Does atheism lead to anything positive?

[HabemusFrancis]

Apart from perhaps having a more open mind and considering new points of view, I do not think atheism leads to much positive. I am no expert, but if one purposely cuts oneself off from the divine, one loses out on much good (apart from God’s grace.)

More to the point, does a positive good come from atheism? Can one be an atheist and not eventually turn to nihilism and hedonism as philosophies?

 

[BobCatholic]

Apart from perhaps having a more open mind and considering new points of view,

I have yet to see an atheist be open to the idea that God exists. So this “open mind” part usually doesn’t apply to all points of view.

 

[minkymurph]

Apart from perhaps having a more open mind and considering new points of view, I do not think atheism leads to much positive. I am no expert, but if one purposely cuts oneself off from the divine, one loses out on much good (apart from God’s grace.)

More to the point, does a positive good come from atheism? Can one be an atheist and not eventually turn to nihilism and hedonism as philosophies?

Atheism by it’s nature is negative and thus had not the capacity to produce anything positive, and it is vulnerable to nihilism and hedonism.

That is not to say atheists themselves cannot do anything positive, but the atheist who does something positive is usually into something other than atheism.

 

[drac16]

No, I don’t think so. All it does is it wraps you up in your ego and temporary pleasures. Atheism doesn’t have a consistent moral code, so to some extent, it is up to the atheist to decide what is in his/her best interest. Atheism is basically self worship.

 

[Bradski]

I have yet to see an atheist be open to the idea that God exists. So this “open mind” part usually doesn’t apply to all points of view.

Here’s one, Bob. And I’d suggest all the other atheists who post here wouod include themselves as well.

I’m also open to the idea that other gods exist as well. But to put the shoe on the other foot, I don’t see many Catholics who are.

 

[HabemusFrancis]

Here’s one, Bob. And I’d suggest all the other atheists who post here wouod include themselves as well.

I’m also open to the idea that other gods exist as well. But to put the shoe on the other foot, I don’t see many Catholics who are.

Do you see anything distinct about Jesus as opposed to Ganesh, Zeus, Buddha, etc?

 

[Bradski]

Do you see anything distinct about Jesus as opposed to Ganesh, Zeus, Buddha, etc?

Jesus and Buddha, yes. A couple of guys who had some things to say that are worth listening to. As opposed to Zeus and Ganesh who are the products of fertile imagination and an all too understandable human need for something other than this nasty, brutish and short life.

 

[Arizona_Fat_Gir]

Sometimes an individual is not intentionally cutting themselves off from God. It is just that they may not been taught anything. An atheist can change. It is never too late.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Here’s one, Bob. And I’d suggest all the other atheists who post here wouod include themselves as well.

I’m also open to the idea that other gods exist as well. But to put the shoe on the other foot, I don’t see many Catholics who are.

I’ll second both statements.

Sometimes an individual is not intentionally cutting themselves off from God. It is just that they may not been taught anything. An atheist can change. It is never too late.

I would agree. By the same token I would say that there are some believers out there (of all stripes) that no little about their faiths. They too can change.

 

[MtnDwellar]

Here’s one, Bob. And I’d suggest all the other atheists who post here wouod include themselves as well.

I’m also open to the idea that other gods exist as well. But to put the shoe on the other foot, I don’t see many Catholics who are.

I’m a Catholic with a very open mind.

It may not seem as though my mind is open because I’m extremely efficient at rejecting wrong ideas.

 

[Bradski]

I’m a Catholic with a very open mind.

It may not seem as though my mind is open because I’m extremely efficient at rejecting wrong ideas.

I can’t really argue with that. It’s how I became an atheist.

 

[MtnDwellar]

I can’t really argue with that. It’s how I became an atheist.

Well played.

 

[Lion_IRC]

I can’t really argue with that. It’s how I became an atheist.

(A) If rejecting wrong ideas lead you to atheism then the idea that God(s) exist
must be a wrong idea.

(B) But you said you are open-minded that God(s) might exist.

So how come (B) if (A)

 

[Lion_IRC]

Maybe I don’t get it because I’m not a “Member of the Rational Rat Pack”

 

[Bradski]

Maybe I don’t get it because I’m not a “Member of the Rational Rat Pack”

I’m sorry, but the first rule of the Rat Pack is…never talk about the Rat Pack.

 

[Lea101]

Usually the atheists I know are so curious about the universe. They don’t believe God did it, so they tend to be interested in stuff that might help explain it to them. Because of that, they are more willing to delve into matters most religious people will shrug and use a religious explanation for it

 

[Lion_IRC]

I’m sorry, but the first rule of the Rat Pack is…never talk about the Rat Pack.

Ummm…you just told me something about the Rat Pack.

 

[Origen52]

One positive thing…the Pope won’t call you a Pharisee.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Apart from perhaps having a more open mind and considering new points of view, I do not think atheism leads to much positive. I am no expert, but if one purposely cuts oneself off from the divine, one loses out on much good (apart from God’s grace.)

More to the point, does a positive good come from atheism? Can one be an atheist and not eventually turn to nihilism and hedonism as philosophies?

Atheism leaves the door open to a lot of things and with that comes some good and bad, like some of the things you mentioned - nihilism, open-mindedness, etc. However, the people that tend to have the most influence on atheism are those that accept metaphysical naturalism and skepticism, and therefore atheism has largely been based on those two positions. It becomes dogma when they take these positions to an extreme, (although metaphysical naturalism is already on the extreme end of the metaphysical spectrum). Take for instance the field of history. …

The standards that some atheists have applied to biblical studies are highly skeptical and some have argued that such skepticism is unwarranted. If such standards were applied to other histories, like Greek histories and other ancient cultures, we’d barely be able to squeeze a drop of historical fact out of these histories. We’d be left with accepting little to nothing about Alexander the Great, Plato, etc. Recent practice in biblical scholarship has made attempts to loosen up this rigid skepticism so that way historical inquiry on the Bible is scaled to standards that are representative of the inquiry for other ancient civilizations. Since then we have had a significant increase of historical facts, esp. on the life of Jesus. Compare the study of the historical Jesus during the 18th century to mid 20th century (the First Quest) to scholarship of recent times (the Third Quest). The majority of modern scholars now accept that the Jesus of the New Testament was a real historical figure.

 

[Russell_SA]

Apart from perhaps having a more open mind and considering new points of view, I do not think atheism leads to much positive. I am no expert, but if one purposely cuts oneself off from the divine, one loses out on much good (apart from God’s grace.)

More to the point, does a positive good come from atheism? Can one be an atheist and not eventually turn to nihilism and hedonism as philosophies?

Atheism is not a world view, philosophy, contain tenants, leaders, books, creeds, etc. It is a conclusion on a single issue about a single question.
Are you convinced that the supernatural exists? No, nope, nada. Same as a jury that finds, unanimously that the defendant is not guilty. Can you now conclude anything universal about those 12 people other than they were not convinced based on the evidence and arguments put forth? No, No you can not. You can not know their politics, world views, philosophies, etc.
You don’t need a world view to believe that someone presented A + B = Apple as a bad presentation and argument.

Your words here, “…if one purposely cuts oneself off from the divine, …”

Based on that statement, you do not know what an atheist is. Atheists are not making claims about the supernatural at all, only responding to the bad reasons why theists believe in the supernatural. For example: I tell you that I believe that C exists because of the conclusion A + B = C. You don’t believe me. Does that mean that C does not exist or does exist in reality? No, it means that you don’t see that it follows that A + B = C. C could still actually exist or not exist, just that you don’t agree with the argument presented. Did you make a claim about reality because you don’t believe my argument works for concluding that C exists? No, you just find flaws in the argument for justification of that conclusion. That’s all atheists are doing. They are not presenting C as an option because they believe that there is no reason to suggest that C is an option at all at this point. They are not making a claim about C, only about the flaws in the argument leading to justified conclusions about C’s existence. Your belief for the supernatural is an atheist’s response of “We don’t know yet.”.

Your question would be better to discuss philosophies of logical reasoning that people apply that tend to result in people not concluding that the supernatural exists. People use all kinds of reasoning, that works for them, that takes them to the conclusion that the supernatural does not exist.

Next you’d want to discuss why the arbitrary choice of picking a deity for a reference point in morality is any better than someone else’s arbitrary choice for picking their reference point for morality.