Is There More to Atheism than Lack of Belief?

[Received]

So, since I told you I think my car will either work or not work,
a. what is it that I have trust or confidence in, and
b. how does that trust or confidence manifest?

You have trust or confidence in your car, or alternatively in the makers of your car. Trust or confidence manifests in how you behave.

To be precise, you don´t have faith in my math abilities, or to even be more precise, you don´t have faith that my math abilities match this particular challenge.

But more importantly: You haven´t been telling me what I don´t have faith in. You have been telling me that I have faith in something - without even knowing my behaviour.

I don’t think being too precise is a big deal when it comes to trust or confidence. We can say we have trust in John, or John’s intelligence, or John’s math abilities, or John’s abilities to resolve complicated calculus problems. Each is progressively more precise, but you’re not wrong (or arguably even vague) if you were to say the first or second rather than the third or fourth.

Ok. Please make a chart concerning the car issue, with three columns:
1. the different degrees of the "inclinations of the will",
2. the correspondent behaviours,
3. the resulting insights of the quality of faith.

I’m too busy procrastinating on my actual work to do this work.

I suspect that, in order to make your point, you will even ascribe some sort of faith in the car to the guy who has lost all hope that it will work, but occasionally tries to start it, just in case.

I think so. Or you could say that this person has faith some of the time (when he tries to start the car) but doesn’t have faith most of the time.

On another note, and since this thread is about atheism, if you don´t even believe there is such an entity to have faith (trust, confidence) in, your definition simply doesn´t apply.

I wouldn’t say it’s about belief that determines whether faith applies, but whether the thing in which you have faith actually exists. If God exists, then it’s possible to have faith in him whether or not you believe in him (conceptually); if God doesn’t exist, it’s not possible to have faith in him. Is it possible to have faith in something that isn’t really there? Maybe it’s possible to distinguish faith as rooted in something objective and faith rooted in something abstract, like an idea.

An instance of "faith" - if not used in a very loose way for purposes of equating all qualities of inclinations - would be to plan to drive to work tomorrow even though I don´t have a car.

On yet another note, it seems to me that "trust, confidence" in a fellow human being and "faith, confidence" in an inanimate object are two completely different concepts.

Maybe.

But since you are free to define words any way you like, language gives you the power to make all differences go away.

My definition is based on the work of the late Dallas Willard, who was a philosopher and theologian, who in turn based his conceptualization after careful exegesis of the Bible. But I don't think you even need to use the Bible, but rather just look at how the term "faith" is used in everyday conversation. When I speak of having "faith" in a person, this isn't at all just a conceptualization thing, but refers each and every time to inclinations of the will. That's why we always talk about someone being unfaithful when he has an affair, and never considered unfaithful when he don't conceptually believe that his wife exists in a certain way.

And really, if you think I'm arbitrarily defining terms, you're wasting a lot of time arguing with me. Apropos our discussion, it sounds like you have some degree of faith in my abilities to minimally define terms with some consistency (or else you wouldn't be acting the way that you are, i.e., responding to me via argument), despite the fact that you say you don't.

 

[quatona]

Then they're lacking in faith. It's a continuum thing, not a dichotomous thing. To my thinking (which is reflected in the biblical notion of faith rather than the post-enlightenment popular one), there's a difference between belief as conceptualization and faith (trust, confidence). And I think it's interesting how the Bible really doesn't place emphasis on conceptualization when it talks about faith; typically faith is mentioned in relation to a person's heart or spirit, which are aspects of action and character.

Ok, then put your money where your mouth is and name three behaviours by which we can reliably tell that a person is a TrueFaithfulChristian (and, of course, we aren´t talking going to church, preaching or evangelizing), and three behaviours by which we can tell that a person has no faith in a god (and, of course, we aren´t talking writing anti-theist blogs or attacking theism).
And, while we are at it, name three behaviours by which we can reliably tell that a person has faith in his car, that a person has no faith in his car.

 

[quatona]

And really, if you think I'm arbitrarily defining terms, you're wasting a lot of time arguing with me. Apropos our discussion, it sounds like you have some degree of faith in my abilities to minimally define terms with some consistency (or else you wouldn't be acting the way that you are, i.e., responding to me via argument), despite the fact that you say you don't.

It´s more like I have hope. But to be honest, I am on the verge of losing it. This saddens me, but that´s an entirely different topic.

Besides, I don´t think the "tell faith by behaviour" thing is cutting way too much slack on the rationality of human behaviour. I for one have engaged in discussions with people even after having lost all confidence and hope that I would get any useful, serious responses from them. I have pressed "on" buttons of devices that I knew were dead, and so on and so forth.

 

[variant]

So if values exist independent of mankind, where do they exist?

Ken

No one said they existed independently, what I said is that values are physical in nature. That they are properties derived from the process of living.

Is independent existence necessary for physical existence?

What of things that exist as relationships within systems? Are they non-physical?

My own physical process of thinking in and of itself won't exist when my physical body is gone, and will never exist independent of me, this doesn't make it a non-physical thing.

I think you are hung up on the idea that physical things need to be solid objective and independent, I don't believe these are correct definitions.

Anything that has an effect in a physical system is part of it in my opinion.

 

[ThinkForYourself]

Then your definition of faith isn't biblical but the more popular post-Enlightenment one. For all purposes when we're both using the term "faith", we're only overlapping if at all on a very small area.

Actually I think my definition of faith: Belief without evidence, is the exact religious meaning of the term.

Unless you have evidence of God's existence? If so, could you please provide? Thanks!

 

[Received]

Actually I think my definition of faith: Belief without evidence, is the exact religious meaning of the term.

Unless you have evidence of God's existence? If so, could you please provide? Thanks!

What you're describing is an aspect of faith, not what faith essentially means. That's like saying a triangle has at least one pointy side, rather than defining what it is.

 

[Received]

It´s more like I have hope. But to be honest, I am on the verge of losing it. This saddens me, but that´s an entirely different topic.

Besides, I don´t think the "tell faith by behaviour" thing is cutting way too much slack on the rationality of human behaviour. I for one have engaged in discussions with people even after having lost all confidence and hope that I would get any useful, serious responses from them. I have pressed "on" buttons of devices that I knew were dead, and so on and so forth.

You doing ok, quatona?

 

[Texas Ranger]

If our planet wasn't created by the Almighty, then how come everything works so well? How do unbelievers explain that we have air to breath, water to drink, and churches to pray in? God meant it to be that way. If he did not, then why is Christianity the most popular religion in the world? Why is America, a Christian nation, the most powerful in the world? This can’t be something that just happened to occur.

 

[znr]

Oh no.

Ducking for cover!

 

[Chany]

If our planet wasn't created by the Almighty, then how come everything works so well? How do unbelievers explain that we have air to breath, water to drink, and churches to pray in? God meant it to be that way. If he did not, then why is Christianity the most popular religion in the world? Why is America, a Christian nation, the most powerful in the world? This can’t be something that just happened to occur.

Wow, there's like, at least three common fallacies right in that short paragraph.

 

[Chany]

Oh no.

Ducking for cover!

ARMING MISSILES AND PREPARING TO ENGAGE!!!

 

[Eudaimonist]

If our planet wasn't created by the Almighty, then how come everything works so well?

Does it? Everything? Even when there are natural disasters such as volcano eruptions?

The history of humanity, and of all life on Earth, has been a one of a struggle for survival. If everything "works well" for us, that's because of three factors:

1) Genetic adaption (applies to any species)
2) Human productivity
3) Human technological know-how

How do unbelievers explain that we have air to breath, water to drink, and churches to pray in?

I can't believe that is a serious question.

The Earth formed from the light and heavy elements produced by stars. The Earth formed with an atmosphere and plenty of water. This should not be considered unusual based on our knowledge of other worlds.

As for the churches, do you think maybe human beings had built them?

God meant it to be that way.

Did he also mean for temples, mosques, and the pyramids?

If he did not, then why is Christianity the most popular religion in the world?

For now. If Christianity were to lose that number one spot, would you agree that Christianity is false?

Why is America, a Christian nation, the most powerful in the world?

For now. If America were to lose the number one spot for political power to China, for instance, would you agree that Christianity is false?

This can’t be something that just happened to occur.

I don't see why not.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[theophilus777]

I think you are confusing the term; "faith" with "trust" in how one forms views on particular issues.

I am illustrating a point, and one that is relevant to this thread. Clarifying the definition of the word "atheist" is a good start, but that alone isn't enough to fix the underlying concern seen so often on this website, that atheists are misunderstood, distrusted, or downright discriminated against.

The same holds true on my side of the fence: just because Webster came along and defined "faith" how they wish is totally irrelevant. My Faith has prior claim, by a couple millennia, and no dictionary can begin to touch what it means. When you use that same word you can mean exactly what the dictionary says - and we will predictably have absolutely 0 communication.

You can continue being misunderstood and discriminated against as long as you want, but the insight I hold combined with your intelligence could probably change a good bit of that.

Some people are more prone to determine views on faith than others, it depends on your personal psychology and how you are wired. Intuitive people tend to use faith more than objective thinkers, who tend to rely to trust things, based on track records and evidence.

Word salad, that is belligerently denying the pov of those on the other side of the fence. As you wish.

 

[theophilus777]

Well, I just said that I don´t think one way or the other. I think "it will work or it won´t". I am aware that I take chances and risks, but then again usually I have a planB.
But to answer your question hypothetically: Yes, if I thought that my car will work, or if I thought that my car won´t work there might be minor differences to my behaviour, as opposed to as it is.

Baloney. If you didn't think your car would start, you wouldn't bother putting the key in the ignition. As the Christian life is lived, putting your key in the ignition to start the car is an act of faith. That's simply what the concept conveys. Note that this concept is bigger than the definition of the word "faith." I realize this is not how an atheist uses words, so its sort of like a lesson on shades of blue to Helen Keller.

Bottom line: if you're wanting to be understood as an atheist, or even just respected, you're up against a LOT more than merely defining the word atheist as meaning not believing in God or gods and nothing more. You have a whole world view that is "other," and therefore inherently scary to a lot of weaker folk. Digging in your heels and being adamant about how a single word is used won't promote understanding.

Covering a reasonable definition of "atheist" is still a good start. A next step might be that although everyone has a world view and an atheist's will of course differ from a Christian's, there is no codified atheistic world view, and there aren't even denominations. This easily breaks down to individuals, on either side of the aisle. (Meaning most Christians even within a given denom will still hold their own thoughts and opinions, and can become common ground)

 

[theophilus777]

Any track record one bases this faith on, is subjective in nature and not objective like knowing my car has started everyday for a year, which is something demonstrable and objective.

You keep talking about this brand new car (well, only 1 year old) and the possibility it might not start. You got a lemon!

 

[bhsmte]

I am illustrating a point, and one that is relevant to this thread. Clarifying the definition of the word "atheist" is a good start, but that alone isn't enough to fix the underlying concern seen so often on this website, that atheists are misunderstood, distrusted, or downright discriminated against.

The same holds true on my side of the fence: just because Webster came along and defined "faith" how they wish is totally irrelevant. My Faith has prior claim, by a couple millennia, and no dictionary can begin to touch what it means. When you use that same word you can mean exactly what the dictionary says - and we will predictably have absolutely 0 communication.

You can continue being misunderstood and discriminated against as long as you want, but the insight I hold combined with your intelligence could probably change a good bit of that.



Word salad, that is belligerently denying the pov of those on the other side of the fence. As you wish.

You can call it word salad, that's fine, I understand why you need to.

 

[bhsmte]

You keep talking about this brand new car (well, only 1 year old) and the possibility it might not start. You got a lemon!

???????????????????????????????

 

[theophilus777]

I consider faith to mean belief without evidence, and I have no use for that in my life.

I want to make the best decision I can, every time. Clearly making decisions based on faith isn't going to allow that to happen. Rather it will lead to making poor decisions.

What you're describing is no part of Christianity, and it has nothing to do with what a Christian means when they use the phrase to do something by faith, or through faith. Just like an atheist doesn't have a church, or a codified list of beliefs (or non-beliefs)

 

[Levi777]

I agree with Ana. There is no more to the atheist belief system than "there is no God". By their estimation, they do not have to prove their belief, even as they demand that Christians prove their beliefs.

The truths of God are revealed. Period. One must be born again of the Spirit of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to understand the Bible, and the issues of faith in God.

And when the atheist tries to put forth their beliefs of the Bible, faith, Christianity, God, spirits, souls, etc., it rather reveals issues such as Isaiah 44:

18 They do not know, nor do they understand, for He has smeared over their eyes so that they cannot see and their hearts so that they cannot comprehend. 19 No one recalls, nor is there knowledge or understanding to say, “I have burned half of it in the fire and also have baked bread over its coals. I roast meat and eat it. Then I make the rest of it into an abomination, I fall down before a block of wood!” 20 He feeds on ashes; a deceived heart has turned him aside. And he cannot deliver himself, nor say, “Is there not a lie in my right hand?”

The idol is agenda. The object of worship is their intellect. To think that we spend our time on earth gaining understanding, learning, living, just to die and leave it to all who come after to spend on their own desires is a bleak, incomprehensible view. The best hope the atheist has is that those who remain when he is gone will think kindly of him? To think that our brain stops waving, and heart stops beating, our physical body stops working, then that's the end of us?

Truly, "The fool has said in his heart, 'there is no God'" (Psalm 14:1).

 

[theophilus777]

Levi, ya stole my numbers, but you rightly divided the Word. I call that a win.