I am interested in opinions on this statement.
60
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
68 comments (26 - 50)
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.I don't mind the word atheist because it tells you almost NOTHING about me. You could make assumptions but really it just means absence of belief in god. On the other hand if I say i am christian, humanist, stoic, nihilist or my personal favourite 'absurdist' you can make all sorts of assumptions.
but then I'm not from usa. you're experience i think is different.
MsDemeanour
Level 8
May 10, 2019
0
If that were true people wouldn't develop new superstitions over time.
If that were true you would have found at least one culture without supernatural explanations of natural events.
If that were true most people would already be atheists.
Who ever wrote the meme hasn't spent enough time around children from different cultures. They're very creative and inventive without any indoctrination required.
Biosteelman
Level 7
May 10, 2019
2
We are born a blank slate and our natural curiosity dictates that we search for answers. The religious understand that the young can have that need allied with a need for security welded together into a mindset imprinted very early. This both locks them in and builds an easily controlled human guidance system which is almost impossible to address. Atheists are vulnerable to having a ''Label'' or identefiable brand imposed upon them and so become more easily herded together for the purpose of selective targeting. We need something that implies compassionate reasoned logic and freedom of intellect in the form of an identity. Perhaps something attached to the word atheist would help.
heritic
Level 4
May 10, 2019
0
The blank slate idea has been abandoned by science:
[en.m.wikipedia.org]
It’s just a bald faced declaration with no supporting argument.
I lean toward thinking that everyone is born religious but that many churches screw that up by using guilt and fear to impose false doctrines.
WilliamFleming
Level 8
May 10, 2019
2
I disagree, though it pains me to say so. It seems to an extent that we are hard wired for belief, and to reject this requires an act of will. Therefore, I think that labelling this rejection atheism seems wholly appropriate.
MrBeelzeebubbles
Level 7
May 10, 2019
1
JimG:
I don't think belief is the default. If we were hardwired for belief, why would the vast majority if the religious believe the prevalent religion of the region, culture, and parents? That indicates to me that indoctrinating children who have yet to develop critical thinking skills is far more likely the source than any genetic predisposition.
@JimG I guess what I mean is that we aren't hard wired for a particular set of beliefs - that's cultural. But the combination of excellent pattern recognition skills, the extremely effective mental shortcut of narrative, and a desire for the transcendental leaves us particularly vulnerable to magical thinking.
@MrBeelzeebubbles It does appear that we are hardwired to believe the unbelievable. People can't seem to accept when something is a coincidence. We seemed destined to put added meaning on it. We say Aunty Jo is psychic because when she makes a 100 statements, we only recall the 5 times she got it right! It's probably same reason there are so many conspiracy theories.
I wonder what evolutionary service this provided. Perhaps it bound us together as well as proving answers for things we didn't understand so we weren't in a constant state of cognitive dissonance
@Jk1960 I've never been in an animals head so I'm not going to make assumptions on their imaginations or lack thereof. tho I'm pretty darn sure my dog was imagining her walk as she yapped away getting me out of bed this morning. And ive seen a crow pick up a stick to poke at something. That must have taken imagination.
I think imagination helps our drive to 'understand' or 'invent' or 'problem solve'. We don't feel completely comfortable unless we have an explanation or solution. Even if the answer lies in superstition. What do you think?
@Jk1960 Shit, it's not like superstition and magical thinking are exclusive to humans.
[curiosity.com]
On the other hand, I tried to be a believer for a time (as a teenager), and found that I really was not wired for it at all.
I feel sure that humans are neither born atheists nor theists, because you have to have the concept of God before you can believe s/he does or does not exist. It is like babies are neither born believing that Santa Claus does or does not exist because they don't come with an idea of Santa Claus.
Wallace
Level 7
May 10, 2019
1
so are we born with morals?
@MsDemeanour I don’t know; I suppose everyone (except sociopaths) has an innate capacity (propensity?) to see things as morally right or wrong. Philosopher Immanuel Kant held that the moral law is “writ within” each human being, but I question that. What do you think?
@Wallace Yeah I think morals are inbuilt, again from a purely evolutionary reason.....we needed each other to survive so we learned to cooperate; Basically treating others how we would want to be treated. Of course as you said there are some anomalies..... sociopaths and politicians......oh wait, they might be the same thing!
@MsDemeanour LOL
Every time I view updated statistics ..we’re gaining in numbers. It seems though, until we’re the majority, the majority ‘mindset’ sets the standards and definitions.
Some day we may expect them to describe themselves as religious, or theist, as we’d simply describe ourselves as normal 
Varn
Level 8
May 10, 2019
0
I blame Jordan Peterson. I like blaming him 
I agree, as we're all born blank slates , so to speak. One must be taught the ways of whatever religion, be taught who to hate, be taught basic values and skills - or not. We are products of our home and neighborhood environments. It is only those that dare to question, to challenge, to choose their own paths in life, that may end up far away from their original direction - searching, and often flourish because of it !
evergreen
Level 8
May 10, 2019
0
It seems very logical but just happens not to be true. The blank slate idea has been well disproved by science.
[en.m.wikipedia.org]
Absolutely true. Easily proven: For those that think you're born believing in a god, which god? Are you also born knowing calculus? Is there a capitalism gene? As for the descriptive term it is merely that. White is the absence of color--should it not have a name because it is the absence of color? Saying there should be no term atheist is like saying there should be no term for white or clear.
lerlo
Level 8
May 10, 2019
0
I like a comparison I read saying there's no formal word for those without a belief in leprechauns. An "aleprechaunist" as it were.
I also like that others have pointed out the subtle but important distinctions between non-belief, unbelief, and disbelief.
WilliamCharles
Level 8
May 10, 2019
0
Agree. Why should I attach a label to myself based upon someone else’s belief. If we are going to do that than shouldn’t we be consistent and, for example, have a label in regards to people who believe in Leprechauns? I don’t feel like a label should be applied to a person simply for requiring evidence. The term atheist sounds too much like it has religious connotations. I just consider myself non-religious. Using the term non-religious instead of atheist may also assist the understanding of the logically-illiterate people who think atheists have a burden of proof.
Sandman07
Level 5
May 10, 2019
0
I disagree because I believe mom is the word for god for every child who has a mother.
Jinx5555555
Level 6
May 13, 2019
0
I disagree. It seems to me Atheists exist as a reaction to the abuses of religion. From the amount of time Atheists on this site speak of their hatred for God and religion would Atheism exist without organized religion? Not as a movement I think. In fact I think based on History humans yearn for meaning through spiritual paths. With or without organized religion. And while religion is declining spirituality is not. Which is a good thing and is as it should be. People should have the freedom to believe or not but not the right to define or apply policy affecting others based on non provable dogma of any kind. Whether its religion or GOOP.
[vox.com]
Quarm
Level 6
May 11, 2019
0
if that were true, where did religion come from.
dellik
Level 6
May 10, 2019
1
Do you think it evolved in the womb then ?
@Moravian not really. if it were, somewhere in the vastness of human history you would see examples of atheist societies.... instead, much like alcohol, every civilization created gods. its pervasive enough to make the assumption that it is ingrained, and a deficiency to be overcome, for some sooner, for others later, for most never.
@dellik Flawed reasoning. Children were and still are indoctrinated almost from birth which is why religions still have the hold that they had.. also there could be severe [penalties for not following the religion of ther region.
the old Soviet Union and current China are atheistic societies although many people still follow the old religions. Muslims are currently being persecuted in China.
I like Hans Moravec's definition: "Religion is a cultural edifice calling upon a supernatural authority to guard tribal standards across generations," meaning that humans invented religion to reinforce social cohesion. When "all causes are opaque," as Sam Harris puts it, such contrived beliefs may be as useful as any other mechanism to hold society together. Far less useful now that we are finding out how reality actually works.
With the time all humans reaches to childhood to boyhood and so on. Not only that intelligence , judgement power, experience, memory also grow. But in general stupdity also grows to become a believer. Which is slowly decreasing day by day and believers are decreasing and non-believers are increasing. Thanks to anti god
allmighty
Level 6
May 10, 2019
0
For the first part of the post.....to identify the state of mind of a child, as having no belief in a supreme being....that works for me.....for the second part....the statement seems very presumptive.
HankSherman
Level 8
May 10, 2019
0
Yep. As imaginations matured throughout human history they eventually began inventing gods to explain the mysteries they couldn't. And those people passed those inventions down to their children. But then science came along and is trying to correct a multi-millennium long course. Obviously not an easy task.
KevinMR
Level 7
May 10, 2019
0
I agree all humans are born atheist, but the term would not exist if it were not for theism in the first place. Humans born into a society where theism is predominant will be labeled atheist by theists, but might better be described as unsullied or natural.
If not "someone" indoctrinating the infant as s/he grows, society will, to some extent, so the label is necessary for distinction.
Hardcore theist leaders would like their flock to consider atheists as evil, but I wear the label as a badge of independent thinking, staying true to myself and jiving with the world I see around me.
It is up to current atheists to create positive awareness within the theist society that we exist and are warm, caring, intelligent individuals. This effort would help the new generation of atheists to be welcome and given a fairer chance than many of us were, growing up atheist within a religious society.
Perhaps using a more positive label such as humanistic, to designate a belief in human reason, compassion and problem solving, would designate a belief in something, rather than "nothing" as many theists like to think about atheists.
Julie808
Level 8
May 10, 2019
1
So true...we have been mischaracterized for wayyyy to long.
I think we should call ourselves "schmyms" Because it has no negative connotation. Until people start giving it one. Language has determined words for the opposite of things. No more and no less. You really think "humanistic" is free from badmouthing if theists want to? I'm pretty sure "sticks and stones..." is appropriate here.
@lerlo My use of "humanistic" is in response to theists who often think atheists don't believe in anything, no moral code, no ethics, etc.
Rather than focus on what we don't believe in, I like to focus on what I do believe in, the goodness, human compassion and problem solving reasoning skills of people, without reliance on supernatural deities.
Morals, ethics and being a good person has nothing to do with belief in god/s, so I like to drive that home a bit.
The word "atheist" is a negative word, not derogatory, but negative in that it means without gods. The word "humanistic" is positive, in that is offers a description of the belief, rather than simply non-belief.
I feel that creating more awareness that most atheists are just as kind and caring as theists, often more so, that we can do our bit toward softening the connotation of the word. That's all.
@Julie808 I get it but they're two different words. Not all atheists are humanistic unfortunately. Atheist is no more a negative word than any other word somebody doesn't like. chocolate is a negative word to people who don't like it or who are allergic to it. Is theist a negative word to you?
@lerlo You're missing my point, but that's okay. I surely never said all atheists are humanists. I am, so that's the example I gave as a word that is something rather than the absence of something. The word chocolate isn't a term designating the absence something, however achocolate could be. I'm not a fan of chocolate, so my diet is usually a-chocolate, for example. Done explaining my answer. Have a good evening.
@Julie808 Julie you got me thinking and perhaps you would agree with and support a new PR campaign for atheists and their new moniker being "god-free" All kinds of products are sold touting that they are sodium free or calorie free or caffeine free. Free is an uplifting word and is positive. In fact I'm going to push the idea to admin and see if they might be interested in changing the site name to god-free.com. What say you?
@lerlo I see no reason to change the name of the site. If I were searching for a site for companionship with like-minded (atheist/agnostic) people, it would not occur to me to search for "god-free" as it's not a well known term, and I would worry that speaking of issues regarding god/s might not be allowed or encouraged. Adding "free" to a word is a little softer than "a" but still means the same thing to me. You should definitely describe yourself as such, if you like it.
For me, I was born without belief in God, but into a Catholic family, so belief in a God was part of my childhood. I made a conscious decision to remove belief in God from my life, but God talk is all around me, so my life is not God-free, but my beliefs are, which is why I identify as a-gnostic. I am without belief in God.
I would rather we all work together as a group of like-minded people to change the perception (stigma?) of atheists/agnostics by setting the example of being warm caring thinking individuals who are positive contributors to society, and thereby making it easier for shy members to come out. The term humanist is also a softer term, I use to describe myself, but I find many theists don't understand the word.
We do have the mirror site "humanist.com" but as you say, not all atheists/agnostics are humanist, or at least they don't identify as such. (I do, but still prefer this side of the site.)
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Related Groups More
Memes R Us
3036 members
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.