Absolutely. Often we have no choice, say with nationality, political ideology, members of a school class room, sporting clubs of diverse forms.
To get a bunch of atheists to conform to any other idea apart from a lack of belief,is like herding cats.
In ‘Cat’s Cradle’, Kurt Vonnegut coined the term ‘granfalloon’ to describe the practice of ascribing relationships between people or things based on very flimsy evidence.
EG When traveling, one meets another person from one’s country. That’s hardly enough to make any assumptions, but I’m sure I’ve done it,especially when traveling alone…
The video below is worth a glance;'“Beware of the granfalloon”
It’s not quite the same. Asking people why they’re doing something and grouping them by their response isn’t the same as saying that all people who don’t believe in stanta clause must have something in common when they clearly don’t. My goal isn’t to get Atheists to conform to anything, it’s to determine why people who are Atheists describe themselves as such. I’m interested in the mental energy expended and the resulting epistemology. Saying that nothing better has come along yet is different than saying that I have a firm position on how I measure reality. I know there are plenty of shades of gray in between and maybe some kind of scale is better. I know a few Atheists with terrible epistemologies that rival my religious friends, but I also know other Atheists with great epistemologies.
Let’s say I wanted to find a group of people that has the best epistemology on this planet in an efficient manner. Considering that the vast majority of the people on earth believe in some form of god, I can immediately eliminate them. That leaves Atheists. Out of those Atheists, how many of them have a good epistemology? I know it will be a small, diverse group, but that is what I am interested in. For this group, what is your epistemology, how did you shape it, how could you see it changing in the future? These are they types of philosophical questions I am interested in and thus, why I am grouping them this way.
When I was told the religious stories, I didn’t believe them. Years later I was told that makes me an atheist. So instead of trying to get into a 30 minute conversation trying to explain what I don’t believe in, it is a hell of a lot simpler to say I’m an atheist. It seems to get my ideas across, at least most of the time.
I doubt if I come close to qualifying for that small group TheMagus, but I will contribute, hopefully adding to your knowledge base.
I am a mechanic, all of my working life I worked with my hands, from jet engines to mining, to being an electrician. I do not have any training in philosophy or epistemology. Almost every job I worked was high risk and critical. If I messed up, people could die. How I interact with this world is a result of my training and experience, real world where there were real and immediate consequences.
That knowledge was derived not from philosophical considerations or mental exercises, all of them were the result of hard-earned knowledge, usually a result of some tragedy.
I will agree with you on naturalism and materialism. But I completely reject your attempting to interject determinism into this thread. I went back and re-read this entire thread, and determinism was never mentioned by anyone.
How can I respect your posts when you dishonestly include determinism?
Please prove that an atheist is influenced by determinism.
If all of reality is material, then the immAterial will does not exist. Your actions are determined by the same natural laws that control the working of a computer, the falling of an unsupported ball, the flow of current, etc. Hence, determinism. Even Hawking conceded this point, but to justify his pretend science he said he would just act as it was not true. What silly contradiction. Atheists cannot live consistently in God’s universe.
Please offer your definition of “immAterial” so we have common ground and are not talking about two different things.
Incorrect. Science is very aware of such things as uncertainty and attempts to include it in calculations and final predictions.
I am an atheist and do not ascribe to determinism. This stems from my understanding that the very early universe was subject to chaos. The Cosmic Microwave Background is not uniform.
Immaterial, that which is not made of anything material, such as elements.
Science is not aware of anything. Don’t personify it.
Again, if the universe of only made of the material, the will, the mind, thought, beauty, reason, etc, does not exist. You are merely reacting to environmental inputs based on the laws of science and your physical makeup. This is materialism consistently apply.
If you reject determinism, you are rejecting atheism, confirming God’s claim that already know He exists, and you must provide your empirical proof that the mind, the will and reason exists. Show me pictures of these three things. Good luck.
Good point, I was not attempting to personify science. I was referring to those who rely on or work with science.
That is an assertion. I could counter with the opposite, and we would appear to be at a standstill. But the results of research and science describes the material processes that generate such things as thought, reason, and beauty.
Those may appear to be worthless, but we ascribe worth to those effects, and that is what contributes to the quality of our lives.
For example, we are genetically programmed animals with our two primary directives, to survive and procreate. As a male, a female with clear unblemished skin, good muscularity, large breasts, and a wide pelvic girdle indicates a healthier potential mate that offers favorable odds in more offspring.
Right, materialists deny the existence of the immaterial, which means you have no mind, no will, no reason. You are nothing but a meat machine that just exists. Tell me what elements are the mind, the will and reason made of?
Atheism: the disbelief in the existence and reality of any God, Gods or other type of supernatural being or entities, based on the lack of physical, empirical evidence. So yes, atheism IS NOT a belief, or philosophy, or a world view, which is the correct view of the Op.
Even an agnostic like myself, knows what atheism is! How come theists don’t get it?
Have I stooped to insulting you? Respect is a two-way street, and if you do not grant it to me, I will not grant it to you. Please remember this moment in time, you were the one who chose to throw shit at me. Don’t go waa waa and play the victim if I return the favor one day. You just probably lost the sole atheist who was willing to treat you with any respect.
Your definition of “immaterial”
is the same as “not existing”. I do not deny the immaterial, I do not accept that anything immaterial exists. How can I when it does not exist?
It was not my intent to insult you. Rather I was pointing out that since YOU say the immaterial does not exist and since the mind, reason and the will are immaterial, you must assert they do not exist (for both of us). I then asked you that if you say they do exist, what elements are they made from.
