Okay then, without logic or referring to the Bible, how would you decide on whether you should get a special gift to your mother on her 80th birthday? You can choose your own example if you want to?
Even if he responded to your ridiculous request there would be no basis whatsoever to apply his reasoning to atheists in general, so why are you asking?
What does this have to do with logic or the Bible? You make the choice based on your knowledge of what your mother likes or what she might like, what she needs, your own budget, and factors of that type.
That’s a pretty dynamic and eclectic group of philosophies, do you run into conflicts very often? If so, can you give me an example of how you would resolve the conflict?
Why don’t you tell us why you think atheism would be in conflict with any of the other things named?
I’m curious, does the Bible specify that you should get your mother a special gift for her 80th birthday?
This thread is a great example of the adage " … an irresistible force meets an immovable object." The irresistible force is the mindset of the rational non-believer, who wants to apply Science to the supernatural. Science can neither prove nor disprove the supernatural … science deals with the “natural”.
The immoveable object is the stubborn, smug, friendly-yet-condescending stance of the believer, who claims to be certain of a set of facts that transcend empirical evidence. Minds like this come up with gems of inconsistency like “Intelligent Design” and “Creation Theory”, as though, once again, Science could ever address the supernatural … it can’t.
Science doesn’t accept the existence of the supernatural.
Science has no trouble at all addressing the supernatural-it’s the believers that refuse to listen to the answers provided.
I would ask her if she wanted or needed anything. Seeing as I have not given her a birthday present for the past 75 birthdays, I doubt I would do anything special. She hasn’t given me a birthday present since I turned 18, either. (With the investment income my father left her, she can better afford to buy herself things than I can. Once we’re out from under the mortgage and the girls’ tuition we will have more discretionary spending available.)
We do both still give gifts to my daughters, in our family birthday presents go from the older generation to the younger, at least until the younger reached adulthood.
Birthdays just aren’t a big deal to grown-ups.
Atheists don’t believe in birthdays?? OMG!!
No! It’s not substituting faith in God for faith in logic. It’s merely the absence of faith in any god. Nothing more. Some atheists are as illogical, and have just as irrational beliefs in non-godlike things, as the most irrational religion adherent you could find. Atheism is not (necessarily) a logically arrived at position. It is merely lack of belief in any god, regardless of how you arrived at that lack. Nothing more, nothing less. Logic does not enter into it. Period. End of definition. You keep looking for the something more that would make it analogous to religion. That ‘something more’ does not exist. It’s not even remotely like a religion. It is merely the lack of any belief in a god or gods. It does not imply anything else. It does not imply any world view or philosophy.
Think of it like having your appendix removed. We’ve had our belief in gods removed (or were born without one), and that’s all. Other than that one common feature (lack of appendix ~=~ lack of god-belief), we are just as varied in all respects as the rest of humanity. Your world view has very little in common with that of a devout Hindu, or an animist living in the jungles of Africa, or a Japanese Shinto or Buddhism adherent. My world view, as an American, is far closer to yours than it is to an atheist who was born into Japan’s Shinto and Buddhism dominated culture. And his world view has far more in common with his Japanese countrymen than it does with mine. And neither of us atheists will have much at all in common with the world view of the African animist who decides his tribe’s animist religion is bullshit, or the former Hindu in India, who suddenly realizes he never did believe in any of the gods in the Hindu pantheon he was taught to worship as a child. We only share the lack of [del]an appendix[/del] god belief.
You’re never going to get anywhere in understanding atheism, until you abandon the mistaken notion that it is a substitute for your religion. You might just as well look to see what was put into the person who had an appendectomy, in place of the appendix that was removed. It doesn’t exist. You are wasting your time looking for it. As long as you keep looking for it, you will never understand why appendectomies are performed. And you will continue to be equally clueless about atheism.
FTR, I have a friend from Ghana. He’s now a Catholic priest. He started his life as an African tribal animist. In fact, he was the heir-apparent to the hereditary leadership of his tribe. When he came to belief in Christianity, and Catholicism, he had to abandon his claim to that hereditary leadership, in order to become a Catholic priest. He did that. His brother is now the heir-presumptive. He took up belief in Catholicism, a belief-system I had already rejected. We had a rather interesting NY to CHI car (with no heat, in the middle of Feb.) trip, and we had nothing better to do than talk about our beliefs, while bitching about our toes freezing. He still makes it a point to stop and see me when he’s in the US, even though we have never agreed on religion. I always look forward to Fr. Paul’s visits. We have very interesting discussions on religion, and the nature of God, and how people in our two countries interpret the meaning of those words. But it has nothing at all to do with your (pchaos) world view. You really don’t matter to us. We really don’t care about you. Nor should we.
If I missed this, I apologize, but are they calling it a ‘church’? If so, why aren’t they just calling it a group, of some type? Seems like vegetarians holding a weekly meeting at Burger King
I’m all for the idea if them meeting, but not getting why they want to call it a church, if churches are what they endeavor to get away from?
Actually, science does not address the existence of the supernatural.
Yeah, you missed the entire point of the thread.
The OP is Christian and suggesting atheists form some kind of church.
Mod fight!!
In much the same way science does not address the existence of Superman.
Sadly, not all atheists are logical. They have nothing in common except the lack of belief in gods.
How could you objectively demonstrate a purely subjective concept (meaning)? Could you objectively demonstrate that a particular painting, say, wasn’t beautiful?
This was addressed to DSeid, but I’ll answer it anyway. I would use rationalism: given that my mother’s happiness is something I value, I would seek to create that happiness, based on what I know she likes, while operating within whatever restrictions of time and budget I was under.
Not really, they are all complimentary: the natural world is all that exists; humans are valuable and have agency; individuals are the basic unit of society; morals are predicated on the rights of others, individuals provide their own meaning to life by living authentically, and the ideal society is the one that facilitates that life.
I suppose conflicts would be handled on a case-by-case basis.
I’m sure their motives vary, but some atheists are also antitheists, and feel the need to oppose religious belief in others, which often manifests as sarcastic tweaking of religious icons, rituals, and such.
I think we’re saying the same thing in slightly different ways. SirGalahad said science can’t prove or disprove the supernatural, but that phrasing suggests the supernatural exists. I don’t think science takes that for granted. Science may not categorically address the supernatural, but it does end up explaining phenomena that others propose as supernatural.
My mother is dead a few years now, so, no present. Thanks.
Let me answer the question’s intent though by doing a compare and contrast.
You might give a present to your mother because the Bible says honor your father and mother and you, knowing your mother, logically deduce that she would like a present.
I might have given a present to my mother because I love her and have had past experiences that getting present is something that would make her happy. Or, in the case of my mother, not. She did not like getting presents. That was an inference, not a logical deduction on my part. A call she liked. Experience taught me that.
But my lack of either Bible or logic to support my actions (and your using both to support yours) is really immaterial. Those with God concepts will use logic and use inference; they will respond with behavior patterns based on years of evolution selecting for certain sorts of responses and based on learned socializations. And so will those without God concepts. You explain/justify your behaviors because you believe your religion tells you those things are right; I don’t need my religion to tell me … but amazingly enough most of the behaviors, most of the values, are likely the same.
You state that you have not met many atheists. I have. My experience has been that the atheists I know are if anything more likely to be moral ethical and selfless than are those who are overtly and explicitly “religious.” Oh I’ve met plenty of moral ethical and selfless religious folk too, don’t get me wrong. Just some who seem to be motivated to do unethical things in the name of their god. Or perhaps who use the institution of religion in unethical ways. Whereas atheism has no institution to so abuse. Religions as institutions tend to be among the ways we create “us” and "them"s and can be used to dehumanize the them. Now I do not blame religion for that. It is part of human nature, a part we need to be on guard from, and if it was not religion it would be something else … tribe, skin color, butter side up or down, stars on behinds …
You comprehend this POV at all?