in those theological Gods aka atheism... however just because something is against scientific understanding does not rule out it may be true... hence agnostic atheism]
-> addendum: The deistic aspect of God is not contradictory or against scientific understanding. However as a rule of not appealing to ignorance, agnosticism becomes default; secondly, with my understanding of quantum physics and occams razor, I consider a higher being unlikely to have created the universe in contrast to an unconscious reason for the existence of the universe.

2. A shrewd question. Evidently a presence in a Christian forum leads to more chances of responding to questions. Why? I think a human desire to be acknowledged, the opportunity to do so is convenient in lieu of my common chatroom loitering.

Lots of words in that post but they all seem to be dancing around my two part question. You did not state what you believe about God and you did not mention why you came to that conclusion.

Here is a case in point, you state some thing that might make one disbelieve in God and yet you do not own it.

secondly, with my understanding of quantum physics and occams razor, I consider a higher being unlikely to have created the universe in contrast to an unconscious reason for the existence of the universe.

You mention quantum theory and the Occam's razor but stop short of saying how those things have led to your decision. Quantum theory has to do with movement of tiny particles and I am unaware of how that can be extrapolated into some sort of evidence that God does not exist. Occam's razor is a philosophical principle that can help in making a decision based on what you have observed. In my life Occam's razor helped me become a christian. For me becoming a Christian was clearly the most obvious decision for me to make. So Occam's razor is not foolproof or axiomatic.

Maybe you could try again?

1) As an Atheist, what do you believe.

2) What lead you personally to this decision.

 

[Logical]

Assuming you are being honest, then you are not an atheist. My two part question is very simple. I have asked Atheists to explain what they believe and why. I assumed they would love to answer this but I was wrong.

I don't know how to better explain it to you. An atheist is someone with a lack of belief in a god. Yes, I am an atheist
in regards to lack of belief in your God. I take the stance of agnostic atheism because I don't know for sure but
highly doubt there is a god. You need to forget about the strict definition in Webster's of what atheism is and pay
attention to what I'm actually writing for a second.

If there's anything else I can clear up please let me know but I feel like I'm explaining the same thing over and
over again.

 

[Tethered]

1) As an Atheist, what do you believe.

2) What lead you personally to this decision.

? spell it out for me (or can another christian assist to explain), i'm not quite sure what my #76 post is missing.

Lots of words in that post but they all seem to be dancing around my two part question. You did not state what you believe about God and you did not mention why you came to that conclusion.

Here is a case in point, you state some thing that might make one disbelieve in God and yet you do not own it.

Conceded the potential for misleading

Spoiler

Purely a persuasive argument (from authority) that makes me consider Deism less likely in the absence of anything really testable, reconciling quantum theory with gravity *according to stephen hawking and lawrence krauss* citation 'A universive from nothing, p164' allows for virtual universes to pop into and out of existence without appearance of divine choice... purely in a mathematical construct - not evidencial.

My spin with occam's razor is that inferring a Gods hand in creation is in the direction of creating complexity for the origins of existence.

 

[danschance]

I don't know how to better explain it to you. An atheist is someone with a lack of belief in a god. Yes, I am an atheist
in regards to lack of belief in your God. I take the stance of agnostic atheism because I don't know for sure but
highly doubt there is a god. You need to forget about the strict definition in Webster's of what atheism is and pay
attention to what I'm actually writing for a second.

If there's anything else I can clear up please let me know but I feel like I'm explaining the same thing over and
over again.

OK, be honest with me, lack of belief is and of itself a belief that there is no deity. Right?

 

[danschance]

[video=youtube;FMHQSNCex2Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMHQSNCex2Q[/video]

Not sure how good this video is but I think atheism is a belief in no god.

 

[allaboutlove]

To put it simple athiest have bo kore tangiable proof that god isnt real than we have that he is... we know god is real because we've felt his presence an his love but we cant shwre that with an athiest which is why they say we hwve no acctual proof just therios an ideas but really athiestism is just theroys an ideas also there theroy is god isnt real an they have ideas like the big bang but there isnt any solid proof to back these up ether.

 

[Kefa52]

1 Corinthians 2:14

But the unbeliever does not welcome what comes from God's Spirit, because it is foolishness to him; he is not able to understand it since it is evaluated spiritually.

 

[Grey]

OK, be honest with me, lack of belief is and of itself a belief that there is no deity. Right?

No for example: an door that opens only upon my death lies in front of me, I examine it, and two other people stand behind me, one says there's a sportscar behind it the other that there's nothing behind it. Im skeptical of the sports car claim and I don't think there is one

lilikely there but in this circumstance I can't rule it out. Its unlikely enough, that I say I don't think there's a car there, but I don't know for sure and I don't know.

 

[danschance]

No for example: an door that opens only upon my death lies in front of me, I examine it, and two other people stand behind me, one says there's a sportscar behind it the other that there's nothing behind it. Im skeptical of the sports car claim and I don't think there is one

lilikely there but in this circumstance I can't rule it out. Its unlikely enough, that I say I don't think there's a car there, but I don't know for sure and I don't know.

Perhaps you missed my point or maybe I did not explain it well.

Let's say you and I stand before a closed door and I say there is a sports car behind it. You doubt my claim and say "There is no sports car behind this door".

You do not know for certain if the sports car is behind the door or not. You simply have a belief that it is not there not a lack of belief. An atheist says "There is no god" even tho' they can not prove this, they do not know this, it is something they believe.

Only the agnostic is intellectually honest by saying I don't know if the sports car is there or not. I need more information.

 

[Grey]

Perhaps you missed my point or maybe I did not explain it well.

Let's say you and I stand before a closed door and I say there is a sports car behind it. You doubt my claim and say "There is no sports car behind this door".

You do not know for certain if the sports car is behind the door or not. You simply have a belief that it is not there not a lack of belief. An atheist says "There is no god" even tho' they can not prove this, they do not know this, it is something they believe.

Only the agnostic is intellectually honest by saying I don't know if the sports car is there or not. I need more information.

Im an agnostic atheist, agnostic can also be used as an adjective. And yes its quite more complicate then that. For one thing the car manual probably wasn't translated much we'll call this car the Christller
.

 

[Logical]

OK, be honest with me, lack of belief is and of itself a belief that there is no deity. Right?

You are trying to twist words to conform to your conspiracy theory that atheism is a "belief system" or religion.
Let's put that to rest.

How is lack of belief (no belief) still a belief?
The lack of a house is not a house.
Bald is not a hair color.
I'd say my atheism is identical to your lack of belief in fairies, Scientology, Zeus, etc.

Definitions of belief:
1. The mental act, condition, or habit of placing trust or confidence in a person or thing; faith. 2. Mental acceptance or conviction in the truth or actuality of something. 3. Something believed or accepted as true; especially, a particular tenet, or a body of tenets, accepted by a group of persons. 4. The psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true.

Still waiting on an agreed definition of God.

How can one with a lack of belief still believe in something that has no definition in the first place?

So how can atheism be a religion? How is nonbelief a religion? By contrast a religion is probably best defined as the belief in one or more supernatural beings or forces. So again, how is atheism a religion?

Skeptical people expect the things that exist to be distinguishable from things that don't exist.

Atheism is a CONCLUSION, not a belief.

 

[Siberian_Khatru]

OK, be honest with me, lack of belief is and of itself a belief that there is no deity. Right?

How is lack of belief (no belief) still a belief?

What does it FLIPPING MATTER? At the end of the day, the worldview is the same; a dime is not a coin on one side and a cavefish on the other.

If an eye doctor probes you during an eye exam:

"Which is better? 1... or 2? 1... or 2?" to which you objectively reply, "2", but they label 2 as 1, it does not make things more coherent or sensible.

 

[basebool]

Ok im gonna make this simple and hope this can clear things up before i lose hope in humanity.

Atheist - doesn't believe in a god
Agnostic - doesn't know if there's a god
Anti-theist - believes there's no god

So having NO BELIEF does not mean a belief in that non-belief. And even if it was, it's a lot more justified then the mainstream religious beliefs. The absense of belief is just that: no belief, nada, nothing. My disbelief in fairies are not a belief that they don't exist

Atheists are not convinced of a god because there's no good evidence to justify so. That's it. We don't assert no god because then we would have a belief and some burden of proof. But i can just not believe and the ball is in your court.

And a better wuestion: do all you christians believe in undisprovable things?

 

[basebool]

He states: "i look at evidence the same way any other rational person does." And yet he insinuates the other men here aren't look at the evidence rationally.

Fine im gonna flat out say it.

Yes

 

[Grey]

Basebool is spot on its not correct to say you believe in nonbelief.

 

[danschance]

Im an agnostic atheist, agnostic can also be used as an adjective. And yes its quite more complicate then that. For one thing the car manual probably wasn't translated much we'll call this car the Christller
.

Agnostic-atheist is a new concept for me and a confusing one at that. An Atheist says their is no god while the agnostic shrugs and says, "I don't know if there is a god". I don't see how they can be blended into a third category and still claim to be logical. Maybe some day I will read up on it.

Now you mention you have a lack of belief and by that I assume you also claim a lack of belief is completely devoid of belief but is that logical? If I believe the Green Bay Packers will win super bowl next year, no one would argue that it is my belief. One the other hand if I say the Green Bay Packers will not win super bowl next year, that is still a belief. A lack of belief would be I don't know if the Packers will win superbowl next year.

Would you agree with that?