Atheist believe there is no God? Yes we do, strongly! (page 6)

Essan

PS, I promise not to post as much or at length from now on. Otherwise Six will tell me off. :)

Anyway, I get the impression that few minds are going to be changed here.

Deputy Dog

Essan

Essan said to bohm: Your next claim is that the word "believe" should be specially interpreted.

I saw that as well. You make a great point.

BurnTheShips

Since someone mentioned Kant....

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/152282/1/Immanuel-Kant-e2809cWhat-is-Enlightenment-e2809d-Dare-to-know-to-grow

BTS

Essan

LOL. Not sure I will. Let's see if I have the self-control. :)

bohm

DD: "Here's the catch, would you admitt that you start with the presupposition: There is no God? I say this is required for the term atheist to have any meaning."

No, thats definately unscientific and (worse) wont ever lead to good conclusions. but i think "where do i start?" is a very hard question to answer, really. I will answer you in a practical sence: When i hear the word "God", i start by trying to form a hypothesis space, ie. determine what the God-hypothesis consist of. Then i must assume all options in that space has chance of being true. Then i must look at the evidence.

I know you feel I (we) are trying to hijack a word. I am sorry. I think what happened is that us atheists had the word "atheist" thrown at us for a while as a swear-word, and then we thought: "Hey, its not that bad a word, lets turn it into something positive?". Also, you got to admit it beat "brights" by a wide margin.

Night Owl: uhmmmmm no.

BD: Im not really sure how to connect what you write with the topic.

REST: Thanks for your input!

bohm

Essan: First, lets simply agree to disagree if we should use the definition of atheism from the dictionary, since that was never really very important for this topic, and we allready have another topic that has gone for 10 pages on that subject.

You put a lot of weight in the primary definition in some dictionaries. I look at the contemporary movement and define atheism from them. Both has some value. Thus if you like, i think we should adopt the following terminology:

Atheist1: A person you describe, ie. a person who say: "There is 100% certain abselutely no chance of there being a God".
Atheist2: My definition, someone who say "I believe there is no God" (believe being defined on page 1 and does not imply certainty).

Personally, I think atheism1 is completely bunk, and i think you are an atheist2 (like me), but i am not sure. Notice atheist2 is defined above, and has a-priori nothing to do with the term "atheist" we will just end fighting over :-).

Are you willing to go with this terminology to give clarity?

Now, on to the "believe" part. You write:

If the dictionary says that "belief" is synonymous with "faith" and Atheists say "I believe there is no God", then according to myself and the dictionary, Atheists are employing "faith" - but you then immediately say: "That is a complete misuse of the english language." No it's not. You've just proved it's perfectly accurate.

First, it is very important we agree believe can mean two different things. In a theistic context, it usually mean something like "faith". But it has a different and very important meaning: For example, lets say you get a novel idea for curing cancer, but since much is unknown in biology, you cant really be sure. Therefore you want to test it on cancer patients. Lets say for any given cancer patient there is a chance that your cure will:

1) cure him.
2) kill him.
3) Turn him into the superhero "El Sombreo!".
4) Something else.

You might be quite sure your treatment will cure him - say 90% sure - but you cant rule out any of the other, some of them just seem very unlikely.

This "educated guesswork" if you like, is what is called your "belief" about the outcome of your cancer-cure. Its standard terminology in inferrense.

After your first test - lets say the patient is cured - your belief about the outcome of the cure change; 1) gain some chance of being the real outcome, the other decrease. There is rules for how this process work, but you can just think about it qualitatively.

This is how belief is used in science. For example, "believe" mean something like:

"I believe in X" --- "the probability that X is true is relatively high"

1) can we agree that "belief" can have this meaning, and usually take that meaning when it is used by scientists?

Now to return to the rest of your post:

Correct. If the dictionary says that "belief" is synonymous with "faith" and Atheists say "I believe there is no God", then according to myself and the dictionary, Atheists are employing "faith"

No, believe has two different meanings. It is my strong impression scientists use it in the sence i outlined above - i certainly use it in that sence in my thesis, my advisors use it in that sence, etc - so you have to listen to the person you discuss with and see what sence he or she use the word before you jump to the conclusion.

Here, i would argue that if you discuss with an atheist1, well, we can both agree he is totally nuts, but a scientific non-believer (atheist2) would typically use it in the sence he allways use the word, namely as defined above.

You follow:

Actually we don't need to analyze the word "belief" to understand that it means exactly what it usually means because Atheism primarily means to "deny the existence of god/s", as the quoted definitions above show.

I am not analyzing the word, i am pointing out it has two meanings established by people who are long dead. The quoted definition describe what i would call an "atheist1" - a complete nutcase - and i dont care how he use the word. The usual person who call himself atheist, an "atheist2" if you like, use believe in the second sence of the word i outlined above.

Your claim that the word "belief" is part of some special "scientific" vocabulary employed by "Atheists" is pure fantasy.

Can you please explain how come Jaynes use it in that sence over and over again in the textbook i quoted on page 1? Can you explain why my thesis advisors use it in that sence? Can you explain the naming of the algorithm "belief propagation" used in graphical models such as bayesian networks, the ising model, etc.?

You haven't proven that the word Atheism arose in a scientific context, you just appealed to some fabricated "archetype" of a "Scientist-Atheist".

I do not claim that. But the main driving force behind modern atheism - atheism2 - certainly seem to come from academia, and i am merely pointing out how i think they use the word believe. I base that both on the usual meaning in science, and how eg. Dawkins describe his ideas in "The God delusion".

You're basically trying to argue that the word "belief" doesn't mean belief and that "Atheists" should be able to say "I believe there is no God" without being held responsible for actually holding a belief, which is obviously, rather silly.

I do not try to redefine a word, i merely point out it has two meanings. I also point out that when scientists say stuff like: "I believe the earth is not flat", "I believe the cambrian explosion was 10 mio. years long", "I believe horizontal gene transfer played a very important role in evolution" and "I believe there is no God" -- it may be prudent to consider they use the same meaning of the word "believe" out of habbit.

The ball is in your court :-)

cognizant dissident

As an atheist, I have yet to hear another atheist say that they believe "there is no God". All the ones I have read or talked to say, "I don't believe in God". They then qualify by saying that's because they have seen no evidence or reason to believe in God and when that evidence is forthcoming they are open to changing their beliefs. That is a far cry from making a definitive statement, "there is no God".

It also irks me when believers in God try to define the belief of atheists. Beliefs, or lack thereof, are subjective and exist (or don't exist) in the minds of those who hold them. For someone else to come along and say "You believe this" because you call yourself an atheist, and that's MY definition of atheism, is the height of arrogance in my opinion.

Actually, I find it incredibly arrogant when anyone tells me what I believe. Until I share my beliefs, or lack thereof, with another, they have no way of knowing. This irked me even when I was a JW. I would stand on the street corner, and sometimes apostates or born again christians would come up to me and say YOU don't believe in Jesus Christ. Huh? I've always believed in Jesus. How arrogant is it to walk up to a complete stranger and tell them what they believe instead of listening to what they believe?

bohm

CD: "I have yet to hear another atheist say that they believe "there is no God". All the ones I have read or talked to say, "I don't believe in God". They then qualify by saying that's because they have seen no evidence or reason to believe in God and when that evidence is forthcoming they are open to changing their beliefs.". Me to.

"For someone else to come along and say "You believe this" because you call yourself an atheist, and that's MY definition of atheism, is the height of arrogance in my opinion"

Yes, especially since atheist has different meanings in different dictionaries.

I imagine a group who protest the rights of homosexuals to marry, lets call it: "Give the gay rights!".

It is inconsieveable to imagine a person stand up and insist they change the name since the original meaning of "gay" is something like happy, and happy people allready have rights. I am left with the thought: is that really all you have to say?

cognizant dissident

I am left with the thought: is that really all you have to say?

And yet even that proves to be too much!

Wobble: I'm fast turning into someone who doesn't give a shit myself, because, created or not created, it doesn't seem to be having a big effect on my life or death as opposed to my hard work and the choices I make.

Someone who doesn't give a shit: Constipationist? acrapist? retentionist?

Atheist believe there is no God? Yes we do, strongly!

Share this