Is an atheist a better person?

[HelioPrime]

Well this might be a questionable topic but I've noticed a trend among select atheists on the boards.

Normally I assume religious debate is mostly between theists and non theists and neither can prove anything to the other. However select atheists seem to speak in a manner not directly debating theists, but assuming that religions is only a drawback that people should hopefully sometime in their life move beyond. This statement isn't debated as a points, its used as a fact.

To use Jack as an example: One of my fondest hopes for humanity is that it will grow out of its infantile obsession with all superstition, which includes religion, and spend more time wondering at a world without the bias of ancient nonsense blinding their senses. Each person can only advance beyond mythology and superstition for themselves. Especially for those raised as theists, the journey can be long or short, the result of decades of learning and understanding, or it can come in a flash of insight. However arrived at, it's a point a person has to reach on their own.

- I find this odd because its not a point of debate. It's relation of personal opinion as if its a given fact that everyone should understand and those who don't agree with it clearly haven't developed to the proper point.

I'm wondering is this true and why? Do atheist feel thats its no longer needed to debate religion, and the major focus is just getting people to "wake" up to your reality?

[Jack]

I find this odd because its not a point of debate. It's relation of personal opinion as if its a given fact that everyone should understand and those who don't agree with it clearly haven't developed to the proper point.

I daresay most of what's debated here is a matter of personal opinion. My opinions are as subject to challenge and debate as anyone's. And what will it be challenged and debated with? Other people's opinions.

Do atheist feel thats its no longer needed to debate religion, and the major focus is just getting people to "wake" up to your reality?

Debate is just one way to make people think about what they believe. It's a way to get believers to question their beliefs, a way to reveal alternative explanations for things they've been told only have one explanation, god. Debate should make people think. If a theist's faith can't withstand skepticism and questioning, the believer owes it to themselves to ask why.

As to the topic title; no, I don't consider myself a better person than everyone else. I'm far less noble, less charitable, less intellectual than many others. I'm no less human than anyone else, but I have my faults. Considering religion, I think the conclusions I've reached are logical and consistent with what evidence there is that might support religious belief. Of course I hope others will come to the same conclusions. However, in my world there's no punishment, temporal or eternal, for those who do not do so. So while I feel that I've come to a sensible conclusion regarding religions, I don't think that makes me a "better" person, more evolved than the religious, or any of the other accusations made against atheists. I simply think I see both sides of this issue and have come to a defensible conclusion.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: HelioPrime Normally I assume religious debate is mostly between theists and non theists and neither can prove anything to the other.

Or, in your case, the non-theist routinely demolishes your argument, you get tired of losing debate after debate, and put the non-theist on ignore to try to save face.

However select atheists seem to speak in a manner not directly debating theists, but assuming that religions is only a drawback that people should hopefully sometime in their life move beyond. This statement isn't debated as a points, its used as a fact.

It's a lot like belief in Santa Claus.

I'm wondering is this true and why? Do atheist feel thats its no longer needed to debate religion, and the major focus is just getting people to "wake" up to your reality?

What's left to debate? Given what we know to be true about the universe, ourselves, our society, and our planet, one cannot be a theist and be intellectually honest. It's absolutely impossible. The intellectually honest theist is off playing cards with all the married batchelors and sexually experienced virgins.

Furthermore, it's ridiculous that in the age of the internet, we should still have to swallow the bronze and iron age offal of middle eastern and eastern cults that happened to be lucky or bloodthirsty enough to be institutionalized.

[SoylentGreen]

HelioPrime Normally I assume religious debate is mostly between theists and non theists and neither can prove anything to the other

Very convenient of you not to mention the debate between theists on who is praying to which god. It would be nice if theists could be consistent in their beliefs.

This statement isn't debated as a points, its used as a fact.

Then can you give an example of that fact instead of printing Jack's opinion about something. The only fact there is that it is in fact his opinion.

Do atheist feel thats its no longer needed to debate religion, and the major focus is just getting people to "wake" up to your reality?

I usually find when a theists argument is torn to shreds the end result is a plea from theists to "just read the bible and then you will understand".
Seems like the major focus of theists is not to argue religion but to get people to stop debating and wake up to their reality.

[Maryjane]

Quote by: HelioPrime Well this might be a questionable topic but I've noticed a trend among select atheists on the boards. Normally I assume religious debate is mostly between theists and non theists and neither can prove anything to the other. However select atheists seem to speak in a manner not directly debating theists, but assuming that religions is only a drawback that people should hopefully sometime in their life move beyond. This statement isn't debated as a points, its used as a fact. To use Jack as an example: One of my fondest hopes for humanity is that it will grow out of its infantile obsession with all superstition, which includes religion, and spend more time wondering at a world without the bias of ancient nonsense blinding their senses. Each person can only advance beyond mythology and superstition for themselves. Especially for those raised as theists, the journey can be long or short, the result of decades of learning and understanding, or it can come in a flash of insight. However arrived at, it's a point a person has to reach on their own. - I find this odd because its not a point of debate. It's relation of personal opinion as if its a given fact that everyone should understand and those who don't agree with it clearly haven't developed to the proper point. I'm wondering is this true and why? Do atheist feel thats its no longer needed to debate religion, and the major focus is just getting people to "wake" up to your reality?

Theist truths are different from atheist truths. I'm not going to feel the least bit responsible if a theist has an inferiority complex because their god(s) can't answer their questions.

[rez]

Quote by: HelioPrime I'm wondering is this true and why? Do atheist feel thats its no longer needed to debate religion, and the major focus is just getting people to "wake" up to your reality?

Yes HelioPrime. Believing someone without asking for backup is a problem. Luckily their attitude does not translate into modern day society. Theists won't buy a car solely on what the sales man says, a theist wont try to fix their broken car with a prayer etc. They won't apply their horrible logic to things in everyday life. However, when it comes to philosophy they are horrible. They lack any honesty and they lack any common sense.

If they feel the need to believe in the supernatural then they have to believe in all supernatural claims. They can't reject some set of supernatural and accept some. There isn't anymore evidence for one set of supernatural claims then there is for another. That is a fact.

Also, their belief in the supernatural seems to inhibit them from understanding anything natural. If anything natural conflicts with the supernatural, then the supernatural wins. However, if there is no conflict then the natural can be used as a way of supporting the supernatural.

Again, these people are very weak in their critical thinking skills especially in the field of Philosophy.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: rez Again, these people are very weak in their critical thinking skills especially in the field of Philosophy.

I don't agree with this last part. There are a lot of excellent Christian critical thinkers. The thing to remember is that they don't use the same logical rules that we do. They've been indoctrinated to adopt a bogus set of rules. Getting them to see past that bogus logic is the real challenge.

[Technosoul]

Collectively they are the same as everyone else.

No one is better or worse.

[The Dunedan]

Which begs the question, Z; if you're actually trying to influence people's thought process, has it ever occurred to you that you might get a whole lot further by -not- acting like a sanctimonious, arrogant, overbearing, intrusive, holier-than-thou bigoted prick?

Or, conversely, have you given up on influencing people and decided to act like a total thundering git just because you feel superior to "those people?"

It's been my observation that people such as yourself have no interest in actually changing anyones minds. Rather, your driving force seems to be an irresistable desire to beat people over the head in order to fluff your own ego. If it wasn't religion, it'd be cars, or math, or abortion, or Jello Shooters for all I care. You don't seem interested in actually engaging anyone, only in lording over them and proclaiming your own alleged superiority based upon this criterion upon which you've settled.

People don't put you on ignore because you've "demolished their arguements." People put you on ignore because you're a flaming asshole.

[Maryjane]

I agree Techno. I've tried to state that in another thread. My christian "friends" (the ones that know I'm an atheist) and I are equal. The christians that treat me differently because we don't share the same beliefs are the ones I have a problem with. My way works for me, their way works for them. What bothers me is their thinking their way is the only way and I'm going to hell for not sharing their beliefs. The funny thing is if I never told them I had a different view point, they'd suspect I was just like them.

I had two bible thumpers on my porch the other day. I immediatly told them I was an atheist. (why waste their time or mine?) They wanted to know why? Long story short, I explained their way doesn't work for me. To which one looked over and asked "Is that a REAL casket on your porch?" So of course I joked..."Didn't they tell you?, atheists keep coffins on their porches." He about fell down the steps stepping away from me. "Really?" he asked. "Come on, I said, I'm only joking with you...what do you know about atheism?" I suggested he read about it to get a better understanding. His pal then asked me if the humming bird feeder on my porch was really there for humming birds? WTF? I couldn't resist asking him if he thought it was blood for vampires? I then had to explain that I've run out of room to store halloween decorations for the haunted house I run as a fund raiser for my son's school. I can't imagine what was running thru their heads as they walked to the next house. I'm not sure they believed me or not....

[rez]

Quote by: Zhavric There are a lot of excellent Christian critical thinkers.

There are a lot of Christian critical thinkers. In fact, a Christian can be a great mathematician, a great Biologist, and a great mechanic or do great at whatever job I give them. However if it involves any sort of philosophy they are corrupt and dishonest.

The thing to remember is that they don't use the same logical rules that we do. They've been indoctrinated to adopt a bogus set of rules.

Only in the field of Philosophy.

[Rainbow]

Can we change the label for this Volcanvo sub-forum :
- from "Philosophy and Religion"
- to "Delusions Unlimited"
???

[Zhavric]

Quote by: The Dunedan Which begs the question, Z; if you're actually trying to influence people's thought process, has it ever occurred to you that you might get a whole lot further by -not- acting like a sanctimonious, arrogant, overbearing, intrusive, holier-than-thou bigoted prick?

Ah, where would we be without volconvo syndrome? Do me a favor, please. Click on my screen name, go to "find more posts by Zhavric" and go through say... five to ten of my posts. From those five to ten, find 3 or 5 specific examples of where you think I acted in the way you alleged. I'm guessing that if you really look, you won't find that many. Maybe some, but not that many. People look at my avatar and read a tone into my statements. Always have. Probably always will. I call it volconvo disease. Tivodan, Helioprime, Kame and a handful of others have it. Badly. Don't be one of them.

Or, conversely, have you given up on influencing people and decided to act like a total thundering git just because you feel superior to "those people?"

Post reported.

It's been my observation that people such as yourself have no interest in actually changing anyones minds. Rather, your ...

Dude, if you want a "Zhavric fanclub" tee-shirt, I told you to pm me. You can't be president unless Helio steps down. Now get back on topic or I'll make you "secretary" and you'll be stuck taking notes at meetings.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: rez There are a lot of Christian critical thinkers. In fact, a Christian can be a great mathematician, a great Biologist, and a great mechanic or do great at whatever job I give them. However if it involves any sort of philosophy they are corrupt and dishonest. Only in the field of Philosophy.

Agreed.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Jack I daresay most of what's debated here is a matter of personal opinion. My opinions are as subject to challenge and debate as anyone's. And what will it be challenged and debated with? Other people's opinions. Debate is just one way to make people think about what they believe. It's a way to get believers to question their beliefs, a way to reveal alternative explanations for things they've been told only have one explanation, god. Debate should make people think. If a theist's faith can't withstand skepticism and questioning, the believer owes it to themselves to ask why. As to the topic title; no, I don't consider myself a better person than everyone else. I'm far less noble, less charitable, less intellectual than many others. I'm no less human than anyone else, but I have my faults. Considering religion, I think the conclusions I've reached are logical and consistent with what evidence there is that might support religious belief. Of course I hope others will come to the same conclusions. However, in my world there's no punishment, temporal or eternal, for those who do not do so. So while I feel that I've come to a sensible conclusion regarding religions, I don't think that makes me a "better" person, more evolved than the religious, or any of the other accusations made against atheists. I simply think I see both sides of this issue and have come to a defensible conclusion.

Let me just start the applause.


[claps]


Very well said, sir.

[Fangrim]

Quote by: Zhavric People look at my avatar and read a tone into my statements. Always have. Probably always will. I call it volconvo disease. Tivodan, Helioprime, Kame and a handful of others have it. Badly. Don't be one of them.

You've had plenty of avatars before your current "chair leg of truth," and the generally negative perception of you stays constant.
I wouldn't blame it on the picture.

Post reported.

Given that this thread is concerned with whether atheists are "better" people, and given that a generally accepted criterion for "better" is "civility," it seems appropriate that he would have to describe your behavior.

That the manner in which he described that behavior might be insulting or would normally be a violation of forum rules is the fault of both the topic at hand and the object of his description.

[HelioPrime]

Since people want descriptions I'll paint one:

Ok you have two people:

1) Sue is a grown women who believes god really did make the world in a week and humanity came from adam and eve. She donates 10 hours of her time per week to serve at a homeless shelter because she believers such acts are a showing of gods will.

2) Ann is a grown women who has no worry about being an atheist. She believes soundly that what science doesn't know it one day will and can't wait for the day everyone forgets their religious beliefs. She donates 10 hours of her time per day at a shelter because she feels it helps give back to the rest of humanity.

This thread is inspired from reading Sam Harris. Although I found letters to be a waste of regurgitated mumbo from every other author he did raise the point how religious folk of all types are inherently inferior because of their use of belief in instead of logic, or worse, because even moderate religious folk help spread extremism. His feelings seem to be if people really wanted to be better moral people they'd stomp down all all religion.

Now reading the above two examples then atheists on the board will affirm both fictional women are acting equally and both as capable and honest a person?

[rez]

Quote by: HelioPrime Now reading the above two examples then atheists on the board will affirm both fictional women are acting equally and both as capable and honest a person?

Obviously, but if I were to talk philosophy with Sue I wouldn't learn too much.

[SoylentGreen]

HelioPrimeNow reading the above two examples then atheists on the board will affirm both fictional women are acting equally and both as capable and honest a person?

Which basically shows that it is possible to arrive at a true conclusion based on false premise, and does nothing to show that Sam Harris's point is wrong.

[freefallife]

Quote by: HelioPrime Now reading the above two examples then atheists on the board will affirm both fictional women are acting equally and both as capable and honest a person?

Indeed, thus illustrating the superfluous nature of theistic belief.