Atheism is most definitely a religion. There is no evidence or reasoning that an "intelligent architect" did not design the universe. None. Everything in the universe is governed by Law, and in a universe governed by law, there is NO SUCH THING as chance. If you are against religious doctrines is one thing, but to claim the universe is random and unconscious is illogical and is based on just as much faith as religious fanatics. Atheism is nothing more than a religion of consensus skepticism.
@gogreen18 Anything that has an ISM at the end is an IDEOLOGY, be it religious or otherwise. Atheism is NO different.
Of course I can't expect any intelligence to come out of a girl so young and uneducated as yourself. Because after all I am sure you have the scientific and biology credentials to back up your belief that KNOWS God, or any god/supernatural do not exist.
At least agnostics acknowledged neither religion, nor science which is based on theories and conjecture.
Atheism is not a philosophy or a religion. It is the default position. If I told you that there is a magical pixie that grant wishes, you not believing me does not make you an afairyist, and that afairyism is a religious and philosophical belief.
@WildManChrisVEVO okay wildmanonsteroidsw/tourettes, Atheism is not an anti-religion, nor a religion itself. To actually think both is thee most idiotic claim ever posted on the internet. How old are you anyway? You sound like a frustrated little kid with down syndrome and daddy issues. A mindlessly defensive, unintelligent child.
@danathefunkiest1 Listen up, you fucking retard bitch!!! ATHEISM IS A FUCKING FAITH, godfuckingdamn it, goddammit! IT TAKES FAITH TO BELIEVE TERE IS NOT a fucking God, goddammit!
So STICK THAT DICK IN YOUR MOUTH AND STAAAAAAART sucking!!!...
Stupid fucking cunt...
YOU GODDAMN FUCKING CUNT ASSWIPE DICKHAT DICKHOLE COCKSUCKING FAG FUCKING DIKE CHILD OF A BITCH GODFUCKER!!!...
@AngieFknDiggsIt This immature fucking cunt bitch really DOES need to grow some boobs AND some fucking pubic hair on her fucking cunt before trying to discuss afdult topics way above her fucking head!
@WildManChrisVEVO : How appropriate that someone who can't discuss their points, and instead insults/curses to get their ideas across is defending Christianity... but comparing theologies and scientific facts is pretty silly. By your logic, not believing in the tooth fairy takes "faith" as well...
Oh my Athiests are more annoying then relious people shoving their belief down everyones throat! What you guys don't get is your just as closed minded as the religious people because you believe there is no God! There is no proof that there is no God like there is no proof for God! Honestly athiests are the most closed minded arrogant people i have ever met, so annoying! Athiesm is a religion your believeing in something without any evidence you're all hipocrites!
Atheism is a religion and its followers are closed minded. Most of the youtube atheists I come across are evangelical atheists like Laci here who try and proselytize and get people to convert to atheism. I find youtube atheists like, TheAmazingAtheist, Thunderf00t, gogreen18, CultofDusty, Evid3nc3, to be just like the evangelical fundamentalist assholes who go around proselytizing and shoving their belief systems down people's throats. Atheists live in a cave shackled along with fundamentalists.
@TheJoshman01 Actually I am against proselytizing, and I do not support in any way, shape, or form the way evangelical fundamentalists spread their beliefs. For one to believe something, one must experience it themselves. Just telling people what to believe is not going to make them believe it. A person born able to see can experience color. But if the one who can see color tries to explain color to a person born blind, it sounds like madness to the blind person.
I respect your opinion very much and in an ideal world would love to see it fulfilled.
Unfortunately it isn't likely to happen, as the Majority of the world is religious and Atheism is a relatively new idea, Atheist are far outnumbered by the religious. Only very recently has it even became acceptable to publicly declare yourself an Atheist.
Telling people what were about is one of the few ways of defending our public image.
I don't think the majority of Atheist go looking for "converts" as we realize that is pretty much a lost cause simply because the religious are so grounded in there beliefs. However if we can encourage people to at least go online and to the library and to read another book besides the Bible, they can experience it for themselves as you have said.
We don't want them to automatically accept what we say. Thats against Atheism in the most fundamental way.
@TheJoshman01 Continued* "We don't want them to automatically accept what we say." That's good! We Orthodox don't want people to automatically accept what we say either. I just don't think Laci is doing this. I've seen many of her videos and what she does, I consider proselytizing. Orthodox won't proselytize to atheists because we know trying to describe it to an atheist is like trying to describe colors to a person born blind. One must experience God to believe in God.
@TheJoshman01 I should have been more clear, as I wasn't referring to all atheists, just the evangelical atheists. And yes, you are absolutely right that people need to go online and read another book besides the Bible. As a Serbian Orthodox Christian myself, I will even admit that the Bible is dangerous as it can become an idol to people. Just so you know, we Eastern Orthodox are not anything like these fundamentalist evangelicals. In fact, we support skepicism. I myself am a skeptic.
@TheJoshman01 I can also totally understand that you want atheists to have a good image. But, quite frankly, I think Laci and TheAmazingAtheist are examples of atheists who give atheism a bad image. These fundamentalist evangelicals give Christianity a bad image, and are in my view the worst enemy to Christianity. Have you ever looked at the channel: allsaintsmonastery? I think you'll like him. Lazar is not going to make you believe in God, but it will show you another side to Christianity :)
Oh I know there are good Christians out there and know several myself. However in the United States most Christians simply don't know what Atheism is about and often think its a type of Satanism. Atheist are the most hated minority in the US and things are hard for us here (although we could be worse). As to Laci I get the feeling she is more bitching about the Christians that keep trying to get her to convert or miss the point of what she is saying entirely.
She doesn't seem to be pushing for them to become Atheist so much as she is calling them out on what she sees as stupidity.
I'll be honest and admit that I agree with her somewhat in that respect, but everyone is entitled to there own opinion and beliefs. One of the main reasons I love America :)
@TheJoshman01 Actually most of the "Christianity" she is speaking of is stupidity. I honestly don't see how people can believe that Hell is a place of fire with demons and pitchforks. I don't see how people can believe that the earth is 6,000 years old...WTF! In fact, a careful study of history, shows the earliest Christians interpreted the Bible as allegorical and did not believe God created the world in 6 days or took the Adam and Eve story as literal.
@TheJoshman01 Continued* The earliest Christians were way more intelligent and had much more common sense than the group of US Christians who take the Bible literally. Many seem to think the Bible fell out of the sky from heaven (btw heaven isn't a place, nor is it in the sky), which is not the case. The evangelical fundamentalists only know God from reading a book--the Bible. But, the Bible was originally never the reason for why people believed in God or Christianity.
@magnus56j : You may think they're "shoving their belief systems down people's throats", but keep in mind that the government isn't helping them, like Christianity. Crooked politicians don't use their constituents atheism to garner votes and make archaic laws only so they can stay in power. Atheism never denies anyone the right to be happy, like Christianity. Atheism is a reaction to religion, like militancy is a reaction to racism.
@DeepSouthWrestling1 How does Christianity deny someone's right to be happy? If you are talking about evangelical fundamentalist cults who go around with picket signs telling everyone they are going to Hell, then I can see what you are getting at since the leaders of those wacko groups control the lives of its followers, where they have no freedom. I, as an Orthodox Christian, am free to be skeptical and ask questions, also the Orthodox community is very close, friendly, and loving. I'm happy :)
@magnus56j : I'm talking about how politicians put Christian dogma into law to gain Christian support, like gay marriage. To deny gays the rights every other American has simply because Christians don't like it is unconstitutional.
@DeepSouthWrestling1 I can see where you are coming from. You make a good point. I can see how it can be frustrating since relgious ideologies effect a lot of our politics. But, at the same time it would definitely be unconstitutional to make religion illegal, and since the United States is a democracy, the people's vote is what matters.
@magnus56j : Not make it illegal, just not endorse one over the others. That's what our gov't does, endorses Christianity. And they're not supposed to.
@DeepSouthWrestling1 I understand and sympathize with you. It is absurd that some states ban atheists from holding public office. That isn't fair at all, and is definitely unconstitutional. I am a Christian that simply doesn't like proselytizing, so I am against both evangelical atheists and evangelical fundamentalist christians (I should clarify I don't think all atheists are closed-minded). I think it is a mistake to believe you can argue someone into believing in something. It never works.
@magnus56j : I've lived on the buckle of the bible belt all my life, so I've seen the worst, so to speak. I'm not against Christianity, either... if that belief gets anyone through the day without killing someone, I'm all for it!
Technically speaking: Faith can come in many forms, if you make a claim about something which you cannot prove, that is faith. So if an atheist expresses himself that there is no god well, that is a matter of faith. When an atheist however expresses himself that there is no proof of god that is being logical. If an atheist expresses himself that the debate of gods existence is largely irrelevant he is being an agnostic atheist.
So, atheists can hold to a faith as such, even be religious about it
The rule is that there is no rules. The dogma is that there is no dogma. Of course, you should believe the following... (blah blah blah science blah blah blah) and definitely do NOT believe the following (blah blah blah God blah blah blah)...
By the way, by stating Atheism is individualistic and Theism isn't, it just proves you have a lot to learn about Theism.
Athiesm technically is, and isn't a religion. It's the belief system that there is no god, no higher power. Nothing but what is observable in the world. It is a belief system, and in that sense it is a religion as recognized by the US government.
@GryffinDarkBreed Belief... system?! How is it a system when it's only ONE message? All atheism says is "I don't believe in any god". Anything that follows from there is not attached to atheism. Atheists don't have to accept evolution. Atheists don't have to accept the big bang theory. Atheists don't have to say ANYTHING other than "I don't believe in any god".
There is no *system*. Get that through your head. If atheism is a religion then not believing that the earth is flat is also a religion.
Atheism isn't a religion, it's the complete opposite. (A-Theism, meaning without theism/religion.) The word 'atheism' shouldn't even exist, as Sam Harris says. There is no word to define your disbelief in ghosts/astrology/numerology/big foot/ufos/etc., so there should be no word to define your disbelief in deities/religions either.
reading my post again, (I ran out of letters in that post) it doesn't make much sense.
Since matter must be observed, a conscious observer must be able to comprehend what exists. So since what exists now and will exists that plank frame of time ahead of our own time. Then it must have existed in the past for it to exist now.
Being, it exists now because it had to exist in the past. Thus creation through an infinite loop in the 4th dimension.
FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER! I'll tell you why, there would be enough spaghetti to feed all of his children to become the people of the world today. Along with the spaghetti being able to touch all ends of the universe! Don't forget meatballs for brains!
Read up on string theory and m-theory. Beyond membranes bumping- one possibility is since a consciousness is needed for wavicles to act as waves, matter is observed. Since it exists in the future, it exists in the past, hurray infinite loop!
The video's claim is useless without defining terms. Words mean different things to different people or in different contexts. If "atheism" is taken to refer to the lack of belief that a god or gods do or do not exist (pure agnosticism; no belief), it would take a highly unconventional definition of religion to match it. If "atheism" is taken to refer to the belief that no gods exist (as is more common), it's very reasonable to call it a religion--probably more reasonable than the opposite.
I dont see aitheism not being a religion. considering philosophy, it would have us make the assumption of a religion being a possible category for atheism. If i say i have no moral code one could assume that following moral code would be against my moral code.
I want to thank you for some very thought provoking videos, particularly the present one. I teach World Religions on the College level and I have enjoyed using this particular video as a conversation starter regarding the issue of labels and how we construct categories. While I might not necessarily agree with your conclusions, I have enjoyed your spirited and intelligent arguments. I wish you all the best.
INVISIBLE PINK UNICORN!!!! An example of god for athiests :) invisible yet pink, giving it that supernatural power, and it's a unicorn. . . Idk exactly how to explain that to you, they don't exist like god :D look it up on wiki, i'm working on fumes.
@RainBringa159 you mean saying all men are equal but allowing slavery? Or saying don't seek any attention or praise but devote all your time, attention, and praise to god? What is possibly hypocritical about that? :) See you at church
@QuestionRenee Then how can the atheists delude themselve and *believe* that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
just pointing out from 2:03 to 2:20 you almost described the church of satan too. I do have debate questions for you, which I hope you accept, but what you should know is that im a christian and a science major too. Not going to be an easy debate if you accept it.
I call my atheism a symptom of a disease called being a reasonable logical person ;]
How i like to explain it: Its like being a car owner and a non-car owner. you can have a chevy, a ford, a kia -those would make you a car owner. if you do not have a car, than you are not a car owner. Lack of car is not a type of car owning.
I know Jesus is true because I have a personal relationship with him- I was there when it happened, as Johnny Cash says in the song. At my salvation I was 40- prior to that, an atheist. Even a religious anti-Christian one! God is true, He reveals himself in his creation and in you- but many wont listen and choose their self serving humanism instead. I was there, I remember. I didnt get saved out of being afraid of hell, God saved me at a low, desperate and hurting place, Jesus is everything! <3
@FrancesAbq The famous catch-phrase "He's everywhere! He's everywhere!" was coined for a fictional character called batman,, Now you could coin the phrase... "He's everything! He's everything!" and it might catch on... but it would still be fiction...
@George0025 RE: “Sorry the U.S. Supreme Court declared Atheism a religion.” --- That is interesting. Could you possibly provide the designated citation for that please? This could prove worthy in a debate. Proof is always necessary. Thanx!
@George0025 Thanx for sending me that link. It stemmed from a case concerning the religious rights for prison inmates in Wisconsin. As said: “The court decided the inmate's First Amendment rights were violated because the prison refused to allow him to create a study group for atheists.” --- Since there isn’t any doctrine for an atheist to actually practice (like in religion; because I would know about it if it existed), a “study group” is an appropriate term.
@George0025 The confusion is that the typical definition of religion is a belief system that includes a moral code and faith. Atheism can be based on evidence, so it doesn't require faith and has no stance on morality.
The courts have ruled that a religion is an attribute that all people possess, and some people stick "atheism" into that slot. This provides atheists with the same legal protections that believers enjoy.
But since this is Youtube and not a courtroom, atheism isn't a religion.
The only people who wan't atheism to be a religion are religious people in power.
Turning it into a religion scares away those looking to identify themselves as atheists in order to avoid the religious cults. It also lets the religious bigots use the media to appoint radical anti theist atheists as our "leaders" and attack the rest of us with bullshit like we want to kill off all belief systems or take away freedom to believe what you want to.
We have to be made demons before they can burn us.
@miiwiiplay Well, we wouldn't want that now. America is the place I first thought of when I was contemplating cheerleaders. Don't sue me bro... *sigh*
Do not confuse creationism with theism. Anyone can believe god created the universe and now does not exist and be an atheist. Many deists believe exactly that and are atheists.
It's really too bad however that people change those quotes to "if atheism is a belief, bald is a hair colour" and "if atheism is a belief, then death is a lifestyle"... because both of them are misapplications of the original argument and are both false.
Let them call it a religion if they want to. Words are just made up sounds and dictionaries just reflect usage, they don't create definitions for people to follow. If they think calling disbelief in God is a religion, so what? they aren't fooling anyone except themselves, it doesn't make our position any less valid or mean that we have adopted any of particular facets of other religions.
When the pull down menu says Religion, I click on Atheist and it doesn't bother me.
@Caesar88888 I dont debate to promote atheism. I debate to, as Hitchens says, fight against this ultimate wickedness and stupidity. and what last 30 mins? I'm not allowed to watch religious debates or else it means atheism is a religion? okaaaaay
@Caesar88888 You are born atheist. Materialism is more of a philosophical belief. Atheism is not a doctrine, it just means you don't believe. you could be a Nazi atheist, (though chances aren't high,) or some kid watching Youtube videos. And the only alternative isn't materialism. there's solipsism, brain in a vat theory, (can someone help me with the name?,) others think we are but simulations being run 10000 years from now by more advanced lifeforms. Lots of stuff you could pick.
No-one is born an atheist. Babies are not born with any positions. No baby believes there is no god.
Materialism denies the existence of philosophical belief, since philosophical belief is not material.
That you do not believe, says nothing about you or about atheists. You did not believe in a god when you did not exist. You were not an atheist when you did not exist.
No I don't believe that. Many deists do. I was pointing out that being an atheist does not require a belief that denies creation by a god
I think the universe always existed because we cannot start time, with or without a god.
To start time requires an event WHEN (a time) no time exists. Any event before time exists, would be at a time when there was no time, before time is a contradiction, therefore no event can start time.
There is no negation of theism. There are theists and nontheists... and all atheists are nontheists but not all nontheists are atheists. eg: babies do not believe there is a god (nontheist) but also do not believe there is no god... so they are nonatheists too.
@gklr atheist and nontheist mean the same thing. the prefix non- and a- both mean the same thing more or less. I don't understand the distinction. babies are born without the belief in god. Therefore they are atheists. I don't understand this parsing of the word atheist. It means you don't believe in God. either you do or don't. theist or atheist.
". the prefix non- and a- both mean the same thing more or less"
A meant without according to how the greek language was formed in literally the stone age, approx. 4300BC.
Over 2000 years later a guy named Aristotle founded something called formal logic. Over 2000 years after that a guy named Bertrand Russell posed the arguments I am giving here on NOT, which without or lack or absence of ... all use.
"I don't understand the distinction. babies are born without the belief in god. "
Yes, and without belief there is no god. They are nontheists and nonatheists.
Saying babies were born without belief in a god, says zero about babies. You were without belief in a god 2 million years ago when you did not exist... saying so does not talk about you.
When we use a= without and so on, we are using etymology. Etymology is not how words are defined as every word has only 1 root. If language worked that way we would have no ambiguity or context in natural languages and we do. Words like relative, mean something new in physics than in ethics than in logic than in geneology. Impossible if etymology was how words are defined.
As well atheist is not defined anyway, it is described. Atheism is defined.
" I feel like you're moving the target with the etymology point. a=without, non=without (im some cases)"
My point is that etymology is no way to define any word... and I pointed out atheist is never defined anyway, it is described. Atheism is defined.
"It doesn't matter when the word was created"
It does if the reason given for that meaning is outdated and logical texts have existed for over 100 years that clarify it and prove the old way is wrong and why.
"I never tried using etymology to define a- or non-."
I know. You were however using the prefix "a" to explain the meaning of atheism. That is literally stone age stuff. Logic has come a long way since then. :)
All definitions are what a word means. All words have definitions except names and labels, which have no meaning, no definition. "gklr" means nothing, but it refers to my youtube account. Names and labels refer to things, act as pointers. I say tree and point to one. We DESCRIBE names and labels, we DEFINE all other words.
The only words that have no meanings are names and labels. They mean nothing and instead refer to an object.
Words that are not names or labels ARE their definition. They are what they mean, and mean nothing outside of what they mean. The word IS the definition.
Wheras for names and labels they are not the object they refer to. The word car is not a car. The word "atheism" is what atheism means, it is it's definition and nothing else.
Definitions vs descriptions, defined words vs names and labels.
When we say what we are not or what we do not do... we have not said a thing about ourselves. We have used secondary predication. Primary predication is when we talk about what we are. "The dog is yellow" says what the dog is. Yellow is a primary predicate of the dog. "The dog is not yellow" uses secondary predication and tells us what the dog isn't, which doesn't talk about the dog or require the dog exists to be valid.
@gklr "we have not said a thing about ourselves." I might be mistaken but secondary predication does not entail a belief since "We have not said a thing about ourselves." How can anything other than primary predication express a belief?
""we have not said a thing about ourselves." I might be mistaken but secondary predication does not entail a belief since "We have not said a thing about ourselves." How can anything other than primary predication express a belief? "
Secondary predicates say nothing about the subject at all. They say what is not the case about the subject, which doesn't imply or require the subject exists.Secondary predicates just say what is not real, what is not the case.
"God does not exist" is a belief that uses secondary predication.
Atheism is the application of a secondary predicate about what is not the case about god.
"How can anything other than primary predication express a belief?"
I believe diamonds are not on Jupiter. Saying so is simply not talking about diamonds. It speaks to what is not the case about diamonds and doesn't require they exist. When diamonds did not exist they were not on Jupiter.
The dog was not yellow when the dog did not exist.
Bertrand Russell points out in On Denoting (available online) that the present King of France, who we know does not exist... is not bald is true. He could have added "and he doesn't have hair" as well.... or he doesn't believe in a god. The present King of France is not anything. Is not an atheist and does not believe in a god.
Theism does not believe in a god and is not an atheist.
"After reading On Denoting I will definitely respond. btw does this constitute an argument from authority? :P"
:) no. I am not arguing it is true because Russell said so. I am referring to the argument rather than saying "this is true because Russell said it was". I only refer people to that so they have a point of reference to argue from.... typically that leads them to Strawson who challenged Russell on this and I have Strawsons problem already covered in my replies to you
ha, ok... well I have been accused of using an argument by authority more than once by those who oppose this viewpoint, simply because I mentioned Russell... and perhaps because I scolded them for using an argument by authority such as the dictionary... and told them "you forfeit the right to pounce on theists who say their daddy told them there was a god so it is true". Turns out I am defending the dictionary definition lol.
We prove something exists by stating 1 truth about that thing.
If "god does not exist" (same form as saying iowntwocats doesn't believe, secondary predication).... is true... and about god, it would prove god exists. It is simply not talking about a god to say there is not a god that exists. It is saying what is not the case about god, not what is the case.
@gklr The Magic Space Monkey does not exist. either a or not a. How does this prove it's existence? Saying God does not exist, does not imply it's existence. I'm not sure what you mean by exist either. talking about something does not mean it exists. we may discuss world peace, does not mean it is a reality.
" The Magic Space Monkey does not exist. either a or not a"
P or not P, where P is a proposition... the proposition being that the Magic Space Monkey exists.
P or not P is true for every P. But it's the whole statement that is true, not one or the other. One or the other are belief statements until either is proven true.
" I'm not sure what you mean by exist either."
Existence applies to those things we have 1 truth about. (continued...)
I could add... you asked me "a does not = without in terms of logic?"
In formal logic, where NOT gets its meaning.... NOT can only be used with propositions or propositional functions. So to say something like "atheism is not believing" uses "believing" when believing is not a proposition or a propositional function. Neither is "believing in god".
This is why I tell people "not something, is not anything... all things are things".
When Rene DesCarte wrote "I think, therefore I am" he started the ball rolling on our modern grasp of existence. He could as well have said "I eat, therefore I am" as he cannot eat if he did not exist.
Down the road what he did was refined, until today when we can summarize what he did simply enough... 1 truth about an object and that object must exist. This is only slightly complicated by that there are 2 types of truths, empirical truths and tautologous truths.... (cont...)
Empirical truths are propositions we verify via 1 of the 5 senses. Eg: if the earth has water is true, the earth exists (the subject of the statement is earth, so the earth must exist if anything at all is true about it).
This is primary predication where we are talking about what is the case about the earth. If true, the earth must exist. Existence applies to those things we have 1 truth for (and there are no truths for a god, just beliefs).
Tautologous truths are like "It is raining out or it is not raining out" (P or not P). This is true only by way of logic. It will not help to look out the window, as it is true if it is raining out and it is true if it is not raining out. This is true, independent of the facts. See my video "tautologies for atheists" for more.
Empirical truths prove the existence of material objects.
Tautologous truths prove the existence of abstract objects like mathematics, logic, language
We prove what does not exist via a logical contradiction, or P and not P at the same time.
eg: the ball is on the table and the ball is not on the table, at the same time. That ball, the subject of the contradiction... cannot exist. "P and not P, at the same time" is false for every P. And "P or not P" is true for every P.
So we prove something exists by stating a truth about it. We prove something doesn't exist by showing it as the subject of a logical contradiction.
"don't understand the distinction. babies are born without the belief in god. Therefore they are atheists"
No... therefore they are nontheists.
"It means you don't believe in God"
False. It means you believe there is no god. Saying you do not believe in a god says nothing about you. The proof being that you did not believe in a god 2 million years ago and you were not an atheist. You haven't said a thing about YOU to say you do not believe in a god.
@Caesar88888 No. Your argument is lame: Atheism is a rejection of belief in god(s). That doesn't entail any other beliefs or ideologies, which you cite. What's more, unlike thieving, parasitic religions, these alternate ideologies do not require tithes. Stop trying to tell atheists who they are, and what they do. All you wind up doing is lying out some bent out of shape belief.
I love your shirt... XD
TheXXePiCfAiLuReXx 7 hours ago
Second pretty and smart lady on youtube....first is CommunityChannel xD.
iTzJimBoi 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Atheism is most definitely a religion. There is no evidence or reasoning that an "intelligent architect" did not design the universe. None. Everything in the universe is governed by Law, and in a universe governed by law, there is NO SUCH THING as chance. If you are against religious doctrines is one thing, but to claim the universe is random and unconscious is illogical and is based on just as much faith as religious fanatics. Atheism is nothing more than a religion of consensus skepticism.
Alkhemist10 1 day ago
Comment removed
Alkhemist10 1 day ago
bahaha favorite part "and that just sounds fucking nuts to me" lol yesss
susieradar 3 days ago
@gogreen18 Anything that has an ISM at the end is an IDEOLOGY, be it religious or otherwise. Atheism is NO different.
Of course I can't expect any intelligence to come out of a girl so young and uneducated as yourself. Because after all I am sure you have the scientific and biology credentials to back up your belief that KNOWS God, or any god/supernatural do not exist.
At least agnostics acknowledged neither religion, nor science which is based on theories and conjecture.
EquitesVeritatis 1 week ago
Atheism is not a philosophy or a religion. It is the default position. If I told you that there is a magical pixie that grant wishes, you not believing me does not make you an afairyist, and that afairyism is a religious and philosophical belief.
DeadFishFactory 1 week ago
Atheism is more of a philosoply I guess
CDMan117 1 week ago
I can't fucking prove there IS a God I DON'T GIVE A RAT'S BLACK FUCK I believe it, godfuckingdamn it!
WildManChrisVEVO 1 week ago
@WildManChrisVEVO Wow! You're a moron!
danathefunkiest1 1 week ago
@danathefunkiest1 WHY, goddammit! WHAT THE GODDAMN FUCK did I say, goddammit?
Stupid ass cunt!!!
ATHEISM IS AN ANTI-religion!!! A religion nonetheless, just like ANTI-fucking-MATTER is STILL MATERIAL, goddammit!...
You dumb FUCK!
You NEED to get busy sucking a DICK...
WildManChrisVEVO 1 week ago
@WildManChrisVEVO okay wildmanonsteroidsw/tourettes, Atheism is not an anti-religion, nor a religion itself. To actually think both is thee most idiotic claim ever posted on the internet. How old are you anyway? You sound like a frustrated little kid with down syndrome and daddy issues. A mindlessly defensive, unintelligent child.
danathefunkiest1 1 week ago
Comment removed
WildManChrisVEVO 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@danathefunkiest1 Listen up, you fucking retard bitch!!! ATHEISM IS A FUCKING FAITH, godfuckingdamn it, goddammit! IT TAKES FAITH TO BELIEVE TERE IS NOT a fucking God, goddammit!
So STICK THAT DICK IN YOUR MOUTH AND STAAAAAAART sucking!!!...
Stupid fucking cunt...
YOU GODDAMN FUCKING CUNT ASSWIPE DICKHAT DICKHOLE COCKSUCKING FAG FUCKING DIKE CHILD OF A BITCH GODFUCKER!!!...
Stupid fucking cunt...
WildManChrisVEVO 1 sec
WildManChrisVEVO 1 week ago
@WildManChrisVEVO You need help.
danathefunkiest1 1 week ago
@danathefunkiest1 Please, insult the dam bigot with all your worth but do not pull in mentally challenged children into it. It would be a compliment.
iTzJimBoi 1 day ago
Atheism STILL HAS FAITH!!!
Faith there IS NO FUCKING GOD, goddammit! GodfuckingshitfuckDAMN IT, godfuckingdammit!
God FUCK it, godfuckingdamn it, goddammit1
You can't fucking PROVE there is NO God, can you, you fucking fish-smelling fucking cunt?
Fucking D IT, then, goddammit!!!
Shit.
WildManChrisVEVO 1 week ago
BULLSHIT, goddammit!
What kinda fucking degree did your asshole "buy" @ at your college?
'Cause your head is so full of hot air you got it in the clouds and your feet entirely off the fucking ground, goddammit!...
Stupid fucking cunt...
WildManChrisVEVO 1 week ago
you don't worship a god.you worship yourself in front of a freaking camera. -.-
AngieFknDiggsIt 1 week ago
@AngieFknDiggsIt This immature fucking cunt bitch really DOES need to grow some boobs AND some fucking pubic hair on her fucking cunt before trying to discuss afdult topics way above her fucking head!
WildManChrisVEVO 1 week ago
@WildManChrisVEVO it's sad when you have to cuss me out instead of using KNOWLEDGE and big boy words. x3
AngieFknDiggsIt 1 week ago
@WildManChrisVEVO : How appropriate that someone who can't discuss their points, and instead insults/curses to get their ideas across is defending Christianity... but comparing theologies and scientific facts is pretty silly. By your logic, not believing in the tooth fairy takes "faith" as well...
DeepSouthWrestling1 6 days ago
Oh my Athiests are more annoying then relious people shoving their belief down everyones throat! What you guys don't get is your just as closed minded as the religious people because you believe there is no God! There is no proof that there is no God like there is no proof for God! Honestly athiests are the most closed minded arrogant people i have ever met, so annoying! Athiesm is a religion your believeing in something without any evidence you're all hipocrites!
sonofapitch100 2 weeks ago
Nobody said that there is anything wrong with you believing in a magic teacup in space.
TheThundergirl23 3 weeks ago
Atheism is a religion and its followers are closed minded. Most of the youtube atheists I come across are evangelical atheists like Laci here who try and proselytize and get people to convert to atheism. I find youtube atheists like, TheAmazingAtheist, Thunderf00t, gogreen18, CultofDusty, Evid3nc3, to be just like the evangelical fundamentalist assholes who go around proselytizing and shoving their belief systems down people's throats. Atheists live in a cave shackled along with fundamentalists.
magnus56j 3 weeks ago
@magnus56j
So while its alright for religions to spreed there message, its rude and fucktarded when Atheist do it?
TheJoshman01 3 weeks ago
@TheJoshman01 Actually I am against proselytizing, and I do not support in any way, shape, or form the way evangelical fundamentalists spread their beliefs. For one to believe something, one must experience it themselves. Just telling people what to believe is not going to make them believe it. A person born able to see can experience color. But if the one who can see color tries to explain color to a person born blind, it sounds like madness to the blind person.
magnus56j 3 weeks ago
@magnus56j
I respect your opinion very much and in an ideal world would love to see it fulfilled.
Unfortunately it isn't likely to happen, as the Majority of the world is religious and Atheism is a relatively new idea, Atheist are far outnumbered by the religious. Only very recently has it even became acceptable to publicly declare yourself an Atheist.
Telling people what were about is one of the few ways of defending our public image.
TheJoshman01 3 weeks ago
@magnus56j
Continued*
I don't think the majority of Atheist go looking for "converts" as we realize that is pretty much a lost cause simply because the religious are so grounded in there beliefs. However if we can encourage people to at least go online and to the library and to read another book besides the Bible, they can experience it for themselves as you have said.
We don't want them to automatically accept what we say. Thats against Atheism in the most fundamental way.
TheJoshman01 3 weeks ago
@TheJoshman01 Continued* "We don't want them to automatically accept what we say." That's good! We Orthodox don't want people to automatically accept what we say either. I just don't think Laci is doing this. I've seen many of her videos and what she does, I consider proselytizing. Orthodox won't proselytize to atheists because we know trying to describe it to an atheist is like trying to describe colors to a person born blind. One must experience God to believe in God.
magnus56j 3 weeks ago
@magnus56j
Continued*
We just want them to look up the information for themselves.
TheJoshman01 3 weeks ago
@TheJoshman01 I should have been more clear, as I wasn't referring to all atheists, just the evangelical atheists. And yes, you are absolutely right that people need to go online and read another book besides the Bible. As a Serbian Orthodox Christian myself, I will even admit that the Bible is dangerous as it can become an idol to people. Just so you know, we Eastern Orthodox are not anything like these fundamentalist evangelicals. In fact, we support skepicism. I myself am a skeptic.
magnus56j 3 weeks ago
@TheJoshman01 I can also totally understand that you want atheists to have a good image. But, quite frankly, I think Laci and TheAmazingAtheist are examples of atheists who give atheism a bad image. These fundamentalist evangelicals give Christianity a bad image, and are in my view the worst enemy to Christianity. Have you ever looked at the channel: allsaintsmonastery? I think you'll like him. Lazar is not going to make you believe in God, but it will show you another side to Christianity :)
magnus56j 3 weeks ago
@magnus56j
Oh I know there are good Christians out there and know several myself. However in the United States most Christians simply don't know what Atheism is about and often think its a type of Satanism. Atheist are the most hated minority in the US and things are hard for us here (although we could be worse). As to Laci I get the feeling she is more bitching about the Christians that keep trying to get her to convert or miss the point of what she is saying entirely.
TheJoshman01 3 weeks ago
@magnus56j
Continued*
She doesn't seem to be pushing for them to become Atheist so much as she is calling them out on what she sees as stupidity.
I'll be honest and admit that I agree with her somewhat in that respect, but everyone is entitled to there own opinion and beliefs. One of the main reasons I love America :)
TheJoshman01 3 weeks ago
@TheJoshman01 Actually most of the "Christianity" she is speaking of is stupidity. I honestly don't see how people can believe that Hell is a place of fire with demons and pitchforks. I don't see how people can believe that the earth is 6,000 years old...WTF! In fact, a careful study of history, shows the earliest Christians interpreted the Bible as allegorical and did not believe God created the world in 6 days or took the Adam and Eve story as literal.
magnus56j 3 weeks ago
@TheJoshman01 Continued* The earliest Christians were way more intelligent and had much more common sense than the group of US Christians who take the Bible literally. Many seem to think the Bible fell out of the sky from heaven (btw heaven isn't a place, nor is it in the sky), which is not the case. The evangelical fundamentalists only know God from reading a book--the Bible. But, the Bible was originally never the reason for why people believed in God or Christianity.
magnus56j 3 weeks ago
@magnus56j
Really? I've often found Atheist to be much more open minded.
TheJoshman01 2 weeks ago
@TheJoshman01 maybe yours are. the one's i've met were more like bigots and trollers to me.
humanist707 1 week ago
@magnus56j : You may think they're "shoving their belief systems down people's throats", but keep in mind that the government isn't helping them, like Christianity. Crooked politicians don't use their constituents atheism to garner votes and make archaic laws only so they can stay in power. Atheism never denies anyone the right to be happy, like Christianity. Atheism is a reaction to religion, like militancy is a reaction to racism.
DeepSouthWrestling1 1 week ago
@DeepSouthWrestling1 How does Christianity deny someone's right to be happy? If you are talking about evangelical fundamentalist cults who go around with picket signs telling everyone they are going to Hell, then I can see what you are getting at since the leaders of those wacko groups control the lives of its followers, where they have no freedom. I, as an Orthodox Christian, am free to be skeptical and ask questions, also the Orthodox community is very close, friendly, and loving. I'm happy :)
magnus56j 1 week ago
@magnus56j : I'm talking about how politicians put Christian dogma into law to gain Christian support, like gay marriage. To deny gays the rights every other American has simply because Christians don't like it is unconstitutional.
DeepSouthWrestling1 1 week ago
@DeepSouthWrestling1 I can see where you are coming from. You make a good point. I can see how it can be frustrating since relgious ideologies effect a lot of our politics. But, at the same time it would definitely be unconstitutional to make religion illegal, and since the United States is a democracy, the people's vote is what matters.
magnus56j 1 week ago
@magnus56j : Not make it illegal, just not endorse one over the others. That's what our gov't does, endorses Christianity. And they're not supposed to.
DeepSouthWrestling1 1 week ago
@DeepSouthWrestling1 I understand and sympathize with you. It is absurd that some states ban atheists from holding public office. That isn't fair at all, and is definitely unconstitutional. I am a Christian that simply doesn't like proselytizing, so I am against both evangelical atheists and evangelical fundamentalist christians (I should clarify I don't think all atheists are closed-minded). I think it is a mistake to believe you can argue someone into believing in something. It never works.
magnus56j 1 week ago
@magnus56j : I've lived on the buckle of the bible belt all my life, so I've seen the worst, so to speak. I'm not against Christianity, either... if that belief gets anyone through the day without killing someone, I'm all for it!
DeepSouthWrestling1 6 days ago
Technically speaking: Faith can come in many forms, if you make a claim about something which you cannot prove, that is faith. So if an atheist expresses himself that there is no god well, that is a matter of faith. When an atheist however expresses himself that there is no proof of god that is being logical. If an atheist expresses himself that the debate of gods existence is largely irrelevant he is being an agnostic atheist.
So, atheists can hold to a faith as such, even be religious about it
RuerlKhan 3 weeks ago
The thing about religion vs. Atheism is that religious men and women can believe more easily. I know I do.
Samisawesomeguy 4 weeks ago
I agree with you on this one, so can I get a kiss on my right cheek now?
alqazaha1 1 month ago
The rule is that there is no rules. The dogma is that there is no dogma. Of course, you should believe the following... (blah blah blah science blah blah blah) and definitely do NOT believe the following (blah blah blah God blah blah blah)...
By the way, by stating Atheism is individualistic and Theism isn't, it just proves you have a lot to learn about Theism.
The "oh god" at the end seals the deal. xD
gikratos 1 month ago
"I don't know what that means"
LOL Yes, you are proving yourself an authority of definitions.
By the way, one of those definitions said you have a set of beliefs. Are you saying you don't?
gikratos 1 month ago
Live and let live, live your life till you are dead and don't live your life in fear and from the world. Who agrees?
That1GuyLouie 1 month ago
Atheism falls under definition 4. Blonde Bimbo: 0, Atheism :1
GryffinDarkBreed 1 month ago
A "Religious" is one who follows a religion.
Athiesm technically is, and isn't a religion. It's the belief system that there is no god, no higher power. Nothing but what is observable in the world. It is a belief system, and in that sense it is a religion as recognized by the US government.
GryffinDarkBreed 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GryffinDarkBreed Belief... system?! How is it a system when it's only ONE message? All atheism says is "I don't believe in any god". Anything that follows from there is not attached to atheism. Atheists don't have to accept evolution. Atheists don't have to accept the big bang theory. Atheists don't have to say ANYTHING other than "I don't believe in any god".
There is no *system*. Get that through your head. If atheism is a religion then not believing that the earth is flat is also a religion.
steviej321 1 month ago
Miley Cyrus! I've watching all your goddamn videos, trying to figure it out. -The spitting image
Striped27 1 month ago
Comment removed
Striped27 1 month ago
I think im in love with this girl
TaylorThought 1 month ago
I think it is very ironic that the ad before this video is a "yay mormon" ad. :P
1000dkt 1 month ago
Atheism isn't a religion, it's the complete opposite. (A-Theism, meaning without theism/religion.) The word 'atheism' shouldn't even exist, as Sam Harris says. There is no word to define your disbelief in ghosts/astrology/numerology/big foot/ufos/etc., so there should be no word to define your disbelief in deities/religions either.
KevinLockard23 1 month ago
The most effective thing to say to a average American is to just call it not a religion, but a set of beliefs.
TheVheren 1 month ago
reading my post again, (I ran out of letters in that post) it doesn't make much sense.
Since matter must be observed, a conscious observer must be able to comprehend what exists. So since what exists now and will exists that plank frame of time ahead of our own time. Then it must have existed in the past for it to exist now.
Being, it exists now because it had to exist in the past. Thus creation through an infinite loop in the 4th dimension.
blah..... a random thought I've had in the past
TrancorWD 1 month ago
FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER! I'll tell you why, there would be enough spaghetti to feed all of his children to become the people of the world today. Along with the spaghetti being able to touch all ends of the universe! Don't forget meatballs for brains!
Read up on string theory and m-theory. Beyond membranes bumping- one possibility is since a consciousness is needed for wavicles to act as waves, matter is observed. Since it exists in the future, it exists in the past, hurray infinite loop!
TrancorWD 1 month ago
There is a flying teapot in space, thank you astronauts for dumping your space waste.
0186924 1 month ago
The video's claim is useless without defining terms. Words mean different things to different people or in different contexts. If "atheism" is taken to refer to the lack of belief that a god or gods do or do not exist (pure agnosticism; no belief), it would take a highly unconventional definition of religion to match it. If "atheism" is taken to refer to the belief that no gods exist (as is more common), it's very reasonable to call it a religion--probably more reasonable than the opposite.
Cr4ndor 1 month ago
I dont see aitheism not being a religion. considering philosophy, it would have us make the assumption of a religion being a possible category for atheism. If i say i have no moral code one could assume that following moral code would be against my moral code.
TheMasterOfTheFrets 1 month ago
I want to thank you for some very thought provoking videos, particularly the present one. I teach World Religions on the College level and I have enjoyed using this particular video as a conversation starter regarding the issue of labels and how we construct categories. While I might not necessarily agree with your conclusions, I have enjoyed your spirited and intelligent arguments. I wish you all the best.
L. Arik Greenberg, PhD
DrArikGreenberg 1 month ago
INVISIBLE PINK UNICORN!!!! An example of god for athiests :) invisible yet pink, giving it that supernatural power, and it's a unicorn. . . Idk exactly how to explain that to you, they don't exist like god :D look it up on wiki, i'm working on fumes.
Cestdesconneries 1 month ago
i hope that god isnt like the christian god because that would mean he is a hypocrite
RainBringa159 1 month ago
@RainBringa159 you mean saying all men are equal but allowing slavery? Or saying don't seek any attention or praise but devote all your time, attention, and praise to god? What is possibly hypocritical about that? :) See you at church
Cestdesconneries 1 month ago
Haha i love it how all religious people say to atheists.
"BAHA! atheism is a belief therefore it is a religion therefore you have faith!"
And im like.. DUDE do you believe in the tooth fairy or roger the talking rabbit?!
and there like "Pfft NO"
so do i go around saying "BAHA you non tooth fairy roger talking rabbit believer!"
Imagine saying that people not believing in something means that they believe in something else rather than nothing............
IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE!!!
paska172 2 months ago
Religion= Supernatural belief
QuestionRenee 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@QuestionRenee Then how can the atheists delude themselve and *believe* that hydrogen and oxygen, electrons and protons, should first produce themselves, then be the source for all other beings, and finally decree the laws that regulate themselves and the rest of the material world?
1tabligh 2 months ago
what about secular religion?
HelloCaille 2 months ago
@HelloCaille that is an oxymoron, secular means not pertaining to religion lol.
dolphuck 1 month ago
I am a Jedi.
SweetLilNibs 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE END OF WORLD IS COMING VERY SOON !!!
BELIEVE ONLY IN JESUS BEFORE TOO LATE OR BURN IN HELL FOREVER !!!
BELIEVE ONLY IN JESUS BEFORE TOO LATE OR BURN IN HELL FOREVER !!!
BELIEVE ONLY IN JESUS BEFORE TOO LATE OR BURN IN HELL FOREVER !!!
fuckmania07 2 months ago
@gogreen No absolutes? Can you be absolutely sure of that?
rioyuske 2 months ago
Atheism is as much a religion as not collecting item X is a hobby, or as much as not smoking is an addiction.
TheRatSquid 2 months ago
@TheRatSquid Or as much as abstinence is a sexual position.
elgmalone 2 months ago
just pointing out from 2:03 to 2:20 you almost described the church of satan too. I do have debate questions for you, which I hope you accept, but what you should know is that im a christian and a science major too. Not going to be an easy debate if you accept it.
jo3jo3221 2 months ago
I call my atheism a symptom of a disease called being a reasonable logical person ;]
How i like to explain it: Its like being a car owner and a non-car owner. you can have a chevy, a ford, a kia -those would make you a car owner. if you do not have a car, than you are not a car owner. Lack of car is not a type of car owning.
boloart 2 months ago
I know Jesus is true because I have a personal relationship with him- I was there when it happened, as Johnny Cash says in the song. At my salvation I was 40- prior to that, an atheist. Even a religious anti-Christian one! God is true, He reveals himself in his creation and in you- but many wont listen and choose their self serving humanism instead. I was there, I remember. I didnt get saved out of being afraid of hell, God saved me at a low, desperate and hurting place, Jesus is everything! <3
FrancesAbq 2 months ago
@FrancesAbq The famous catch-phrase "He's everywhere! He's everywhere!" was coined for a fictional character called batman,, Now you could coin the phrase... "He's everything! He's everything!" and it might catch on... but it would still be fiction...
daNDayati 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"BELIEVE IN JESUS BEFORE TOO LATE" OR "BURN IN HELL FOR ETERNITY"
THE END IS COMING SOON WITH SUDDEN DESTRUCTION ON EARTH.
fuckmania07 2 months ago
Sorry the U.S. Supreme Court declared Atheism a religion.
George0025 3 months ago
@George0025 RE: “Sorry the U.S. Supreme Court declared Atheism a religion.” --- That is interesting. Could you possibly provide the designated citation for that please? This could prove worthy in a debate. Proof is always necessary. Thanx!
RRoocckkyy50 3 months ago
Comment removed
RRoocckkyy50 3 months ago
@George0025 Thanx for sending me that link. It stemmed from a case concerning the religious rights for prison inmates in Wisconsin. As said: “The court decided the inmate's First Amendment rights were violated because the prison refused to allow him to create a study group for atheists.” --- Since there isn’t any doctrine for an atheist to actually practice (like in religion; because I would know about it if it existed), a “study group” is an appropriate term.
RRoocckkyy50 3 months ago
@George0025 The confusion is that the typical definition of religion is a belief system that includes a moral code and faith. Atheism can be based on evidence, so it doesn't require faith and has no stance on morality.
The courts have ruled that a religion is an attribute that all people possess, and some people stick "atheism" into that slot. This provides atheists with the same legal protections that believers enjoy.
But since this is Youtube and not a courtroom, atheism isn't a religion.
CasualTS 3 months ago 6
I got an ad for morman.org...
xyzqwa 3 months ago in playlist More videos from gogreen18
This has been flagged as spam show
My hobby is to not collect stamps.
Shrillwhip 3 months ago
Comment removed
Shrillwhip 3 months ago
thumbs up gurlie since ratings are disabled. ;0)
ushtemanushteunchaga 3 months ago
The only people who wan't atheism to be a religion are religious people in power.
Turning it into a religion scares away those looking to identify themselves as atheists in order to avoid the religious cults. It also lets the religious bigots use the media to appoint radical anti theist atheists as our "leaders" and attack the rest of us with bullshit like we want to kill off all belief systems or take away freedom to believe what you want to.
We have to be made demons before they can burn us.
Chousakan 3 months ago
An American Cheerleader-like hottie... TALKING FUCKIN' SENSE?! WTF has the world gone mad?! :o
DeluxeSux 4 months ago 39
@DeluxeSux that was kinda passive aggressive at americans. I'm going to assume your a douche until further notice.
miiwiiplay 2 months ago
@miiwiiplay Well, we wouldn't want that now. America is the place I first thought of when I was contemplating cheerleaders. Don't sue me bro... *sigh*
DeluxeSux 2 months ago
@miiwiiplay Also, she's an American and looks like a cheerleader. So don't sue me and also STFU. Thanks.
DeluxeSux 2 months ago
@DeluxeSux i love you <3
miiwiiplay 2 months ago
@miiwiiplay If you look and think anything like her then I love you too! If you're a dude then sorry, it's against my religion. :P
DeluxeSux 2 months ago
@DeluxeSux dude she's not that hot maybe like a 6.5 her face is pretty wrecked
Mr420Panda 1 month ago
@Buceroo21,
Do not confuse creationism with theism. Anyone can believe god created the universe and now does not exist and be an atheist. Many deists believe exactly that and are atheists.
gklr 4 months ago
My two favourite sayings to illustrate that atheism is not a religion:
-If atheism is a religion, then bald is a hair colour.
-if atheism is a religion, then death is a lifestyle choice.
mrs7195 4 months ago
@mrs7195,
It's really too bad however that people change those quotes to "if atheism is a belief, bald is a hair colour" and "if atheism is a belief, then death is a lifestyle"... because both of them are misapplications of the original argument and are both false.
gklr 4 months ago
Let them call it a religion if they want to. Words are just made up sounds and dictionaries just reflect usage, they don't create definitions for people to follow. If they think calling disbelief in God is a religion, so what? they aren't fooling anyone except themselves, it doesn't make our position any less valid or mean that we have adopted any of particular facets of other religions.
When the pull down menu says Religion, I click on Atheist and it doesn't bother me.
chrisofnottingham 4 months ago
@Buceroo21
Lord Krishna says in Bhagavad Gita that He created this illusion for those who dont want to be His servants.
If man is envious of God, God gives him ability to forget their relationship and live in illusion.
Caesar88888 4 months ago
It is a negation of theism.
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats
yeah, but if you negate theism you automatically accept another philosophy - humanism, communism, capitalism, nazism and so on.
Thats why they say that ateism is a religion.
Caesar88888 4 months ago
@Caesar88888 Is not collecting Pokemon cards a hobby? Is bald a hairstyle? (I say no because there is no hair to style :P)
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats
Yeah not collecting stamps is not a hobby.
But if you dont collect stamps you definitely spend your time in some different way. You cant just do nothing.
For example man who collects stamps spent last 30 minutes in stamp shop, buying stamps.
But you dont collect stamps. Thats why you spent last 30 minutes in front of computer, debating on youtube =)
Caesar88888 4 months ago
@Caesar88888 I dont debate to promote atheism. I debate to, as Hitchens says, fight against this ultimate wickedness and stupidity. and what last 30 mins? I'm not allowed to watch religious debates or else it means atheism is a religion? okaaaaay
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats That what religious people mean when they say that atheism is a religion.
I actually call it materialism.
When you reject God you automatically become materialist. That means you start looking for happiness in this material world.
Caesar88888 4 months ago
@Caesar88888 You are born atheist. Materialism is more of a philosophical belief. Atheism is not a doctrine, it just means you don't believe. you could be a Nazi atheist, (though chances aren't high,) or some kid watching Youtube videos. And the only alternative isn't materialism. there's solipsism, brain in a vat theory, (can someone help me with the name?,) others think we are but simulations being run 10000 years from now by more advanced lifeforms. Lots of stuff you could pick.
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
No-one is born an atheist. Babies are not born with any positions. No baby believes there is no god.
Materialism denies the existence of philosophical belief, since philosophical belief is not material.
That you do not believe, says nothing about you or about atheists. You did not believe in a god when you did not exist. You were not an atheist when you did not exist.
gklr 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gklr yes but only because I did not exist. If you don't exist you don't exist and can't BE anything. your point is moot.
iowntwocats 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Caesar88888,
"When you reject God you automatically become materialist"
Nonsense. Materialism is as unfounded as theism is and is the position that all things that exist are material.
Show me the material object "atheism" then.
Materialists make less sense than die hard fundies, and they are nuts.
gklr 4 months ago
@Caesar88888,
Not collecting stamps is not anything.
Not a hobby is not anything.
Not believing in god is not anything.
Where X is anything, not X is not anything.
No matter what you use for X, not X is not something.
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr yeah in theory you are right.
But on practice if you reject theism you have to accept another faith.
if you dont believe that you are soul, you automatically start thinking that you are body.
If you deny that Universe was created by God, you have to accept another theory.
Caesar88888 4 months ago
@Caesar88888,
I have faith there is no god.
"if you dont believe that you are soul, you automatically start thinking that you are body"
I did not believe I had a soul and neither did you in the year 1200. I did not think I was a body in the year 1200.
Atheists can believe that god created the universe and now does not exist. Many deists do and they are very much an atheist.
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr Do you believe that God created Universe, and now doesnt exist?
Caesar88888 4 months ago
@Caesar88888,
"God created Universe, and now doesnt exist?"
No I don't believe that. Many deists do. I was pointing out that being an atheist does not require a belief that denies creation by a god
I think the universe always existed because we cannot start time, with or without a god.
To start time requires an event WHEN (a time) no time exists. Any event before time exists, would be at a time when there was no time, before time is a contradiction, therefore no event can start time.
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr
I absolutely agree with you on time.
Vedic philosophy says the same - there never was a time world didnt exist.
Caesar88888 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
There is no negation of theism. There are theists and nontheists... and all atheists are nontheists but not all nontheists are atheists. eg: babies do not believe there is a god (nontheist) but also do not believe there is no god... so they are nonatheists too.
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr atheist and nontheist mean the same thing. the prefix non- and a- both mean the same thing more or less. I don't understand the distinction. babies are born without the belief in god. Therefore they are atheists. I don't understand this parsing of the word atheist. It means you don't believe in God. either you do or don't. theist or atheist.
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
"atheist and nontheist mean the same thing"
False. Nontheists are members of the complement set of "theists"
Atheists are a new set, with it's own complement set.... nonatheists.
If you believe there is a god you are a theist, if not you are nontheist.
If you believe there is no god, you are an atheist, if not you are a nonatheist.
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr nonatheist is an invention of your own? I can't find the word anywhere, and atheist seems to fit in every situation yer using it in.
iowntwocats 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@iowntwocats,
"nonatheist is an invention of your own?"
Hell no. NON is a set theory term. Atheists are a set. Nonatheists are the complement set.
" I can't find the word anywhere, and atheist seems to fit in every situation yer using it in"
Atheist cannot be confused with nonatheist. I bet you can't find "nonredishness" either until you consult a book on set theory.
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
". the prefix non- and a- both mean the same thing more or less"
A meant without according to how the greek language was formed in literally the stone age, approx. 4300BC.
Over 2000 years later a guy named Aristotle founded something called formal logic. Over 2000 years after that a guy named Bertrand Russell posed the arguments I am giving here on NOT, which without or lack or absence of ... all use.
And I should return to the stone age?
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
"I don't understand the distinction. babies are born without the belief in god. "
Yes, and without belief there is no god. They are nontheists and nonatheists.
Saying babies were born without belief in a god, says zero about babies. You were without belief in a god 2 million years ago when you did not exist... saying so does not talk about you.
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
When we use a= without and so on, we are using etymology. Etymology is not how words are defined as every word has only 1 root. If language worked that way we would have no ambiguity or context in natural languages and we do. Words like relative, mean something new in physics than in ethics than in logic than in geneology. Impossible if etymology was how words are defined.
As well atheist is not defined anyway, it is described. Atheism is defined.
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr I feel like you're moving the target with the etymology point. a=without, non=without (im some cases)
It doesn't matter when the word was created. how are you using it when you say nontheist? does it mean something other than without?
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
" I feel like you're moving the target with the etymology point. a=without, non=without (im some cases)"
My point is that etymology is no way to define any word... and I pointed out atheist is never defined anyway, it is described. Atheism is defined.
"It doesn't matter when the word was created"
It does if the reason given for that meaning is outdated and logical texts have existed for over 100 years that clarify it and prove the old way is wrong and why.
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr I never tried using etymology to define a- or non-.
a does not = without in terms of logic? that may be so, but it does when you say Atheism.
Please clarify what you mean by "and I pointed out atheist is never defined anyway, it is described. Atheism is defined."
I'm quite tired and would appreciate a little help. :)
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
"I never tried using etymology to define a- or non-."
I know. You were however using the prefix "a" to explain the meaning of atheism. That is literally stone age stuff. Logic has come a long way since then. :)
"a does not = without in terms of logic?"
Heck no.
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
"Please clarify..."
All definitions are what a word means. All words have definitions except names and labels, which have no meaning, no definition. "gklr" means nothing, but it refers to my youtube account. Names and labels refer to things, act as pointers. I say tree and point to one. We DESCRIBE names and labels, we DEFINE all other words.
The only words that have no meanings are names and labels. They mean nothing and instead refer to an object.
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
Words that are not names or labels ARE their definition. They are what they mean, and mean nothing outside of what they mean. The word IS the definition.
Wheras for names and labels they are not the object they refer to. The word car is not a car. The word "atheism" is what atheism means, it is it's definition and nothing else.
Definitions vs descriptions, defined words vs names and labels.
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
The problem is this:
When we say what we are not or what we do not do... we have not said a thing about ourselves. We have used secondary predication. Primary predication is when we talk about what we are. "The dog is yellow" says what the dog is. Yellow is a primary predicate of the dog. "The dog is not yellow" uses secondary predication and tells us what the dog isn't, which doesn't talk about the dog or require the dog exists to be valid.
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr "we have not said a thing about ourselves." I might be mistaken but secondary predication does not entail a belief since "We have not said a thing about ourselves." How can anything other than primary predication express a belief?
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
""we have not said a thing about ourselves." I might be mistaken but secondary predication does not entail a belief since "We have not said a thing about ourselves." How can anything other than primary predication express a belief? "
Secondary predicates say nothing about the subject at all. They say what is not the case about the subject, which doesn't imply or require the subject exists.Secondary predicates just say what is not real, what is not the case.
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
"God does not exist" is a belief that uses secondary predication.
Atheism is the application of a secondary predicate about what is not the case about god.
"How can anything other than primary predication express a belief?"
I believe diamonds are not on Jupiter. Saying so is simply not talking about diamonds. It speaks to what is not the case about diamonds and doesn't require they exist. When diamonds did not exist they were not on Jupiter.
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
The dog was not yellow when the dog did not exist.
Bertrand Russell points out in On Denoting (available online) that the present King of France, who we know does not exist... is not bald is true. He could have added "and he doesn't have hair" as well.... or he doesn't believe in a god. The present King of France is not anything. Is not an atheist and does not believe in a god.
Theism does not believe in a god and is not an atheist.
Rocks, murder, rape, hate, AIDS too.
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr After reading On Denoting I will definitely respond. btw does this constitute an argument from authority? :P
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
"After reading On Denoting I will definitely respond. btw does this constitute an argument from authority? :P"
:) no. I am not arguing it is true because Russell said so. I am referring to the argument rather than saying "this is true because Russell said it was". I only refer people to that so they have a point of reference to argue from.... typically that leads them to Strawson who challenged Russell on this and I have Strawsons problem already covered in my replies to you
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr I was joking about the authority fallacy hehe.
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
"I was joking about the authority fallacy hehe"
ha, ok... well I have been accused of using an argument by authority more than once by those who oppose this viewpoint, simply because I mentioned Russell... and perhaps because I scolded them for using an argument by authority such as the dictionary... and told them "you forfeit the right to pounce on theists who say their daddy told them there was a god so it is true". Turns out I am defending the dictionary definition lol.
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr logic humor LOL
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
lol ya... hey you are fun btw
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
We prove something exists by stating 1 truth about that thing.
If "god does not exist" (same form as saying iowntwocats doesn't believe, secondary predication).... is true... and about god, it would prove god exists. It is simply not talking about a god to say there is not a god that exists. It is saying what is not the case about god, not what is the case.
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr The Magic Space Monkey does not exist. either a or not a. How does this prove it's existence? Saying God does not exist, does not imply it's existence. I'm not sure what you mean by exist either. talking about something does not mean it exists. we may discuss world peace, does not mean it is a reality.
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
" The Magic Space Monkey does not exist. either a or not a"
P or not P, where P is a proposition... the proposition being that the Magic Space Monkey exists.
P or not P is true for every P. But it's the whole statement that is true, not one or the other. One or the other are belief statements until either is proven true.
" I'm not sure what you mean by exist either."
Existence applies to those things we have 1 truth about. (continued...)
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr yes continue...
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
One handed typing.... smoking a doob...
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr you know what, gimme time to light one up, be back in a bit haha.
iowntwocats 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
"you know what, gimme time to light one up, be back in a bit haha."
Good. You give me a chance to write that way. lol
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
I'm good now. lol. I caught up... sorta
I could add... you asked me "a does not = without in terms of logic?"
In formal logic, where NOT gets its meaning.... NOT can only be used with propositions or propositional functions. So to say something like "atheism is not believing" uses "believing" when believing is not a proposition or a propositional function. Neither is "believing in god".
This is why I tell people "not something, is not anything... all things are things".
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr I think i'm gonna read On Denoting before my rebuttal. I'm a bit too high as well lol
iowntwocats 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@iowntwocats,
" I think i'm gonna read On Denoting before my rebuttal. I'm a bit too high as well lol"
ha,well I just snubbed out a small one and now I am rolling my bedtime snack.
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
When Rene DesCarte wrote "I think, therefore I am" he started the ball rolling on our modern grasp of existence. He could as well have said "I eat, therefore I am" as he cannot eat if he did not exist.
Down the road what he did was refined, until today when we can summarize what he did simply enough... 1 truth about an object and that object must exist. This is only slightly complicated by that there are 2 types of truths, empirical truths and tautologous truths.... (cont...)
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
Empirical truths are propositions we verify via 1 of the 5 senses. Eg: if the earth has water is true, the earth exists (the subject of the statement is earth, so the earth must exist if anything at all is true about it).
This is primary predication where we are talking about what is the case about the earth. If true, the earth must exist. Existence applies to those things we have 1 truth for (and there are no truths for a god, just beliefs).
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
Tautologous truths are like "It is raining out or it is not raining out" (P or not P). This is true only by way of logic. It will not help to look out the window, as it is true if it is raining out and it is true if it is not raining out. This is true, independent of the facts. See my video "tautologies for atheists" for more.
Empirical truths prove the existence of material objects.
Tautologous truths prove the existence of abstract objects like mathematics, logic, language
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
We prove what does not exist via a logical contradiction, or P and not P at the same time.
eg: the ball is on the table and the ball is not on the table, at the same time. That ball, the subject of the contradiction... cannot exist. "P and not P, at the same time" is false for every P. And "P or not P" is true for every P.
So we prove something exists by stating a truth about it. We prove something doesn't exist by showing it as the subject of a logical contradiction.
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
"don't understand the distinction. babies are born without the belief in god. Therefore they are atheists"
No... therefore they are nontheists.
"It means you don't believe in God"
False. It means you believe there is no god. Saying you do not believe in a god says nothing about you. The proof being that you did not believe in a god 2 million years ago and you were not an atheist. You haven't said a thing about YOU to say you do not believe in a god.
gklr 4 months ago
@iowntwocats,
"either you do or don't. theist or atheist"
Either you do or don't.... yes... theist or nontheist.
Either you do believe there is no god or you don't, atheist or nonatheist.
gklr 4 months ago
@gklr I disagree. Atheist don't "believe" there is no god. It is the negation to the proposition, God exists.
iowntwocats 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@iowntwocats,
"I disagree."
It's your quarter. :) "Atheist don't "believe" there is no god"
Each and every last atheist does believe there is no god. If you do not share that belief, you are not an atheist... which doesn't matter much.
"It is the negation to the proposition, God exists."
Oh you mean like "god doesn't exist", which is a belief.
For those gods we can prove do not exist, we use no atheism. No belief required.
gklr 4 months ago
There are no atheist membership fees? Damn it! I've been scammed!! :D
meaninter03 4 months ago
@meaninter03 If you reject theism you automatically become humanist or capitalist or communist or accept some different faith.
Human being cant live without philosophy or faith.
So you should demand membership fees from those who you belong to now.
Caesar88888 4 months ago
@Caesar88888 No. Your argument is lame: Atheism is a rejection of belief in god(s). That doesn't entail any other beliefs or ideologies, which you cite. What's more, unlike thieving, parasitic religions, these alternate ideologies do not require tithes. Stop trying to tell atheists who they are, and what they do. All you wind up doing is lying out some bent out of shape belief.
meaninter03 4 months ago
a religion is based on faith , dogma and tenants.
a simple way of sorting this out,
apart from the disbelief i