Atheism is the position of ignorance.Is it?

[paarsurrey1]

Atheism is the position of ignorance.Is it, please?
Regards

___________
One may like to read post 16, thread "Science does not support Atheism, does it?"
viewtopic.php?p=888924#888924

[Mithrae]

[Replying to post 33 by Mithrae]

This sounds like we're going yet another step further and redefining atheism into "Does not show any signs or indications of theistic views."

Or it is simply another way of saying 'lacks belief in GODs.'

Babies show no sign or indication that they lack belief in gods. They don't show any indication either way. So how do you reach the conclusion that they lack belief?
- By assuming that there is no soul independent of the brain's cognitive development
- By assuming that babies don't sense god's presence as they sense their mother's heartbeat
- By assuming they don't naturally conceive a world distinct from themselves which is specifically responsive to them and providing all their needs

I can't say what was and wasn't assumed by William, but as to the first two assumptions you've listed, since there is no empirical evidence for the existence of souls or god beings, there is no issue in assuming those things do not exist, anymore than people assume leprechauns don't exist. If you think it should be assumed that the DO exist, then kindly present some kind of data backing up your claim

Assuming an atheistic reality as the basis for the claim that babies are atheists is obviously circular, or at least looks and smells a lot like it. But even assuming an atheistic reality, it still seems entirely possible that babies in the weeks before birth have a conception of their world best described as a simple theism: A world which is specifically responsive to them (eg. excited voices when they kick) and provides all their needs.

So pending some evidence one way or the other, we simply don't know whether newborn babies are theists or not.

And it's very interesting how determined some people are to apply the atheist label to them. If you saw folk claiming that "All children are naturally Christian" you'd recognize it as empty propaganda, plain and simple. The same is true of the efforts to label them atheists.


So to answer the OP question, atheism is not a position of ignorance: Every single person who calls themself an atheist has encountered the concept of god/s, and decided not to accept it.

[Artie]

Atheism is the position of ignorance.Is it, please?
Regards

___________
One may like to read post 16, thread "Science does not support Atheism, does it?"
viewtopic.php?p=888924#888924

Can you clarify your position?

1) You don't believe in the existence of all gods (except one)?
2) Do you actively believe in the non-existence of all gods (except one)?

Position 1 makes you a weak atheist in regards to all gods except one.
Position 2 makes you a strong atheist in regards to all gods except one.

Remember that anyway you are an atheist concerning 99.99% of all gods. In the future if I were you I would be careful about saying anything negative about people who don't believe in gods as it only reflects badly back on yourself.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Atheism is the position of ignorance.Is it, please?
Regards

___________
One may like to read post 16, thread "Science does not support Atheism, does it?"
viewtopic.php?p=888924#888924

Can you clarify your position?

1) You don't believe in the existence of all gods (except one)?
2) Do you actively believe in the non-existence of all gods (except one)?

Position 1 makes you a weak atheist in regards to all gods except one.
Position 2 makes you a strong atheist in regards to all gods except one.

Remember that anyway you are an atheist concerning 99.99% of all gods. In the future if I were you I would be careful about saying anything negative about people who don't believe in gods as it only reflects badly back on yourself.

What exactly is the difference in not believing that there is a Santa Claus, and actively believing that there is no Santa Claus?

[Artie]

Atheism is the position of ignorance.Is it, please?
Regards

___________
One may like to read post 16, thread "Science does not support Atheism, does it?"
viewtopic.php?p=888924#888924

Can you clarify your position?

1) You don't believe in the existence of all gods (except one)?
2) Do you actively believe in the non-existence of all gods (except one)?

Position 1 makes you a weak atheist in regards to all gods except one.
Position 2 makes you a strong atheist in regards to all gods except one.

Remember that anyway you are an atheist concerning 99.99% of all gods. In the future if I were you I would be careful about saying anything negative about people who don't believe in gods as it only reflects badly back on yourself.

What exactly is the difference in not believing that there is a Santa Claus, and actively believing that there is no Santa Claus?

The difference is that a person who does not believe there is a Santa Claus can also not believe there is no Santa Claus. He can be sitting on the fence. A person who actively believes there is no Santa Claus has jumped off the fence onto one side.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Atheism is the position of ignorance.Is it, please?
Regards

___________
One may like to read post 16, thread "Science does not support Atheism, does it?"
viewtopic.php?p=888924#888924

Can you clarify your position?

1) You don't believe in the existence of all gods (except one)?
2) Do you actively believe in the non-existence of all gods (except one)?

Position 1 makes you a weak atheist in regards to all gods except one.
Position 2 makes you a strong atheist in regards to all gods except one.

Remember that anyway you are an atheist concerning 99.99% of all gods. In the future if I were you I would be careful about saying anything negative about people who don't believe in gods as it only reflects badly back on yourself.

What exactly is the difference in not believing that there is a Santa Claus, and actively believing that there is no Santa Claus?

The difference is that a person who does not believe there is a Santa Claus can also not believe there is no Santa Claus. He can be sitting on the fence. A person who actively believes there is no Santa Claus has jumped off the fence onto one side.

Which side of the Santa fence are you on? Do you have a belief system that denies the existence of Santa Claus? Or do you simply not believe in Santa Claus?

[Artie]

Atheism is the position of ignorance.Is it, please?
Regards

___________
One may like to read post 16, thread "Science does not support Atheism, does it?"
viewtopic.php?p=888924#888924

Can you clarify your position?

1) You don't believe in the existence of all gods (except one)?
2) Do you actively believe in the non-existence of all gods (except one)?

Position 1 makes you a weak atheist in regards to all gods except one.
Position 2 makes you a strong atheist in regards to all gods except one.

Remember that anyway you are an atheist concerning 99.99% of all gods. In the future if I were you I would be careful about saying anything negative about people who don't believe in gods as it only reflects badly back on yourself.

What exactly is the difference in not believing that there is a Santa Claus, and actively believing that there is no Santa Claus?

The difference is that a person who does not believe there is a Santa Claus can also not believe there is no Santa Claus. He can be sitting on the fence. A person who actively believes there is no Santa Claus has jumped off the fence onto one side.

Which side of the Santa fence are you on? Do you have a belief system that denies the existence of Santa Claus? Or do you simply not believe in Santa Claus?

I'm not answering any more questions until you've indicated that you've understood the difference.

[Rufus21]

The difference is that a person who does not believe there is a Santa Claus can also not believe there is no Santa Claus. He can be sitting on the fence. A person who actively believes there is no Santa Claus has jumped off the fence onto one side.

So the passive person does not believe in Santa but doesn't know for sure while the active person claims to know that there is no Santa. Is that correct?

[Artie]

The difference is that a person who does not believe there is a Santa Claus can also not believe there is no Santa Claus. He can be sitting on the fence. A person who actively believes there is no Santa Claus has jumped off the fence onto one side.

So the passive person does not believe in Santa but doesn't know for sure while the active person claims to know that there is no Santa. Is that correct?

No, the passive person doesn't believe Santa exists and doesn't believe Santa doesn't exist. The active person believes Santa doesn't exist. Don't start talking about knowledge this is just about belief.

[William]

[Replying to post 45 by Clownboat]

I don't understand how the state of being awake, aware or perceiving can learn.
Can you explain what you meant because I don't see consciousness as a thing that can do any actual learning? Sure, something must be conscious in order to learn, but it is a thing that is conscious and learning, not consciousness itself.

What is this thing which is conscious and learning?

[Royston]

[Replying to post 1 by paarsurrey1]

While I wouldn't say that Atheism takes a position of ignorance, I would suggest that its position is rather skew-whiff: Just as there is scant proof at present that an Architect (or 'God,' if you like) exists, then neither has mankind amassed anywhere near enough knowledge at this point in time to 100% guarantee that belief in Him (or 'It,' whatever) is without foundation.

It seems to me that Agnosticism is the logical position to take, given the state of what we do and don't [yet] know. When we have attained a level technology and scientific understanding which enables us to safely and rapidly traverse the Universe at will, then, I suppose, either belivers or atheists will be proven correct in their faith.