Atheist bored at work. Feel free to ask questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Russell_SA
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Russell_SA

Guest
Let me clarify some terminology so that everyone can understand the what I mean by the labels I use

Knowledge is a subset of Belief
I see knowledge is something that you have more evidence of than just argumentation through hearsay. Knowledge of something you experience first hand.
Belief is something you have been convinced of to be the case regardless if you have directly experienced it or not.

Gnosticism / Theism
Gnosticism / Agnosticism is what you claim to know.
Theism and Atheism is what you claim to believe or to be convinced of.
Gnostic Theist: Someone who knows that a deity exists (positive claim about reality that is challengable), and is convinced that their deity exists (positive claim about reality that is challengable).
Agnostic Theist: Someone who does not claim to know that a deity exists (Not a positive claim about reality that is challengable), and and is convinced (believes) that their deity exists (positive claim about reality that is challengable).
Gnostic Atheist: Someone who knows that a deity does not exists (positive claim about reality that is challengable), and is not convinced (does not believe) that deity(s) exists (Not a positive claim about reality that is challengable).
Agnostic Atheist - Someone who does not know a deity exists (Not a positive claim about reality that is challengable), and is not convinced (does not believe) that deity(s) exists (Not a positive claim about reality that is challengable). Basic default position everyone is born to.

Anti-theist - someone who actively works towards removing religious special privileged in their society to the point of it being a benign irrelevancy as much as any other harmless hobby someone takes up.

Morality is subjective until you have a reference point to ground it in for “absolutism”. There is not one right/absolute correct answer to moral questions though. Much like eating apples or pears for nutrition. Either are fine to promote health and nutrition, but drinking battery acid is absolutely bad in reference to nutrition. Same with morality.

Atheism is a single response to a single question. “Do you believe that the supernatural exists?” No. That is it. You can not get to any moral questions, governing rules, or anything else by only using the single descriptor of “Atheist”.
Example: Jar of marbles. There is either even or odd number of marbles in the jar. No one can investigate the jar in anyway. The theist is claiming there is an even number of marbles in the jar. The atheist is someone that is unconvinced that the conclusion of even is valid at this point. So that means the atheist thinks there is an odd number of marbles in the jar? No, No it does not. The atheist also is unconvinced that the conclusion of odd is valid at this point as well. The atheist is not making a claim about reality on that topic of even or odd number of marbles. They are only responding to someone else’s claim about their belief in the conclusion of even or odd number of marbles. The atheist is claiming they are unconvinced either way in the positive claim of even or odd number of marbles.
 
Last edited:
did you ever believe?
which faith?
what happened that changed your mind?
how long have you been an atheist?
is there right and wrong? justify the answer
 
Athiest, what is a soul? Do you have a soul? Do you have an immortal soul? What makes a soul immortal?

You can answer all of these questions without any theology, no mention of god, no world religious views, just use your intellect and reason. Use philosophy and meta-physics, both non-religious in any way and I suspect that would be your first step in seeking the Truth. (Hint: think ancient Greek philosophers, Socrates, Aristotle, and Plato)

And, as analogies go, no analogy can ever be comprehensive as they only connect on very small aspects of detail. Without having to get to my 3,200 word limit per post … the marble thing didn’t make sense to me as the points of contact between the existence of god and the differentiation between the determination of an even or odd number of physical and contained objects just didn’t make sense to me.

Then, there is always the concept of non-contradiction. Put your cell phone in your hand, does it exist? It either has to exist or does not exist, there is no “well, I’m not sure, it might be in existence or it might not”. Thus, in the exact same concept, God either exists or does not exist, there can be no other state. Thus, if an atheist position is that “God does not exist” … then as the atheist pushes the burden of proof on the theist, “prove to me God exists” … by the very same measure, I would ask the atheist, “prove to me that God does not exist.” and the we’re off to the races! 😀
 
did you ever believe?
No I never believed. I went to the religious events with my family but I never felt it was anything more than just a family event of cultural identity and traditions.
which faith?
christian
what happened that changed your mind?
Nothing happened, I just never believed the supernatural part of the conversation.
how long have you been an atheist?
All my life
is there right and wrong? justify the answer
Yes, in reference to your zero point of right and wrong. I look for the most common overlapping zero reference point that everyone has access to. So that, by default removes the reference of supernatural since that is not available to everyone universally. So that seems to be the universal human condition that we all experience. Then you have to have a conversation with that person to see what version of right and wrong they prefer, much like my apple or pear example. The universal “wrong” would be something like throwing battery acid in someone’s face or disowning children over sexual identity for example. Those are universally bad regardless of culture, in reference to the human condition. It is subjective to use the human condition as your reference point for “right or wrong”, but once you do, then you can have a zero reference point. But at least the reference point of the human condition is universal to everyone instead of the supernatural.
 
I don’t see how the supernatural is distinguishable from the unknown, so by default, anything attributing to the supernatural is not something that I believe is justified to conclude is there. Souls, deities, angles, demons, etc. all fall in that category.

The way I see the religious splitting the idea of Natural and Supernatural is the same as someone like me saying Reality and the Unknown. Supernatural, as I see it being used, is an attempt to smuggle in the idea that there is something supernatural at all. Nope, you have to show me how it’s distinguishable between the unknown of reality. Currently, the track record of every unknown event that was attributed to the supernatural and then it becomes known to how that event works, it was never the supernatural. Zero is a pretty interesting value to have as a track record.

Take you time to write what you need to write. If you need more than 3200, then take a couple of posts to write.

What don’t you like about the marble analogy? It’s just to show how someone making a claim about reality to someone else may not be actually justified to that audience. It may be for you but not for them. Not every conclusion people make is justified to everyone else. That’s really all that analogy attempts to show. The basic difference between atheism and theism is justification for their conclusions. One is making a positive conclusion about reality, the other is not.

The cell phone example does not meet the same level of evidence for the deity claim. How about this for an example: one hand appears to have an empty jar while the other hand is holding a jar of supernatural transcendent dice that no one can detect in any known way. Now place the jars behind your back, swap them around, then ask someone to determine the difference. The religious are claiming they can, but to everyone else, the jars look exactly the same. Both look empty.
 
Last edited:
I remember this I think from before the ‘switch’. Shouldn’t it be ‘bored’ at work? Or, to be nitpicky, ‘atheist who is bored at the workplace’ or “atheist, bored with work”. . .etc. Or do you have a whiteboard or dry erase board at your office that all the atheists use?

(Dang Spellchecker).
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I saw that spelling error too late. Ah well. 😛
Hey found out how to fix it.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for your reply. As a catholic evangelist, I’ve made a personal categorization of the area of effect … meaning that we all come from different places and different times and different perspectives, though they are a bit consistent. My groups are:

Atheists and Agnostics
Religious Non-Christians
Protestants (Baptists are my favorite)
Catholics

Before we go further, or I engage much more, I will try not to respond until the 4 questions have been answered, or at least attempted to be answered with some degree of authenticity.

Hint: I will not accept an unfounded personal opinion for the 4 questions as I have found that 99/100 people I ask can’t even answer the first question. It’s not as easy as it looks. Dig Deep!
 
Last edited:
Clarification request to your four points: Since I don’t claim that souls exists, it’s not on me to define it and justify that it is actually part of reality, correct? I’m not the one making that claim about reality. It’s on the person that claims that is part of reality to explain what it is and why they believe it. Otherwise anyone could do that about any imagined idea. For example: Theist, what is a blabla? Do you have a blabla? Do you have an {insert descriptor that has not been justified to be attributed to a blabla other than an assertion} blabla? What makes a blabla have {insert descriptor that has not been justified to be attributed to a blabla other than an assertion}. You skipped the part of assuming that the blabla is agreed upon by everyone that it is actually part of reality instead of being indistinguishable from an idea of a cultural identity. Just asserting and assuming that your version of a blabla is there is not something I accept since I don’t play with your cultural identity. To me its indistinguishable from someone claiming that happy thoughts make you fly with fairy dust. Asserting that to be the case without actually demonstrating that to be the case is indistinguishable from it not actually being part of reality. So, again, one hand has a jar with nothing in it and the other hand has a jar with supernatural transcendent dice that no one can detect except the religious. But to me, both jars still look empty.
 
Last edited:
What do you think of the Blessed Virgin Mary and how Catholic devotion to her? How much do you know about them? Was there ever a time where you didn’t know about them, and if so, what was your reaction when you first heard about them? Do you think these devotions have a positive or negative effect on society and culture?
 
Excuse me if this already has been answered…

1.Are you an anti-religion atheist? If not what do you think about those that are?
  1. What do you think of the behavior you might see on YouTube comments for example if someone says something religious like for example God bless this person and then an atheist comments there is no God/ Magic guy in the Sky.
 
Nothing really, I don’t really read their books or follow them. I like Matt Dillahunty from the Atheist Experience call in show. He’s pretty easy to follow on his approach to religious claims. It seems its about what we can agree upon for justified belief about reality and “I don’t know” and “no one knows” are actually correct and honest responses to questions it seems.
 
I’ll have to check him out.

You know the old saying “scratch an atheist, find a skeptic”.
 
1: Anti-religious: I am for specific parts of religious practice on a case by case basis.

2: I think the atheist there is rude. But it does need to be pointed out to the politicians that are using religion as a political tool for their constituents. If you need your politicians to wear their religion on their sleeve, then you are just asking to be lied to. Also, “thoughts and prayers” during terrible events is just them saying, “Hey, during this terrible event, don’t forget about me as well.” Well that terrible event is not about that politician at this point and time. If they would get together and actually try to find out what they can do about stopping those terrible events, then that’s something I could feel fine with reminding people that our politicians are helping to solve this problem.
 
What do you think of the image of Our Lady of Guadeloupe? Or the tested and confirmed as real blood, Eucharistic Miracles? Do you believe stigmatas such as St. Padre Pio’s to be of natural origin, then? These sort of miracles I would say are what make me believe. I’m curious as to what an atheist would think of them.
 
“Scratch an X and you’ll find a skeptic.” is true about everyone that doesn’t agree with the presenter’s conclusion to their presentation. “Scratch a christian and you’ll find a skeptic” says the muslim.
 
Though I am not Catholic - if Christ - the Catholic Christ appeared to you in a what if scenario leaving you with little doubt at all of his existence and Deity how would you respond to that experience if you would like to answer?
 
Last edited:
No thoughts on Mary. What catholics do for devotion to her is fine for them. Don’t really know much about the catholic tradition. First went to catholic mass in the military just to get out of the barracks. Pretty much the same experience as any other religious ceremony I’ve attended. I do actually attend sunday church on a regular basis, but just to sing in the choir. I like to have a place I can practice and being around people that enjoy practicing music. They don’t know I’m not religious since they can’t tell a difference between me and anyone else there.
Benign cultural devotions are fine by me, but once they start having a negative affect on society, then I have a problem. Don’t want to eat beef, fish, pork, etc., I don’t care. Want to shame your daughter for having a say over her own discussions about her body, I’ll have a problem with that. Want to disown your child for their sexual identity, I’ll have a problem with that. etc. But it’s a case by case basis.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top