Do you have atheist friends?
Assassin~ Badass Buzz Guru
2012/05/14 23:32:26
|
|
|||||
|
134 votes
|
|
85% | |||
|
23 votes
|
|
15% | |||
Top Opinion
-
melly~thwarting Satan since... 2012/05/15 00:05:33
to enter a conversation concerning the topic.It's a good way to remain friends.
But strangely, all of my friends are white. Weird. lol
Anyways, I also have Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, and Wiccan friends. Possibly other religions as well, but I'm not sure.
Dawkins offers:
1. Strong theist. 100 percent probability of God.
2. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent.
3. Higher than 50 percent but not very high.
4. Exactly 50 percent. Completely impartial agnostic.
5. Lower than 50 percent but not very low.
6. Very low probability, but short of zero.
7. Strong atheist.
Dawkins opts for six, as do I. Sounds reasonable to me. One cannot know all things, thus, one cannot know with certitude that there is no god, but the probability of such a being existing is certainly near zero since objective evidence is non existent.
In other words, the existence of a god is as probable as Bertrand Russell's orbiting teapot. Given that the evolution of technology appears to be increasing exponentially, however, who can say what we could do in another thousand years. Perhaps we are evolving gods.
Also: it's funny. The term for what I identify as is actually agnostic atheist. But I always say atheist agnostic. To me, it just makes more sense. I mean, I'm more agnostic than I am atheist. So atheist agnostic makes it sound more like "atheist" is the adjective. Anyways, carry on....... :P
I HIGHLY recommend Richard Dawkins' book, "THE GOD DELUSION." You can buy it either in print or download the audio version, read by Dawkins himself. If you do a lot of commuting as did I, the audio version would work great. I also bought it in digital download so I could do searches when I wanted to reference particular propositions. It has been most valuable in my own writing.
I think (and Dawkins discusses the disagreement he had with his publisher--Dawkins won) the title is unfortunate, as it will inhibit many potential readers from picking it up. It is, however, a MOST interesting book, chocked full of gems of reason and humor.
I used to say that I was an "agnostic with latent atheistic tendencies" :D. I reasoned that the strong fundamentalist was simply a mirror image of the strong atheist--neither could with intellectual honesty hold that position with certitude. After reading The God Delusion in which the scale of theistic belief is presented, I found 6 to be a better description of my position. Thus, I now consider myself an atheist (I actually evolved from "almost" Christian fundamentalism to atheism). Had I bee...
I HIGHLY recommend Richard Dawkins' book, "THE GOD DELUSION." You can buy it either in print or download the audio version, read by Dawkins himself. If you do a lot of commuting as did I, the audio version would work great. I also bought it in digital download so I could do searches when I wanted to reference particular propositions. It has been most valuable in my own writing.
I think (and Dawkins discusses the disagreement he had with his publisher--Dawkins won) the title is unfortunate, as it will inhibit many potential readers from picking it up. It is, however, a MOST interesting book, chocked full of gems of reason and humor.
I used to say that I was an "agnostic with latent atheistic tendencies" :D. I reasoned that the strong fundamentalist was simply a mirror image of the strong atheist--neither could with intellectual honesty hold that position with certitude. After reading The God Delusion in which the scale of theistic belief is presented, I found 6 to be a better description of my position. Thus, I now consider myself an atheist (I actually evolved from "almost" Christian fundamentalism to atheism). Had I been a strong fundamentalist (1), I would never have evolved, and would be shutting out any and all reason that might cast doubt on my learned beliefs (SodaHead member TheR is a prime example).
I now say that the unexamined belief is not worth believing.
Note: the edit was for correcting typos.
You know, it's funny. I've actually wanted to read The God Delusion for quite a while. It just sounds so interesting. Although, whether that's because of its title or its content has yet to be determined. I mean, I'm dying to read The Last Testament, A Memoir by God, and I really haven't even looked at what it's about yet. But, if I read it, I'll definitely look into that first.
Anyways, yes, I'd really like to read the God Delusion. I love books, articles, etc. that discuss that topic. Because I think about it all the time, and it's nice to have someone else's opinion to look at. It really helps in developing my own, you know?
Thanks for the heads up on that.
If we are talking the actual religions that are out there its more like 6.99 for me, but if we are talking about something that is way more intelligent than us controlling at least part of this universe (doesn't necessarily have to be a god) then I'm like a 6.8 - could be possible, but most likely definitely not :)
That is why many (most?) fundamentalists will respond in anger, or run away, or blurt out endless and incoherent prophesies of divine retribution for my heresies when I ask them hard questions about their theology.
The late, great Joseph Campbell called religion a mask that we place against the unknowable. I love that analogy, and I would add that each person who dares to peek behind that mask, as I did, will see only themselves.