Categories Of Non-Belief

[Slim]

So - prompted by a discussion in the AI section: atheism and belief exist on a sort of spectrum.

So at one end there are people who claim to know for a fact that their god, whichever one it is, exists. And at the other there are those who say that they know for certain that it doesn't.

In the strictest sense, all of us are agnostic - we can't know, for a 100% fact whether there's a god or not. Same with fairies, the Loch Ness monster, Moon pixies and so on, of course.

The term "atheist" just means that you reject belief in a god. Everyone's an atheist of course, in that there can't be anyone who believes in all of humanity's gods.

Personally I identify as a "strong atheist", which means that I take the position that "God" isn't real. I'm so close to knowing for a 100% fact that "God" doesn't exist that there's no practical difference. I don't need absolute proof to accept the truth of God's failure to exist.

So if someone were to say to me - "James, God doesn't exist" I'd reply "Yes. I know".

[The Picnic Wasp]

So - prompted by a discussion in the AI section: atheism and belief exist on a sort of spectrum.

So at one end there are people who claim to know for a fact that their god, whichever one it is, exists. And at the other there are those who say that they know for certain that it doesn't.

In the strictest sense, all of us are agnostic - we can't know, for a 100% fact whether there's a god or not. Same with fairies, the Loch Ness monster, Moon pixies and so on, of course.

The term "atheist" just means that you reject belief in a god. Everyone's an atheist of course, in that there can't be anyone who believes in all of humanity's gods.

Personally I identify as a "strong atheist", which means that I take the position that "God" isn't real. I'm so close to knowing for a 100% fact that "God" doesn't exist that there's no practical difference. I don't need absolute proof to accept the truth of God's failure to exist.

So if someone were to say to me - "James, God doesn't exist" I'd reply "Yes. I know".

Well put. I would only add to your second sentence, to say that it's a sliding scale, and for many that pendulum swings fairly readily in both directions. Argument between the different stances is probably the most futile element possible. However, doesn't the term monotheist rule out your idea that everyone is an atheist of some sort? The other stance is monolatry where you select your favourite and reject the others, although you acknowledge their existence. Confusing stuff, for me anyway and I'd be delighted to be corrected if wrong.

[Slim]

I don't think it is futile to argue with someone who believes something unsupportable, especially when it causes personal and social harm.

In saying that everyone's an atheist, I must mean that there must be at least one god that we all disbelieve. You don't believe in Zeus or Ganesha, I expect.

[Matt2112]

Yes, I think James has saved some typing here, and will likely save some more, since on the face of it my position is identical.

Everyone is born an atheist - what happens after that is often an accident of geography.

[The Picnic Wasp]

Yes, I think James has saved some typing here, and will likely save some more, since on the face of it my position is identical.

Everyone is born an atheist - what happens after that is often an accident of geography.

We're also born illiterate and have to be taught. James's point about personal and social harm is too huge a place for me to visit with my level of intellect. I can only say that personally it has served me well bringing more satisfaction than any harm. I'm lucky to feel like that I suppose having had many, many difficulties throughout my life.

[Slim]

If there's something fundamental that you believe about the nature of the universe that defines your worldview - you believe it because of the teachings of a cult, but it's an illusion and you go through your whole life guided by a belief that's false - is that harm? I think it is.

We only get one go and one of the unique things about being human is that we can understand things about the universe. Religion ruins that for people. And that's before you consider all the social division, hostility to science, time wasted in churches and so on.

[Matt2112]

We're also born illiterate and have to be taught.

Sure, but literacy is critical; belief that, for example, a human has a soul that can achieve salvation one day by the weekly eating of a small cracker, not so much.

[The Picnic Wasp]

We're also born illiterate and have to be taught.

Sure, but literacy is critical; belief that, for example, a human has a soul that can achieve salvation one day by the weekly eating of a small cracker, not so much.

This is where it becomes futile as I would describe it as the Holy Eucharist, and I would also accept that anyone can qualify for salvation, not just Catholics. I need to take Nickslikk2112's wise advice and never debate politics or religion. Certainly not on here, where I'm ploughing that furrow pretty much alone, which makes a guy feel a bit isolated. I only really joined in with this thread because I liked the clarity of James's post but thought my suggested tweaks were accurate.

[Matt2112]

We all have our perspectives, I'm sure; mine is of an apostate within a large Irish Catholic extended family; thing is, it appears I'm far more knowledgeable about Catholicism than those who still hypocritically cling to it when it suits, and that inconvenient fact tends to rather annoy them when I mention it.

My advice?  Just ditch the whole thing - and all the unnecessary problems that were invented in the first place just disappear.

[Slim]

This is where it becomes futile as I would describe it as the Holy Eucharist, and I would also accept that anyone can qualify for salvation, not just Catholics.

OK so you're saying not only that there's a supreme paranormal architect of the entire cosmos, but that on one particular planet among hundreds of billions in one galaxy among perhaps two trillion, it's particularly interested in which members of a primate species that's evolved there observe a ritual involving an edible product made from one of the planet's domesticated cereal grass species.

The real salvation of humanity will arrive when this obvious nonsense is stamped out.

By the way at what stage of our evolution did we start to qualify for this special reward involving having our conscious minds magically extended beyond brain death? Does this magic realm accomodate large numbers of Australopithecus Afarensis perhaps, or the tree-climbing primate creatures that lived five million years ago? Or the proto-primates with long tails and elongated snouts that the first primates evolved from?

[The Picnic Wasp]

This is where it becomes futile as I would describe it as the Holy Eucharist, and I would also accept that anyone can qualify for salvation, not just Catholics.

OK so you're saying not only that there's a supreme paranormal architect of the entire cosmos, but that on one particular planet among hundreds of billions in one galaxy among perhaps two trillion, it's particularly interested in which members of a primate species that's evolved there observe a ritual involving an edible product made from one of the planet's domesticated cereal grass species.

The real salvation of humanity will arrive when this obvious nonsense is stamped out.

By the way at what stage of our evolution did we start to qualify for this special reward involving having our conscious minds magically extended beyond brain death? Does this magic realm accomodate large numbers of Australopithecus Afarensis perhaps, or the tree-climbing primate creatures that lived five million years ago? Or the proto-primates with long tails and elongated snouts that the first primates evolved from?

Ex smokers, non smokers, it's all the same to me.

[Slim]

Ex smokers, non smokers, it's all the same to me.

I see truth as more important than that.

[The Picnic Wasp]

Ex smokers, non smokers, it's all the same to me.

I see truth as more important than that.

I'm genuinely happy to hear that, which means we both seek the truth, but in my case it is in upper case.

[Slim]

I'm genuinely happy to hear that, which means we both seek the truth, but in my case it is in upper case.

What, a special version of truth in which using capital letters to define it gives you licence to ignore reality? This, in itself, is an offence against truth.

[The Picnic Wasp]

I'm genuinely happy to hear that, which means we both seek the truth, but in my case it is in upper case.

What, a special version of truth in which using capital letters to define it gives you licence to ignore reality? This, in itself, is an offence against truth.

Pointless argument. I'm disappointed in myself more than anything, knowing I just draw fire from you and Matt whenever I defend my faith. The stuff about the Eucharist was difficult to read and therefore difficult to ignore. Yet again, the Catholic Church is an easy target. Thousands weigh in against it at any opportunity so I'm well used to it. Transubstantiation is central to my belief. I would never consider rubbishing something at the core of someone else's chosen faith. Mind you, other faiths are afforded far more protection these days and even someone of the fortitude of Hitchens would probably be more guarded. Anyway, have a pop. It's your your opinion and your site so crack on. I suppose Christianity does suggest turning the other cheek. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind as I go about my life. I would never be so presumptuous as to think my opinion carries much weight.