• @agent_flounder
    link
    English
    199 months ago

    that atheism is a belief like any other, it is not fact, and it is not science, it is a belief.

    For me, personally, I have not found or been presented with sufficient evidence to believe in the existence of any sort of deity. I don’t consider it a belief so much as a lack of belief until sufficient evidence is provided. Which is a perfectly sensible default position towards any claim, really. My reason for deconverting was due to adopting much more stringent requirements for believing religious claims.

    Only science is science. One’s thinking and epistemology could be scientific or non-scientific, though. Science depends on using good quality evidence to inform our theories.

    • @Dagrothus@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      189 months ago

      Exactly. Calling atheism a belief just like religion is absurd. That’s like if I were to say underground lizard people control the government, then branding you a non-lizard-eist for not believing me. It’s not a belief system, it’s just the logical default when no evidence is presented.

      • @NattyNatty2x4@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        79 months ago

        The “atheism is just another belief” talking point is popular in religious circles because it’s a little mental game they can play to try and make their lack of evidence equal to someone saying they lack evidence. They frame atheism as an assertion that no gods exist, which is therefore equal to a religious person making the assertion that their god does exist. We know that in reality, lack of belief in something (anything) is passive and the default (I’m not gonna believe that lizard people live in the sewers unless you prove it to me), but they try to frame it as an active claim because then it’s just a bunch of people claiming different things.

        It’s just another form of deceit they wrap around themselves to hide from the fact that they have no actual evidence of the divine existing.

          • @taladar@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            39 months ago

            Agnosticism is not some sort of ‘weak atheism’, it is a completely independent thing, you can have gnostic theists, gnostic atheists, agnostic theists and agnostic atheists. It just means that you believe something can be known about the existence of god vs. you believe nothing can be known about it.

            • @Obi@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              19 months ago

              Thanks for the precision, I’m definitely not an expert in the topic, grew up completely religion-free.

            • Bizarroland
              link
              fedilink
              19 months ago

              You raise a good point. I feel like my personal issue is with gnostic atheists, who proudly trumpet that since human beings cannot prove that God exists then he must not exist and any attempt to think or act otherwise is just foolishness.

              I’m much more conversationally compatible with the agnostic atheists who say we can’t know that God exists so most likely he does not.

              To be fair, there are assholes in all four quadrants, and my actual beef is with the assholes who feel like they need to force their belief or their lack thereof on me.

              I would feel the same way about a militant zoroastrian who expects me to convert to their religion as I would against a militant Gnostic atheist who expects me to abandon my own.

              And I also understand that many atheists have been antagonized by militant Christians for not believing and so therefore they are primed to defend themselves against anyone that identifies with their former enemies.

              • @NattyNatty2x4@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                19 months ago

                Realistically gnostic atheists and gnostic theists are just different flavors of the same type of stupid. Obviously we can argue one is more likely to be correct and how we should operate because of that, but that’s covered by the atheist/theist part of the title. Anyone claiming to know something that’s inherently unprovable is either stupid or intellectually lazy

    • @senoro@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      39 months ago

      This is a very good point that I completely missed, lack of belief is really a default which is what atheism is, or what agnostic athiesm is.

      The chances of any religion on earth being close to correct are unbelievably small if at all. So to follow a religion at all will almost certainly not be following the most truest of truths. My problem is with people who take this fair and reasonable viewpoint, and morph it into hatred for people who do choose to believe in a religion. Sometimes it’s nice to believe in what probably isn’t true, that doesn’t make that person stupid or oblivious.

      I really chose a bad term ‘online athiest’, I meant it more like who the term ‘average redditor’ describes vs who the factual average redditor would be. It may be misleading, but I’m not very good at coming up with names for things.

      Ultimately my comment was directed at the author of this post, which says to take a book, that is over a thousand years old and do whatever is in it. The author of the post is what I’d call an ‘online athiest’ because they use the guise of athiesm to just post stupid drivel about a book I’m sure they have never read.

      • @agent_flounder
        link
        English
        29 months ago

        I appreciate the well thought out reply. I agree that choosing to believe in a thing does bring comfort in difficult times I know all too well. And I know the type to whom you directed your comment–the edgy atheist that is just rude and shits on anyone religious.

        In an echo of your good faith… (And sorry for the lengthy post here). In case it is helpful to hear my perspective as it was for me to hear yours…

        I admit that I have been less than kind about religion and have been the edgy atheist at times. That was wrong of me.

        Your comment has given me cause to reflect.

        I know my anger shouldn’t be directed at all religious prople. It should be directed at the religious right who display bigotry and judgement, and also to the religious leaders who abuse their power. I let my anger, bitterness, and personal hurt get the better of me and I have lashed out too widely sometimes. Not ok. And I am sorry for the times I’ve done that.

        Relevant backstory: I was religious for most of my life, over 40 years. My experience toward the end of that felt like utter betrayal.

        I had gotten caught up in an evangelical church. Most people I interacted with were quick to judge, lecture, and preach though I had considered them friends. It was hurtful to discover most were interacting with me out of obligation, not authenticity. They weren’t there to support me or be a friend, but just to police my actions.

        (And while I get the biblical basis for what they did, they failed to act on 1 Cor 13 – doing everything out of love, the kind that requires commitment, genuine connection, a relationship with authenticity and vulnerability, not just calling people out without having any real investment in their life).

        I left that church. It took some years after that before I deconverted.

        I realize I have anger and resentment towards those specific people and too often let it bleed over to more than just them.

        I have always felt frustration and anger towards people who use religion as a cover for hatred and bigotry. As I am sure is true for you. Nothing wrong there except directing that anger more broadly.

        I am also angry at myself for being sucked into that church and for putting my trust in untrustworthy people. I’m angry for letting my religious belief hurt others and myself over the years.

        And I sometimes allow myself to be angry and disdainful of all religious people and that’s simply not right or ok.

        So I will do better. I will recognize my anger and deal with it more appropriately before commenting on religion or the religious.

        Again thanks for the reply.

        • @senoro@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          29 months ago

          I myself am guilty of having been an ‘online athiest’, everyone does it, and we do let our personal biases get in the way of that. All I want, and I’m sure all anybody wants is for people to just respect each other and be kind, and it isn’t always easy, especially when no matter how hard you try there will be people who won’t reflect on themselves.

          But for someone to see error in the ways of their past and try to change, no matter how successful they are, that’s all that matters. If everyone tried to be kind and understanding we’d all be better off for it.

          Thanks for your comment, it’s great to hear your story :)

          Have a good day my friend.