I wouldn't say it's erroneous. I think agnostics are the only group who could say they are truely not religious. There is as much evidence for a God as against, so to say I don't know and don't care is probably the rational approach.
People say Athiests are religious for two reasons; firstly because they believe there is nothing based on as much evidence for God, I don't see much difference in the belief of something vs belief of nothing.
And secondly because of the ferocity of the Atheists belief system, many may spout lines so similar there could be a Atheist bible and they try to convert everyone they meet to their so called "non-religion".
I can be considered an athiest depending on who you talk to or the subject we talk about. But I don't have a belief in nothing or that I believe there is no god. I am not Anti-theist, so I am not against religion - I HAVE NO RELIGION. I think you are also part of the crowd that places atheist ideas into a "non-religious belief" column.
Belief is the state of mind in which a person thinks something to be the case, with or without there being empirical evidence to prove that something is the case with factual certainty.
There is enough empirical evidence so far to support the conclusion that there are no deities. There is not sufficient empirical evidence to support the conclusion there are deities. Therefore, you must enter the realm of 'belief' in a deity as there is not enough evidence to support that claim.
I agree that agnostics take the rational approach, but we are talking about belief which is irrational by definition.
Anyways, your stance is clearly wrong and you're taking the traditional religious approach when confronted with an atheist. Its quite simple - atheism is not nihilism - it isn't a belief in ANYTHING. There is no belief. Belief in nothing is not atheism.
I'm sorry I must have missed a lot of science news.
Empirical evidence is information acquired by observation or experimentation. This data is recorded and analyzed by scientists and is a central process as part of the scientific method
I would love to review some of those papers/studies that concluded there is no God. Are there any that stand out as the "best" or most peer reviewed with similar conclusions?
I never said there was empirical evidence proving or disproving anything, just that enough exists to make an educated conclusion (re: assumption). But that is not a belief in something. Look - I am not interested in debating theology with an anon theist on Voat. Believe what you want - I don't believe in sky fairies, sky pies, or any other nonsense.
I guess we dissagree on the definition of the word belief and the scientific method.
I wasn't after Proof because I know none exists (there is Proof of little in science) one way or the other. I was after some of the science/ empirical evidence that supported your position.
Since you do not want to share any evidence, I assume you have none.
view the rest of the comments →
Tb0n3 ago
Atheism isn't a religion.
un1ty ago
Don't know why the downvoats - Atheism literally means 'without theism' which means "no religion."
I think people like to erroneously conflate 'belief' with 'I believe in nothing" as being equals.
2899456? ago
I wouldn't say it's erroneous. I think agnostics are the only group who could say they are truely not religious. There is as much evidence for a God as against, so to say I don't know and don't care is probably the rational approach.
People say Athiests are religious for two reasons; firstly because they believe there is nothing based on as much evidence for God, I don't see much difference in the belief of something vs belief of nothing. And secondly because of the ferocity of the Atheists belief system, many may spout lines so similar there could be a Atheist bible and they try to convert everyone they meet to their so called "non-religion".
:)
un1ty ago
Ummm, no.
I can be considered an athiest depending on who you talk to or the subject we talk about. But I don't have a belief in nothing or that I believe there is no god. I am not Anti-theist, so I am not against religion - I HAVE NO RELIGION. I think you are also part of the crowd that places atheist ideas into a "non-religious belief" column.
There is enough empirical evidence so far to support the conclusion that there are no deities. There is not sufficient empirical evidence to support the conclusion there are deities. Therefore, you must enter the realm of 'belief' in a deity as there is not enough evidence to support that claim.
I agree that agnostics take the rational approach, but we are talking about belief which is irrational by definition.
Anyways, your stance is clearly wrong and you're taking the traditional religious approach when confronted with an atheist. Its quite simple - atheism is not nihilism - it isn't a belief in ANYTHING. There is no belief. Belief in nothing is not atheism.
Not sure how to put it more simple.
2899786? ago
I'm sorry I must have missed a lot of science news.
Empirical evidence is information acquired by observation or experimentation. This data is recorded and analyzed by scientists and is a central process as part of the scientific method
I would love to review some of those papers/studies that concluded there is no God. Are there any that stand out as the "best" or most peer reviewed with similar conclusions?
un1ty ago
I never said there was empirical evidence proving or disproving anything, just that enough exists to make an educated conclusion (re: assumption). But that is not a belief in something. Look - I am not interested in debating theology with an anon theist on Voat. Believe what you want - I don't believe in sky fairies, sky pies, or any other nonsense.
2904609? ago
I guess we dissagree on the definition of the word belief and the scientific method. I wasn't after Proof because I know none exists (there is Proof of little in science) one way or the other. I was after some of the science/ empirical evidence that supported your position.
Since you do not want to share any evidence, I assume you have none.