2 of 4
2
Atheism is Stupid!
Posted: 29 October 2015 09:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2013-08-29

I never could read someone’s mind and it amazing that some people can do that.  The Greeks simply put the letter “A” in front of a word to show the opposite, thus the word atheist.  Only one big problem.  The theists had almost everyone killed or tortured and it is still going on.  The Christian, Muslim and Jewish leaders defined the term atheist and it still has the same negative meaning.  That is a good reason not to use the term.  The term has had a negative effect for over 2000 years.  It shuts down communications and that helps no one. Atheists are like a herd of cats, there is very little unity and strength that people can see.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 October 2015 11:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4074
Joined  2009-10-21

True, not all atheists follow one drum. That’s what being free from dogma will do for you. Unlike many things that you can choose not to do or not to believe in, not believing in god goes to the core of someone’s thoughts about who they are. It doesn’t matter so much if I don’t like someone’s car or their shoes, so the word a-Chevy was never created. But as you pointed out, all sorts of requirements can be put upon me to believe and consequences if I don’t. And even in a world of tamed religion and freedom of choice, people still claim harm if I state my non-belief.

So, there are reasons from both directions to claim my atheism. One, it is my right, and I should not be discriminated against or even considered immoral for my choice, two, the harm felt by others is their problem. They need to work that out and figure out how to live in a pluralistic world where “love your neighbor” means being considerate of everyone.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 October 2015 06:06 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4267
Joined  2014-06-20
grand pa ray - 29 October 2015 09:33 AM

I never could read someone’s mind and it amazing that some people can do that.  The Greeks simply put the letter “A” in front of a word to show the opposite, thus the word atheist.  Only one big problem.  The theists had almost everyone killed or tortured and it is still going on.  The Christian, Muslim and Jewish leaders defined the term atheist and it still has the same negative meaning.  That is a good reason not to use the term.  The term has had a negative effect for over 2000 years.  It shuts down communications and that helps no one. Atheists are like a herd of cats, there is very little unity and strength that people can see.

Are you saying people can’t see unity and strength in atheists because atheists insist on calling themselves atheists?

Christians and Muslim leaders also defined the term Jew and it still has a negative meaning. Jews were tortured by many people, Christians being the worst perpetrators. Would you suggest that Jews stop calling themselves Jews because the name itself sets some people off?

Christians have been demonized, too. Would you suggest that Christians call themselves something else?

Aren’t you playing a very macabre game of blaming the victim? They should change their identity because it brings out the worst in some people?

Lois

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 October 2015 06:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2013-08-29

Lois, I was suggesting something that has not been tried.  The object is to get people to think. Check out Steven Pinker, it is not a game, words are important.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 October 2015 07:13 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1310
Joined  2005-01-14
grand pa ray - 30 October 2015 06:37 AM

Lois, I was suggesting something that has not been tried.  The object is to get people to think. Check out Steven Pinker, it is not a game, words are important.

What do you mean it hasn’t been tried?  What do you think the Secular Humanism movement is?  What do you think the Rationalist movement is?  What do you think the old “Bright” movement was?  And funny thing, most Christians reject any attempt at dialogue.  For most Christians, there are only two categories of people Believers and Unbelievers.  If you don’t absolutely, positively, not-the-slightest-shred-of-doubt believe in the same God they believe in, you’re on the Unbeliever side.

What I’m saying is if a Christian is open-minded enough to talk to you and really listen to what you say, it doesn’t much matter what label you use, Secular Humanist or agnostic or even catheist.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 October 2015 08:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2013-08-29

Sorry Advocatus, I don’t know!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 October 2015 09:19 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7757
Joined  2009-02-26

In context of the OP, lets make a few things clear. Title: Why did Carl Sagan say that atheism is stupid”?
This is a misleading title and leads one to accept that Sagan was a Theist.

Carl Sagan actually said:

“An atheist has to know a lot more than I know. An atheist is someone who knows there is no god. By some definitions atheism is very stupid.”

Philosophies of Men Mingled With Scripture


https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Carl-Sagan-say-that-By-some-definitions-atheism-is-very-stupid#!n=37

I encourage you to also read the comments by other minds in regard to this statement, such as

Robert Frost, Instructor and Flight Controller at NASA,
He didn’t say “atheism is very stupid.”  He said “By some definitions atheism is very stupid.”
Those two statements are not the same.

Sagan’s views on theology were shifting and amorphous and are probably closest to agnosticism (although others argue he was an atheist).  He was open to the idea there was some form of god, but felt that conventional religious conceptions of God were too anthropomorphized, too small and too local and fell apart when the immenseness of the universe was viewed.

In a series of lectures he gave, that have been gathered in a book called The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God, Sagan said:

I think if we ever reach the point where we think we thoroughly understand who we are and where we came from, we will have failed. I think this search does not lead to a complacent satisfaction that we know the answer, not an arrogant sense that the answer is before us and we need do only one more experiment to find it out. It goes with a courageous intent to greet the universe as it really is, not to foist our emotional predispositions on it but to courageously accept what our explorations tell us

The OP uses this distortion of the phrase as proof Sagan was a Theist. A false assumption to begin with.

p.s. the term for “Catheism” is “Apostate”. In some religions you can be killed for that.

[ Edited: 30 October 2015 09:25 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 October 2015 11:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4267
Joined  2014-06-20
Write4U - 30 October 2015 09:19 PM

In context of the OP, lets make a few things clear. Title: Why did Carl Sagan say that atheism is stupid”?
This is a misleading title and leads one to accept that Sagan was a Theist.

Carl Sagan actually said:

“An atheist has to know a lot more than I know. An atheist is someone who knows there is no god. By some definitions atheism is very stupid.”

Philosophies of Men Mingled With Scripture


https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Carl-Sagan-say-that-By-some-definitions-atheism-is-very-stupid#!n=37

I encourage you to also read the comments by other minds in regard to this statement, such as

Robert Frost, Instructor and Flight Controller at NASA,
He didn’t say “atheism is very stupid.”  He said “By some definitions atheism is very stupid.”
Those two statements are not the same.

Sagan’s views on theology were shifting and amorphous and are probably closest to agnosticism (although others argue he was an atheist).  He was open to the idea there was some form of god, but felt that conventional religious conceptions of God were too anthropomorphized, too small and too local and fell apart when the immenseness of the universe was viewed.

In a series of lectures he gave, that have been gathered in a book called The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God, Sagan said:

I think if we ever reach the point where we think we thoroughly understand who we are and where we came from, we will have failed. I think this search does not lead to a complacent satisfaction that we know the answer, not an arrogant sense that the answer is before us and we need do only one more experiment to find it out. It goes with a courageous intent to greet the universe as it really is, not to foist our emotional predispositions on it but to courageously accept what our explorations tell us

The OP uses this distortion of the phrase as proof Sagan was a Theist. A false assumption to begin with.

p.s. the term for “Catheism” is “Apostate”. In some religions you can be killed for that.

Theists have a habit of doing that.

Lois

[ Edited: 30 October 2015 11:20 PM by LoisL ]
 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 October 2015 11:19 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4267
Joined  2014-06-20
grand pa ray - 30 October 2015 06:37 AM

Lois, I was suggesting something that has not been tried.  The object is to get people to think. Check out Steven Pinker, it is not a game, words are important.

What are you trying to get them to think?

Lois

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 October 2015 03:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2013-08-29

Lois, A correct way of thinking is to use the scientific method of evaluating any claim.  People listen to claims about a god and do not question.  It is really scary the high numbers of people who do not question their preacher.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 October 2015 03:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2013-08-29

Write4you, read my Oct,29th post

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 October 2015 05:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3594
Joined  2011-08-15

Jr. Member


Lois, A correct way of thinking is to use the scientific method of evaluating any claim.  People listen to claims about a god and do not question.  It is really scary the high numbers of people who do not question their preacher.

IMO that’s because there is a disconnect between the two, science teaches facts while religion favors values according to Stephen J. Gould. He even coined an acronym for it, NOMA. If you’re not familiar with it’s “non-overlapping Magseteria whereby the two may exist together in society. This is why you may see a physician in the pews at a Catholic Church. He knows full well that Transubstantiation is bunk but participates in the ritual anyway. Or a university educated PhD. who listens to his favorite exorter drone on about hell fire and damnation. And don’t forget that even atheists sometimes like the rituals churches perform, if nothing else just to enjoy the music, e.g. Dan Barker and Richard Dawkins.


Cap’t Jack

 Signature 

One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.

Thomas Paine

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 October 2015 06:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2013-08-29

Thevilageaatheist,  I prefer Dan Dennett,  especially when everyone I know is catholic.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 October 2015 06:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4074
Joined  2009-10-21
grand pa ray - 31 October 2015 06:17 AM

Thevilageaatheist,  I prefer Dan Dennett,  especially when everyone I know is catholic.

Have you heard Dennett’s talk on what is good about religion?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 October 2015 08:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2013-08-29

Lausten,  Sagan was a scientist and O’Hair was a lawyer, one seeks truth the other by training just wants to win an argument.  I said that I agreed with the assessment that that atheism is stupid.  My reason is that for almost 2000 years the religious leaders of the time gave the word atheist it’s meaning.  Using the word just solidifies in the brain of believers something evil.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 4
2