dont you guys think its a little close-minded to say there is absolutely positively beyond a doubt no god/sprititual entity in any sense? i am not religious but it seems to me that atheism could be compared to religion, in that atheists dogmaticly deny the existence of god/spirit/whatever.

just a thought..

Views: 298

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Finding your own sufferings and then working to fix, or accept them, them builds character, i guess. I myself have my own failings that I can either try to fix or accept as who I am.
I completely agree that suffering is inevitable, just like one cannot be completley moral and still be human. But we can minimize it through scientific advancement and through infrastructure.
I had to wiki the Four Truths.

1.Life as we know it ultimately is or leads to suffering/uneasiness (dukkha) in one way or another.
2.Suffering is caused by craving. This is often expressed as a deluded clinging to a certain sense of existence, to selfhood, or to the things or phenomena that we consider the cause of happiness or unhappiness. Craving also has its negative aspect, i.e. one craves that a certain state of affairs not exist.
3.Suffering ends when craving ends. This is achieved by eliminating delusion, thereby reaching a liberated state of Enlightenment (bodhi);
4.Reaching this liberated state is achieved by following the path laid out by the Buddha.

I can agree on the first rule but the other laws seem like wishful thinking. One might even say that a regulated greed might make life more pleasent if the infrastructure already existed to make it work.

dṛṣṭi (ditthi): viewing reality as it is, not just as it appears to be.

This again reflects some common atheistic traits (not that all atheists may have theses traits, however). Droone's discussion of 'The new Buddhist atheism' may answer further questions.
Buddha-dharma pretty much says that trying to avoid/minimize suffering or eliminate it altogether is impossible. People talk about desire but they forget Sid also talked about aversion as the other side of that coin of suffering.
Trying to avoid the unpleasant things in life will only cause more suffering than if you just confronted them.

At the core of Buddha-dharma is the 1st Noble Truth that suffering is inevitable. You can't eliminate it. It's a fact of human existence that any life involves suffering. You can change how you relate to it though.
While suffering is inevitable, there are types of suffering that are not, that are our own making. Acknowledging that we can't eliminate suffering altogether is one of the steps toward doing something about the stuff you CAN change.
Circular reasoning. A book also told me that elves live together in middle earth with humans and fallen elves called orks, with wizards and short people. Another told me that the world was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. LOL

It's not dogmatic because people who are Atheist aren't required to not believe in God. Atheist is a label for people who identify with that belief. If you stray from it, you simply aren't Atheist anymore by definition. Atheists don't threaten people with hell or punishment for decoverting from it. There's no system of rules or beliefs one must follow. It's a label only.
Faulty logic alert! Battle mode initiated.


We are born atheists. No belief in anything whatsoever, until someone usually indoctrinates us with their ideologies. We usually accept it blindly, either because we are too young to reason correctly, or either that the doctrine is relevant to our interests ( infinite life? infinite power? infinite protection? infinity? ).

That doctrine is usually accompanied by motivators. Negative and positive.
Positive: Infinity(Heaven), life after death, happiness, social recognition ( in religious community ), etc.
Negative( based on fear) : Infinity(Hell), wrath of god, reminder of our own mortality , pain, bad fortune, etc.

Earlier in life you realize that there was no valid evidence for that doctrine except for a 3k years-old story book and countless personal testimonies.

It is not our job to prove you wrong. It is your job to prove you right. Until now, any religion doctrine that I ever heard was utter bullsh- stories.

You then react to certain stimulus that you face.


If stimulus is in accord with my belief, accept it. ( credulity )
If stimulus is against my religion, deny it. ( ignorance )
If person talks against your religion, take offense. Person backs up out of common sense.
Religion prevails.

Another thing.

religion = the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods
We don't worship. Don't believe in supernatural. Neither God or gods. We can't be compared to religion unless if you say that the natural is supernatural. We understand it. It's the natural. We don't understand it. it's the supernatural.

Unless you bring proof of this supernatural, that you don't even understand yourself, we won't believe it.

So, please stop inventing all kind of stories just for the sake of profiting of the human need of power, happiness, infinity, second life. It's disgraceful.


dogma = A principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true

We have no authority that is controlling us or telling us what is incontrovertibly true ( if you think about science, science does not say it's true it just says "based on the evidence at hand, this is how it works" ). Each and every one of us has became an atheist by it's own reasoning. It's that simple.

Stable thinking at it's best.

Quotes from my quotebook on the subject:
"Faith does not give you the answers, it just stops you asking questions." -Frater Ravus
"When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."-Stephen Roberts
"If you have faith in god you have ceased looking for the truth." -Unknown
"In some respects, science has far surpassed religion in delivering awe. How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, "This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed"? Instead they say, "No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way." " - Carl Sagan
Do you think its close-minded to say there is absolutely positively beyond a doubt no pixies/magical entities in any sense?

NOPE...yet I don't think anyone here actually says 'absolutely positively beyond a doubt' about god or anything else for that matter.

What we say as has already been mentioned is that until there's reason to propose such specific entities we don't see any reason to assume that they exist.

We prefer to ask the questions.. From what evidence, where and why did these various ideas about magical beings originate? How have they evolved? What did they evolve from?

Do I see a good reason to believe in the specific god Zeus? What about Woden/Odin? Thor? Apollo? Yahweh? Allah? Brahma? El Shadai? Elohim?

Nope...Does this mean they don't exist? Nope.. But it sure seems much more likely that they are human constructs then independent entities.
"in any sense"

In any sense at all? Really? OK...

God exists. As a memetic entity - a shared instance of consciousness among multiple individuals. To say "god says X" is therefore directly analogous to "Popeye says X". Therefore, god is a selective, aggregate expression of self. You pretty much get to decide whatever god is, but there are social rules that define how far you can go (no one is allowed to say "Popeye hates spinach.")

God is like an imaginary friend. Except with inquisitions, institutionalized child abuse, etc.

Does this mean I've reconverted?
Michael is still around, I think. And no cojones other than the willingness to be challenged is required to hang here.
Agnosticism is a nod to the other side. Think politics. If you don't have the answer, then you are a bad candidate. Religion has such a faulty premise that they can't afford wishy washy candidates.
Most believers make the false assumption that Atheists deny the existence of god or gods. However Atheists are first and foremost people who do not believe in any gods. There is a difference. Some do go further and contend that god does not exist. Most of us are very open minded (not a little close-minded as questioned posed). But as others have said the onus of proof is on those who profess a belief and not on those who don't. BTW another common view of believers is that it takes as much faith to be an Atheist as it does to be a believer. Also wrong - it requires no faith not to believe something.This is my first post so will stop here.


© 2022   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service