Atheist here (Ask me anything)

[nicknack28]

I don't believe in disembodied spirits due to the lack of evidence, but I sometimes refer to human beings as having spirits, by which I simply mean their minds and personalities.

^^ This too. Merely conversationally I'm sure many atheists would use the word "soul" in the same sense. I know I do.

 

[Montalban]

For those logical and scientific atheists, it would simply take sufficiently convincing evidence. Obviously, illogical arguments, or feelings alone, would not be enough.

So they'd be convinced if they could be convinced?

 

[Montalban]

^^ This too. Merely conversationally I'm sure many atheists would use the word "soul" in the same sense. I know I do.

You are soul?

 

[nicknack28]

You are soul?

Yeah that's exactly what I said. You caught every nuance. Spot on!

 

[Eudaimonist]

So they'd be convinced if they could be convinced?

Yes. I'm not suggesting that it is easy to turn on a dime regarding one's worldview, but I think many would be convinced given sufficient evidence.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Max3k]

Atheism is an intellectual position. What reasons do you have for holding that position? Your reasons are based upon logic and/or evidence or lack of it. So, is there any reason/evidence for you holding your position that you defend?

 

[Tinker Grey]

Does non-belief require defense? Do you need to defend your lack of belief in tooth-fairies (I hope I am not presuming too much)? What about your lack of belief in the planet Meepzor located about 2.5 billion light-years from here?

The thing that is argued is whether what someone presents as evidence is evidence and whether or not it is sufficient to change one's position.

 

[Janser]

Atheism is an intellectual position. What reasons do you have for holding that position? Your reasons are based upon logic and/or evidence or lack of it. So, is there any reason/evidence for you holding your position that you defend?

Put simply an Atheist is a person who does not reject Gods because they want to they do it because they do not have a choice, they just can not make themselves believe something they know is not possible,
think about something that you simply can not make yourself believe no matter how hard you try, keep trying to make yourself believe until you are blue in the face, then you will know what it's like to be an Atheist, some Atheists give up trying sooner than others but all Atheists are basicly the same, their brains will not allow them to fool themselves into believing in something that their brains tell them is not possible, namely the belief in Gods, any Gods.

It seems that Christians do not like anyone who says "I can not believe there is a God",
it's as if there is only one position to take and that is their position, believe.

That's how it is for me anyway.

 

[Max3k]

But where is the evidence to disprove there is a God? Without evidence it is merely opinion.

 

[CoderHead]

But where is the evidence to disprove there is a God? Without evidence it is merely opinion.

It's in the same place as the evidence to prove there is a God, or gods. Do you need evidence to disprove the flying purple elephant over your head right now? I think not.

 

[Max3k]

To say "there is no proof for God's existence" is illogical because an atheist cannot know all things by which he could state that there is no proof. He can only say he has not yet seen a convincing proof; after all, there may be one he hasn't yet seen.

 

[CoderHead]

To say "there is no proof for God's existence" is illogical because an atheist cannot know all things by which he could state that there is no proof. He can only say he has not yet seen a convincing proof; after all, there may be one he hasn't yet seen.

That's all I ever say: I don't know if there is a god or gods, but I have no compelling reason to believe there is/are, nor any desire to worship It/Him/Her/them. That's why I call myself an agnostic atheist.

 

[Max3k]

So we have moved from "There definately is no God" to "I just don't know"

 

[CoderHead]

So we have moved from "There definately is no God" to "I just don't know"

I never said, "There definitely is no God." I (and many more atheists) have said, "It is extremely unlikely, due to a complete lack of credible evidence, that there are gods. Because of this, I am unable to believe in any gods." Further, it is even more unlikely that if there were a god it would resemble the anthropomorphic Christian version.

 

[nicknack28]

So we have moved from "There definately is no God" to "I just don't know"

Just for the record, people who actually argue such a statement are extremely rare. I highly doubt you'll find anyone here claiming that "There definitely is no god."

 

[Max3k]

You cannot call yourself an atheist without declaring that there is no God. That is the very definition of the word. You would then be labeled an agnostic.

noun a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

 

[CoderHead]

You cannot call yourself an atheist without declaring that there is no God. That is the very definition of the word. You would then be labeled an agnostic.

An atheist simply does not (or cannot) believe in the existence of gods. They don't have to firmly declare the non-existence of gods as established fact.

noun a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Read your definition again (emphasis mine).

 

[nicknack28]

You can be both an atheist and agnostic. This discussion has been done to death in many different places on these forums and across the internet in a much more effective manner than anyone will probably get into in this thread. I'd look into the manner some and not depend on a single definition from a single source to dictate your perception of a term.

 

[Max3k]

If I were to choose to believe that you don't love your family. But I have no evidence to support it, you would say I was wrong. You would provide evidence to the contrary, which I would choose not to believe. Not accepting any evidence to support your claim that you do in fact love your family, my statement immediately becomes opinion.

I cannot reasonably review all the evidence and come up with the same conclusion as prior to the evidence.

So, my question to you is, Have you reasonably reviewed ALL the evidence in which you state your case.

My purpose here is not to try to convert you. Only the Holy Spirit do that. My aim is to understand your reasoning and see the rationale behind it. So far, I have seen none, other than just opinion.

 

[CoderHead]

If I were to choose to believe that you don't love your family. But I have no evidence to support it, you would say I was wrong.

But loving my family is a subjective, personal experience that applies only to me. I don't extend my love for my family to you and your lifestyle. I don't propose that you should also love my family. Regardless of whether you believe I love my family, I will continue to feel the way I feel. It's not a good comparison.

So, my question to you is, Have you reasonably reviewed ALL the evidence in which you state your case.

Yes. I used to be a Christian, and this has already been covered, in this thread IIRC.