Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Atheism is the sound of no god hands clapping

Page 1 of 1 [ 14 posts ] 

Previous topic | Next topic

Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

13 Nov 2010, 8:15 pm

Does that koan make better sense of the concept of atheism for you religious folks?

Ah hell, everyone just argue furiously.


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,227
Location: the island of defective toy santas

14 Nov 2010, 1:04 am

atheism is declining to believe in any reality other than the familiar physical one. but, to paraphrase p.k. dick, reality is that which doesn't go away if you don't believe in it.



Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

16 Nov 2010, 2:00 pm

Problem is, atheism as you define her does not provide for a militant wing.

I do not believe in String Theory. I have no impulse to identify all the String Theoreticians and convert or eliminate them.

There are too many atheists itching to save my soul [or disappear me] for practical 21st century atheism to be merely failure or refusal to believe.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

16 Nov 2010, 4:29 pm

Philologos wrote:

There are too many atheists itching to save my soul [or disappear me] for practical 21st century atheism to be merely failure or refusal to believe.


Most atheists do not give a rat's patootie about what you believe or don't believe. The outspoken atheists simply do not want to give religion and the religious the free ride they have been receiving that last two thousand years.

ruveyn



Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

16 Nov 2010, 4:34 pm

Philologos wrote:
There are too many atheists itching to save my soul [or disappear me] for practical 21st century atheism to be merely failure or refusal to believe.


Those atheists are also antitheists. While antitheism is compatible with atheism and, indeed, much more common among atheists (as you sort of have to disbelieve in Gods before you state that the false belief in God is harmful), it is not a neccessary condition for atheism.


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


waltur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2009
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 924
Location: california

16 Nov 2010, 5:40 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Philologos wrote:

There are too many atheists itching to save my soul [or disappear me] for practical 21st century atheism to be merely failure or refusal to believe.


Most atheists do not give a rat's patootie about what you believe or don't believe. The outspoken atheists simply do not want to give religion and the religious the free ride they have been receiving that last two thousand years.

ruveyn


Master_Pendant wrote:
Those atheists are also antitheists. While antitheism is compatible with atheism and, indeed, much more common among atheists (as you sort of have to disbelieve in Gods before you state that the false belief in God is harmful), it is not a neccessary condition for atheism.


what those guys said.


_________________
Waltur the Walrus Slayer,
Militant Asantist.
"BLASPHEMER!! !! !! !!" (according to AngelRho)


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

16 Nov 2010, 5:46 pm

waltur wrote:
ruveyn


Master_Pendant wrote:
Those atheists are also antitheists. While antitheism is compatible with atheism and, indeed, much more common among atheists (as you sort of have to disbelieve in Gods before you state that the false belief in God is harmful), it is not a neccessary condition for atheism.


what those guys said.[/quote]

I take that as an unequivocal endorsement of my "Master_Pedant for Alpha-Plus Atheistic Antitheist on June 2011" campaign.


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

16 Nov 2010, 5:48 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:
waltur wrote:
Quote:
ruveyn


Master_Pendant wrote:
Those atheists are also antitheists. While antitheism is compatible with atheism and, indeed, much more common among atheists (as you sort of have to disbelieve in Gods before you state that the false belief in God is harmful), it is not a neccessary condition for atheism.


what those guys said.


I take that as an unequivocal endorsement of my "Master_Pedant for Alpha-Plus Atheistic Antitheist on June 2011" campaign.

I should run a "draft ruveyn" campaign.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

16 Nov 2010, 5:51 pm

Orwell wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:
waltur wrote:
Quote:
ruveyn


Master_Pendant wrote:
Those atheists are also antitheists. While antitheism is compatible with atheism and, indeed, much more common among atheists (as you sort of have to disbelieve in Gods before you state that the false belief in God is harmful), it is not a neccessary condition for atheism.


what those guys said.


I take that as an unequivocal endorsement of my "Master_Pedant for Alpha-Plus Atheistic Antitheist on June 2011" campaign.

I should run a "draft ruveyn" campaign.


YOU ARE A MONSTER!! ! :P

Besides, as bad of an atheist (and as bankrolled by you) as he was, AG was right about one thing:

http://www.wrongplanet.net/posts127481- ... 722a935e8d

I don't want a reconstructed Raelian representing the face of WP Strident Atheism!! !! !! !


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


Last edited by Master_Pedant on 16 Nov 2010, 6:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

waltur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2009
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 924
Location: california

16 Nov 2010, 5:58 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:
waltur wrote:
Quote:
ruveyn


Master_Pendant wrote:
Those atheists are also antitheists. While antitheism is compatible with atheism and, indeed, much more common among atheists (as you sort of have to disbelieve in Gods before you state that the false belief in God is harmful), it is not a neccessary condition for atheism.


what those guys said.


I take that as an unequivocal endorsement of my "Master_Pedant for Alpha-Plus Atheistic Antitheist on June 2011" campaign.

I should run a "draft ruveyn" campaign.


YOU ARE A MONSTER!! ! :P


a draft ruveyn?! ...apparently google images is not a ready source of images of centaurs with hasidic sideburns, otherwise i'd have pasted a real monster.

MP, it was more of a limited endorsement of your statement :) i endorsed AG as "wrongplanet's most strident atheist" already this month and i can only do so much endorsing at a time. what do i look like, the former half-term governor of alaska?


_________________
Waltur the Walrus Slayer,
Militant Asantist.
"BLASPHEMER!! !! !! !!" (according to AngelRho)


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

16 Nov 2010, 6:06 pm

waltur wrote:
MP, it was more of a limited endorsement of your statement :) i endorsed AG as "wrongplanet's most strident atheist" already this month and i can only do so much endorsing at a time. what do i look like, the former half-term governor of alaska?


When it becomes apparent (i.e. the first week of June 2011) that I'm going to knock the shoot of Awesomelyglorious's campaign, will you then flip-flop? Superdelegate George McGovern did it!


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

16 Nov 2010, 6:28 pm

Quote:
koan: A puzzling, often paradoxical statement or story, used in Zen Buddhism as an aid to meditation and a means of gaining spiritual awakening.
Fuzzy wrote:
Does [Atheism is the sound of no god hands clapping] make better sense of the concept of atheism for you religious folks?

No, for there would first have to be a god before no god hands could clap, and neither could there be a spiritual awakening apart from the existence of one.


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

17 Nov 2010, 2:31 pm

The sound of No-God preaching to an illusory choir.

On a serious note - I stupidly feel that once in a while even this post-Absurdist forum there could / should be serious discussion - I ask:

"The outspoken atheists simply do not want to give religion and the religious the free ride they have been receiving that last two thousand years. "

A. There were no religions earlier than 2000 BP? On what do you base that? What I know from the archaeologists suggests that religion-like activities and societies existed much earlier, in some cases in apparently more privileged positions. Are we using the same definition of religion?

B. On what do you base the "free ride"? Societal support? Freedom from criticism? Freedom from physical attack? I have not lived 2000 years yet [some days it feels more] but I never saw religion and the religious being given any kind of free ride in this country - unless you count the fact that in grade school certain classmates got to take Jewish holidays on top of what everybody else got off - too bad if you were Buddhist or Muslim but there were none in my school.

In any case, an awful lot of very painfully dead religious people from the last 200 yeares would like to discuss that "free ride" with you.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

17 Nov 2010, 7:08 pm

Philologos wrote:
The sound of No-God preaching to an illusory choir.

On a serious note - I stupidly feel that once in a while even this post-Absurdist forum there could / should be serious discussion - I ask:

"The outspoken atheists simply do not want to give religion and the religious the free ride they have been receiving that last two thousand years. "

A. There were no religions earlier than 2000 BP? On what do you base that? What I know from the archaeologists suggests that religion-like activities and societies existed much earlier, in some cases in apparently more privileged positions. Are we using the same definition of religion?

B. On what do you base the "free ride"? Societal support? Freedom from criticism? Freedom from physical attack? I have not lived 2000 years yet [some days it feels more] but I never saw religion and the religious being given any kind of free ride in this country - unless you count the fact that in grade school certain classmates got to take Jewish holidays on top of what everybody else got off - too bad if you were Buddhist or Muslim but there were none in my school.

In any case, an awful lot of very painfully dead religious people from the last 200 yeares would like to discuss that "free ride" with you.


Religions are given all sorts of tax advantages. Scientology is delighted with this.

Before you can acquire the right to speak for a bunch of dead people you have to have their written agreement.