Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
Excellent point. It's almost like there is something in the mind of men, that compels them to believe in something supernatural, yet modern. As if we can't cope with the fact that life is not as grand as depicted in the movies and stories. Like people feel the need to believe in the supernatural because it gives them purpose.
This is where religion steps in, put simply it went something like this......we are going to die...that can't be true.....yes it is.....I don't like the idea of that.....what can we do??...let's tell our children there is a way out of death....how do we do that??...make up an all powerful being that will not let us die....they won't believe us.... they will if we tell them that the all powerful being wrote a book and that the book is true....it might work let's give it a try.....we will still die but we will never know because we will be dead....that's a good idea, it might even work, the rest is history.
I'm sorry, but I'm rather skeptical that you've met a very large number of atheists. Not to be ageist, but you aren't very old, so you can't have been studying atheists for very many years. Please don't tell me you're basing your conclusions on the atheists you've met at theist/atheist internet forums.
I don't disagree that there are large numbers of non-religious people who are into all kinds of ridiculous and sometimes harmful beliefs, and some of them no doubt are atheists, but many of them, if you delve a bit deeper, are not atheists - they are more likely pantheists or deists or believe there's some kind of entity/spirit that operates in the universe.
I'm sorry, but I'm rather skeptical that you've met a very large number of atheists. Not to be ageist, but you aren't very old, so you can't have been studying atheists for very many years. Please don't tell me you're basing your conclusions on the atheists you've met at theist/atheist internet forums.
I don't disagree that there are large numbers of non-religious people who are into all kinds of ridiculous and sometimes harmful beliefs, and some of them no doubt are atheists, but many of them, if you delve a bit deeper, are not atheists - they are more likely pantheists or deists or believe there's some kind of entity/spirit that operates in the universe.
Well sir, I'm skeptical of your skepticism.
I go to a college in New York, there are MANY atheists here. College is a place where, among my peers, I have never before seen so many atheists. I've spent no short amount of time speaking and discussing things with many other atheists in my college, and roughly one in four of them believe in at least something that could be considered supernatural.
Telepathy or other forms of ESP, alien abductions, ghosts, and magic/witchcraft being the most common.
I'm sorry, but I'm rather skeptical that you've met a very large number of atheists. Not to be ageist, but you aren't very old...
Originally Posted by Parogar
I go to a college in New York, there are MANY atheists here. College is a place where, among my peers, I have never before seen so many atheists. I've spent no short amount of time speaking and discussing things with many other atheists in my college, and roughly one in four of them believe in at least something that could be considered supernatural.
Telepathy or other forms of ESP, alien abductions, ghosts, and magic/witchcraft being the most common.
I don't have any solid demographic data to back it up, especially since I deal more with people focused on skepticism than atheism, but I'd be willing to bet that more younger atheists accept or find plausible woo than older ones.
__________________ (The Library of Alexandria) questioned the permanence of the stars, but did not question the justice of slavery - Carl Sagan in Cosmos
I think you will find that outlandish beliefs correlate very well to how someone came to be an atheist. In my mind, there are two distinct types of atheists. The first is the counter-culture atheist. This type of person rejects all religion because of emotional reasons (ie. religious belief can lead to atrocities) or cultural reasons (ie. person enjoys being outside of the norm). The same type of thinking that led this type of person to atheism can lead them to believe all kinds of pseudoscience and woo.
The other type of atheist is the cogent atheist. This type of person came to atheism because they carefully analyzed the claims of several religions and found them lacking. Typically, their decision was not made lightly, or instantaneously, but was a process they had to work through. The same type of thinking that led them away from religion will also work to filter out pseudo-scientific or wooish beliefs.
I wouldn't quite put it as black-and-white as that, though, it's more greyscale. I'd say that most of us would be nearer the "cogent atheist" side.
I wouldn't say the "This type of person rejects all religion because of emotional reasons (ie. religious belief can lead to atrocities)" part was soley of the former. I'm an atheist mostly for the reasons mentioned in the latter, but the atrocities that religion has been the direct cause of is one reason I'm an atheist.
I agree that I was much too black and white in the above post. Of course there is a large gray area between the two extremes that I gave above. I was just trying to make the point that if you talked to atheists with pseudo-scientific beliefs about why they are an atheist, emotional responses would be more prevalent (with some good logic mixed in). If the same conversation was had with someone lacking the belief in woo, I think more logical reasons would dominate (with emotional responses mixed in).
I must admit, it was my distaste for certain things done or supported in the name of religion that first caused me to question my beliefs.
So my question is this, to the atheists here. How can other atheists argue FOR evolution, and AGAINST creationism using evidence as their sole reason for believing in one or the other, if they believe in any of the above.
An atheist just doesn´t believe in gods. That´s all there is to it. For what reasons and by application of which rationale (if any) they don´t believe in gods is immaterial for them being atheists.
__________________
Why I call myself a „non-believer“ or „atheist“:
I can´t relate to any of the god concepts I´m familiar with so far.
Either I´m not convinced by the concept, or
– although not having a problem with the worldview itself -
I see no reason to call one of its elements „God“:
There are already more precise, more common, less loaded and less likely to be misunderstood terms for these elements.
E.g. I prefer to call nature „nature“, the universe „universe“ and everything „everything“.
An atheist just doesn´t believe in gods. That´s all there is to it. For what reasons and by application of which rationale (if any) they don´t believe in gods is immaterial for them being atheists.
I don't like the definition of "They just don't believe in gods.".
"They consciously disbelieve in gods." is far more accurate. It's not just not believing, but the conscious decision to not believe. For example, a 1 year old kid, who has no idea of the concept of religion couldn't be said to be an atheist, because they haven't specifically made the choice to not believe.
No! Its a religious lie! 
Linear Mode
