What Are Your Impressions of Atheism

[Mathim]

A quote from a book I'm reading:

"Good things happen.  Evil things happen and in neither physics nor religion is there an explanation."

I'm not expressing an opinion here, merely repeating something interesting I read.

The problem with that is, a lot of people expect an answer to that problem from religion, the lack of which causes many to turn away from their faith (that certainly helped me make my decision about it). Secular ethics doesn't really have the same conception of good and evil as religious ethics so phrasing it in that way is also misleading.

[TaintedAndDelish]

I was in the process of responding to this when the thread was locked.

Valid question? - No, he did not ask a valid question he was being a wise ass and therefore deserves to be ignored.

Deflecting? - This is why I am walking away, for some reason you can't see that you all have been deflecting my comment (It can't be proven that God does not exist, anymore than it can be proven that God does exist) basically because you can't answer it and that makes you all feel rather unhappy with yourselves. So you attack, you vilify, you condescend and use as much pseudo intellectual bullshit as you can all think of to try and make someone who made a simple comment feel intimidated. Well you failed and made yourselves look like absolute prats.

Childish? - Again we have very ideas of what that means. In short I could see that this discussion was going nowhere fast, the comments and attitude were becoming increasingly hostile and hypocritical, all of you were applying a set of rules against me that you yourselves were not willing to follow. Rather than put up with that, I walked away and will still walk away. If you consider this childish then so be it.

I like to converse with people about all manner of topics and I am ok if people disagree with me but I am not ok with being spoken down to or being disrespected, I feel that you lot are not ok with people who have different opinions and I am definite in my belief that you guys are also not ok with people posing questions that you cannot come up with answers to.

The odd thing is

a/ I didn't care if no one answered.

b/ I would have been totally ok if people had of just put forward their opinions on the matter.

Anyway, I think the amount of religious/atheist threads that get closed down here more than supports what I have just said.

Have fun getting threads locked and Goodbye, this board is not for me.

I asked what "faith" was, since you said it was a matter of faith.  I was not being a "smart ass", I just wanted to bring a definition for "faith" into the discussion.

I explained very clearly the point about Russel's teapot and even summarized it in one or two lines. You got pissed and made two angry comments about this and the faith question.

Try to understand, the threads in the section are for "DEBATING" topics. In order to debate productively, we need to be able to ask questions and challenge ideas and beliefs. Look at the stickies at the top of this section.

[Sethala]

Sounds like Bullshit to me and rather immature, not to mention that you have stacked the whole thing to suit your argument.

I'm going to go against my better judgment and hope that you came here for some form of reasonable discussion.  If you are, then I'm perfectly willing to debate with you on why there is a null hypothesis and why I believe it to be correct.  If you have no interest in forming arguments beyond "that sounds like bullshit" however, then please, don't bother.

[BeeJay]

I haven't been involved in a few days, but I want to make it mnown that I don't want any flaming to go on. I'm not pointing fingers. I will lock the thread myself if it does happen. I can't respond to anything now because I'm at work, so I'll post when I get off.

[Cryptic Anomaly]

I'm going to go against my better judgment and hope that you came here for some form of reasonable discussion.  If you are, then I'm perfectly willing to debate with you on why there is a null hypothesis and why I believe it to be correct.  If you have no interest in forming arguments beyond "that sounds like bullshit" however, then please, don't bother.

As I mentioned above, don't bother, I was very interested in having a discussion but people don't seem capable of that and I won't subject myself to their abuse, so yes "Sounds like bullshit" is all they are entitled to.

And stop the flaming already, what more do you want? I said "Goodbye" I stated my reasons, the board is yours to lock down threads as you wish and abuse people as you wish. I won't stand in your way.

This has really made me question this site to be honest.

[Cryptic Anomaly]

I even tried deleting my posts to avoid further conflict from the people who can't handle a difference of opinion and the mods came down on me for that.

I will say it again, GOODBYE, A REASONABLE DISCUSSION CANNOT BE HAD WITH YOU GUYS.

The more passive I try and be the more aggressive you guys get, what do you want?

If you want to take part in these discussions learn to accept that some people will not think or feel the same as you do.

Again - Goodbye and please refrain from addressing me again.

[Sabby]

This is, what, the third time you've proclaimed complete innocence, accused everyone else of being bullies and then dusted your hands of the conversation? Sorry, you don't get to act like a child and then demand to be treated like a reasonable adult.

[Blythe]

Let's get this thread back on track with civil discussion, please.

I saw mention of the null hypothesis in the thread? Could someone link me to a source with an example + explanation of the null hypothesis, something that is approachable for someone that's not read about it before and is a little new to it? I'd be grateful; I'm actually surprised I have not read about the null hypothesis before. 

[consortium11]

Let's get this thread back on track with civil discussion, please.

I saw mention of the null hypothesis in the thread? Could someone link me to a source with an example + explanation of the null hypothesis, something that is approachable for someone that's not read about it before and is a little new to it? I'd be grateful; I'm actually surprised I have not read about the null hypothesis before. 

The wiki article is a decent overview although it dives into some somewhat technical statistics.

In essence the null hypothesis is something that someone is trying to disprove; it's a negative rather than positive approach where someone succeeds by proving something is wrong as opposed to proving that something is right. As a general rule it's set up opposite of what is known as the "alternative hypothesis", which is what someone is trying to prove.

The approach taken when conducting a study is normally this; I have an opinion or theory that I want to prove, for example that the reason I keep losing socks is that a cat sneaks into my room and takes them. I set up a high-tech cat detection system and record the data, seeing if a cat sneaking in corresponds with the rate of sock loss. But, whatever information I record and whatever it seems to indicate, it may be simple chance that I keep losing socks whenever the cat sneaks in. I have to prove that this isn't the case and thus I set up a null hypothesis;

Null hypothesis: the loss of my socks is nothing to do with a cat sneaking in and taking them.

Alternative hypothesis: the loss of my socks is due to the cat sneaking in and taking them.

I can support and prove the alternative hypothesis once I have disproven the null hypothesis... once I have shown that there is some relation between the cat sneaking in and taking socks and my socks disappearing.

[Blythe]

That cat example was absolutely perfect and what I was looking for, Consortium, thank you! I'd looked at the Wikipedia article, but I got a little lost in the technical statistics bits.

[Sethala]

As I mentioned above, don't bother, I was very interested in having a discussion but people don't seem capable of that and I won't subject myself to their abuse, so yes "Sounds like bullshit" is all they are entitled to.

And stop the flaming already, what more do you want? I said "Goodbye" I stated my reasons, the board is yours to lock down threads as you wish and abuse people as you wish. I won't stand in your way.

This has really made me question this site to be honest.

You say you're here to have "a discussion", yet your first post repeats a common fallacy that has already been pointed out as a fallacy, and when called on it, your second post is to simply reply "Sounds like bullshit"?  I admit my first reply to you may have been more exasperated than I'd like, and a flippant response from you may have been reserved, but to then go back and say this, it makes me doubt how much of a "discussion" you really want.

That being said, if you'd like to take this to a one-on-one discussion in the dialogs forum, I'd be happy to oblige.  If you don't want a discussion, that's fine.  But don't try to claim that you want a discussion and then deflect any attempt to do just that.

[Ironwolf85]

I even tried deleting my posts to avoid further conflict from the people who can't handle a difference of opinion and the mods came down on me for that.

I will say it again, GOODBYE, A REASONABLE DISCUSSION CANNOT BE HAD WITH YOU GUYS.

The more passive I try and be the more aggressive you guys get, what do you want?

If you want to take part in these discussions learn to accept that some people will not think or feel the same as you do.

Again - Goodbye and please refrain from addressing me again.

*gibs slap*
that's how you start flame wars my friend.
*the robot drags him off into a dark room with an electro paddle* 

In all seriousness some of these guys are stubborn and opinionated, but they aren't bad people, they didn't harass you, and it's the internet so what else did you expect?
Dial back the forum rage and take a breather my friend.

[Avis habilis]

If anyone has a problem with what another member has posted, use the report link, don't take it upon yourself to chastise them here. Let's stick to discussing the subject at hand in the thread.

Also "Gibbs", I think, but that's neither here nor there.

[Ironwolf85]

If anyone has a problem with what another member has posted, use the report link, don't take it upon yourself to chastise them here. Let's stick to discussing the subject at hand in the thread.

Also "Gibbs", I think, but that's neither here nor there.

Okay ^w^

[Mathim]

I had resisted speaking up about my opinion on it, guess I missed my opportunity to chime in. What-evah.

Regardless of my feelings on the whole matter, I don't actually get many opportunities to really converse, even in the short-term, with serious believers. I'd like to know what their reactions would be to me challenging them now that I've armed myself with bookloads of knowledge that compile evidence to the contrary. It's rather hard to gauge a person's reaction online since anonymity allows them to say things they wouldn't in person and whatnot. I think the worst part of arguing the point is for passive or liberal believers who don't see any harm being done in the way they practice their own beliefs. Even in all my research, it's kind of hard to really get the point across that it's still worse than having no belief at all.

[BeeJay]

I had resisted speaking up about my opinion on it, guess I missed my opportunity to chime in. What-evah.

Regardless of my feelings on the whole matter, I don't actually get many opportunities to really converse, even in the short-term, with serious believers. I'd like to know what their reactions would be to me challenging them now that I've armed myself with bookloads of knowledge that compile evidence to the contrary. It's rather hard to gauge a person's reaction online since anonymity allows them to say things they wouldn't in person and whatnot. I think the worst part of arguing the point is for passive or liberal believers who don't see any harm being done in the way they practice their own beliefs. Even in all my research, it's kind of hard to really get the point across that it's still worse than having no belief at all.

You can catch some of the banter you are looking for by checking out https://www.youtube.com/user/TheAtheistExperience. It's a live call in show where people are encouraged to say what they believe and why. It's pretty good, although some of the hosts are of the "Ridiculous claims deserve ridicule" camp, though they usually tamp that down quite a bit. They have some really great theist callers interspersed between the atheist and prank callers.

EDIT: Didn't mean to post an empty video.

[Beguile's Mistress]

I get to spend time with atheists in one of my volunteer situations and seldom find the need to defend believing but then we find many other things to discuss and debate simply because believing or not believing is only one aspect of each of us.  We all find the dogmatic atheist as repulsive as the dogmatic believer more often than not.  They are like a one-note song lacking any ability to harmonize.

[Mathim]

You can catch some of the banter you are looking for by checking out https://www.youtube.com/user/TheAtheistExperience. It's a live call in show where people are encouraged to say what they believe and why. It's pretty good, although some of the hosts are of the "Ridiculous claims deserve ridicule" camp, though they usually tamp that down quite a bit. They have some really great theist callers interspersed between the atheist and prank callers.

See, that's the thing: That's exactly my attitude about it but atheists are encouraged to be respectful of it only because they're the minority, and meanwhile there are little if any serious objections to people telling atheists they're evil and going to burn for eternity or be murdered for their blasphemy. We may look at lunatics like Fred Phelps and such with disgust but nobody ever goes right up to them and tells them to shut the fuck up and drop dead on behalf of intelligent and mentally healthy intellectual unbelievers. Seriously, if a person can't see things from what I call the 'outside looking in' then there's no point in arguing. If people are unwilling to look at faith and religion objectively and acknowledge that, to anyone not sharing that unfounded belief, it really is essentially and inescapably all of those negative things that get ascribed to it. It's a completely unfair and unbalanced argument and the only things that have allowed our species to advance to this level, reason and science, are being treated as if they're the biggest detriments to humanity. How can an atheist not feel their sanity threatened on a daily basis living in this kind of society, or just on this planet in general?

[Oniya]

Actually, the major reason that people don't go up to lunatics like the Phelps clan and tell them to shut the fuck up is because that's exactly the kind of attention that they want.  They want you to get angry with them, lose your cool, and maybe even throw a punch.  Then their crew of blood-related lawyers soak you on assault charges.

[Beguile's Mistress]

They bait you and when you physically attack them they become the martyrs and use you actions to prove the right of their opinions.

[Mathim]

That's not what I meant. It's hard to describe in words but it's like, I could probably find more common ground and less to argue about if tamer theists actually came to the defense of atheists in protest against these radical pricks. When stuff like that doesn't happen, all it does is make it look like even the liberals and moderates are against us too, which lends doubt to the idea of being liberal or moderate. It's like, "Well, we don't believe in quite what they believe, but we're still more like them than like the unbelievers." That makes it hard to separate my opinion of liberals from that of fundamentalists. When you believe in the same (but not all of) things that they do and for the same reasons, expecting me to respect you more than them, or fear you less than them, is just asking too much.

[BeeJay]

I don't think being polite and respectful is a bad thing for atheism. I think we get to more borderline believers that way, and that's who we should be helping anyway. They are the ones that will help the US drag the religious kicking and screaming into reasoning society when they turn over in great enough numbers.

[Iniquitous]

I don't think being polite and respectful is a bad thing for atheism. I think we get to more borderline believers that way, and that's who we should be helping anyway. They are the ones that will help the US drag the religious kicking and screaming into reasoning society when they turn over in great enough numbers.

I have stayed out of this till now.. but that boldes statement? It pisses me off. What right do you have to tell me I have to believe as you? I am one of those that doesnt give a shit what others believe. Aint my business. And it isnt any of your business what I believe. So to make such a blatantly rude statement shows just how disrespectful you are to those that believe different than you.

[Yukina]

I have stayed out of this till now.. but that boldes statement? It pisses me off. What right do you have to tell me I have to believe as you? I am one of those that doesnt give a shit what others believe. Aint my business. And it isnt any of your business what I believe. So to make such a blatantly rude statement shows just how disrespectful you are to those that believe different than you.

I second your emotions, IO. I may be an atheist, but I find that quote horribly intolerant of others.

[BeeJay]

I have stayed out of this till now.. but that boldes statement? It pisses me off. What right do you have to tell me I have to believe as you? I am one of those that doesnt give a shit what others believe. Aint my business. And it isnt any of your business what I believe. So to make such a blatantly rude statement shows just how disrespectful you are to those that believe different than you.

I second your emotions, IO. I may be an atheist, but I find that quote horribly intolerant of others.

Obviously my statement wasn't directed at either of you. However, I feel the need to defend it anyway. Belief in religion is a force for evil in the world, and it is the obligation of a citizen of a society to further progress toward bettering said society. I am only doing my civic duty by standing up to religion and helping people see reason. How is my statement rude in the slightest? What's rude is only helping people in Haiti if those people convert to Catholicism. What's rude is bombarding a sick or dying unbeliever with offers of salvation while they lay in pain on their hospital bed. What's rude is saying that someone should burn in Hell for disbelieving in a god. From beyond rude, from evil comes stoning apostates in the street and mutilating the genitals of infants. I'm sorry you find my flippant statement about showing borderline believers that their celestial dictator was made up to scare them into submission rude. These examples are extreme, sure, but they aren't even rare. These are acts that stem directly from religion, and from nowhere else. Human's without religion can do horrible things, but religion consistently gives them real incentive to do so, and gives them a creative guide on how to do it. Even if religion wasn't evil, believe is completely unfounded. People should believe as many true things and as few false things as possible. Belief in religion gums up the machinery of society by rejecting science and reason in favor of blind obedience to an imaginary friend. Compare the bolded statement to that of an evangelizing Christian in a mega church. Nothing is different, except that I have reality on my side.