@hairboy2 yeah I picked that up too. Its mainly a matter of experience in this realm. We can agree and disagree with immaterial things but like the theologist debates of old (of which our greatest minds have held varying views and expounded them) there is no correct or incorrect on this one.
I agree with all you say here, even though I do not share your atheist position. I hope you realise that some theists are capable of intelligent and reasoned discussion without the aggressive/bigoted nature you describe - I don't believe that is occurring BECAUSE of religious differences, but simply an exhibit of poor human behaviour while discussing a passionate topic. Ironically, the oppression you describe has also applied to religious people of all (most?) denominations throughout history!
@VColossalV well, video was all measured and rational at the start, explaining a viewpoint quite eloquently.... then there was a touch of "defensive fervency" that crept in for a bit at around 8:00-ish, as well as a couple of slapdowns aimed at all (? major?) existing monotheistic religions which (to me) insinuated that all people of religious persuasion are either a/ unintelligent, and/or b/ hostile towards all people of a different disposition. I "believe" I'm neither ;-)
Really, I can prove my lack of belief, I simply do not believe, do you believe me?
The point surly is that the burden of proof should always be upon the claimant, the more extraordinary the claim the more extraordinary the evidence required to support it.
A book written by savages hundred of years ago, that displays a primitive understanding of the world doesn't really stand up as extraordinary, and there are plenty of them to choose from.
@AndyCielecki Exactly! What's to prove either you believe or you don't. Did I harass you? Am I calling you out? Are you going to mess me up? Save the attitude for your life in the homeless shelter it'll serve you better there.
To believe without proof is irrational much like the rest of your post.
As for 'calling you out', if you make ridiculous assertions, you should expect others to question them.
I would never try to 'mess you up' I think your probably capable of making a far better job of that then I ever could living as I do in the fantasy 'homeless shelter' you have constructed in your mind.
@AndyCielecki That's what you have anyway, you don't believe and you don't not believe, you are simply withholding judgment on the question and attempting to cast doubt on any to choose to believe something that you want explicit knowledge about. You have all the proof that we have that allowed us to come to the conclusion, if you don't trust it, that is something that you have to live with and no longer my dilemma.
Proof didn't allow you to believe, you believe in spite of the lack of proof, it's not that I don't truest the alleged 'proof' it's that there isn't any, the bible is NOT credible proof by any stretch of the imagination.
Unless you have something more substantial to offer?
@AndyCielecki Incorrect, I took as proof the things that convinced me which are insufficient for you to consider proof. As for you not believing, I'm prepared to accept that. As for the bible, I guess that's in the eye of the beholder.
No, I have no substantial offerings beyond what you have already.
@MrItchyElbow,,,,Exactly how would you prove "lack of belief"? Let me answer that for you...you don't nor would you try either. A belief or lack of a belief is just an opinion...it is NOT a claim. A statement of fact such as: "Yahweh exists", is however a claim and does require evidence. "I believe with 99.999% certainty that there are no deities" is an opinion; it's not a statement of fact and thus requires no proof. Opinions may be explained and defended but never proven.
I love all of the videos I've seen on your channel, but this one is my favorite. Thank you for being able to make these videos, as I can share them with friends and family who don't understand my atheistic position. Great work, and keep it up!
You define atheism similarly to agnosticism. Agnosticism is lack of belief, rather than belief in NO gods? Theism = 1, Agnosticism = 0, Atheism = -1, right?
@DisembodiedLoaf Not really...Agnosticism is often confused as a substitute for atheism or theism...People often think it means they are unsure if their is a god or not...However what it really means is weather you claim knowledge in your athesim or theism. For example an agnostic atheist believes there is no god, but does not claim to know there is a god..Same with an agnostic christian, believes in god but does claim to know..If you are nostic then you claim to know your sides decision.
Just what to fuck are you trying to prove! Religion is not the problem! God does not need anyone prayer You need his! Just our Existence is prove enofe! This Moron is just trying too hard to be smart!
How could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?
Two weeks ago, a woman died at something called "The Maria Queen of Peace Compound", where a woman held Christian-oriented personal growth sessions, claiming to be inspired by an angel that was whispering to her.
That day, she decided that the members would be covered in mud, wrapped in black garbage bags, covered in thick blankets and then put in boxes.
One woman was left in this condition for 9 hours. The coroner said she was "slow-cooked to death".
They think with time a non-living thing can start to live,a non aware being can start to aware,Information (like DNA) can be formed without intellegence,social behaviour and technics of animals and insects are in the genes! and the best is this stuff : /watch?v=dOyc98tV5kA did evolve wings! and the ability to fly! throug random mutations and naturel selection,And they ignored completly this : /watch?v=PD6Ov8JHTfk,please hold down to the real science :)
you use the word belief in a very woolly way. Belief is holding something as true when there is no evidence, any other use of the word is just confusing.
How? By adding a clauses. For instance "I believe in evolution because of the vast amounts of evidence for it and because, despite being falsifiable, it has yet to be falsified". Is it really that hard?
How the hell can stating one's belief and then giving reasons for that belief make any debate impossible? It's exactly what happens in any debate.
Whether people actually do what I suggest withsignificant frequency is irrelevant. You asked how to distinguish between faith and justified belief, I gave you one method. Just using another word which indicates justified belief instead of faith won't help, because there's no reason to actually think the belief is justified.
Im christian, i dont kill people. Your argument is fataly invalid because not all christians are like that. Im a christian with very liberal views as so as conservative. I believe gays have the right to marry because god gave us all free will to do whatever we want needless of what everyone else says. Let the legalization of marijuana. I do understand though, the church has been distorted into this horrific piece of shit, specialy catholic churches and I agree, but i dont do the things u say!
@josechampthinks That's irrelevent. The fact that it /is/ indeed done on a regular basis to atheists is enough. If you personally don't, then kudos to you. We atheists appreciate your respect, however, most Germans didn't support the Nazis either. Jews still remember them with contempt. I won't apoligize for comparing the church to Nazi Germany because it is a valid comparison, though I do feel sorry that good people like you get associated by default in some people's heads.
@animefreak5855 Yes i know i have many atheist friends, im a big believer in liberty. You may do whatever you want as long as you dont interfere with other peoples rights. I just dont know why our religion has turned people into such intolerant people.Ive learned to do religion and liberty at the same time, and seem to be working very well! This is a very well thought argument though, and it makes allot of sense and i do respect their views im not some intolerant asshole
@josechampthinks Through what you've just said, I personally have gained more respect for you than the average atheist I know. (which is a big deal because of my ethnocentricity I think of them in pretty high regard.) To stand with your side and still respect and understand the other is more than the average person can do, esp. people involved in the quarrel about religion. You're that good guy who can remind atheists that not all Christians are extremists who persecute others.
@josechampthinks "I believe gays have the right to marry because god gave us all free will to do whatever we want needless of what everyone else says."
Obviously they do have the right to marry, but the Bible clearly states that you should stone all homosexuals to death on the spot, just for being gay. This is just one of many examples of barbaric bronze-age bigotry expressed by this deity.
This video is one of the best i've seen. Yet for some poor believer, they will lack the intellect to consider it valid. Poor, poor believers. I used to feel sorry for them. But in this nuclear age, they deserve to be labeled stupid, and treated as such until they are harmless.
Wow that people actually fall for this shit. Change the definition of atheism?
Atheism by its definition is the OPPOSITE of Theism. Without theism, there would be no atheism.
Definition of ist:
- an adherent of or believer in
- a person having or displaying prejudice related to
- a person who does, makes, or practices (the thing specified): words so formed correspond to verbs ending in -ize or nouns ending in -ism: moralist, satirist
@EquitesVeritatis Theism: 1. The belief in one god as the creator of the universe. 2. belief in the existence of a god or gods ( opposed to atheism). The atheist does NOT believe in any god or gods so in effect you are correct that it's the opposite of theism. That you want to add shit to it to make it fit into a category that you can ridicule is just the type of dishonesty that we have come to expect from the "morally superior" theists. The religious are a joke.
Atheism asserts the creation of the universe came out of nothing, just that no creator god(s) did it. Atheism asserts that life came from inorganic materials. Despite the necessary ingrediants for life being able to exist ONLY in living cells. Just that no creator god(s) etc did it. Atheism asserts theists are indoctrinated, but ignore cases like China, USSR, Hollywoodism, left wing politics, and folks like Dawkins who are PAID
@EquitesVeritatis "Atheism asserts..." right there the rest of your post is nonsense. Atheism is a lack of belief in a god. Is says NOTHING about evolution, morals, abiogenesis, political agenda or the like. A - without Theism - belief in a deity. Nothing more, nothing less. That *some* atheists are left wing, right wing, soft or hard, doesn't change that atheism means only what it means. It only means these other things to theists who wish to manipulate an argument.
@thelordmemnoch "It only means these other things to theists who wish to manipulate an argument."
Yep, just like folks such as Dawkins, of which many of you advocate and copy paste your lines from, asserts things like Religion being the cause of wars and suffering. Yet you comfy atheists fail to ignore your luxurious lifestyle comes at the cost of millions for your blood oil and cheap manufactured goods made from countries of poor human rights conditions.
@EquitesVeritatis "for your blood oil and cheap manufactured goods made from countries of poor human rights conditions." Keep up your honest and dialectical discussion. Sarcasm aside, a political idealogy which you wrote about has NOTHING to do with atheism. Again, since you apparently don't read well, or are just way past dishonest--a bold faced liar, I will remind you that atheism is a lack of belief in a deity or deities. Nothing more, nothing less.
@thelordmemnoch An atheist like Dawkins, would never say the obvious. That being that wars are POLITICAL, for gain of MONEY, RESOURCES, POWER, INFLUENCE etc. Religion is bar none the ONLY ideology responsible for this. Eg USSR indoctrination its youth with anti-religious mantras from the 1950s on.
@EquitesVeritatis Atheist do not claim the universe came out of nothing. Theists do. God created everything ex nihilo. The big bang was an expansion of a singularity. The singularity was the entire universe packed into a tight ball as is evident with everything moving away from a common point 14 or so billion years ago. Please gather your facts before you make claims about what others claim.
@EquitesVeritatis Finally, just to demonstrate your ignorance, what material ONLY exists in living things and not in inorganic material? Carbon? Hydrogen? The difference between the two is that an organic entity has a carbon and hydrogen COMPOUND. Both of those exist in inorganic matter by themselves. The "materials" for life exist in inorganic objects, it's just a matter of arrangement. I think it's safe to say that there is nothing to be learned by continuing this discussion.
@thelordmemnoch "Finally, just to demonstrate your ignorance, what material ONLY exists in living things and not in inorganic material? "
RNA, DNA, and lipids to name a few. To say that hydrogen and carbon alone is enough for life is as much a fairytale as the existance of God (even though there is more support for this, eg fine tuned universe, intelligent design)
Many scientists ARE atheist and there research is based on seeking evidence of creation without a creator.
@EquitesVeritatis RNA and DNA are not materials, they are an arrangement of materials. I think I was very clear about my description and for you to butcher what I said shows me you aren't interested in a discussion. You merely want to strawman my arguments, as you have done about atheism in all of your posts. I also didn't say that H and C are the ONLY things needed for life. I specified that it's the difference between organic and inorganic.
@thelordmemnoch I merely stated RNA, DNA, lipids etc, can ONLY be found in LIVING matter. Science has no explanation of how these came to be outside of the atheist statement of "It wasn't done by any god(s)."
The fact that many scientists believe in the mutliple universe "theory" which cannot be proven with any emperical evidence, also shows the hypocrasy of this lot. They believe in multiple universe to explain the fine tuned universe just to contradict creationist theories.
@EquitesVeritatis No you stated "materials" which is not the same as an organic assembly of parts. And science does have a few ideas, however, ignorance doesn't give credence to bronze age myths. That's the core difference. Abiogenesis isn't taught in schools, nor are they knocking door to door with this stuff. The religious, without any evidence are in fact doing this. That is the core difference between the two. There is nothing wrong with speculating about our origins.
@EquitesVeritatis Finely tuned universe? Finely tuned for what may I ask? If this is the William Lane Craig argument, it is indeed a sad one, but before I say anything, I would like for you to define "finely tuned" and what you think it means to you.
@EquitesVeritatis RNA and DNA are nucleotides whose order calls for different proteins. All you need are some amino acids and a simple membrane; they can arrange themselves and over hundreds of millions of years can build into an early prokaryotic cell. As far as complexity goes look into endosymbiotic theory and the evidence that supports it. This explains how eukaryotic cells developed and from their it's not hard to get to higher life forms. Their is no need for any divine intervention.
Atheism: - a person having or displaying prejudice related to their particular idealogy.
Anyone who slaps themselves under a title or idealogy is indoctrinated, period. Much like our education of WW2 in the west is 80% indoctrination because no true historian would ever take an account written in a good guy/bad guy context without reading other sides of the story because such a context has always been proven to be propoganda. eg like Dawkin's books
@EquitesVeritatis A- without Theism - belief in a deity. I don't know why you ignore the obvious truth. Well, I do know: you are being dishonest which should give you an indication of the validity, or lack of, in your posts. Good guy/bad guy...you mean like god who is good, and the devil who is evil? I agree. Dawkin was never about propaganda. He is a scientist first and theists have always attacked his field of study, knowing NOTHING about it, just like you.
Why do so many people argue definitions from the root of the word rather than how it is used? The most common meaning of agnostic is that it refers to a person who believes "that the existence of God or of all deities is unknown, unknowable, unproven, or unprovable" (wiktionary) and I suspect you know that. Mind you because of the tendency of people to argue from the knowledge definition and use it as a modifier to atheist and theist, I have started calling it "classic agnosticism".
I can't accept that if a given person who abuses religion didn't have religion, he or she would not commit a similar injustice in the name of something else.
Aside from that, I really like your position on agnosticism.
A God who needs worship but can ensure that He gets worship without limiting His actions could still be perfect.
Also, God would not die if He were not worshipped. Just because He wants humans to worship Him, does not mean He needs worship - it stands to reason that a perfect sentient Being would have perfect desires, but it does not follow that such desires would include a perfect world.
You aren't very polite to people who actually do have faith in a lack of gods - there are few, but some.
The problem with this particular label "agnosticism" is that every reasonable person even Dawkins and Hitchens is agnostic the only people who rule out the alternative view are fundamentalists.
hey QualiaSoup, I think I have found something that reflects your views: have you heard of ignosticism?
Wikipedia: Ignosticism or igtheism is the theological position that every other theological position (including agnosticism and atheism) assumes too much about the concept of God and many other theological concepts.
[...] An ignostic maintains that they cannot even say whether he/she is a theist or an atheist until a sufficient definition of theism is put forth.
This is a wonderful video. I addresses why I am an atheist, what an atheist is, why being an atheist is a rational position, why theists carry the burden of evidence and why atheists are feeling more and more determined to have their reasoning understood and respected. Very good.
@Rushlimpballs "The old days?" Really? Seems to me these discussions are continually sending the comment sections of videos like this up shit creek. Just check out the videos of TheAmazingAtheist.
I'm not talking about the arguments; those will go on forever. I was talking about some of my favorite atheist/theist Youtubers that don't make videos anymore like QualiaSoup, JaguarJones, Defender of Reason, TheoreticalBullshit, vbfl920, Veritas48 etc...
This is the best explination of "atheism" I've seen yet. Up until now the "atheist" position was championed by people just as bad as the religous zelots. At least this offers the possibility that it isn't a god who controls the actions, but the locked-in beliefs.
Bowing down to a "supreme entity" (be it a god, the gov't or the environment) as a way to remove responsibility from the individual is dangerous.
It's possible to believe AND not be an a-hole. Until now, I doubted that of "atheists"
@bsabruzzo The "Toupé Fallacy" is something that continually applies to both theists and atheists. One could make a claim that sounds "all toupés suck, because none of them look real", without taking into consideration that all the good, realistic toupés, by their own nature, go by unnoticed.
The lack of interest in whether god exist or not is called apatheism. Isn't this more closely descriptive of the people who sat through the trial and still made no decision?
@artsHscience Simply because one feels that they do not hold enough information to make qualified judgement does not mean that they have no interest in it.
Maybe we should call the belief that 'the universe is without god' could be called 'antitheist' since it is polar opposite of 'theist' and the middle view of 'I am without belief in gods' is then 'atheist'.
Your video is nice but the position you have that people want to force you to hard atheism is not what is going on. Bertrand Russell and other philosophers from archaic times were influential on the definition and common usage of the term 'atheist'. Also from the Latin it is a-theism or 'without' 'god'. For many years this meant 'the universe is without god' not 'I am without belief in god'.
It would be nice if a third word was coined that defines the 'weak atheist'.
@mclovinakapascal Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." [John 20:29]
Yeah the bible covers it's ass well huh? I'd forgo the blessed part to just know. You know, considering that knowledge can end ALOT of wars. But that's just my opinion, ya know, give up 'eternal happiness' so people don't have to suffer here. Nice God you have there btw.
@mclovinakapascal "As you know, we count as blessed those who have persevered. You have heard of Job’s perseverance and have seen what the Lord finally brought about. The Lord is full of compassion and mercy." [James 5:11]
For the Christian, suffering is not in vain. It is an opportunity to testify; it is an opportunity to lay up treasure in Heaven.
For an atheist, all suffering is in vain. All things are meaningless.
God brings meaning to the universe; He makes facts rational.
No things aren't meaningless. In my view, this is my only life, which makes everything, failures, emotions, friends, pets, lessons, all the more amazing and vibrant and cherished. Don't twist my hatred of meaningless religious wars into a hatred of learning experiences and life to serve your own purposes, you aren't atheist, you don't know my position. I hate how two or more different groups are willing to kill and lose their only life because you both think you're God's favorite.
@mclovinakapascal "No things aren't meaningless. In my view, this is my only life, which makes everything, failures, emotions, friends, pets, lessons, all the more amazing and vibrant and cherished."
WTF. You expect someone to believe you have overcome your genetically programmed instinct for survival by painting a silver lining on a shit pile? Have the courage to admit you have swallowed the bitter pill simply because you think it's true.
@StormTrek Simply because you are a bitter asshole does not mean that everyone has to be equally sour. Some people can actually enjoy life knowing that it's the only one they've got.
@NightsirK Intellectual dishonesty makes me bitter. But you're the asshole for trying to peddle the bullshit that one's life is somehow enhanced by the knowledge that they, their friends, and their family are destined to oblivion.
@StormTrek "But you're the asshole for trying to peddle the bullshit that one's life is somehow enhanced by the knowledge that they, their friends, and their family are destined to oblivion."
Nah. It's the same reason gold is valued because it's rare. Your relationship with your family has value to you because it's finite and because you are forced to choose between spending time with them as opposed to spending time with others.
@StormTrek Same thing is true for your actions. You are forced to choose how to spend your life, and certain ways are perceived by you to be more valuable than others. With an eternity in the future, everything you do in your 70-80 years or so on earth is pointless. Those of us who don't believe in such things do not have to consider "oblivion" as relevant to determining value though. What matters is what happens to the people we care about when we exist.
@StormTrek The entire concept of value comes from having to make choices. You simply don't have to do that if you have infinity at your disposal. Of course, most religious people who claim to believe in lives after death actually live as if their lives are finite and deal with their loved ones as if they are on a timetable - which is good. It's just not honest.
@Gnomefro I've always noticed that. I think it's because deep down they have doubts, whether they are conscious of them or not, about the validity of their beliefs and act them out.
@Gnomefro "What matters is what happens to the people we care about when we exist."
I think this statement undermines your argument. Mathematically, an infinite sum of the smallest number will always be greater than a finite sum of the largest number. In other words, an infinite existence (see the quote) will inevitably lead to greater value no matter how little you think one should value their family in response to the belief that their life is infinite.
@StormTrek It's funny you believe in genetics, evolutionist much? ;). It sounds to me you only believe so you can satisfy your need for survival by 'knowing' there is another life. You're scared of thinking anything different. It's not a bitter pill either. I may have been raised Catholic, but I never really fooled myself (even as a child) that I could live forever. A sliver lining on a shit pile? That's just me being optimistic :) why be dwell on the bad? Enjoy what life has to offer right? :D
@mclovinakapascal Evolution programmed your genetic code to survive. If you choose to remain optimistic *despite* your belief in the imminence of personal oblivion that's understandable. But you said your life was enhanced *by* that belief, which is absurd. Furthermore, I don't 'know' there is another life but I certainly have biology on my side when I say that belief enhances my enjoyment of life.
So you believe in evolution and the church's teachings? If anything it's your views that are absurd, constantly being contradicted by each other for the sake of having your cake and eating it too. Biology on your side in our talk or in your life? Don't make yourself sound undoubtedly right by claiming such a thing. You mean psychological comfort you allow your body by partially thinking that you can surpass mortality? I can do the same by putting great importance into each event.
I'm thinking you're more agnostic, believing in logic yet still entertaining the thought of clinging to hope, that there may be something beyond. Which, in that case, I respect and cannot disprove whatsoever. I just happen to treat this as my only life and enjoy it no less than you do, which (no offense) is not under your ability to judge the level of my enjoyment. And should there happen to be an afterlife, hey all the better.
@mclovinakapascal You're backtracking into a position of saying you can enjoy your life no less than I do. Doesn't have quite the same punch as your initial claim that you enjoy life *more* because of your belief. In fact, you have effectively abandoned referring to your belief as a basis for enjoying life. You certainly can enjoy your life as much as I do, but not because of your belief that there isn't an afterlife.
Initial Statement: I cherish life more because I know it's my only one
Later Statement: I enjoy life no less than you
With the given information, this translates into: Your life ≤ My life.
In NO WAY have I abandoned my beliefs. My statements do not contradict nor do they eliminate each other. Not unlike yours, which you seem to keep avoiding discussing them in favor for ineptly nit-picking my wording. I put emphasis on appreciating even the dullest events, which some people hate.
@mclovinakapascal The topic is your claim that life is enhanced by *your* beliefs. You keep attempting to introduce the red herring of my beliefs because you don't know how to defend your position. Now, not only is your claim absurd in the light of biology, but it also fails in terms of the human desire for social justice: eons of criminal behavior remain unresolved because the victims suffered without recourse.
You don't even want to try to comprehend my position, you merely try to disprove it and thus cannot begin to judge it. Not only that, you have the absurd ego to think that you are fundamentally backed up by the "Light of Biology", which is honestly, the biggest load of horse shit. Do basic cellular functions hide a pattern saying I'm stupid? FUTHERMORE you compare the mystery of criminal behavior to my perception of life which leads me to wonder what hallucinogenic drugs you are on
@mclovinakapascal Your position is that life is enhanced by your belief that you and everyone else are destined to die. 1) It runs contrary to your biologically programmed instinct to survive. This doesn't mean you are stupid, it means your position contradicts your biology; hence it is suspect. 2) It ensures the failure of social justice for everyone who has ever died, which means your position contradicts an inarguably life enhancing hope. Clearly, I comprehend your position.
@StormTrek Well, have fun in your eternal afterlife, but I don't want it thank you. It surely has to be the most horrifyingly boring idea the human mind ever came up with. I might find a few interesting things to do for the first 500 years or so, but I wouldn't know what to do with the million years after that...and the billion years after that million years...let alone the trillion years after that billion years...and no possible escape from it...thanks but no thanks.
@StormTrek Hmm, well since I don't own an xbox and you're the one who came up with this, forgive me for suspecting that your comment stinks very strongly of projection. You're obviously looking forward to playing xbox for ever and ever...I don't.
@Atila6735 OK, so your friend owns the xbox. Nevertheless, the xbox is arbitrary, the point was your life consists of avoiding boredom and cleaning your room. No one would look forward to an eternity of that.
@StormTrek Meh, to make your argument interesting (as opposed to boring), you should avoid making cheap assumptions about people you know nothing about, as you'll expose yourself to a strong projection suspicion. I don't own an xbox, my friend(s) don't either, and even though I use a cleaner every week, I do believe living in a clean room is rather preferable to living in a messy one. Do I really need to tell you I have other interests in life ?
@Atila6735 I observe that you have begun every post with an interjection: well, hmm, meh. My initial observation was that you entered the conversation by broadcasting your goal in life is to avoid boredom. Consequently, observation -- rather than cheap assumption -- leads me to believe that adding the pursuit of education to your list of interests in life will soon result in your ability to make significant improvements in your personal presentation. Happy learning!
@StormTrek Youplaboom ! Saying that the pursuit of education is not included to my list of interests is yet another cheap assumption. Now you went from my initial post to deduct that my goal in life is to avoid boredom is...surprise....an unsubstantiated cheap assumption, do you have anything else in store ?
Anyway, don't you think that if you had eternity, your "pursuit of education" stands a serious chance of being completed one day ?
@StormTrek Ooops, forgot a few words there : Now you went from my initial post to deduct that my goal in life is to avoid boredom: that is...surprise....an unsubstantiated cheap assumption, do you have anything else in store ?
@StormTrek Wrong, it's perfectly in tune. Our instinct to survive is *because* we are going to die and we know it. The religious, on the other hand, think they are going to heaven when they die, yet they cling on to life just like an atheist. If I had a better life to go to, I would never take medicine. I would rejoice in funerals rather than die. Deep down they know that they won't see their loved ones again. Atheists simply admit it outright.
@thelordmemnoch 1) Your instinct to survive derives from your genetic programming not your contemplation. Animals run from forest fires without ever having pondered their place in life, the universe, and everything. 2) Behavior and belief don't always align, that's why Christians cry at funerals and why atheists enjoy their lives.
@thelordmemnoch "Deep down they know that they won't see their loved ones again"
Is there any empirical evidence to suggest this? And what of all the ghost sightings that take place around the world? Can every single case of super natural phenomenon be proven false? There is much in our existance that we cannot explain, to pretend we know everything is hubris. But then again hubris is the reason why history continually repeats itself. We ignore wisdom of the past :P
@lesbanon Claiming that all atheists find everything meaningless is a pretty baseless claim. I could just as well claim that all theists are looking forward to dying - it doesn't make it true. In fact, I'd dare to say most atheists find more value in their lives knowing that it's the only one they've got.
If you truly believe the premise of this video and think it can hold up under rigorous logic come to "Atheism is a Belief" on Facebook.
A page run by myself ( an agnostic), mostly atheists and some theists as well all sharing a mutual disdain for the "logic" in videos like this or ThunderTARD. We are against the proliferation of ignorance regardless of whether the source is atheist or theist.
@EManning81 Ok, I went to "Atheism is a Belief" on Facebook... interesting. Perhaps it depends on the definition of atheism or agnostism used. I seem to remember Richard Dawkins describing his position on a scale of 1..7 this way... theism = 1, atheism = 7. He considered himself to be at position 6. So is he an atheist or an agnotstic?
Some atheists will admit that a God might exist but state that at this time there is no good evidence to believe.
@MrToby9999 I seem to remember Richard Dawkins being accomplished in his field of biology but rather pathetic in terms of philisophical logic and since he centers his self described "central argument" of the God Delusion is broken up into 6 points, many of which are easily refuted and the conclusion of which doesn't even follow from the 6 points ( aka non sequitor), the entire book is pretty much garbage. When I first left the church at 14 I was using arguments he put in that book.
@MrToby9999 Short version: Dawkins is a hack and unless you he is going to talk biology he should stop embarrassing himself because the God Delusion is a horrific application of logic. That book is a waste of trees.
Very nice argument...I think beliefs are important because they represent ideas. You can have good ideas and bad ideas - but everything is driven by knowledge and experience. The longer you live, the more ideas you obtain to create different belief structures. Thats why you don't have any believes as an infant, but become more religious as an elder. Beliefs are based off knowledge and experience, otherwise you wouldn't have them. I'm confused by your def. of atheism, no beliefs no creator?
@12whitetribes It is an intentionally confusing defintion. The truth is that the traditional definition is more, useful, meaningful and descriptive as a word. Unfortunately the "new" atheists are driven by people like Dawkins, who may be accomplished in their respective fields, but are laymen in terms of philosophy and as such their logical conclusions are often fallacious and non-sequitor. This definition is nothing more than a dishonest, illogical play of semantics.
@12whitetribes That's funny because I only say an argument is "very nice" if it stands up to logic and this one fails in more ways than I can even begin to describe with a 400 character limit.
No, in keeping with the fact that to "lack" or "possess" a belief is merely a figure of speech( ironically a religious one) how would you define atheism literally?
Search Atheism is Belief on Facebook. There is a very good page run by atheists, theists and agnostics with a mutual disdain for the fallacious logic of the new atheists such as what can be found in this overwhelmingly pathetic and misleading video. The reason I ask is because youtube limits responses and it makes discussion very restricted here.
Having witnessed the varied extremist opinions about near any topic here on Youtube, I can assure you that it is no more censored than your suggested Facebook. Case in point: how much shit you're talking right now.
If you want your opinions barred from ridicule any further, then do yourself a favour and actually look up 'atheism' before asking how one would define it 'literally'. Dictionaries serve well for literal meaning in many words! Superb tool, highly recommended.
@BeBoBli First off I need to address your reading comprehension failure. I never said comments were censored here. I recomomended the Facebook page so we could discuss without a character limit. I find the limit is inadequate to properly respond to most of the comments regarding the subject.
Also I have looked up the definition and applied it. "Lack of Belief" is not to be found in most cases and that is because it is a poor definition and a plethora of different ways. 20 characters left...
Also consider that if belief is a property ( which it isn't) to be lacked then atheists are all which lack god beliefs.
Therefore if someone says "I believe there is no god" they are not atheist by this defintion, however, inanimate objects are since they "lack belief." So atheists are not atheists but rocks are. What a great new definition....
@Spiral81C They would be atheists as they don't have the belief in a god, other beliefs held on his existence don't matter. All that is needed to be defined as an atheist is to not have a belief in a deity. I have pointed out numerous times that the prefix 'a-', as found in 'asymmetrical', 'abiotic' and 'anosmia', means 'to be without/to not be'. And, as explained in the video (5:00 onwards), identifying rocks with a personal noun/adjective is both puerile and nonsensical.
@FactThis You only "have" or "lack" belief as a figure of speech and ironically it is on primarily propgated by theists. In a literal sense belief is not something you have, it is something that you do.
I agree that it is asinine to identify rocks that way,however, I have encountered many "lack of belief" atheists who cling to the idea that rocks are in fact atheists.
@Spiral81C In the end of the day we are arguing about the use of labels here, so it's mostly going to come down to speech and semantics. The word 'atheist' simply came about to describe people who had no... ahem, didn't believe in gods. That is its core etymology. It later became somewhat misrepresented by being equated with 'people who *believe* gods do not exist', when really the label does not necessitate this, and, as stated, was originally coined to describe a non-belief. (Cont)
@BeBoBli This logic in this video is awful and misleading. I am compelled to challenge this dishonesty(or intellectual ineptness) for the same reason an atheist wants to challenge a theist. ( I am agnostic btw).
This lack of belief defintion is a disingenous play on words with the hope of avoiding any burden of proof in a debate and nothing more.
To "lack" or "possess" a belief is merely a figure of speech. In a literal sense it is a cognitive action by which one assigns true or false to an idea or premise. To lack a belief is to assign false to an idea or true to it's converse and in both senses satisfies the definition of belief.
Ultimately, though technical definitions are appropriate for a journal of philosophy - indeed such are comprised of little else - we must use words in they way they are used in the vernacular, or risk becoming a character in Alice in Wonderland who says words mean what I want them to mean when I use them.
And also, ultimately, I completely agree with your closing statement.
@hairboy2 yeah I picked that up too. Its mainly a matter of experience in this realm. We can agree and disagree with immaterial things but like the theologist debates of old (of which our greatest minds have held varying views and expounded them) there is no correct or incorrect on this one.
izakst 2 days ago
I honestly didnt hear a word he said, he voice was to damn sexy.
RoadSideCircusM77 3 days ago
I agree with all you say here, even though I do not share your atheist position. I hope you realise that some theists are capable of intelligent and reasoned discussion without the aggressive/bigoted nature you describe - I don't believe that is occurring BECAUSE of religious differences, but simply an exhibit of poor human behaviour while discussing a passionate topic. Ironically, the oppression you describe has also applied to religious people of all (most?) denominations throughout history!
hairboy2 3 days ago
@hairboy2 "I hope you realise that some theists are capable of intelligent and reasoned discussion"
Nobody said there aren't any, this video certainly doesn't.
VColossalV 3 days ago
@VColossalV well, video was all measured and rational at the start, explaining a viewpoint quite eloquently.... then there was a touch of "defensive fervency" that crept in for a bit at around 8:00-ish, as well as a couple of slapdowns aimed at all (? major?) existing monotheistic religions which (to me) insinuated that all people of religious persuasion are either a/ unintelligent, and/or b/ hostile towards all people of a different disposition. I "believe" I'm neither ;-)
hairboy2 3 days ago
Comment removed
hairboy2 3 days ago
Comment removed
hairboy2 3 days ago
This is quite the advertisement for atheism. Atheism is a lack of belief in any god(s), and just as unprovable as its counterpart.
MrItchyElbow 5 days ago
@MrItchyElbow
Really, I can prove my lack of belief, I simply do not believe, do you believe me?
The point surly is that the burden of proof should always be upon the claimant, the more extraordinary the claim the more extraordinary the evidence required to support it.
A book written by savages hundred of years ago, that displays a primitive understanding of the world doesn't really stand up as extraordinary, and there are plenty of them to choose from.
AndyCielecki 5 days ago 7
@AndyCielecki Exactly! What's to prove either you believe or you don't. Did I harass you? Am I calling you out? Are you going to mess me up? Save the attitude for your life in the homeless shelter it'll serve you better there.
MrItchyElbow 3 days ago
@MrItchyElbow
To believe without proof is irrational much like the rest of your post.
As for 'calling you out', if you make ridiculous assertions, you should expect others to question them.
I would never try to 'mess you up' I think your probably capable of making a far better job of that then I ever could living as I do in the fantasy 'homeless shelter' you have constructed in your mind.
AndyCielecki 3 days ago
@AndyCielecki That's what you have anyway, you don't believe and you don't not believe, you are simply withholding judgment on the question and attempting to cast doubt on any to choose to believe something that you want explicit knowledge about. You have all the proof that we have that allowed us to come to the conclusion, if you don't trust it, that is something that you have to live with and no longer my dilemma.
MrItchyElbow 2 days ago
@MrItchyElbow
Incorrect, I do not believe.
Proof didn't allow you to believe, you believe in spite of the lack of proof, it's not that I don't truest the alleged 'proof' it's that there isn't any, the bible is NOT credible proof by any stretch of the imagination.
Unless you have something more substantial to offer?
AndyCielecki 2 days ago
@AndyCielecki Incorrect, I took as proof the things that convinced me which are insufficient for you to consider proof. As for you not believing, I'm prepared to accept that. As for the bible, I guess that's in the eye of the beholder.
No, I have no substantial offerings beyond what you have already.
MrItchyElbow 2 days ago
@MrItchyElbow
I sincerely hope you are never called to sit on a jury.
AndyCielecki 2 days ago
@MrItchyElbow,,,,Exactly how would you prove "lack of belief"? Let me answer that for you...you don't nor would you try either. A belief or lack of a belief is just an opinion...it is NOT a claim. A statement of fact such as: "Yahweh exists", is however a claim and does require evidence. "I believe with 99.999% certainty that there are no deities" is an opinion; it's not a statement of fact and thus requires no proof. Opinions may be explained and defended but never proven.
WFCoW 3 days ago 2
@MrItchyElbow Mostly because it isn't an assertion of anything...
VColossalV 3 days ago
@VColossalV Read the comments above, it's an assertion of your belief.
MrItchyElbow 3 days ago
@MrItchyElbow What belief? Atheism is the LACK of belief in god(s)- lacking belief is not an assertion of anything...
VColossalV 3 days ago
@VColossalV Okay, I stand corrected. You don't believe and don't not believe, you withhold judgment until explicit knowledge can be provided. Gotcha.
MrItchyElbow 2 days ago
I want to have a beer with this man.
GRAVEMIIND 5 days ago
That trolling scientology add on the bottom of the video clearly makes the point of this video. How ironic.
lexdimond1 6 days ago
I love all of the videos I've seen on your channel, but this one is my favorite. Thank you for being able to make these videos, as I can share them with friends and family who don't understand my atheistic position. Great work, and keep it up!
MadSavage001 6 days ago
You define atheism similarly to agnosticism. Agnosticism is lack of belief, rather than belief in NO gods? Theism = 1, Agnosticism = 0, Atheism = -1, right?
DisembodiedLoaf 1 week ago
@DisembodiedLoaf Not really...Agnosticism is often confused as a substitute for atheism or theism...People often think it means they are unsure if their is a god or not...However what it really means is weather you claim knowledge in your athesim or theism. For example an agnostic atheist believes there is no god, but does not claim to know there is a god..Same with an agnostic christian, believes in god but does claim to know..If you are nostic then you claim to know your sides decision.
itchygonads 1 week ago
@DisembodiedLoaf An agnostic is someone who has no knowledge of whether a deity exists or not. An agnostic can be either a theist or n atheist.
HimesInu 1 week ago
very good video bud
smallrossy 1 week ago
Just what to fuck are you trying to prove! Religion is not the problem! God does not need anyone prayer You need his! Just our Existence is prove enofe! This Moron is just trying too hard to be smart!
musico28 1 week ago
@musico28 Perfect example of yet another theist being afraid of intelligence.
LamentableSon 1 week ago
@musico28 Something exists so that is proof of your god?
Bahahahahahahahaha.
dave474c 1 week ago
@musico28 please go away
antonio3h3 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The atheist Delusion!
How could some of the scientists permit themselves to make a claim that would necessitate knowledge as extensive as the scheme of the universe, when their knowledge of the total scheme of being is *close* to zero, when confronted with a whole mass of unknowns concerning this very earth and tangible, lifeless matter, let alone the whole universe?
1tabligh 1 week ago
Two weeks ago, a woman died at something called "The Maria Queen of Peace Compound", where a woman held Christian-oriented personal growth sessions, claiming to be inspired by an angel that was whispering to her.
That day, she decided that the members would be covered in mud, wrapped in black garbage bags, covered in thick blankets and then put in boxes.
One woman was left in this condition for 9 hours. The coroner said she was "slow-cooked to death".
The DA's Office is weighing its options.
Unicron4ever 1 week ago
how can anyone watch this and still take thiesm seriously?
alexanderhulse 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
They think with time a non-living thing can start to live,a non aware being can start to aware,Information (like DNA) can be formed without intellegence,social behaviour and technics of animals and insects are in the genes! and the best is this stuff : /watch?v=dOyc98tV5kA did evolve wings! and the ability to fly! throug random mutations and naturel selection,And they ignored completly this : /watch?v=PD6Ov8JHTfk,please hold down to the real science :)
YamiYami17 1 week ago
you use the word belief in a very woolly way. Belief is holding something as true when there is no evidence, any other use of the word is just confusing.
cynic252 2 weeks ago
@cynic252
No, that's faith. Belief also encompasses knowledge and everything in between the two. It's just thinking some statement is true.
Quintinohthree 1 week ago
@Quintinohthree I repeat myself - that makes the word a waste of time. How do you distinguish I believe in fairies from I believe in evolution.
cynic252 5 days ago
@cynic252
How? By adding a clauses. For instance "I believe in evolution because of the vast amounts of evidence for it and because, despite being falsifiable, it has yet to be falsified". Is it really that hard?
Quintinohthree 5 days ago
@Quintinohthree because people never ever do what you are doing that is qualifying their use of the word. It makes written debates impossible.
cynic252 5 days ago
@cynic252
How the hell can stating one's belief and then giving reasons for that belief make any debate impossible? It's exactly what happens in any debate.
Whether people actually do what I suggest withsignificant frequency is irrelevant. You asked how to distinguish between faith and justified belief, I gave you one method. Just using another word which indicates justified belief instead of faith won't help, because there's no reason to actually think the belief is justified.
Quintinohthree 5 days ago
Brilliance at its finest!
MeepullStewray 2 weeks ago
@MeepullStewray basically
killuminatiplz 1 week ago
Im christian, i dont kill people. Your argument is fataly invalid because not all christians are like that. Im a christian with very liberal views as so as conservative. I believe gays have the right to marry because god gave us all free will to do whatever we want needless of what everyone else says. Let the legalization of marijuana. I do understand though, the church has been distorted into this horrific piece of shit, specialy catholic churches and I agree, but i dont do the things u say!
josechampthinks 2 weeks ago
@josechampthinks That's irrelevent. The fact that it /is/ indeed done on a regular basis to atheists is enough. If you personally don't, then kudos to you. We atheists appreciate your respect, however, most Germans didn't support the Nazis either. Jews still remember them with contempt. I won't apoligize for comparing the church to Nazi Germany because it is a valid comparison, though I do feel sorry that good people like you get associated by default in some people's heads.
animefreak5855 2 weeks ago
@animefreak5855 Yes i know i have many atheist friends, im a big believer in liberty. You may do whatever you want as long as you dont interfere with other peoples rights. I just dont know why our religion has turned people into such intolerant people.Ive learned to do religion and liberty at the same time, and seem to be working very well! This is a very well thought argument though, and it makes allot of sense and i do respect their views im not some intolerant asshole
josechampthinks 2 weeks ago
@josechampthinks Through what you've just said, I personally have gained more respect for you than the average atheist I know. (which is a big deal because of my ethnocentricity I think of them in pretty high regard.) To stand with your side and still respect and understand the other is more than the average person can do, esp. people involved in the quarrel about religion. You're that good guy who can remind atheists that not all Christians are extremists who persecute others.
animefreak5855 1 week ago
@josechampthinks "I believe gays have the right to marry because god gave us all free will to do whatever we want needless of what everyone else says."
Obviously they do have the right to marry, but the Bible clearly states that you should stone all homosexuals to death on the spot, just for being gay. This is just one of many examples of barbaric bronze-age bigotry expressed by this deity.
VColossalV 1 week ago
Excellent video! One of the best I've seen on the subject.
BillMcQ18 2 weeks ago
"With great power comes great responsibility." - Uncle Ben
Hobzy107 2 weeks ago
This video is one of the best i've seen. Yet for some poor believer, they will lack the intellect to consider it valid. Poor, poor believers. I used to feel sorry for them. But in this nuclear age, they deserve to be labeled stupid, and treated as such until they are harmless.
commoncents78 2 weeks ago
Brilliant video, so well articulated and presented. The world needs more compassionate, intelligent people like yourself.
Liked, favourited & subscribed!!
andyjs2008 2 weeks ago
In Honour Of Darwin - A British Legend: -
submissions.epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/1617
Ritual666Metal 2 weeks ago
Wow that people actually fall for this shit. Change the definition of atheism?
Atheism by its definition is the OPPOSITE of Theism. Without theism, there would be no atheism.
Definition of ist:
- an adherent of or believer in
- a person having or displaying prejudice related to
- a person who does, makes, or practices (the thing specified): words so formed correspond to verbs ending in -ize or nouns ending in -ism: moralist, satirist
EquitesVeritatis 2 weeks ago
@EquitesVeritatis Theism: 1. The belief in one god as the creator of the universe. 2. belief in the existence of a god or gods ( opposed to atheism). The atheist does NOT believe in any god or gods so in effect you are correct that it's the opposite of theism. That you want to add shit to it to make it fit into a category that you can ridicule is just the type of dishonesty that we have come to expect from the "morally superior" theists. The religious are a joke.
thelordmemnoch 2 weeks ago
@thelordmemnoch Should I specifiy further?
Atheism asserts the creation of the universe came out of nothing, just that no creator god(s) did it. Atheism asserts that life came from inorganic materials. Despite the necessary ingrediants for life being able to exist ONLY in living cells. Just that no creator god(s) etc did it. Atheism asserts theists are indoctrinated, but ignore cases like China, USSR, Hollywoodism, left wing politics, and folks like Dawkins who are PAID
EquitesVeritatis 2 weeks ago
@EquitesVeritatis "Atheism asserts..." right there the rest of your post is nonsense. Atheism is a lack of belief in a god. Is says NOTHING about evolution, morals, abiogenesis, political agenda or the like. A - without Theism - belief in a deity. Nothing more, nothing less. That *some* atheists are left wing, right wing, soft or hard, doesn't change that atheism means only what it means. It only means these other things to theists who wish to manipulate an argument.
thelordmemnoch 2 weeks ago
@thelordmemnoch "It only means these other things to theists who wish to manipulate an argument."
Yep, just like folks such as Dawkins, of which many of you advocate and copy paste your lines from, asserts things like Religion being the cause of wars and suffering. Yet you comfy atheists fail to ignore your luxurious lifestyle comes at the cost of millions for your blood oil and cheap manufactured goods made from countries of poor human rights conditions.
EquitesVeritatis 2 weeks ago
@EquitesVeritatis "for your blood oil and cheap manufactured goods made from countries of poor human rights conditions." Keep up your honest and dialectical discussion. Sarcasm aside, a political idealogy which you wrote about has NOTHING to do with atheism. Again, since you apparently don't read well, or are just way past dishonest--a bold faced liar, I will remind you that atheism is a lack of belief in a deity or deities. Nothing more, nothing less.
thelordmemnoch 2 weeks ago
@thelordmemnoch An atheist like Dawkins, would never say the obvious. That being that wars are POLITICAL, for gain of MONEY, RESOURCES, POWER, INFLUENCE etc. Religion is bar none the ONLY ideology responsible for this. Eg USSR indoctrination its youth with anti-religious mantras from the 1950s on.
EquitesVeritatis 2 weeks ago
@EquitesVeritatis Atheist do not claim the universe came out of nothing. Theists do. God created everything ex nihilo. The big bang was an expansion of a singularity. The singularity was the entire universe packed into a tight ball as is evident with everything moving away from a common point 14 or so billion years ago. Please gather your facts before you make claims about what others claim.
thelordmemnoch 2 weeks ago
@thelordmemnoch "Atheist do not claim the universe came out of nothing. "
Hawking, who basically reaffirmed that as in the bible, the seen universe came into existence from the unseen.
EquitesVeritatis 2 weeks ago
@EquitesVeritatis "Hawking, who basically reaffirmed that as in the bible, the seen universe came into existence from the unseen."
Do I really need to answer to this? Are you going to sit there and tell me that the unseen is the same as nothing? You are trolling right?
thelordmemnoch 2 weeks ago
@EquitesVeritatis Finally, just to demonstrate your ignorance, what material ONLY exists in living things and not in inorganic material? Carbon? Hydrogen? The difference between the two is that an organic entity has a carbon and hydrogen COMPOUND. Both of those exist in inorganic matter by themselves. The "materials" for life exist in inorganic objects, it's just a matter of arrangement. I think it's safe to say that there is nothing to be learned by continuing this discussion.
thelordmemnoch 2 weeks ago
@thelordmemnoch "Finally, just to demonstrate your ignorance, what material ONLY exists in living things and not in inorganic material? "
RNA, DNA, and lipids to name a few. To say that hydrogen and carbon alone is enough for life is as much a fairytale as the existance of God (even though there is more support for this, eg fine tuned universe, intelligent design)
Many scientists ARE atheist and there research is based on seeking evidence of creation without a creator.
EquitesVeritatis 2 weeks ago
@EquitesVeritatis RNA and DNA are not materials, they are an arrangement of materials. I think I was very clear about my description and for you to butcher what I said shows me you aren't interested in a discussion. You merely want to strawman my arguments, as you have done about atheism in all of your posts. I also didn't say that H and C are the ONLY things needed for life. I specified that it's the difference between organic and inorganic.
thelordmemnoch 2 weeks ago
@thelordmemnoch I merely stated RNA, DNA, lipids etc, can ONLY be found in LIVING matter. Science has no explanation of how these came to be outside of the atheist statement of "It wasn't done by any god(s)."
The fact that many scientists believe in the mutliple universe "theory" which cannot be proven with any emperical evidence, also shows the hypocrasy of this lot. They believe in multiple universe to explain the fine tuned universe just to contradict creationist theories.
EquitesVeritatis 2 weeks ago
@EquitesVeritatis No you stated "materials" which is not the same as an organic assembly of parts. And science does have a few ideas, however, ignorance doesn't give credence to bronze age myths. That's the core difference. Abiogenesis isn't taught in schools, nor are they knocking door to door with this stuff. The religious, without any evidence are in fact doing this. That is the core difference between the two. There is nothing wrong with speculating about our origins.
thelordmemnoch 2 weeks ago
@EquitesVeritatis Finely tuned universe? Finely tuned for what may I ask? If this is the William Lane Craig argument, it is indeed a sad one, but before I say anything, I would like for you to define "finely tuned" and what you think it means to you.
thelordmemnoch 2 weeks ago
@EquitesVeritatis RNA and DNA are nucleotides whose order calls for different proteins. All you need are some amino acids and a simple membrane; they can arrange themselves and over hundreds of millions of years can build into an early prokaryotic cell. As far as complexity goes look into endosymbiotic theory and the evidence that supports it. This explains how eukaryotic cells developed and from their it's not hard to get to higher life forms. Their is no need for any divine intervention.
PaulGilbertIsGod2 2 weeks ago
@thelordmemnoch Hence the LOLz I get when reading about the Avida program for example. Pure desperation at best.
EquitesVeritatis 2 weeks ago
@thelordmemnoch final point
Atheism: - a person having or displaying prejudice related to their particular idealogy.
Anyone who slaps themselves under a title or idealogy is indoctrinated, period. Much like our education of WW2 in the west is 80% indoctrination because no true historian would ever take an account written in a good guy/bad guy context without reading other sides of the story because such a context has always been proven to be propoganda. eg like Dawkin's books
EquitesVeritatis 2 weeks ago
@EquitesVeritatis A- without Theism - belief in a deity. I don't know why you ignore the obvious truth. Well, I do know: you are being dishonest which should give you an indication of the validity, or lack of, in your posts. Good guy/bad guy...you mean like god who is good, and the devil who is evil? I agree. Dawkin was never about propaganda. He is a scientist first and theists have always attacked his field of study, knowing NOTHING about it, just like you.
thelordmemnoch 2 weeks ago
I love videos like this.
Sound logic, intelligently reasoned, while speaking in an even and direct tone does so much more, I feel, than angry and passionate rants.
FrankLightheart 2 weeks ago
Well said.
jonerkinch 3 weeks ago
what a brilliant vid, t
psycho3968 3 weeks ago
Why do so many people argue definitions from the root of the word rather than how it is used? The most common meaning of agnostic is that it refers to a person who believes "that the existence of God or of all deities is unknown, unknowable, unproven, or unprovable" (wiktionary) and I suspect you know that. Mind you because of the tendency of people to argue from the knowledge definition and use it as a modifier to atheist and theist, I have started calling it "classic agnosticism".
BigAtheist 3 weeks ago
I can't accept that if a given person who abuses religion didn't have religion, he or she would not commit a similar injustice in the name of something else.
Aside from that, I really like your position on agnosticism.
anemiously 3 weeks ago
A God who needs worship but can ensure that He gets worship without limiting His actions could still be perfect.
Also, God would not die if He were not worshipped. Just because He wants humans to worship Him, does not mean He needs worship - it stands to reason that a perfect sentient Being would have perfect desires, but it does not follow that such desires would include a perfect world.
You aren't very polite to people who actually do have faith in a lack of gods - there are few, but some.
anemiously 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
anemiously 3 weeks ago
Very well done, is there a manuscript at all?
penbandit 3 weeks ago
Very good video
InteGrayting2 3 weeks ago
The problem with this particular label "agnosticism" is that every reasonable person even Dawkins and Hitchens is agnostic the only people who rule out the alternative view are fundamentalists.
lsynno 3 weeks ago
Awesome
shanedrake2 3 weeks ago
hey QualiaSoup, I think I have found something that reflects your views: have you heard of ignosticism?
Wikipedia: Ignosticism or igtheism is the theological position that every other theological position (including agnosticism and atheism) assumes too much about the concept of God and many other theological concepts.
[...] An ignostic maintains that they cannot even say whether he/she is a theist or an atheist until a sufficient definition of theism is put forth.
daveluik 3 weeks ago
Best atheistic video I've seen in a while!
mansanraps 3 weeks ago
very good
MidnightCardinal 3 weeks ago
This is a wonderful video. I addresses why I am an atheist, what an atheist is, why being an atheist is a rational position, why theists carry the burden of evidence and why atheists are feeling more and more determined to have their reasoning understood and respected. Very good.
teaohar2 3 weeks ago
What you believe that everything came from nothing?
Ha, idiots!
The Universe must have come from a creator who created everything from noth... Oh crap!!!
baldurus1 3 weeks ago
im glad sum1 finaly said this in a video grand stuff
kingpharaohtsar 3 weeks ago
This video was absolutely awesome... FAVORITE
TioPhillippe 3 weeks ago
Thank you this was very well done and I agree completely!
jahill100 3 weeks ago
I miss your videos. This video reminds me of the old days of the Atheist/Theist debates on Youtube.
Rushlimpballs 3 weeks ago
@Rushlimpballs "The old days?" Really? Seems to me these discussions are continually sending the comment sections of videos like this up shit creek. Just check out the videos of TheAmazingAtheist.
NightsirK 3 weeks ago
@NightsirK
I'm not talking about the arguments; those will go on forever. I was talking about some of my favorite atheist/theist Youtubers that don't make videos anymore like QualiaSoup, JaguarJones, Defender of Reason, TheoreticalBullshit, vbfl920, Veritas48 etc...
Rushlimpballs 3 weeks ago
This is the best explination of "atheism" I've seen yet. Up until now the "atheist" position was championed by people just as bad as the religous zelots. At least this offers the possibility that it isn't a god who controls the actions, but the locked-in beliefs.
Bowing down to a "supreme entity" (be it a god, the gov't or the environment) as a way to remove responsibility from the individual is dangerous.
It's possible to believe AND not be an a-hole. Until now, I doubted that of "atheists"
bsabruzzo 3 weeks ago
@bsabruzzo The "Toupé Fallacy" is something that continually applies to both theists and atheists. One could make a claim that sounds "all toupés suck, because none of them look real", without taking into consideration that all the good, realistic toupés, by their own nature, go by unnoticed.
NightsirK 3 weeks ago
The lack of interest in whether god exist or not is called apatheism. Isn't this more closely descriptive of the people who sat through the trial and still made no decision?
artsHscience 3 weeks ago
@artsHscience Simply because one feels that they do not hold enough information to make qualified judgement does not mean that they have no interest in it.
NightsirK 3 weeks ago
Maybe we should call the belief that 'the universe is without god' could be called 'antitheist' since it is polar opposite of 'theist' and the middle view of 'I am without belief in gods' is then 'atheist'.
artsHscience 3 weeks ago
Your video is nice but the position you have that people want to force you to hard atheism is not what is going on. Bertrand Russell and other philosophers from archaic times were influential on the definition and common usage of the term 'atheist'. Also from the Latin it is a-theism or 'without' 'god'. For many years this meant 'the universe is without god' not 'I am without belief in god'.
It would be nice if a third word was coined that defines the 'weak atheist'.
artsHscience 3 weeks ago
ive never heard the rocks and dogs thing before. hilarious!
anyway fantastic video. subscribed
jamieconon 3 weeks ago 2
With power comes responsibility? Who told you that? I'll kill them with my power!
Snakepliskinist 3 weeks ago
No decision is a decision. [Matthew 12:30]
God has plainly revealed Himself, but you suppress this knowledge. [Romans 1:18-20]
lesbanon 4 weeks ago
@lesbanon "Begging the question": See lesbanon
Johnf85 4 weeks ago
@lesbanon
Show me a flesh and blood jesus manipulating a car into a pheonix and then we'll call it plain. Until then, I'll supress your bullshit.
mclovinakapascal 4 weeks ago
@mclovinakapascal Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." [John 20:29]
lesbanon 3 weeks ago
@lesbanon
Yeah the bible covers it's ass well huh? I'd forgo the blessed part to just know. You know, considering that knowledge can end ALOT of wars. But that's just my opinion, ya know, give up 'eternal happiness' so people don't have to suffer here. Nice God you have there btw.
mclovinakapascal 3 weeks ago
@mclovinakapascal "As you know, we count as blessed those who have persevered. You have heard of Job’s perseverance and have seen what the Lord finally brought about. The Lord is full of compassion and mercy." [James 5:11]
For the Christian, suffering is not in vain. It is an opportunity to testify; it is an opportunity to lay up treasure in Heaven.
For an atheist, all suffering is in vain. All things are meaningless.
God brings meaning to the universe; He makes facts rational.
lesbanon 3 weeks ago
@lesbanon
No things aren't meaningless. In my view, this is my only life, which makes everything, failures, emotions, friends, pets, lessons, all the more amazing and vibrant and cherished. Don't twist my hatred of meaningless religious wars into a hatred of learning experiences and life to serve your own purposes, you aren't atheist, you don't know my position. I hate how two or more different groups are willing to kill and lose their only life because you both think you're God's favorite.
mclovinakapascal 3 weeks ago
@mclovinakapascal "No things aren't meaningless. In my view, this is my only life, which makes everything, failures, emotions, friends, pets, lessons, all the more amazing and vibrant and cherished."
WTF. You expect someone to believe you have overcome your genetically programmed instinct for survival by painting a silver lining on a shit pile? Have the courage to admit you have swallowed the bitter pill simply because you think it's true.
StormTrek 3 weeks ago
@StormTrek Simply because you are a bitter asshole does not mean that everyone has to be equally sour. Some people can actually enjoy life knowing that it's the only one they've got.
NightsirK 3 weeks ago in playlist Favorite videos
@NightsirK Intellectual dishonesty makes me bitter. But you're the asshole for trying to peddle the bullshit that one's life is somehow enhanced by the knowledge that they, their friends, and their family are destined to oblivion.
StormTrek 3 weeks ago
@StormTrek "But you're the asshole for trying to peddle the bullshit that one's life is somehow enhanced by the knowledge that they, their friends, and their family are destined to oblivion."
Nah. It's the same reason gold is valued because it's rare. Your relationship with your family has value to you because it's finite and because you are forced to choose between spending time with them as opposed to spending time with others.
Gnomefro 3 weeks ago
@StormTrek Same thing is true for your actions. You are forced to choose how to spend your life, and certain ways are perceived by you to be more valuable than others. With an eternity in the future, everything you do in your 70-80 years or so on earth is pointless. Those of us who don't believe in such things do not have to consider "oblivion" as relevant to determining value though. What matters is what happens to the people we care about when we exist.
Gnomefro 3 weeks ago
@StormTrek The entire concept of value comes from having to make choices. You simply don't have to do that if you have infinity at your disposal. Of course, most religious people who claim to believe in lives after death actually live as if their lives are finite and deal with their loved ones as if they are on a timetable - which is good. It's just not honest.
Gnomefro 3 weeks ago
@Gnomefro I've always noticed that. I think it's because deep down they have doubts, whether they are conscious of them or not, about the validity of their beliefs and act them out.
SinceretheGhost 3 weeks ago
@Gnomefro "What matters is what happens to the people we care about when we exist."
I think this statement undermines your argument. Mathematically, an infinite sum of the smallest number will always be greater than a finite sum of the largest number. In other words, an infinite existence (see the quote) will inevitably lead to greater value no matter how little you think one should value their family in response to the belief that their life is infinite.
StormTrek 3 weeks ago
@StormTrek It's funny you believe in genetics, evolutionist much? ;). It sounds to me you only believe so you can satisfy your need for survival by 'knowing' there is another life. You're scared of thinking anything different. It's not a bitter pill either. I may have been raised Catholic, but I never really fooled myself (even as a child) that I could live forever. A sliver lining on a shit pile? That's just me being optimistic :) why be dwell on the bad? Enjoy what life has to offer right? :D
mclovinakapascal 3 weeks ago
@mclovinakapascal Evolution programmed your genetic code to survive. If you choose to remain optimistic *despite* your belief in the imminence of personal oblivion that's understandable. But you said your life was enhanced *by* that belief, which is absurd. Furthermore, I don't 'know' there is another life but I certainly have biology on my side when I say that belief enhances my enjoyment of life.
StormTrek 3 weeks ago
@StormTrek
So you believe in evolution and the church's teachings? If anything it's your views that are absurd, constantly being contradicted by each other for the sake of having your cake and eating it too. Biology on your side in our talk or in your life? Don't make yourself sound undoubtedly right by claiming such a thing. You mean psychological comfort you allow your body by partially thinking that you can surpass mortality? I can do the same by putting great importance into each event.
mclovinakapascal 3 weeks ago
@StormTrek
I'm thinking you're more agnostic, believing in logic yet still entertaining the thought of clinging to hope, that there may be something beyond. Which, in that case, I respect and cannot disprove whatsoever. I just happen to treat this as my only life and enjoy it no less than you do, which (no offense) is not under your ability to judge the level of my enjoyment. And should there happen to be an afterlife, hey all the better.
mclovinakapascal 3 weeks ago
@mclovinakapascal You're backtracking into a position of saying you can enjoy your life no less than I do. Doesn't have quite the same punch as your initial claim that you enjoy life *more* because of your belief. In fact, you have effectively abandoned referring to your belief as a basis for enjoying life. You certainly can enjoy your life as much as I do, but not because of your belief that there isn't an afterlife.
StormTrek 3 weeks ago
@StormTrek
Initial Statement: I cherish life more because I know it's my only one
Later Statement: I enjoy life no less than you
With the given information, this translates into: Your life ≤ My life.
In NO WAY have I abandoned my beliefs. My statements do not contradict nor do they eliminate each other. Not unlike yours, which you seem to keep avoiding discussing them in favor for ineptly nit-picking my wording. I put emphasis on appreciating even the dullest events, which some people hate.
mclovinakapascal 3 weeks ago
@mclovinakapascal The topic is your claim that life is enhanced by *your* beliefs. You keep attempting to introduce the red herring of my beliefs because you don't know how to defend your position. Now, not only is your claim absurd in the light of biology, but it also fails in terms of the human desire for social justice: eons of criminal behavior remain unresolved because the victims suffered without recourse.
StormTrek 3 weeks ago
@StormTrek
You don't even want to try to comprehend my position, you merely try to disprove it and thus cannot begin to judge it. Not only that, you have the absurd ego to think that you are fundamentally backed up by the "Light of Biology", which is honestly, the biggest load of horse shit. Do basic cellular functions hide a pattern saying I'm stupid? FUTHERMORE you compare the mystery of criminal behavior to my perception of life which leads me to wonder what hallucinogenic drugs you are on
mclovinakapascal 3 weeks ago
@mclovinakapascal Your position is that life is enhanced by your belief that you and everyone else are destined to die. 1) It runs contrary to your biologically programmed instinct to survive. This doesn't mean you are stupid, it means your position contradicts your biology; hence it is suspect. 2) It ensures the failure of social justice for everyone who has ever died, which means your position contradicts an inarguably life enhancing hope. Clearly, I comprehend your position.
StormTrek 3 weeks ago
@StormTrek Well, have fun in your eternal afterlife, but I don't want it thank you. It surely has to be the most horrifyingly boring idea the human mind ever came up with. I might find a few interesting things to do for the first 500 years or so, but I wouldn't know what to do with the million years after that...and the billion years after that million years...let alone the trillion years after that billion years...and no possible escape from it...thanks but no thanks.
Atila6735 3 weeks ago
@Atila6735 Maybe you could spend the first 500 years learning that life isn't about playing xbox to avoid boredom and household chores.
StormTrek 2 weeks ago
@StormTrek Hmm, well since I don't own an xbox and you're the one who came up with this, forgive me for suspecting that your comment stinks very strongly of projection. You're obviously looking forward to playing xbox for ever and ever...I don't.
Atila6735 2 weeks ago
@Atila6735 OK, so your friend owns the xbox. Nevertheless, the xbox is arbitrary, the point was your life consists of avoiding boredom and cleaning your room. No one would look forward to an eternity of that.
StormTrek 2 weeks ago
@StormTrek Meh, to make your argument interesting (as opposed to boring), you should avoid making cheap assumptions about people you know nothing about, as you'll expose yourself to a strong projection suspicion. I don't own an xbox, my friend(s) don't either, and even though I use a cleaner every week, I do believe living in a clean room is rather preferable to living in a messy one. Do I really need to tell you I have other interests in life ?
Atila6735 2 weeks ago
@Atila6735 I observe that you have begun every post with an interjection: well, hmm, meh. My initial observation was that you entered the conversation by broadcasting your goal in life is to avoid boredom. Consequently, observation -- rather than cheap assumption -- leads me to believe that adding the pursuit of education to your list of interests in life will soon result in your ability to make significant improvements in your personal presentation. Happy learning!
StormTrek 2 weeks ago
@StormTrek Youplaboom ! Saying that the pursuit of education is not included to my list of interests is yet another cheap assumption. Now you went from my initial post to deduct that my goal in life is to avoid boredom is...surprise....an unsubstantiated cheap assumption, do you have anything else in store ?
Anyway, don't you think that if you had eternity, your "pursuit of education" stands a serious chance of being completed one day ?
Atila6735 2 weeks ago
@StormTrek Ooops, forgot a few words there : Now you went from my initial post to deduct that my goal in life is to avoid boredom: that is...surprise....an unsubstantiated cheap assumption, do you have anything else in store ?
Atila6735 2 weeks ago
@StormTrek Wrong, it's perfectly in tune. Our instinct to survive is *because* we are going to die and we know it. The religious, on the other hand, think they are going to heaven when they die, yet they cling on to life just like an atheist. If I had a better life to go to, I would never take medicine. I would rejoice in funerals rather than die. Deep down they know that they won't see their loved ones again. Atheists simply admit it outright.
thelordmemnoch 2 weeks ago
@thelordmemnoch 1) Your instinct to survive derives from your genetic programming not your contemplation. Animals run from forest fires without ever having pondered their place in life, the universe, and everything. 2) Behavior and belief don't always align, that's why Christians cry at funerals and why atheists enjoy their lives.
StormTrek 2 weeks ago
@thelordmemnoch "Deep down they know that they won't see their loved ones again"
Is there any empirical evidence to suggest this? And what of all the ghost sightings that take place around the world? Can every single case of super natural phenomenon be proven false? There is much in our existance that we cannot explain, to pretend we know everything is hubris. But then again hubris is the reason why history continually repeats itself. We ignore wisdom of the past :P
EquitesVeritatis 2 weeks ago
@StormTrek rather than weep*
thelordmemnoch 2 weeks ago
@lesbanon Claiming that all atheists find everything meaningless is a pretty baseless claim. I could just as well claim that all theists are looking forward to dying - it doesn't make it true. In fact, I'd dare to say most atheists find more value in their lives knowing that it's the only one they've got.
NightsirK 3 weeks ago
@lesbanon How, pray tell, does an imaginary being bring meaning to the universe?
Nilsy1975 3 weeks ago
@lesbanon But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. — Luke 19:27
NightsirK 3 weeks ago
If you truly believe the premise of this video and think it can hold up under rigorous logic come to "Atheism is a Belief" on Facebook.
A page run by myself ( an agnostic), mostly atheists and some theists as well all sharing a mutual disdain for the "logic" in videos like this or ThunderTARD. We are against the proliferation of ignorance regardless of whether the source is atheist or theist.
EManning81 4 weeks ago
@EManning81 Ok, I went to "Atheism is a Belief" on Facebook... interesting. Perhaps it depends on the definition of atheism or agnostism used. I seem to remember Richard Dawkins describing his position on a scale of 1..7 this way... theism = 1, atheism = 7. He considered himself to be at position 6. So is he an atheist or an agnotstic?
Some atheists will admit that a God might exist but state that at this time there is no good evidence to believe.
MrToby9999 4 weeks ago
@MrToby9999 I seem to remember Richard Dawkins being accomplished in his field of biology but rather pathetic in terms of philisophical logic and since he centers his self described "central argument" of the God Delusion is broken up into 6 points, many of which are easily refuted and the conclusion of which doesn't even follow from the 6 points ( aka non sequitor), the entire book is pretty much garbage. When I first left the church at 14 I was using arguments he put in that book.
Spiral81C 3 weeks ago
@MrToby9999 Short version: Dawkins is a hack and unless you he is going to talk biology he should stop embarrassing himself because the God Delusion is a horrific application of logic. That book is a waste of trees.
Spiral81C 3 weeks ago
Very nice argument...I think beliefs are important because they represent ideas. You can have good ideas and bad ideas - but everything is driven by knowledge and experience. The longer you live, the more ideas you obtain to create different belief structures. Thats why you don't have any believes as an infant, but become more religious as an elder. Beliefs are based off knowledge and experience, otherwise you wouldn't have them. I'm confused by your def. of atheism, no beliefs no creator?
12whitetribes 4 weeks ago
@12whitetribes It is an intentionally confusing defintion. The truth is that the traditional definition is more, useful, meaningful and descriptive as a word. Unfortunately the "new" atheists are driven by people like Dawkins, who may be accomplished in their respective fields, but are laymen in terms of philosophy and as such their logical conclusions are often fallacious and non-sequitor. This definition is nothing more than a dishonest, illogical play of semantics.
EManning81 4 weeks ago
@12whitetribes That's funny because I only say an argument is "very nice" if it stands up to logic and this one fails in more ways than I can even begin to describe with a 400 character limit.
EManning81 4 weeks ago
@12whitetribes Sorry 500.
EManning81 4 weeks ago
No, in keeping with the fact that to "lack" or "possess" a belief is merely a figure of speech( ironically a religious one) how would you define atheism literally?
Spiral81C 1 month ago
Search Atheism is Belief on Facebook. There is a very good page run by atheists, theists and agnostics with a mutual disdain for the fallacious logic of the new atheists such as what can be found in this overwhelmingly pathetic and misleading video. The reason I ask is because youtube limits responses and it makes discussion very restricted here.
Spiral81C 1 month ago
@Spiral81C
Having witnessed the varied extremist opinions about near any topic here on Youtube, I can assure you that it is no more censored than your suggested Facebook. Case in point: how much shit you're talking right now.
If you want your opinions barred from ridicule any further, then do yourself a favour and actually look up 'atheism' before asking how one would define it 'literally'. Dictionaries serve well for literal meaning in many words! Superb tool, highly recommended.
BeBoBli 1 month ago
@BeBoBli First off I need to address your reading comprehension failure. I never said comments were censored here. I recomomended the Facebook page so we could discuss without a character limit. I find the limit is inadequate to properly respond to most of the comments regarding the subject.
Also I have looked up the definition and applied it. "Lack of Belief" is not to be found in most cases and that is because it is a poor definition and a plethora of different ways. 20 characters left...
EManning81 4 weeks ago
Also consider that if belief is a property ( which it isn't) to be lacked then atheists are all which lack god beliefs.
Therefore if someone says "I believe there is no god" they are not atheist by this defintion, however, inanimate objects are since they "lack belief." So atheists are not atheists but rocks are. What a great new definition....
Spiral81C 1 month ago
@Spiral81C They would be atheists as they don't have the belief in a god, other beliefs held on his existence don't matter. All that is needed to be defined as an atheist is to not have a belief in a deity. I have pointed out numerous times that the prefix 'a-', as found in 'asymmetrical', 'abiotic' and 'anosmia', means 'to be without/to not be'. And, as explained in the video (5:00 onwards), identifying rocks with a personal noun/adjective is both puerile and nonsensical.
FactThis 1 month ago
@FactThis You only "have" or "lack" belief as a figure of speech and ironically it is on primarily propgated by theists. In a literal sense belief is not something you have, it is something that you do.
I agree that it is asinine to identify rocks that way,however, I have encountered many "lack of belief" atheists who cling to the idea that rocks are in fact atheists.
Spiral81C 1 month ago
@Spiral81C In the end of the day we are arguing about the use of labels here, so it's mostly going to come down to speech and semantics. The word 'atheist' simply came about to describe people who had no... ahem, didn't believe in gods. That is its core etymology. It later became somewhat misrepresented by being equated with 'people who *believe* gods do not exist', when really the label does not necessitate this, and, as stated, was originally coined to describe a non-belief. (Cont)
FactThis 1 month ago
@Spiral81C
Stop talking shit.
BeBoBli 1 month ago
@BeBoBli This logic in this video is awful and misleading. I am compelled to challenge this dishonesty(or intellectual ineptness) for the same reason an atheist wants to challenge a theist. ( I am agnostic btw).
EManning81 4 weeks ago
This lack of belief defintion is a disingenous play on words with the hope of avoiding any burden of proof in a debate and nothing more.
To "lack" or "possess" a belief is merely a figure of speech. In a literal sense it is a cognitive action by which one assigns true or false to an idea or premise. To lack a belief is to assign false to an idea or true to it's converse and in both senses satisfies the definition of belief.
Spiral81C 1 month ago
Ultimately, though technical definitions are appropriate for a journal of philosophy - indeed such are comprised of little else - we must use words in they way they are used in the vernacular, or risk becoming a character in Alice in Wonderland who says words mean what I want them to mean when I use them.
And also, ultimately, I completely agree with your closing statement.
ThePeaceableKingdom 1 month ago
A simple spectrum of those who believe a