@papayalily
I feel like that’s a prime example, though, of the “fooling themselves” that I’m talking about. My attitudes about the way god could be conceptualized, or if god exists, are truly ambivalent. I just don’t know, a lot of the times. But a lot of the times I feel like I do. However, I am not an atheist. If anyone called me an atheist, I would disagree – not because I have anything against it, but I haven’t committed to the idea that there isn’t a god. I can’t claim a belief…so I can’t really be an atheist.
When you say it’s not a belief system, are you saying that there is no one thing that atheists believe in? If so, it has no meaning. If you’re saying that it’s a belief that none of the religions are right, so you don’t believe in any of them…that’s more like an agnostic. If some atheists believe that there could be a god, then they shouldn’t really call themselves atheist (they have the right to, but they’re just going to confuse a bunch of people).
You recognized that your assumption about me was an assumption, so I’ll clarify…no, I do not believe in a default setting. I do not claim that atheists are rebelling against the idea of god in order to rebel or as a reaction to a former belief in god.
Drawing on that person, though, let’s make an analogy – someone used to believe in god. After time, they figured out there were many different religion, all with different ideas of what god was or wanted. Learned about atrocities committed in the name of god. Saw bad stuff happen for no reason. Saw good people leading lives committed to god, but unable to tell him how they KNEW god was there. After a while, being given nothing that could show him god was a reality, decided that there was no such thing. And adhered to that belief. People may try to convince him that there is a god, but can offer no proof. But he has no proof that there isn’t a god…nothing shows him that. He is an athiest because he believes, he does not know, that there is no god.
The same boy, as a child, was told by his parents about Santa Clause. In school one year, he hears people say that Santa Clause doesn’t exist. He asks his parents who tell him that he’s right, there is no Santa. He’s sad, but Christmas comes all the same. But there’s no more cookies and milk (presents all the same). He’s super naughty one year…no coal. No footprints in the ash of the chimney. He starts his own family. The only presents under the tree are the ones he buys. One year he doesn’t put any under the tree – his kids are furious, but nothing magically appears. Full explorations of the north pole reveal no workshop, no one’s ever seen an elf, and the physics of reindeer flight to children all over the world (except for non-Christians) is, as scientists show him, whoa impossible. This man knows that Santa Clause isn’t real…if he believes otherwise, it’s irrational.
So, there is a unifying belief that is shared by all atheists. Otherwise, athiests are just people. Belief that something is NOT true, without reasonable proof that it is not, is belief based on nothing. That is pure faith. Atheism is not a term for everyone in the group – I would like to see a definition that stated atheism was “not something” without including the word belief (or variation). Stating that atheism is not a belief in god begs the question what is it? Saying an atheist is someone who does not believe in god is begging who is he or she? Saying that atheists do not believe in god, but they do not believe in no god, is mind-boggling.
As for the AMOTEs – well, for one, you’d have objective proof that their beliefs were based on fiction. Also, if we were to translate their word into our language, it would probably be something more like “heathen” or “disbeliever” or “heretic” – something that described you as someone who was not one of the faithful – because, regardless of whether in their language they think it means someone who doesn’t believe in god, we would know that since there are other religions it means only someone who doesn’t believe in their god. Even if the word were translated as you suggest, once it was explained most people would be “oh…so they just don’t understand that there are other religions…” We had several words in the old colonial world for religious and spiritual people that weren’t Christian – not a one was atheist. So if they believe the Cheshire Cat is real, they may not try to convince you that he is. If they do, it’s a colonial “convert the native” approach in reverse. But you can’t say that your belief is more valid then their’s – unless in the hypo you know that AIW is a fictional book and who wrote it. In that case, you have objective evidence about the veracity of their claims. Athiests claim there is no god…they believe there is no god…there is no objective evidence to the veracity of that claim.
The anarchy example you give has the same problems. I assume the woods-person was completely alone. Yes, that person would have no concept of government. That person is not an anarchist. That person has never had their beliefs CHALLENGED. That person has also never lived with another person. People in groups tend to form organized structures…sometimes a heirarchy (well often), sometimes flat. But people together will always tend to separate out the labor in a manner they think is the best (or sometimes told to, with poor results). We would have absolutely no concept of how that person related to the world…to try to say how that person would relate to people after a life of unheard of isolation is like asking how we’d act if dropped into a silicon-based life form with a super-advanced form of wormhole energy making it run, no concept of currency or organization of individuals but mostly because they share a hive mind. If you’re asking through this or showing me that there’s no default if people are raised without the influence of others…well, I’m not convinced, since societies always seem to find a way to create a god-force. However, I’ll bow to that. But the argument is moot…no one lives outside the influence of others. Maybe there will be a point where children will feel the absolute liberty while growing up to make a decision later on about whether they believe there’s something behind all this, a god of sorts…and maybe we’ll have thereafter an even mix of people who believe that there’s a god and people who don’t. That’s cool But both viewpoints will be based on the same amount and kind of information – we can’t explain this, we don’t know what happens after death, and we don’t know exactly why we’re here. You believe whatever you want, but you believe something.
Composing members:
0
