Am I an atheist?

[Asmodean]

That's why I like the word "ignostic"

Oh, admit it, it's beause it begins with a small i, like everything else cool these days  (Needs to have a big G though. iGnostic. See? The coolometer rising... Falling... Just like that. Going to sub-zero, that is.)

[xSilverPhinx]

That's why I like the word "ignostic"

Oh, admit it, it's beause it begins with a small i, like everything else cool these days  (Needs to have a big G though. iGnostic. See? The coolometer rising... Falling... Just like that. Going to sub-zero, that is.)

Yep. 

[not your typical...]

That's why I like the word "ignostic"

Oh, admit it, it's beause it begins with a small i, like everything else cool these days  (Needs to have a big G though. iGnostic. See? The coolometer rising... Falling... Just like that. Going to sub-zero, that is.)

Agreed. iGnostic. Gonna start typing it like that from now on.

[mjolnir]

Whether or not you are an atheist is for you to answer.

Does it matter though? Do you just want a label that fits? Or to fit a label, in case I've got things reversed..?

I want a label that fits. I'm not sure if my viewpoint is considered agnostic or atheist.

[Asmodean]

Heheh... Wanting a label... Nothing really wrong with that, I suppose.

Well, in that case, you can just label yourself out of your stance on gods. Do you believe in such things or not? You can also refuse to take a stand either way, in which case you would probably be agnostic. (Although an agnostic who technically does not believe in gods is a de-facto atheist)

[Davin]

Whether or not you are an atheist is for you to answer.

Does it matter though? Do you just want a label that fits? Or to fit a label, in case I've got things reversed..?

I want a label that fits. I'm not sure if my viewpoint is considered agnostic or atheist.

How about the label: "mjolnir the crusher"? "Agnostic atheist" simply means that you don't believe in a god and also that no one can know for sure if there is or isn't a god. There are a lot of labels, however I doubt that you'll find one that fits as well as your name.

[mjolnir]

Welcome!

If you believe in some sort of god, then you're not an atheist. If you don't, then you are.

Simple and to the point.

It's a simple point only if you can define "god." Is the gravitational force a "god?" What about the electromagnetic force? What causes it to exist? Where does it come from? Is the concept of "god" an abstraction used to explain the cause of unknown forces?

Let's say you hold the view that Big Bang is our best explanation of the origin of our visible universe (and I do hold this view). Then, what force(s) created the singularity of matter that existed at the moment the Big Bang occurred?

[Asmodean]

It's a simple point only if you can define "god."

No, if you can. Your label largely hinges on your definition of a deity, not ours.

[Tank]

Welcome!

If you believe in some sort of god, then you're not an atheist. If you don't, then you are.

Simple and to the point.

It's a simple point only if you can define "god." Is the gravitational force a "god?" What about the electromagnetic force? What causes it to exist? Where does it come from? Is the concept of "god" an abstraction used to explain the cause of unknown forces?

Let's say you hold the view that Big Bang is our best explanation of the origin of our visible universe (and I do hold this view). Then, what force(s) created the singularity of matter that existed at the moment the Big Bang occurred?

Why God? You can wade in there after your 10 getting to know you posts are done.

[Happy_Is_Good]

Let's say you hold the view that Big Bang is our best explanation of the origin of our visible universe (and I do hold this view). Then, what force(s) created the singularity of matter that existed at the moment the Big Bang occurred?

I like the Big Bang Theory, and I'd like to see if it can somehow be confirmed. What we do know is that the universe is expanding and that we can estimate the "age of the universe as we know it" to a fairly reasonable degree - about 13.75 Billion years.  But...beyond the very earliest stages of the universe,  The Big Bang Theory becomes the Big Bang Hypothesis when such things as "Universal Singularities" are discussed, because this inference would require an empiracle knowledge of physics we are not yet capable of either replicating or observing in order to be reasonably sure of that inference.

Nevertheless, people talk about "Singularities" and the Universe just "Popping into existence" like they really know what they are talking about.  I mean, I've never seen so much Oyster Soup brewed from a single oyster.

So...there's some things we just don't know for sure...yet!  But in any case, why insert the Supernatural into the equation?

Furthermore, people tend to assume that Physics gives us a sharper view of reality than is possible.  Now...Modern Physics can do some crazy-cool things.  It can confirm a Black Holes, help us understand Quasars and Quantum Mechanics can be used for such mundane things as designing a new laser or predicting the reliability of ultra-small circuits.  But...we'll always have limits to our physical knowledge even as we keep expanding it at a mighty rate.  In fact, every time we find answers, we realize that there are even more questions that need to be answered!   

Meanwhile, the more we find out about the universe, the less "Conceptual Sense" it seems to make (e.g., Common Sense).  For example, have you ever thought about what might be the underlying physics of Newtonian Gravity?  It's mind blowing!  To this I say, "Who says reality is there for us to totally comprehend - and how can they possibly say that?"  Likewise, this is yet another reason not to inject the Supernatural as a possible cause of a physical phenomenon - for today's mysteries are tomorrow's answers - and there's no reason that this will be different in the future. 

Hope this helps.

[Whitney]

Welcome!

If you believe in some sort of god, then you're not an atheist. If you don't, then you are.

Simple and to the point.

It's a simple point only if you can define "god." Is the gravitational force a "god?" What about the electromagnetic force? What causes it to exist? Where does it come from? Is the concept of "god" an abstraction used to explain the cause of unknown forces?

Let's say you hold the view that Big Bang is our best explanation of the origin of our visible universe (and I do hold this view). Then, what force(s) created the singularity of matter that existed at the moment the Big Bang occurred?

Perhaps you are a pantheist?  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

I think that when anyone uses the word god they are thinking of a superior consciousness that is responsible for all of existence....which would mean that anything that is right to call god would be some kind of being and not just a natural phenomena.

[xSilverPhinx]

How about ignostic?

Does the word 'god' to you have to describe something that is intelligent and conscious? Capable of planning the creation of a universe, for instance?

[launion]

iGnostic Atheist, Dawkinator, never reborn!


View Profile WWW Personal Message (Online)
   
   
Re: Am I an atheist?
« Reply #14 on: Yesterday at 11:18:32 AM »
   Reply with quoteQuote
Quote from: Crow on Yesterday at 10:07:47 AM
In regards to point one, it is still possible to be atheist with a belief of this sort just look at the Taoist concept of the Tao, by large the religion is atheistic and the gods that are found in the folk form of the religion are more like a government rather than the christian/jewish/islamic concept, i.e. they aren't the creators, they are the managers. in itself 

That's why I like the word "ignostic" Grin


agnostic is  viewed  by some  as a wishy  washy  non ism


if u can find an interview with compass on abc net au  //  iview  /  with a ex pom called  peter  cundll   now in tasmania   -  a bit like purgatory

[Sweetdeath]

Whether or not you are an atheist is for you to answer.

Does it matter though? Do you just want a label that fits? Or to fit a label, in case I've got things reversed..?

I want a label that fits. I'm not sure if my viewpoint is considered agnostic or atheist.

You don't really need to be labeled. Just be yourself. It's not so difficult to figure "hey, I do" or "don't believe in the invisible, improbable, sky daddy."

I don't go shouting out "i'm atheist!!" to the world. I just go about my day normally.

[mjolnir]

How about ignostic?

Does the word 'god' to you have to describe something that is intelligent and conscious? Capable of planning the creation of a universe, for instance?

Nice, I like the article about ignosticism.

I consider the world's major religions to be a low quality way of understanding the creation of the universe, and I see no reason to believe in any god proposed by any of these religions. If the concept of god is limited to the gods associated with religions, then I'm most likely an atheist.

If god is defined as a force that created the universe, then I believe it is reasonable to speculate that there may have been a force (or forces), prior to the current known forces (e.g. gravitational, electromagnetic, strong, weak), that created the universe and its laws and dimensions. This force may or may not be conscious (it doesn't have to play an architect role, but it could). If a force that created the universe (or set it into motion, or specified its rules) is considered to be a god, then I may not be an atheist.