Player1x3 said:
I speak from experience. So there you go |
lol - there I go ignoring your uninformed opinion then.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
Player1x3 said:
I speak from experience. So there you go |
lol - there I go ignoring your uninformed opinion then.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
Reasonable said:
Because Atheism isn't a negation, and the implication it is is insulting. Although to be fair part of the problem is the standard definition of Atheism and the fact, like Agnostic, it is a word the developed to define something besides being religious - i.e. if you're not religious your an Atheist. The problem is your modern Athesist sees the situation reversed. We are educated, informed and believe in what has been proven to be the case - i.e there is no negation because we don't even consider ourselves compared to religious people. We believe in evidence and science. There is no "disbelief" involved. Religion to a modern atheist is simply something that either has been disproven enough in terms of flaws in religous tracts, etc. or is so general and "unprovable" that it is simply ignored unless some evidence is provided. The problem IMHO is that the technical definition of an Atheist now lags well behind what an Atheist actually is. |
Well... I don't find anything insulting with the fact Atheism is a negation of a positive claim (there is/are god/s). If the positive claim for the existence of those gods didn't exist, atheism wouldn't exist as well, it would be a meaningless word. You see the point, right?
Also 1 thing... being atheist doesn't mean you're not religious... case in point: Buddhism. There is no god claim in that religion, thus making each and every buddhist an actual atheist. Doesn't make them rational or secular humanists or anything else for that matter... but they are still religious atheists.
What you proceed to define after would be considered a 'rationalist', and that's fine. I consider myself exactly that :). Being an atheist doesn't define me, it's merely a position that i'm forced to take due to a lot of people posing the ridiculous idea that there's some god or gods out there ;)
Reasonable said:
lol - there I go ignoring your uninformed opinion then. |
High school picking and teenage angst I have no evidence of. But the amount of self loathing and urge to feel superior is the case in about 75% atheists I know in real life.
Player1x3 said:
High school picking and teenage angst I have no evidence of. But the amount of self loathing and urge to feel superior is the case in about 75% atheists I know in real life. |
aren't self loathing / urge to feel superior 2 mutually exclusive feelings? are you sure you're not confusing 'atheists' with the group of emo kids you knew back in school?
Player1x3 said:
What are you talking about? What things? What ''true atheists''? Atheists dont even have a moral code or any code of that matter, they dont even believe in morals (and manage to be extremly self-righteous at the same time). True atheist wouldnt believe in God. Thats it ! |
There's such thing known as secular ethics, which exists in multiple shape and forms for a few hundreed years now (few thousand years if you count in Confucianism). So hands off my morality, that's not yours, believers, monopoly! Though to be fair I'm an atheist and many people desribe me as self-righteous (they use different rather insulting word, but that's not the point).
setsunatenshi said:
|
I doubt he sees any difference between the two.
"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"
"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."
(The Voice of a Generation and Seece)
"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"
(pizzahut451)
Reasonable said:
Because Atheism isn't a negation, and the implication it is is insulting. Although to be fair part of the problem is the standard definition of Atheism and the fact, like Agnostic, it is a word the developed to define something besides being religious - i.e. if you're not religious your an Atheist. The problem is your modern Athesist sees the situation reversed. We are educated, informed and believe in what has been proven to be the case - i.e there is no negation because we don't even consider ourselves compared to religious people. We believe in evidence and science. There is no "disbelief" involved. Religion to a modern atheist is simply something that either has been disproven enough in terms of flaws in religous tracts, etc. or is so general and "unprovable" that it is simply ignored unless some evidence is provided. The problem IMHO is that the technical definition of an Atheist now lags well behind what an Atheist actually is. |
All atheism is, is a lack of a belief in a God or gods. That is all it is. That is the definiton, and tells nothing about. It is a LACK of belief in something, and thus consists of describing an attribute that is missing. Just like humanity doesn't believe that in something call Fuoai, which I haven't defined, has ZERO impact on anything human beings do or believe, so it is with atheism. There is nothing there to be proud of missing, or magically makes one more educated or informed, believe in evidence or science. Now, one's belief in science and evidence, and rationalism (for the lack of a better word) can cause one to NOT have a belief in a God or gods, the lack of belief itself isn't anything.
What I see in what you wrote, is an attitude I read about in the book "Skipping towards Gommorah", where the write, who was homosexual, wrote that the homosexual community tended to have an attitude that just because someone was homosexual, it somehow made others their "brothers" or had elements that by being homosexual, you ended up with attributes because of sexual orientation, that rationally shouldn't exist. There is no such thing as "modern atheism". Being an atheist doesn't make you anything at all. That is the point here. Now, do you want to say your faith in science, or something else, like western rational thought makes something? That is fine. But don't presume that just because you lack a belief in something it means anything. It isn't. Your lack of belief, just like the belief others have in something, is a byproduct of something, and in and of itself isn't worth anything. I would say that the positive belief in something actually does have an impact because it gives something someone to move towards. A lack of a belief doesn't provide anything.
The 75% isn't so surprising since that's around the US number. However a lot more than just 1% are atheists.
Of course atheists are not so well represented in jail. They are better educated (probably wouldn't be an atheist if they weren't), hence wealthier, hence they commit less crime since they have less need to.
On the other hand, I will take a dumbass "evil" person over a smart, educated one any day of the week.
Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."
HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374
Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420
gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835
Player1x3 said:
High school picking and teenage angst I have no evidence of. But the amount of self loathing and urge to feel superior is the case in about 75% atheists I know in real life. |
What do you mean "urge" to feel superior. We are superior!
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
I don't believe this statistic because it's singling out Christians.
Reputation proceeds me, they told you I'm crazy, I swear I don't love the drama it loves me <3
BUY TAYLOR'S NEW ALBUM REPUTATION!!