Why/how is atheism better than theism?

Post Reply New Topic

This question is to address the underpinnings of atheism, so that we may better understand its truth, and STRIDENTLY oppose theism.

There are multiple reasons that come to mind on this issue:
1) Atheism rejects the existence of a moral tyrant, as many theistic systems have.
2) Atheism promotes real human freedom.
3) Atheism reduces the necessary entities that one must hold due to the advances of science.
4) Most theistic ideas are such nonsense as to be unworthy of our trust.
5) There is very lacking proof for theism of any sort.

What are your ideas?

Just remember, who is the person you can expect to STRIDENTLY assert the power of the atheistic case, and bring both REASON and TRUTH to the matter for good? I think by reading this, you know the answer, and it isn't a Marxist, a person who thinks that ET is god, or any other, but rather an option far more glorious.
(This message has been paid for by the commission to awesomize Awesomelyglorious)

1) Atheism rejects the existence of a moral tyrant, as many theistic systems have.
Guilty, however there are religious beliefs (often more spiritual in nature) that do not use a moral tyrant.

2) Atheism promotes real human freedom.
Not necessarily Atheism promotes freedom from a moral tyrant, not from a political one.

3) Atheism reduces the necessary entities that one must hold due to the advances of science.
Atheism denies the existence of any entities. Science is using the scientific method. Until then it remains theory.

4) Most theistic ideas are such nonsense as to be unworthy of our trust.
Religion is swamped in nonsense. However there is quite a few golden eggs hidden with valuable knowledge.

5) There is very lacking proof for theism of any sort.
Incorrect there is only lacking proof from a materialism perspective which denies spiritual existence.

Atheism is better because it is more parismonious and more easier to integrate into scientifically-informed web of belief.

I don't think it's better, but I wanted to see results....and post.

Posting is fun, and something I do STRIDENTLY!

(godlessly too...)

Well, if one looks at American politics, it is usually the social conservatives who are religious, and atheists are more often socially liberal and want real human freedom. The real reason why atheism was so restrictive in the USSR was a Marxian dogma, and this can be clearly seen in how the idea of the USSR was to bend everything to Marxism, but not to Godlessness.


The two go together because scientific ideas such as evolution, and certain advances in psychology remove problems that atheists have to solve to go against religion.


Well, the problem with spiritual experience is the confusion. Which theism? A hindu pantheism? An olympian polytheism? A Calvinist monotheism? A liberal Christian monotheism? The problems seem humongous given the confusion.

Metaphysical Philosophy is a deeply untouched subject for many people worldwide

Materialism views things such as thoughts as "not real" i.e. a ghost would be viewed as hallucination produced by a thought which was produced by nerves/chemicals in the brain.

Duality would view the same perspective as materialism except it would not view the ghost as a hallucination but as being equally real as the person seeing the phenomena.

A paradigm shift is essentially when the philosophical perspective changes thus changing the interpretation of the results.

Due to the increasing amounts of limitations materialism places on physics some expect a paradigm shift to duality or another more balanced metaphysical perspective.

Materialism is a strict matter over mind philosophy
Duality is likely the best candidate for a paradigm shift as it is more balanced in defining reality
Idealism (this would be an atheists hell) views the mind as the base of all existence. (opposite of materialism basically).

Matter and Energy in space-time is all that there is. Thoughts are electrochemical processes of the brain so they are quite real.

ruveyn

According to materialism. Metaphysics does not contradict science it only affects how it is interpreted.

Atheism is logical.

It depends on what you mean by "metaphysical philosophy", as a lot of people read metaphysics as in crystal healing, and a lot of people read metaphysics as in actual academic philosophy.


You mean mental images aren't real? Well.... mental images AREN'T real images. This is often shown with a particular geometric form, basically it is a rectangle with a square removed. The question is at what angle a person can see a dot inside the area where the square was removed out of the body of the rectangle. People can't figure it out at all though, but if there was a real image moved, then this should be easy.


The problem is that it multiplies entities in a bizarre manner. Monism really is a better explanation if it works simply due to Occam's razor.


Y'know, I *really* doubt that. Some physicists, such as Vic Stenger, consider this kind of idea outright stupid. As it stands though, there is no basic mental reality, so a shift to include a non-basic mental reality would be ad hoc.


Duality is not parsimonious, even compared to idealism. Both suck though because the mind isn't a basic unit, but rather the existence of all of the aberrations we see really do suggest that a material world is basic and that a mental reality cannot be nearly as real.

This can be seen in the inability of some people to know their own deficiencies here:
http://psych.utoronto.ca/~peterson/psy4 ... 201996.pdf

This can be seen with conditions such as Cotard's syndrome.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotard_delusion

This can kind of be seen in the lack of unity in the mind itself.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... ural/7055/
http://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/papers/selfctr.htm

A lot of truths about the mind and brain utterly shatter any dream of "dualism" or "idealism".

2) Atheism promotes real human freedom.
What about in regards to religious freedom?

You are free to not believe in any way you like.

My answer is that atheism is only superior to theism if it is true. Since I personally am a theist I consider atheism to be inaccurate. But theism is only superior to atheism if it is true... and I can't prove to anyone that I'm right and they're wrong. Couldn't do it when I was an atheist either.

As you can guess, I posted other...

What about being able to follow a religion of your choice?

Most theists wish to promote their particular theism, even at the public expense. Atheists usually give lipservice to a free society, even for religious people, despite thinking religious beliefs to be nonsense.