Big "A" Atheism versus little "a" atheism

Logicman said:

Calling one's self an atheist is disingenuous. An atheist cannot possibly know for certain there is no god.

Let's be extremely generous and assume an atheist knows 1/2 of everything there is to know in the universe. Then, what if the knowledge of god is in the half that he doesn't know about?

So at best, these so-called atheists should be more realistic and call themselves agnostics.

Click to expand...

You can't ever know anything for certain. All you can ever do is create a theory using whatever observations you can make. If a god performs some verifiable miracles, they they will be considered to exist. Until such a time, they don't.

People believe in religion not because its explains a single thing about the natural world around us, but because they were told to by other humans. There has never been a single instance in our entire existence in which two people ever managed to discover the same god independently. Despite having allegedly created the cosmos, every deity has never done anything but show in a single tiny geographic region for a very specific time period. When the wisdom of the gods is written down, it always matches the moral and scientific knowledge of contemporary society. All the evidence can be explained by positing that humans invented god and there is nothing can only be explained the other way around.

All things considered, gods who have no evidence of their existing in reality and lots of evidence of existing as stories probably aren't real. You can never prove anything as absolute truth, but you can be confident enough to live your entire life under the premise that gods don't exist.

EdwinWillers said:

our very Constitutional freedoms are being threatened because of a few radical haters whose intolerance has gone amuck.

Click to expand...

Are you trying to suggest that no BELIEVERS have ever done, and/or don't try to do the same kind of thing?

Are you suggesting some RELIGIOUS people are not "radical haters" who's intolerance threatens others Constitutional freedoms?

Are you suggesting some RELIGIOUS people are never too "in your face" about certain issues and beliefs?

Logicman said:

Hey, a lot of you 'moderates' worship at the trough of Barack Obama.

Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with the topic whatsoever, your obsessive derangement makes you put in a slur like that when you have no other thing to argue? Really?

Keep praying to the invisible man, evidently you need him.

Dragonfly said:

Are you trying to suggest that no BELIEVERS have ever done, and/or don't try to do the same kind of thing?

Are you suggesting some RELIGIOUS people are not "radical haters" who's intolerance threatens others Constitutional freedoms?

Click to expand...

No, not at all.

In fact I acknowledge that some believers most definitely HAVE done this same kind of thing, yes. And some out of their own intolerance and "radical hate" - yes. The group of Westbury kooks with their radical hatred and intolerance for anything remotely homosexual come immediately to mind. And there have certainly been others throughout history that have taken their belief to unfathomable depths, Christian or otherwise.

Dragonfly said:

Are you suggesting some RELIGIOUS people are never too "in your face" about certain issues and beliefs?

Click to expand...

Again, not at all. That would be rather silly too inasmuch as we both know that's not true.

I can handle people getting in my face about something; but that wasn't the issue with that group of humanists that warned several schools to suspend their charitable activities... or face legal action.

It's much more than "getting in your face" to threaten someone with legal action - especially when they're doing nothing wrong. That's what this humanist group did to at least two schools, one of which so far has dropped their support of the charity out of genuine fear, or in their words, out of "an abundance of caution because we do not want to expend school financial resources defending a lawsuit."

And again, those schools were doing nothing wrong, let alone anything that might warrant legal action. The humanist group was using the legal system as a threat to get them to stop their charitable work - ostensibly because the work was associated with a Christian organization.

Were it merely an "in your face" issue, I don't think that story would warrant much attention; but that particular humanist group has imho taken their hatred and intolerance for anything remotely Christian and made themselves so much the worse than say, the likes of the Westbury group, by their threats of legal action.

Frankly, I don't believe their actions have anything to do with their being non-believers. I think it has everything to do with their hatred for Christianity. There's a big difference - hence the distinctions "little a" and "big A."

Proselytizing atheists are as annoying as proselytizing Christians or Muslims, and the arrogance inherent in claims to absolute truth when accompanied by condescension is the same either way.

As to the separation of church and state is concerned, I do believe some people go too far at times, but it's a pretty fine line. So many aggressive Christians trot out the word "intolerance" in an entirely Orwellian fashion every time they are not allowed to hurt others through misuse of their religion that the discussion becomes clouded.

Heck, since Jesus, Himself, indicated that whenever two or three gathered together, that was just fine and dandy with Him and was very specific about how prayer was a private matter instead of a big spectacle to be heard by others, perhaps if more Christians were to just follow His instructions, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Same goes for all the aggressive, mocking atheists, who need to belittle in order to feel good about themselves. One thing plays off the other and the other thing plays off it in return.

spud_meister said:

Capital letters denote proper nouns, atheist isn't a proper noun. Furthermore it causes confusion by being nonspecific. Anti-religious is a better term for asshole atheists.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. Big A, little a... meh, isn't that big a deal in my mind.

For what it's worth, I've some atheist friends who laugh at the sort of antics small factions of "atheists" like this particular group take, noting that atheism is, by definition the lack of belief in a supreme being. They chuckle then when they see some who claim to be atheists who are so outraged by anything Christian, wondering why their ire is aroused by something that they [ostensibly] don't even believe exists.

...which is sort of my point in making any distinction at all. True atheists, as one put it, don't allow themselves to get lathered over something they know doesn't exist, any more than those who don't believe in the abominable snowman allow themselves to get worked up over supposed sightings of one.

"Fear" is an emotive term, the school simply chose not to defend the patently indefensible, excusing their retreat on specious grounds of expense, and punishing the charity recipients in the process. That this should be spun by ideologues into oppressiion would be laughable were it not so transparently partisan.
As has been said before, Religion is like a penis. It's fine to have one and even be proud of it, but don't wave it around in public and keep it away from me and my children.

EdwinWillers said:

Fair enough. Big A, little a... meh, isn't that big a deal in my mind.

For what it's worth, I've some atheist friends who laugh at the sort of antics small factions of "atheists" like this particular group take, noting that atheism is, by definition the lack of belief in a supreme being. They chuckle then when they see some who claim to be atheists who are so outraged by anything Christian, wondering why their ire is aroused by something that they [ostensibly] don't even believe exists.

...which is sort of my point in making any distinction at all. True atheists, as one put it, don't allow themselves to get lathered over something they know doesn't exist, any more than those who don't believe in the abominable snowman allow themselves to get worked up over supposed sightings of one.

Click to expand...

The "No true atheist!" fallacy in action. People may not get worked up by sightings, but they often ridicule and mock those who claim to have seen it.

specklebang said:

Sure I can. You can disagree but honestly, all I see is someone who is angry about something they don't think exists. This doesn't win any logic contests.

Click to expand...

Precisely. :thumbs:

specklebang said:

Sure I can. You can disagree but honestly, all I see is someone who is angry about something they don't think exists. This doesn't win any logic contests.

Click to expand...

Who is angry?

FreedomFromAll said:

a god is a construct of the human mind. ....

So the logical conclusion is that the concepts of gods must be rejected as just human imagination. ....

I am a strong atheist not because of lack any evidence but because the concept of gods is silly and childish primitive crap.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but this is utterly unscientific, not to mention silly and childish. Everything we talk about, think about, even see is a "construct of our minds". We have to undertsand what makes those minds "construct" some things, and not others.

To say that something does not exist because it is a subject of folklore is like an 18th century skeptic saying that Australia doesn't exist because black swans, kangaroos and platypuses are clearly products of childish imagination, just like unicorns.

People claim religious experiences. These claims are a fact of human behavior. The reality behind those claims - whether we are talking about gods or inner workings of their brain - is the subject of study, where we state hypotheses and look for factual confirmations. At this point, we "do not believe" in gods, because we have no evidence of their existence - no more, no less. The assertion that something does not exist because people who claim otherwise are "just telling stories" is a logical fallacy.

beefheart said:

Keep praying to the invisible man, evidently you need him.

Click to expand...

Keep thinking the historical Jesus was always invisible. I'm sure you need that too to make your world view fly.

EdwinWillers said:

I know a number of atheists, some acquaintances, some being good friends - they are not believers and I respect their lack of belief, and they all respect my belief. We get along. We can do things together; we can talk, I can be who I am and they can be who they are. NP

Strictly to make a point here, one might call them "little a" atheists - no different than anyone else save for their lack of belief.

Then, in stark contrast there are those "big A" Atheists whose lack of belief has taken on a different dimension entirely. Not content to merely be non-believers, they have taken it upon themselves to actively seek to take away the freedoms of those who are believers.

Case in point: SkyView Academy cuts ties with Christmas donation program after lawsuit threat - The Denver Post

I might cite a host of other actions - removal of anything "Christian" from public view (prayers, the 10 commandments, crosses, nativity scenes, references to God..., ostensibly excused on the basis of the separation of church and state (another topic) ---- the point being these "big A" Atheists are actively seeking the total abolition of anything Christian - and that at the expense of fundamental Constitutional freedoms they've misapplied and warped to advance their own intolerant biases.

In effect, "big A" Atheism has little to do with their lack of belief, and everything to do with their abject hatred of anything Christian. Beyond being atheists, they have - in effect - assumed the sinister role of being actively anti-God... actively anti-Christian... actively anti-Christ... Atheists.

...and frankly, it needs to stop. More is at stake than the removal of things "Christian" from public view; our very Constitutional freedoms are being threatened because of a few radical haters whose intolerance has gone amuck.

Click to expand...

Well I'm lost on this one.

Why did they end it - just because of a lawsuit? What did the lawsuit allege?

When people roll over and just give in so easily it makes me wonder if they really had the cohones to begin with. . . looks like they didn't in this case.

I would have said "fine - take it to court. It's not required, sue me for my involvement with a charity."

I'm not religious - but I remember that being a lesson in church. If you're religious and devote, don't let anyone mow you over and have THEIR way.

Logicman said:

Keep thinking the historical Jesus was always invisible. I'm sure you need that too to make your world view fly.

Click to expand...

I respect that you are religious, I was once. But, you guys don't do yourselves any favors by getting all giddy about non believers roasting in the hell that you need to create to keep yourselves fearful and compliant. I tried to believe, it it didn't make any rational or logical sense, and faith is just believing in something that you can't prove exists.

As knowledge is more accessable world wide, old beliefs and dogma are challenged. If you want to believe in god, go ahead, lots of us thought long and hard about it, and don't.

One very simple, and yet completely accurate definition of atheism is; lack of a belief in god.
Nothing more, nothing less. No certainty is declared, none is implied.
* i might add that in this definition the word "god" is understood to mean the traditional, singular ,paternal, omnipotent creator God of Abraham and Isaac.*

We all need to defend the constitution at all times including the freedom of religion for others( as an atheist myself). An asshole is an asshole. it doesn't matter if a militant atheist duchebag belittles the intellect of people of faith,or a bible-thumping fundamentalist condemns an atheist to hell, both suffer from the same personality defect. right? They are assholes, and likely quite insecure in their own stated beliefs, to be honest.

Hello everyone, btw. first post on the site. In time you will come to know me as a brilliant, insightful beacon of un-deniable truth and philosophical clarity, the likes of which you have never seen. I'm also funny, handsome, and, err, humble. LOL.


Jayar

beefheart said:

I respect that you are religious, I was once. But, you guys don't do yourselves any favors by getting all giddy about non believers roasting in the hell that you need to create to keep yourselves fearful and compliant. I tried to believe, it it didn't make any rational or logical sense, and faith is just believing in something that you can't prove exists.

As knowledge is more accessable world wide, old beliefs and dogma are challenged. If you want to believe in god, go ahead, lots of us thought long and hard about it, and don't.

Click to expand...

Most of us have thought long and hard about it also, and studied it, and debated it, experienced it, and have absolutely no doubt it is real.

Here's some recommended reading for you and yours:

EdwinWillers said:

I know a number of atheists, some acquaintances, some being good friends - they are not believers and I respect their lack of belief, and they all respect my belief. We get along. We can do things together; we can talk, I can be who I am and they can be who they are. NP

Strictly to make a point here, one might call them "little a" atheists - no different than anyone else save for their lack of belief.

Then, in stark contrast there are those "big A" Atheists whose lack of belief has taken on a different dimension entirely. Not content to merely be non-believers, they have taken it upon themselves to actively seek to take away the freedoms of those who are believers.

Case in point: SkyView Academy cuts ties with Christmas donation program after lawsuit threat - The Denver Post

I might cite a host of other actions - removal of anything "Christian" from public view (prayers, the 10 commandments, crosses, nativity scenes, references to God..., ostensibly excused on the basis of the separation of church and state (another topic) ---- the point being these "big A" Atheists are actively seeking the total abolition of anything Christian - and that at the expense of fundamental Constitutional freedoms they've misapplied and warped to advance their own intolerant biases.

In effect, "big A" Atheism has little to do with their lack of belief, and everything to do with their abject hatred of anything Christian. Beyond being atheists, they have - in effect - assumed the sinister role of being actively anti-God... actively anti-Christian... actively anti-Christ... Atheists.

...and frankly, it needs to stop. More is at stake than the removal of things "Christian" from public view; our very Constitutional freedoms are being threatened because of a few radical haters whose intolerance has gone amuck.

Click to expand...

OMG!!!!!! A.group of people has a nonzero percentage of their population who are jerks!!!!!! Alert the presses! Has anyone told Obama? Won't someone PLEASE think of the children!?

Hahaha. Theists have their jerks too and their jerks actually run around killing each other over gods. So perhaps you should watch over your own house before lording over mine.

Also this topic has nothing to do with philosophy. It's theist garbage.

Logicman said:

Calling one's self an atheist is disingenuous. An atheist cannot possibly know for certain there is no god.

Let's be extremely generous and assume an atheist knows 1/2 of everything there is to know in the universe. Then, what if the knowledge of god is in the half that he doesn't know about?

So at best, these so-called atheists should be more realistic and call themselves agnostics.

Click to expand...

The majority of atheists do not make the claim that they know for certain that there is no god. I am sure you have probably been tipped off to this before just now though.

This atheist does call himself agnostic. I am both, and I am far from alone.

spud_meister said:

Capital letters denote proper nouns, atheist isn't a proper noun. Furthermore it causes confusion by being nonspecific. Anti-religious is a better term for asshole atheists.

Click to expand...

Is this just your way of telling us you ARENT proper, there, lower case spud?

Logicman said:

Most of us have thought long and hard about it also, and studied it, and debated it, experienced it, and have absolutely no doubt it is real.

Here's some recommended reading for you and yours:

Click to expand...

I recommend you read "Losing My Relgion" by William Lobdell
and "God is not great" by Christopher Hitchens

Logicman said:

Calling one's self an atheist is disingenuous. An atheist cannot possibly know for certain there is no god.

Let's be extremely generous and assume an atheist knows 1/2 of everything there is to know in the universe. Then, what if the knowledge of god is in the half that he doesn't know about?

So at best, these so-called atheists should be more realistic and call themselves agnostics.

Click to expand...

There's no way a theist could know for certain there is a.god, so what I guess everyone is an agnostic.

Cyrylek said:

Sorry, but this is utterly unscientific, not to mention silly and childish. Everything we talk about, think about, even see is a "construct of our minds". We have to undertsand what makes those minds "construct" some things, and not others.

To say that something does not exist because it is a subject of folklore is like an 18th century skeptic saying that Australia doesn't exist because black swans, kangaroos and platypuses are clearly products of childish imagination, just like unicorns.

Click to expand...

That isnt at all the same as what I said. If someone is telling you that Australia, black swans, kangaroos and platypuses they didnt just imagine them they most likely seen them. And we can go to Australia and confirm it exists. But a god cannot be found anywhere, not just on Earth but anywhere because gods are not said to live on Earth or anywhere natural in the universe. SO then where did the concept of gods comes from if no one can know anything about them? The concept of gods came from people telling stories and nowhere else. I can reject that story just as I can reject any story that has no evidence. It doesnt even take effort.

People claim religious experiences. These claims are a fact of human behavior. The reality behind those claims - whether we are talking about gods or inner workings of their brain - is the subject of study, where we state hypotheses and look for factual confirmations. At this point, we "do not believe" in gods, because we have no evidence of their existence - no more, no less. The assertion that something does not exist because people who claim otherwise are "just telling stories" is a logical fallacy.

Click to expand...

The jury isnt still out like you claim. https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://psychiatryonline.org/data/Journals/NP/3847/498.pdf

EdwinWillers said:

I know a number of atheists, some acquaintances, some being good friends - they are not believers and I respect their lack of belief, and they all respect my belief. We get along. We can do things together; we can talk, I can be who I am and they can be who they are. NP

Strictly to make a point here, one might call them "little a" atheists - no different than anyone else save for their lack of belief.

Then, in stark contrast there are those "big A" Atheists whose lack of belief has taken on a different dimension entirely. Not content to merely be non-believers, they have taken it upon themselves to actively seek to take away the freedoms of those who are believers.

Case in point: SkyView Academy cuts ties with Christmas donation program after lawsuit threat - The Denver Post

I might cite a host of other actions - removal of anything "Christian" from public view (prayers, the 10 commandments, crosses, nativity scenes, references to God..., ostensibly excused on the basis of the separation of church and state (another topic) ---- the point being these "big A" Atheists are actively seeking the total abolition of anything Christian - and that at the expense of fundamental Constitutional freedoms they've misapplied and warped to advance their own intolerant biases.

In effect, "big A" Atheism has little to do with their lack of belief, and everything to do with their abject hatred of anything Christian. Beyond being atheists, they have - in effect - assumed the sinister role of being actively anti-God... actively anti-Christian... actively anti-Christ... Atheists.

...and frankly, it needs to stop. More is at stake than the removal of things "Christian" from public view; our very Constitutional freedoms are being threatened because of a few radical haters whose intolerance has gone amuck.

Click to expand...

I think we need to divide this down just a little bit further, and then I can talk about it.

Not all atheists advocacy is like this. There are legitimate codified and societal discriminations against atheists. There are some states that forbid them from serving in office, which is blatantly unconstitutional. There are atheist families who have been run out of their towns.

It is important when talking about this issue to separate the wheat from the chaff. With that said, the chaff is mostly coming from certain organizations, and you're right that a lot of it is almost unbelievably stupid.

Personally, I think these organizations are borrowing a page from the way every other minority advocacy is going about things right now. There is a large segment of all of these groups today -- gender groups, sexuality groups, racial groups -- who have an us versus them mentality, and need to "win." They don't necessarily want a peaceful coexistence.

However, there is another segment in all of these groups who does.

I think this is an outgrowth of our overall political climate right now, which is very divided and uninterested in working together.

And it's important we don't throw all of them into the same box, lest we fall pray to that same us versus them mentality.

FreedomFromAll said:

And we can go to Australia and confirm it exists.

Click to expand...

Now we can confirm it easily. The first reports of platypus were not even ridiculed - they were presumed to be a humorous hoax: "A hybrid of a beaver and a duck? How inventive!", and actual confirmation came decades later, when settlers started exploring the continent in earnest.

It just may be that we don't have "ships to go to Australia", in the department of god-detection. Maybe one day, we will have them.

FreedomFromAll said:

But a god cannot be found anywhere, not just on Earth but anywhere because gods are not said to live on Earth or anywhere natural in the universe.

Click to expand...

"Not natural" is a meaningless claim, so let's not spend time on it; everything that exists is natural, part of nature, by definition. If someone claims to have a religious experience, and if at some point we will discover that it is not entirely a psychological/cultural phenomenon, but has actual connection with some other aspects of reality, then we still will be looking for something natural, right?

FreedomFromAll said:

The jury isnt still out like you claim. https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=h...P/3847/498.pdf .

Click to expand...

Of course it is. Studying the "neural substrates" is a logical way of approaching the problem, at least at our current level of understanding.

But do we KNOW that we will NEVER discover anything more complicated than "circulation of made-up stories"? The only way we can "know" that is, ironically, by divine revelation.

Ikari said:

There's no way a theist could know for certain there is a.god, so what I guess everyone is an agnostic.

Click to expand...

Nope. The overwhelming evidence from history and the personal experiences with the Holy Spirit gives me great confidence that Christ is real.