Why are atheists thought ill of?

[EffEmDoubleyou]

Like that ^

 

[zago]

Like that ^

Science isn't a religion, technology is. And yes, they believe that atheists are to be looked down upon. I can prove it. Not even close to every atheist says believing in god is stupid. I don't. But if you believe in god, you should at least have the good sense to follow his word and love thy neighbor.

 

[pure_mercury]

It's unfortunate that the atheists who are smug assholes make other ones look like assholes, too. Kinda like the religious people who blow other people up "for God." They aren't doing much for their argument, either.

 

[AOA]

You're right.

... It's unfortunate God let us be in this shameful state that we see the world... or did He?

 

[zago]

For the record, though, I want to differentiate my opinion on unquestioning people and religious people. I do not think that being religious means you are unquestioning, but, unquestioning people do seem to be religious fanatics quite frequently.

 

[pure_mercury]

For the record, though, I want to differentiate my opinion on unquestioning people and religious people. I do not think that being religious means you are unquestioning, but, unquestioning people do seem to be religious fanatics quite frequently.

True, but lots of atheists are pretty self-satisfied, too. When an atheist says something like, "Religious people are just afraid of the truth" (which we have seen in this thread), it just sounds stupid and self-righteous. The truth is, nobody knows for certain how the universe started and what happens after we die. If you use your own notions of what we cannot see to cut down other people in this lifetime, you're wrong no matter what you believe.

 

[Feops]

Science isn't a religion, technology is. And yes, they believe that atheists are to be looked down upon. I can prove it. Not even close to every atheist says believing in god is stupid. I don't. But if you believe in god, you should at least have the good sense to follow his word and love thy neighbor.

Technology isn't a religion. Technology is stuff.

 

[reason]

After considerable investigation, I am quite convinced that "science" is nothing more than a political tool.

Intellectuals create a method by which it is impossible to arrive at any conclusion they disagree with, and then call that method "science". Anything "unscientific" is branded illegitimate. Should any disagreeable ideas somehow sneak by, then the method will be revised until the disagreeable ideas are banished.

This isn't a new thing, either. Philosophers play the same game with the word "knowledge". It's a little sad and pathetic, really.

 

[zago]

Technology isn't a religion. Technology is stuff.

Thank you, Captain Obvious. I was actually using a metaphor there! I guess I should have made it more clear that there is no deity behind technology, nor written scripture handed down from said nonexistent deity which outlines how technology should be worshiped. I was actually saying that many people seem to blindly put faith in technological development just like how a lot of people blindly put faith in religion. That was a response to someone who said science in a religion, which in actuality the bare definition of science is the scientific method, which sort of undermines itself as a religion by saying that any scientific theory must be extremely well backed by experimental evidence and also, oddly enough, falsifiable.

 

[zago]

After considerable investigation, I am quite convinced that "science" is nothing more than a political tool.

Intellectuals create a method by which it is impossible to arrive at any conclusion they disagree with, and then call that method "science". Anything "unscientific" is branded illegitimate. Should any disagreeable ideas somehow sneak by, then the method will be revised until the disagreeable ideas are banished.

This isn't a new thing, either. Philosophers play the same game with the word "knowledge". It's a little sad and pathetic, really.

Maybe you're getting science and statistics mixed up. You've given the completely wrong definition of science. Science is a method for experimentally testing hypotheses. Science is the ongoing study of the predictability of nature.

 

[Athenian200]

I've had some interesting conversations with friends lately about athiests and been surprised to find that many think some weird things about atheists and atheism like:

-Atheists are without morals
-Atheists cannot be normal nice people
-Atheism promotes lawlessness
-Atheists are arrogant because they don't believe there is something higher than them
-Atheists don't have a sense of purpose in life
-Atheists don't deserve the same respect as everyone else
-Atheists don't respect other people
-A rise in Atheism is making the planet corrupt
-If you say you are an Atheist you are trying to convert everyone to your beliefs which is wrong but it's OK to try to convert an Atheist
-It's OK to question Atheists about why they don't believe in God but not OK for them to question why people do.

None of those things are particularly true so where do these attitudes come from? It seems the majority of people I know subscribe to at least one of these beliefs.

People tend to divide the world into "us" and "them." Sometimes this is taken further, and negative traits are attributed to "them," while positive traits are attributed to "us." This may well be the origin of the concepts of "good" and "evil."

In a nutshell, many religious people see themselves as on the side of right, and believe that anyone who isn't on their side must automatically be on the side of wrong. This is most prevalent in people who identify more strongly with their religion than anything else they're a part of.

I should also point out that this kind of thinking is hardly limited to religion. It happens in politics and countless other things as well.

 

[run]

cause often they're jackasses. You wouldn't go "Junk food is bad for you!" if you saw a person eating junk food, so why would you say "there is no god!" if you knew someone believed in god?

 

[Blank]

cause often they're jackasses. You wouldn't go "Junk food is bad for you!" if you saw a person eating junk food, so why would you say "there is no god!" if you knew someone believed in god?

I haven't seen any radical Islamist terrorists fight for Twinkies. Have you?

 

[Lexicon]

cause often they're jackasses. You wouldn't go "Junk food is bad for you!" if you saw a person eating junk food, so why would you say "there is no god!" if you knew someone believed in god?

A lot of the athiests I'm friends with aren't overtly opinionated about it, especially if religious people are present, and discussing their beliefs [discussing, not actively trying to convert]. Most athiestic people I know [myself included], don't see the point in pushing their views on others, or forcing discussion of it with someone who is obviously not receptive. However, most won't hesitate to offer an honest response rearding their beliefs [or, really, lack thereof] if anyone asks about it. That seems reasonable to me.

There are probably equal amounts of overzealous, overbearing people within every sect. It's less to do with the faith itself and more to do with people who are just "jackasses" in general..

 

[Lexicon]

I haven't seen any radical Islamist terrorists fight for Twinkies. Have you?

That's because Twinkies are bad for you.

We shouldn't even be discussing Twinkies. It's a sensitive topic.

 

[reason]

Maybe you're getting science and statistics mixed up. You've given the completely wrong definition of science. Science is a method for experimentally testing hypotheses. Science is the ongoing study of the predictability of nature.

There is no mix-up. Science is many things to many people.

There are important and interesting questions about truth, testability, and observation, but, for the most part, "science" has been defined to deligitimise particular kinds of beliefs. The first philosophers of science were more explicit about this, and often made it quite clear that there goal was to banish some ideas (like metaphysics) from sensible and rational debate. So, in accordance with that goal, they developed methods of "science" to control what kind of beliefs would be acceptable.

Unfortunately, it's nothing other than the genetic fallacy writ large, but then that is also 99% of philosophy. Before the word "science" was used, it was the word "knowledge". The purpose is always the same: control debate by deligitimising any idea that cannot be arrived at by a proposed method. It is, therefore, not surprising, when most "rational" and "scientific" controversies side-line goals like truth, and instead focus on what The Method deems it acceptable to believe.

 

[nozflubber]

Atheism is really scientific agnosticism, but we can't call it that otherwise we'd be confused with all the mystics.
.

omg I think .... I think Eck made a good point! OMG

No kidding, I think that hit the nail on the head. The "problem with Atheists" isn't that they don't believe or disbelieve or anything pertaining to that, it's that they have suspended the issue altogether and not made it a part of how people understand their world and the events of the day.

Theists don't like it when you keep God in suspended animation. I don't like the hatred and contempt for atheists, but that reaction to their worldview is understandable imo

 

[Jeffster]

Because they suck. Duh.

 

[reason]

Atheists suspend the issue of God's existence? No they don't. Everytime an atheist does not go to church, synagogue, mosque, temple, etc., and everytime they do not pray meditate, or abide by religious commandments, they express with their actions a clear judgement of their beliefs about God and the afterlife. The costs of being wrong may be enormous, and yet few atheists are indecisive when they decide not to join in worship, or adherence to religious doctrine. They have judged, because they must judge: reality presents us with no fence to sit on, but demands action, decision, and judgement.

 

[FallaciaSonata]

If you don't follow a "moral guideline", then why is killing people wrong? And let's not stop there, why is anything "wrong", or "right"?

I'm not trying to open a can of worms here. I really want to know. Most of the agnostics/atheists that I know answer with "It's against the law", to which I respond, "Where did your political law come from", and we go back and forth throughout history until we hit the Bible.