Pope says atheists can go to heaven...

[TimG]

This is a response to several of the posters:

The problem here is a difference is how the word atheism is used by different people.

For many here 'atheism' is simply the question of believing in gods or not.

For others 'atheism' is refers to the much broader metaphysical belief systems that include the question of atheism/theism.

Now I asked cybercoma to provide different words to describe the different classes of metaphysical belief systems and he simply ignored it as irrelevant. Its not irrelevant - it is the entire basis for the debate.

As a parallel - the word 'liberal' has a specific dictionary definition, it also has a meaning to Canadians which goes beyond the dictionary definition. The same word has yet another meaning to Americans. None of these differences are wrong - it just means that if you are going to use the word 'liberal' you better make damn sure you know how the people hearing/reading it are going to interpret it.

The same is true of 'atheist'. When people say atheists have a belief system they are referring to the broader metaphysical belief system that must accompany any claims about god. It is simply not possible to make a claim without constructing a belief system that forms the basis for the claim.

If you have an issue with this use of the word atheist then propose some alternate words to use in this forum when referring to those concepts.

Edited January 21, 2014 by TimG

[cybercoma]

Tim, atheists can have any conception of metaphysics that they want or they can abstain and simply say they don't know. You're again trying to introduce knowledge claims into something that by definition is about belief.

[carepov]

The problem here is a difference is how the word atheism is used by different people.

For many here 'atheism' is simply the question of believing in gods or not.

For others 'atheism' is refers to the much broader metaphysical belief systems that include the question of atheism/theism.

Now I asked cybercoma to provide different words to describe the different classes of metaphysical belief systems and he simply ignored it as irrelevant. Its not irrelevant - it is the entire basis for the debate.

As a parallel - the word 'liberal' has a specific dictionary definition, it also has a meaning to Canadians which goes beyond the dictionary definition. The same word has yet another meaning to Americans. None of these differences are wrong - it just means that if you are going to use the word 'liberal' you better make damn sure you know how the people hearing/reading it are going to interpret it.

The same is true of 'atheist'. When people say atheists have a belief system they are referring to the broader metaphysical belief system that must accompany any claims about god. It is simply not possible to make a claim without constructing a belief system that forms the basis for the claim.

If you have an issue with this use of the word atheist then propose some alternate words to use in this forum when referring to those concepts.

Tim, you may be right. The use of the word "atheist" in society is loaded with generalizations. Like you said, the word "liberal" is a similar word - but arguably almost any word that is used to describe a person comes with attached generalizations, for example: "chess player", "accountant", "environmentalist".

It is up to the speaker/writer to use the correct words as per their definition. It is up to the listener/reader to interpret correctly - to not over-generalize (i.e stereotype, pre-judge) and instead to ask the speaker/writer follow-up questions or clarification.

Q: Do you believe in God?

A: No - I am an atheist

Q: So you are sure there is no God?

A: Yes, I believe that no god(s) exist.

Q: Do you believe in God?

A: No - I am an atheist

Q: So you are sure there is no God?

A: No I am not sure, I am an agnostic atheist.

Q: Do you believe in God?

A: No - I am an atheist

Q: So you are sure there is no God?

A: No I am not sure and I don't care. I am an apathetic agnostic atheist.

Q: Do you believe in God?

A: No - I am an atheist

Q: So you are sure there is no God?

A: No, I am sure that humanoids were seeds planted by extraterrestrial beings that periodically visit Earth to....

[TimG]

It is up to the speaker/writer to use the correct words as per their definition. It is up to the listener/reader to interpret correctly - to not over-generalize (i.e stereotype, pre-judge) and instead to ask the speaker/writer follow-up questions or clarification.

Very cumbersome to do in many contexts which is why people want a single term to refer to recurring combinations of beliefs.

i.e. people who do not believe in god and feel a need to denigrate those that do believe in god.

Plenty of those people here. If not atheist then what to call them?

[Mighty AC]

The same is true of 'atheist'. When people say atheists have a belief system they are referring to the broader metaphysical belief system that must accompany any claims about god. It is simply not possible to make a claim without constructing a belief system that forms the basis for the claim.

This is ridiculous. Atheism is simply a term denoting a lack of belief in deities...that's it. Atheists do not necessarily share any other beliefs.

I do not believe in the existence of unicorns due to a lack of reasonable evidence for their existence. I did not construct a belief system for the basis of that claim. The same process applies to my lack of belief in fairies, Zeus, Nessy, Fraggles, and the god of the Bible.

If you have an issue with this use of the word atheist then propose some alternate words to use in this forum when referring to those concepts.

Simply use the term atheist correctly and new words are unnecessary.

[Mighty AC]

Very cumbersome to do in many contexts which is why people want a single term to refer to recurring combinations of beliefs.

i.e. people who do not believe in god and feel a need to denigrate those that do believe in god.

Plenty of those people here. If not atheist then what to call them?

The process of combating theism could be referred to as anti-theism.

Edited January 21, 2014 by Mighty AC

[TimG]

This is ridiculous. Atheism is simply a term denoting a lack of belief in deities...that's it. Atheists do not necessarily share any other beliefs.

And liberal is simply a term denoting a belief in freedom of action - except you know that that is not true - the word means a lot more in different contexts. Atheism has meaning beyond its dictionary definition when it is used in political discourse.

You say I should use the dictionary definition of words. I say you should learn how words are used in the real world and stop complaining because people don't use the words to mean what you would like them to mean.

Edited January 21, 2014 by TimG

[Bonam]

Atheism has meaning beyond its dictionary definition when it is used in political discourse.

You mean the absurd nonsensical meaning that religious fanatics try to paint it with to muddy the waters? Anyone outside that camp and its brainwashed followers knows exactly what atheism means and uses the term accordingly.

Social conservatives may want to paint the term "homosexual" to mean also mean immoral, promiscuous, etc. Too bad for them, it means what it means and it doesn't include those connotations.

Liberals may want to redefine the term "justice" to include "social justice", i.e., wealth redistribution. Too bad for them, that's not what it means.

Religious fanatics may want to define atheism as a religion. Too bad for them, they don't get to do that either.

There's meanings of words as they are actually used, and then there's meanings that specific groups try to impose on them through propaganda. You are falling for the latter.

[cybercoma]

The process of combating theism could be referred to as anti-theism.

It is anti-theism. That's the term that's generally used for those people.

[carepov]

Very cumbersome to do in many contexts which is why people want a single term to refer to recurring combinations of beliefs.

You can't label everything, there are too many combinations of beliefs.

i.e. people who do not believe in god and feel a need to denigrate those that do believe in god.

Plenty of those people here. If not atheist then what to call them?

Well it depends, you can call them "arrogant atheists", or "asshole atheists", or "atheists that are trying to be funny" or "atheists that are not informed about other people's beliefs" or "atheists that are not actually trying to denigrate others but are misunderstood or poorly communicating". It depends.

[cybercoma]

But what do we call atheists who have moustaches, wear khakis, and like to east at Vietnamese restaurants on Sundays?

[The_Squid]

But what do we call atheists who have moustaches, wear khakis, and like to east at Vietnamese restaurants on Sundays?

The_Squid

[The_Squid]

I say you should learn how words are used in the real world and stop complaining because people don't use the words to mean what you would like them to mean.

That's exactly what you have been told several times in this thread, and others.

You should read Kimmy's brilliant post... an excellent summary of exactly what you are attempting to do. All the twisting and deflecting won't change it.

[TimG]

You mean the absurd nonsensical meaning that religious fanatics try to paint it with to muddy the waters?

From my perspective 'anti-theists' have all of the attributes which they despise in theists (dogmatism, desire to spread the faith, condescension) so when theists claim that anti-theists are just like them I tend to agree.

That said, the word anti-theism captures the concept I wish to express so I have no issue using that term moving forward.

[Bonam]

That said, the word anti-theism captures the concept I wish to express so I have no issue using that term moving forward.

Sounds like a plan.

[Moonlight Graham]

The belief that there is nothing to the universe other than what can be explained by science *is* a belief. It has to be because it is claim that cannot be proven one way or another.

There's many different types of "atheism". If you believe with certainty there is no God(s), that is different than a lack of belief in Gods because of lack of evidence. Both mean "atheism" though, but different variants.

[eyeball]

I bet the Pope would feel differently about letting anti-theists into heaven.

[On Guard for Thee]

Tim, atheists can have any conception of metaphysics that they want or they can abstain and simply say they don't know. You're again trying to introduce knowledge claims into something that by definition is about belief.

You nailed it there, knowledge and belief, two rather different things. As the old adage goes about people believing in things they don't know: if one does it, it's mental retardation, if a group do it, it's a cult, if a really large group does it. it's a religion.

[Mighty AC]

I challenge the lack of skepticism and critical thinking in all sectors. I think we become part of the problem if we turn a blind eye to evil within our society. Whether it be racism, sexism, violence, homophobia, suppression of knowledge, and so on, I think we have a duty to future generations to combat evil. Since, religion is a large source of and perpetuator of hateful beliefs I try to help stop its spread. Hence, I am an anti-theist.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Mighty AC

[TimG]

Since, religion is a large source of and perpetrator of hateful beliefs I try to help stop its spread. Hence, I am an anti-theist.

This is like saying you want to combat crime and you are anti-native since natives are a large source and perpetrator of a crimes in this country.

There are many theists who are stand up for all the values that you claim to want to uphold yet seek to vilify them because they hold beliefs which you find distasteful. This is why I say that anti-theists are no different from some theists. They are two sides of the same coin.

If you really want to uphold those values you would not make blanket generalizations about theists and instead focus on the exact actions or words which are objectionable whether they are made by theists or others.

As a concrete example: can you give me any reason why causing harm by opposing abortion because it violates someone's theist belief system is different from causing harm by opposing technologies like golden rice because it violates some non-theist's belief system?

Edited January 24, 2014 by TimG

[Mighty AC]

Odd...you seem to think people are born religious. People are born into a race category but belief in invisible magic men is taught. Well, taught is being to kind. It is forced on children who have yet to develop the critical thinking skills necessary to prevent the brainwashing. In that regard, theism spreads like racism.

Poverty and massive income inequality are sources of crime and worth fighting, but more importantly they actually exist. There is no evidence for the basis of theism. Stamping out BS is a worthwhile goal in itself, but especially when the fairy tale is a major source of socially tolerated evil.

Even the religious who oppose misogyny, sexual orientationism, racism, social regression and the suppression of scientific knowledge still contribute to perpetuate the problem by lending support to a church or the idea that faith is a virtue. Belief in anything without evidence is a dangerous problem itself, but the social protection we grant to this stupidity is far worse.

[sharkman]

I challenge the lack of skepticism and critical thinking in all sectors. I think we become part of the problem if we turn a blind eye to evil within our society. Whether it be racism, sexism, violence, homophobia, suppression of knowledge, and so on, I think we have a duty to future generations to combat evil. Since, religion is a large source of and perpetuator of hateful beliefs I try to help stop its spread. Hence, I am an anti-theist.

You say you challenge the lack of skepticism in ALL sectors on one hand, and then heap scorn on those who are skeptical of vaccines. Hypocrite. Your philosophy is cut and paste, you need to get past your dogma and bigotry and realize that mankind is the source of hate and uses religion, politics, philosophy and anything else he can fashion to aid his agenda. KIds bully other kids to death. Let me know when you've got a blame religion angle for when non faith kids bully others so much that they kill themselves. Or at least one that can hold water.

[TimG]

People are born into a race category but belief in invisible magic men is taught. Well, taught is being to kind. It is forced on children who have yet to develop the critical thinking skills necessary to prevent the brainwashing. In that regard, theism spreads like racism.

And you are bigot as venal as any racist because you judge an entire group of people based on the actions of a some. Discrimination laws don't distinguish between groups which are genetically defined vs groups which are defined by choice.

Stamping out BS is a worthwhile goal in itself, but especially when the fairy tale is a major source of socially tolerated evil.

Stamping out BS is a worthwhile goal but the BS now-a-days comes from all sides. Theism is not a uniquely associated with it. In Canada most of the BS comes from environmentalists who make completely irrational demands based on nothing but a belief that if something is done by humans it must be bad.

Belief in anything without evidence is a dangerous problem itself, but the social protection we grant to this stupidity is far worse.

What social protection? If people break laws they are accountable. The problem you have is you have your own belief systems which you want to impose on others and you dislike laws which prevent you from doing this. This makes you no different from those that you claim to oppose. Edited January 24, 2014 by TimG

[carepov]

Belief in anything without evidence is a dangerous problem itself, but the social protection we grant to this stupidity is far worse.

I disagree, but even if you were right, what's worse than benign beliefs (religious or otherwise) is driving a wedge between religious humanists and secular humanists - which is exactly what you are doing.

Is the belief/conviction of the existence of extraterrestrial life dangerous? If not, why is that different than the belief in the existence of God?

[cybercoma]

I disagree, but even if you were right, what's worse than benign beliefs (religious or otherwise) is driving a wedge between religious humanists and secular humanists - which is exactly what you are doing.

Is the belief/conviction of the existence of extraterrestrial life dangerous? If not, why is that different than the belief in the existence of God?

I really don't know any atheists that care about people's personal relationship with gods. They care about it when those relationships are pushed on others and are used in defence of dangerous things.