Atheist bus campaign

BaldJean wrote: Spammer21 wrote: Everyone is born an atheist. You have to be taught to believe. I sincerely doubt that, and there is no proof for it whatever. If everyone was born an atheist, why did religions come up in the first place? you won't find a single culture without religion

Are you seriously suggesting that when a newborn child emerges from the womb it already has knowledge of, say, a traditional Jewish conception of a creator god? Or maybe every new child can name off all the Mesopotamian gods. Maybe the reason many children begin making sounds that seem similar to "Ra" is because they are actually worshiping the Egyptian god of the sun. Everyone is born an atheist! You don't need proof for that, it's just logic.

Edited by Finnforest - March 18 2009 at 12:21

Spammer21 wrote: BaldJean wrote: Spammer21 wrote: Everyone is born an atheist. You have to be taught to believe. I sincerely doubt that, and there is no proof for it whatever. If everyone was born an atheist, why did religions come up in the first place? you won't find a single culture without religion Are you seriously suggesting that when a newborn child emerges from the womb it already has knowledge of, say, a traditional Jewish conception of a creator god? Or maybe every new child can name off all the Mesopotamian gods. Maybe the reason many children begin making sounds that seem similar to "Ra" is because they are actually worshiping the Egyptian god of the sun. Everyone is born an atheist! You don't need proof for that, it's just logic.

I am not suggesting anything of that kind, and it would indeed be nonsense. but no-one is born as an atheist either, because to be an atheist one has to know about such conceptions in the first place. you can't deny something you don't know anything about.
I suppose what you wanted to say is "everyone is born an agnostic". that makes indeed a lot more sense. however, as I mentioned before, anthropologists are seriously discussing whether there is a kind of "religious instinct" (please take this term with a grain of salt)

Sean Trane wrote: BaldJean wrote: Sean Trane wrote: BaldJean wrote:   Sean, you are twisting this completely, and especially your last argument is not valid. the practice of quick baptizing has historical reasons; do you have any idea how high the death rate was (and in many countries still is) among newborn? this is the historical reason for quick baptizing; it has become a tradition in our culture. since you don't know my personal history you should rather refrain from giving me advice about stepping back and leaving my superstitions behind. first of all they are not superstitions, second they have close to nothing to do with my childhood. my mother was Irish and a Roman catholic, but my parents also were hippies, and the only person who told me about religion was my grandma on my mother's side. she also told me about the little folk, by the way, or pixies, as some call them. as it is with many founders of a religion, my belief is based on a mythical experience, only with us it is an experience two people had. one morning Friede showed me a poem she had just written. I read it, and my mouth dropped open. I asked her why she had written it, and she said it wqas based on a dream she had had the night before. the amazing thing is: I had had the same dream! if you are curious I can send you the poem wikth a rough translation (it is in German). when sujch a thing happens you give it significance, and that was the birth of our religion. we had both not been religiously active at all in any way before, apart from taking part in the usual festivities of the Christian religion which have become part of our culture. to believe in God the way I believe you just have to ask the question: where does our consciousness come from? it is a qestion scientists have not been able to answer yet, and it is a widespread belief among scientists of the human brain that we will never know. my answer is that once a process, like the process which iks going on in our brains, is sufficiently complex it develops a consciousness. since the universe is definitely "sufficiently complex" it should have a consciousness too. we do, however, not worship the universal consciousness directly, because we think it is impossible to grasp, so we worship a minor aspect of it: Gaia, the Goddess of the Earth. we see the effects of her every day. by the way: the Gaia hypoothesis of James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis is seriously being discussed by scientists, so it is anything but a superstitious belief     Again you may not like my using the word superstition because of its negative  tone ; like the brainwashing bit. but it's used correctly in our atheists way of seeing things. Supernatural beliefs are superstitions. Period!!! Don't see it as an insult, just take the word at face value.   A second remark I should point to you is that you take things to personally. Just because I quote you doesn't mean I aim at you and only you.     From previous threads I remember your parents being hippies from the Bay area (Oakland possibly) , but that doesn't mean they were atheist.s..... if God wasn't that big with that generation, it didn't mean most US hippies didn't believe >> remember that being an Atheists was being considered as being a communists in these decades and with the cold war on. If they never told you about religion, then they might've been atheists but in no way did you come close to say that.Only the counter-culture activist were atheists in the US and Canada. Hippies from Europe were on the whole a lot more Atheists or Agnostics.    As for your mystical experiences, again it depends how impressionable one can be. One of my first girfiend  in Canada was an Algonquin Amerindian and .first daughter of a shaman. I was "sortof" "initiated" one night during a Aurora Borealis, through some "herbs iufusions" and a few pipes and even could touch elks, heard the faithful call out for the divinities etc.... .. Quite imùpressive at the time.... but when I came back down from my trip, it was all gone because   it wasn't real!! It was a deam!! Ditto with the strange (sometimes bordering stupid) dreams I have..... we all have them, but I never felt the need to see any significance into them. And I personally find that those that do have that need are either getting lost in life or trying to excape reality by building some fantasy world around them.All the more power tio them if it serves them well, but this is probably how Rael started his own religion. (again don't take this as aiming you, it's a general comment)     Since then I've always appreciated Amerindian shamanic experiences (I experienced one in Mexico and another in British Columbia), but remain firmly atheists despite my feeling something mystical (because there were always mind-altering substances involved) in these meetings.   If I had let these mystical things get in my way and let them influenced me in everyday life, I'd call my beliefs and visions superstitions as well.     Sooooooo....... Whether you like it or not the use of that word is correct and not insulting, even if you find it to be so!!.     But I really wish you wouldn't take offence, coz deep down after four years of discussing with you and Friede in this forum, I like you both  , just as I do with Ivàn (despite his pope)   there is nothing supernatural in our beliefs at all; I thought I made that clear     Trying to interpret dreams (which is grosso modo how your religion stated from what's highlighted in orange)  is believing in the supernatural , since the dream might be premonitory or any other kind of supernatural phenomenon.     And probably like the Electric Prunes, you had too much to dream last night.....

first of all: there is nothing supernatural about interpreting a dream. it is a basic method of psychoanalysis. are all psychoanalysts supernatural quacks?
second: the dream only started us thinking. the religion is by no means based on the dream at all.
let me ask you a question, Sean: where does your consciousness come from? and don't evade

Logan wrote: Rico is not saying that children are not born a blank slate.

I would posit it to be true that children are born a blank slate as far as ideology religious or otherwise is concerned.  Religion or any other system of belief is about indoctrination and experience.

This is ridiculous. It always ends up with people arguing about words and definitions!

Logan wrote: atheism means without theism, so one could look at newborns as atheists in that sense (some use it to mean the absence of belief in God

This is all I meant when BaldJean implied atheism is something that has to come from elsewhere...

Spammer21 wrote: This is ridiculous. It always ends up with people arguing about words and definitions!

Given that, a few posts after the thread opened, the great debaters started discussing the difference between "atheism" and "agnosticism", I'm not surprised at all.

But you can agree at least that, despite the newborn theoretically is "without theism" in his mind at that time, it's wrong to consider it like that. Infants can't perceive a lot of things from this world at such an age, let alone have a perception about something that transcends the world. According to Kohlberg, morality appears at the age of 4, and it's pre-conventional, so why should the child have any kind of divine belief or non-belief until at least that point?

Yes, we argue too much over words, because considering that you're born atheist can make sense, from terms' perspective, but can't in fact be applied to reality.


Edited by Ricochet - March 18 2009 at 16:56

Spammer21 wrote: This is ridiculous. It always ends up with people arguing about words and definitions!

Which isn't a bad debate to have at all, you know.


My condensed opinions on the subject:

The bus company has every right to show the slogan, though it might be a stupid decision on their part (nevertheless it is their decision to make).

If the bus company worker does not like the slogan, he should either suck up his pride and drive the bus or resign and find a company to work for where he will not have to drive such a bus.  He is an expendable resource and the company should not have to bend to his wishes on the matter.

The people who created the slogan are annoyingly militant atheists who are just as bad as Christian evangelicals.  However, like such evangelicals, they should have the right to express themselves should they be able to find a willing medium.


Regarding some subjects that arose in discussion of this thread:

Atheism is not a faith, nor is it an organization.  It does not have any set rules or "commandments."

Most people are agnostic to at least some degree.  "Belief" does not require 100% assurance, just reasonable confidence.

People are not born as blank slates, though for the purposes of this discussion, they can be considered as such, since they are not born with any beliefs regarding God.  As for where the idea of God(s) came from, the most plausible explanation I can imagine is that it came from human desire to understand the world around us.  In the absence of information, we filled in the gaps with God.

InvisibleUnicorns wrote: Spammer21 wrote: This is ridiculous. It always ends up with people arguing about words and definitions! Which isn't a bad debate to have at all, you know. My condensed opinions on the subject: The bus company has every right to show the slogan, though it might be a stupid decision on their part (nevertheless it is their decision to make). If the bus company worker does not like the slogan, he should either suck up his pride and drive the bus or resign and find a company to work for where he will not have to drive such a bus.  He is an expendable resource and the company should not have to bend to his wishes on the matter. The people who created the slogan are annoyingly militant atheists who are just as bad as Christian evangelicals.  However, like such evangelicals, they should have the right to express themselves should they be able to find a willing medium. Regarding some subjects that arose in discussion of this thread: Atheism is not a faith, nor is it an organization.  It does not have any set rules or "commandments." Most people are agnostic to at least some degree.  "Belief" does not require 100% assurance, just reasonable confidence. People are not born as blank slates, though for the purposes of this discussion, they can be considered as such, since they are not born with any beliefs regarding God.  As for where the idea of God(s) came from, the most plausible explanation I can imagine is that it came from human desire to understand the world around us.  In the absence of information, we filled in the gaps with God.

  Well said.  Agree with much of it although I'm not a fervent atheist.  I'm an "I don't know" guy, the only honest answer I can make.  I would add religion was a good control device for the masses. 

Finnforest wrote: InvisibleUnicorns wrote: Spammer21 wrote: This is ridiculous. It always ends up with people arguing about words and definitions! Which isn't a bad debate to have at all, you know. My condensed opinions on the subject: The bus company has every right to show the slogan, though it might be a stupid decision on their part (nevertheless it is their decision to make). If the bus company worker does not like the slogan, he should either suck up his pride and drive the bus or resign and find a company to work for where he will not have to drive such a bus.  He is an expendable resource and the company should not have to bend to his wishes on the matter. The people who created the slogan are annoyingly militant atheists who are just as bad as Christian evangelicals.  However, like such evangelicals, they should have the right to express themselves should they be able to find a willing medium. Regarding some subjects that arose in discussion of this thread: Atheism is not a faith, nor is it an organization.  It does not have any set rules or "commandments." Most people are agnostic to at least some degree.  "Belief" does not require 100% assurance, just reasonable confidence. People are not born as blank slates, though for the purposes of this discussion, they can be considered as such, since they are not born with any beliefs regarding God.  As for where the idea of God(s) came from, the most plausible explanation I can imagine is that it came from human desire to understand the world around us.  In the absence of information, we filled in the gaps with God.   Well said.  Agree with much of it although I'm not a fervent atheist.  I'm an "I don't know" guy, the only honest answer I can make.  I would add religion was a good control device for the masses.

Agreed entirely. Stop the thread now.