Why are there religious people?

[bhsmte]

I don't understand why atheists make such a huge deal out of something so ridiculous, as if there is some serious difference between "I don't believe" and "I lack belief".
"I don't have any money" means exactly the same thing as "I lack money", doesn't it?
Someone says to you "your atheism is based on your lack of belief in any gods" is the exact same thing as "your atheism is based on your belief that there are no gods"...either way, you have faith that no gods exist. You do not have knowledge that no gods exist, you simply have a lack of any belief that gods exist.
Why the silly tap dance? I have never understood this....

What it comes down to Barrd, is lacking evidence and knowledge to believe a God exists, not having absolute knowledge that a God doesn't exist.

 

[TheBarrd]

No, you are confusing belief for lack of belief and faith for lack of faith.



There's no tap dance at all. I never claimed to know that there are no gods.

It sounds an awful lot like semantic antics to me...

 

[TheBarrd]

I forgot... because it was awhile ago in the thread...but aren't you the person who claimed to be a "christian mystic"?

No.

 

[TheBarrd]

If I were to make such a claim that I knew you had no money when you said that you did, you could easily prove me wrong by showing the money. It would reveal both my arrogance (for those who would perceive my behavior as such) and also that I was faulty in my conclusion (for whatever that would be worth to someone). It would prove you correct obviously, and perhaps trustworthy if your credibility were somehow in question. If you actually had the money, but refused to show it to me ... then it would be more like a game, and not only would I possibly be arrogant for claiming you had no money, but I may also be a fool for playing your game of "I have it, but I'm not showing you ..."

The easiest way for me to clarify however, would be to ask where it was. If I was convinced one way or another, I still may ask you where it is, for any number of reasons. But I do think that asking directly and clarifying before making a conclusion is often more conducive to learning.

So having said all of that, do you then see the difference between stating a belief, stating one's disbelief, stating one's lack of belief ... contrasted with outright claiming a positive or negative truth (i.e. that one "knows") ? This is often where some of us find the believer: claiming to *know* something that they have little to no evidence to support, instead of simply asserting their belief or disbelief in something. They may claim to *know* something about reality, when they've only checked a couple of pockets.

Perhaps those who claim to know are the ones who actually asked and got a positive answer, rather than fooling around looking for something hidden.

 

[TheBarrd]

What it comes down to Barrd, is lacking evidence and knowledge to believe a God exists, not having absolute knowledge that a God doesn't exist.

Then say so. There is nothing at all wrong with "I don't know."
Why all the silly flim flammery, as if there were any real difference between "I don't believe" and "I lack a belief"? It's not as if it matters one way or the other...the atheist's stance is based on his faith that, because he has no evidence or knowledge that a God exists, therefore it must follow that no god exists.
You freely admit that it is not based on knowledge, or evidence. What else is left?

 

[Ana the Ist]

No.

My mistake.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Then say so. There is nothing at all wrong with "I don't know."
Why all the silly flim flammery, as if there were any real difference between "I don't believe" and "I lack a belief"? It's not as if it matters one way or the other...the atheist's stance is based on his faith that, because he has no evidence or knowledge that a God exists, therefore it must follow that no god exists.
You freely admit that it is not based on knowledge, or evidence. What else is left?

Personally, I have no problem with you describing my position that way if it makes it easier to understand. It just sounds funny when you associate it with faith.


There's all kinds of silly things you probably have no belief in because you've never found any evidence for them. Fairies, dragons, vampires, werewolves, leprechauns, giants, nymphs, ogres, trolls....the list probably goes on and on. If you look at your disbelief/lack of belief in those things as a matter of "faith"...then sure, my disbelief in god is a matter of faith.

 

[TillICollapse]

Perhaps those who claim to know are the ones who actually asked and got a positive answer, rather than fooling around looking for something hidden.

Not sure what you mean, if you're talking about those who claim to know this/that concerning God.

 

[bhsmte]

28999

Then say so. There is nothing at all wrong with "I don't know."
Why all the silly flim flammery, as if there were any real difference between "I don't believe" and "I lack a belief"? It's not as if it matters one way or the other...the atheist's stance is based on his faith that, because he has no evidence or knowledge that a God exists, therefore it must follow that no god exists.
You freely admit that it is not based on knowledge, or evidence. What else is left?

I would imagine, there are a whole host things you don't believe in, because you see no evidence to believe in them, but don't have evidence to prove they don't exist.

Think of it that way.

 

[Ana the Ist]

28999


I would imagine, there are a whole host things you don't believe in, because you see no evidence to believe in them, but don't have evidence to prove they don't exist.

Think of it that way.

I'm guessing that's the problem here...she doesn't see it that way. You and I think of those things, the absence of any evidence for them, and realize that's a good reason to believe that they don't exist.

If she looked at it as a matter of reason in the first place...she wouldn't be struggling to describe our beliefs as a matter of faith.

 

[TillICollapse]

Then say so. There is nothing at all wrong with "I don't know."
Why all the silly flim flammery, as if there were any real difference between "I don't believe" and "I lack a belief"? It's not as if it matters one way or the other...the atheist's stance is based on his faith that, because he has no evidence or knowledge that a God exists, therefore it must follow that no god exists.
You freely admit that it is not based on knowledge, or evidence. What else is left?

But you recognize the difference between having something, verses not having it ... right ? Having verses lacking ?

I think many people view "belief" as this thing a person has which you must do something with. It's like a ballot which you write down what you cast your vote on ... and so if you believe in God then you've cast your vote for God with your ballot. If you don't believe in God, then you've cast your vote either against God, or for some other person/thing/etc.

Yet a person can be undecided, cast no vote with their ballot at all ... or lack a ballot all-together. For some, there is no relevance to having a ballot for some topics. For example ... I may presume you've never tasted "balut" (a type of food popular in the Philippines). So if I asked you what you believe concerning balut, you may not have a belief one way or another. You don't cast a vote for it, against it ... you don't even have a ballot. So it is a similar claim for some concerning their view of God: they LACK belief. Thus, such a description may suit them. They lack belief. I think this may be hard for many believers to conceptualize, because they *do* have a belief: they have a ballot and they have cast a vote. To even think that a person may not have a ballot at all, so to speak, is outside their frame of reference. Yet, there are arguably many issues which you do not have a "ballot" on either, which you lack belief concerning.

 

[TheBarrd]

My mistake.

We all make 'em....

 

[TheBarrd]

28999


I would imagine, there are a whole host things you don't believe in, because you see no evidence to believe in them, but don't have evidence to prove they don't exist.

Think of it that way.

Actually, I'm more inclined to consider the possibilities. You tell me that there are no such things as pink unicorns. I immediately think...how can he know that? It's a huge universe...there could be a planet out there, somewhere, where pink unicorns are common.
I have no evidence to prove that there is a planet where pink unicorns play...but I don't know that there isn't either.
Or Russell's famous teapot. LOL, after reading "The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy", I'm convinced that it is quite possible that some planet hopper may have dropped his teapot, and it is still out there....orbiting some far off star...
The thing is, we don't even know all there is to know about this one tiny bit of rock we call home...let alone what else might exist in this great universe of ours. So, I am quite reluctant to state with any kind of assurance what might exist in the far reaches of space....

 

[TheBarrd]

But you recognize the difference between having something, verses not having it ... right ? Having verses lacking ?

I think many people view "belief" as this thing a person has which you must do something with. It's like a ballot which you write down what you cast your vote on ... and so if you believe in God then you've cast your vote for God with your ballot. If you don't believe in God, then you've cast your vote either against God, or for some other person/thing/etc.

Yet a person can be undecided, cast no vote with their ballot at all ... or lack a ballot all-together. For some, there is no relevance to having a ballot for some topics. For example ... I may presume you've never tasted "balut" (a type of food popular in the Philippines). So if I asked you what you believe concerning balut, you may not have a belief one way or another. You don't cast a vote for it, against it ... you don't even have a ballot. So it is a similar claim for some concerning their view of God: they LACK belief. Thus, such a description may suit them. They lack belief. I think this may be hard for many believers to conceptualize, because they *do* have a belief: they have a ballot and they have cast a vote. To even think that a person may not have a ballot at all, so to speak, is outside their frame of reference. Yet, there are arguably many issues which you do not have a "ballot" on either, which you lack belief concerning.

An hour ago, I'd never heard of "balut". I still don't know what it is. However, I do know that something called "balut" does exist, because you told me that it does, and I have no reason to think you would lie to me. In other words, the only evidence I have that there is a type of food called "balut" is your word, but I accept that evidence as true. Now, if I want to find out more about this balut, I could ask you...or I could do some investigating on my own. I'm curious enough that tomorrow morning just might find me cruising the net looking for information about "balut". I may never be an expert...but I will know more than I did an hour ago...

 

[Ana the Ist]

Actually, I'm more inclined to consider the possibilities. You tell me that there are no such things as pink unicorns. I immediately think...how can he know that? It's a huge universe...there could be a planet out there, somewhere, where pink unicorns are common.
I have no evidence to prove that there is a planet where pink unicorns play...but I don't know that there isn't either.
Or Russell's famous teapot. LOL, after reading "The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy", I'm convinced that it is quite possible that some planet hopper may have dropped his teapot, and it is still out there....orbiting some far off star...
The thing is, we don't even know all there is to know about this one tiny bit of rock we call home...let alone what else might exist in this great universe of ours. So, I am quite reluctant to state with any kind of assurance what might exist in the far reaches of space....

I don't see why you need the far reaches of space....surely you haven't explored every corner of the earth.

Do you believe pink unicorns could exist right here on our planet?

 

[TheBarrd]

I don't see why you need the far reaches of space....surely you haven't explored every corner of the earth.

Do you believe pink unicorns could exist right here on our planet?

I doubt it, but I suppose it could be possible. There are supposed to be brontos in Africa...and what about all those lake monsters, like Nessie? There are legends of dragons in cultures far apart in time and in areas far removed from one another. Who knows? Science has barely scratched the surface, and there are loads of mysteries left to be explored.
OTOH, why not the far reaches of space? Anything might exist out there....

 

[Ana the Ist]

I doubt it, but I suppose it could be possible. There are supposed to be brontos in Africa...and what about all those lake monsters, like Nessie? There are legends of dragons in cultures far apart in time and in areas far removed from one another. Who knows? Science has barely scratched the surface, and there are loads of mysteries left to be explored.
OTOH, why not the far reaches of space? Anything might exist out there....

Why doubt it?

 

[TheBarrd]

Why doubt it?

It does seem that there'd be some remains or something...still, as I say, I do not discount the possibility. I might be surprised if one day someone actually produces a pink unicorn on this planet...but I wouldn't keel over from shock. My attitude would be more "gee, how about that?" And I'd smile when I'd realize that all of my atheist friends would have to find another centerpiece for their arguments....

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Then say so. There is nothing at all wrong with "I don't know."
Why all the silly flim flammery, as if there were any real difference between "I don't believe" and "I lack a belief"? It's not as if it matters one way or the other...the atheist's stance is based on his faith that, because he has no evidence or knowledge that a God exists, therefore it must follow that no god exists.
You freely admit that it is not based on knowledge, or evidence. What else is left?

Once again you are confusing faith for lack of faith. My nonbelief is not based on faith in God's non-existence. I've thought about the matter a great deal and, in my view, the reasons believers give for believing in God are unconvincing, so I don't share their theistic beliefs, making me an atheist. There may be a good reason that does warrant such belief, but I have not encountered it yet.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

It does seem that there'd be some remains or something...still, as I say, I do not discount the possibility. I might be surprised if one day someone actually produces a pink unicorn on this planet...but I wouldn't keel over from shock. My attitude would be more "gee, how about that?" And I'd smile when I'd realize that all of my atheist friends would have to find another centerpiece for their arguments....

Why would your atheist friends have to find another centrepiece for their arguments? I don't see how this follows. Most atheists don't "discount the possibility" of a God; that is, they don't declare God to be an impossibility. Yes, it's possible that there is a God. But why should we believe that there really is one?