Why modern atheism is so shallow

[ajblaise]

So what I think we all can agree on and conclude with is that:

There are plenty of deep theists, but the average atheist will obviously be deeper than the average theist.

[CaptainChick]

Originally Posted by ajblaise

So what I think we all can agree and conclude with is that:

There are plenty of deep theists, but the average atheist will obviously be deeper than the average theist.

Absolutely!!!

[Magic Poriferan]

Originally Posted by CaptainChick

Listen, I NEVER said that theists were shallow.

I do not think that theists are necessarily shallow.

I do, however, think that humanist atheists happen to also be incredibly deep.

I cannot provide evidence for this opinion, who can?!?!?!

How can one prove depth or shallowness?!?!?

If there's never proof, then there isn't much to argue about.

[Magic Poriferan]

Originally Posted by ajblaise

So what I think we all can agree on and conclude with is that:

There are plenty of deep theists, but the average atheist will obviously be deeper than the average theist.

Can we? Even if so, we don't know whether or not that is the over-lap of averages or an actual causal relationship.

[Didums]

Originally Posted by ajblaise

So what I think we all can agree on and conclude with is that:

There are plenty of deep theists, but the average atheist will obviously be deeper than the average theist.

Lol I think this is what Peguy is arguing against right? So yea, he wouldn't agree with us there.

[ajblaise]

On causation: Could the fact that someone is a believer cause, hinder, or turn them away from looking to deep issues (existentialism, popular philosophy in general, biology, sociology...) for answers on the workings of the universe?

I think a casual relationship could very well exist there to a degree.

[Bella]

Originally Posted by ajblaise

So what I think we all can agree on and conclude with is that:

There are plenty of deep theists, but the average atheist will obviously be deeper than the average theist.

Why is that so 'obvious'?

[CaptainChick]

Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan

If there's never proof, then there isn't much to argue about.

Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan

Can we? Even if so, we don't know whether or not that is the over-lap of averages or an actual causal relationship.

To quote William Blake, "when I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."

You can use your "N" to read between the lines of what this means, k?

[Magic Poriferan]

Originally Posted by ajblaise

On causation: Could the fact that someone is a believer cause, hinder, or turn them away from looking to deep issues (existentialism, popular philosophy in general, biology, sociology...) for answers on the workings of the universe?

I think a casual relationship could very well exist there to a degree.

It can, but does not necessarilly, or even probably, as of yet. Maybe the fact that someone is a believer could turn them away, but I would argue that a need to find answers about religious beliefs, even if they had the self-serving goal of seeking validation, would require one to look at a lot of those existential issues.

Now, a religious person may just not be that much of a critical thinker, but the same is possible of an atheist.

[Didums]

Originally Posted by ajblaise

On causation: Could the fact that someone is a believer cause, hinder, or turn them away from looking to deep issues (existentialism, popular philosophy in general, biology, sociology...) for answers on the workings of the universe?

I think a casual relationship could very well exist there to a degree.

I think that an average theist and average atheist may go to the same extent of research into their belief or why they lack said belief. Non-intellectual theists can be (well, are) willingly ignorant of deep issues, and non-intellectual atheists are as well. Ignorance takes multiple forms, we're all guilty of it to some degree. I don't think an atheist can call him or herself an atheist unless they know the arguments and the issues, otherwise they are just as bad as the ignorant theists in my eyes. Knowledge or educated opinion in either opinion is superior to lack of knowledge.