atheism is a belief system

Originally posted by stellspalfie
you believe its real? does this mean you accept evolution but think it was a process initiated by god?

Kelly thinks the universe is in the thousands of years old and that humans coexisted with dinosaurs, now unless he's had a complete u-turn with respect to those beliefs I reckon he's using a non-standard definition of 'evolution'.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Kelly thinks the universe is in the thousands of years old and that humans coexisted with dinosaurs, now unless he's had a complete u-turn with respect to those beliefs I reckon he's using a non-standard definition of 'evolution'.

well that what ive always assumed he thought. im kinda just hoping for that middle ground, im happy to give him god in exchange for evolution (not really, but you know what i mean).

Originally posted by lemon lime
Evolution is the most obvious, and some other examples come to mind, but mentioning them will only open up a pandoras box and inspire the same old arguments that have been going on for as long as I have been alive... this debate has actually been going on for centuries, but I cannot attest to any personal experience of what was happening before I was born.

There were atheists before biological evolution was even proposed in science. Evolution became a hypothesis to explain the differences between fossils found in different geological strata of rock, when the differences in geological strata came to be explained as indicative of the age of the strata. This suggested that the morphology of the animals and plants changed over time.

Originally posted by sonhouse
That is bullox. Millions of Christians think evolution is real.

I am talking about evilution. You guys have redefined evolution so many different ways that one can not be sure what is being referred to now days. If by "evolution" you simply mean "a change over time" then sure I believe in that, however, if you mean all changes, including evilution, then that is another story. True Christians do not believe in evilution.

The Instructor

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Evolution is not a faith-based belief, nor is it a required belief for an atheist.

Got a better example?

Evolution has been getting squeezed into an ever tighter box over the past 40 to 50 years. Abiogenesis has been abandoned, and the reason given is it is unnecessary to the study of evolution. Don't need to prove an evolutionary process started in order to assume it did start. So it's assumed all the focus may be on the development of evolution, without needing to consider how it started. Clever BS, but BS all the same. I think it does take a great deal of faith, and a desire for it to be true, for this kind of thinking to pass muster. But this usually does pass muster among most evolutionists, and many other scientists as well.

It takes faith to invent a supporting theory out of nothing (punctuated equilibrium) and then pretend the conditions necessitating this supporting theory can also be proof of it. This kind of self supported thinking would be unacceptable and laughable in any other arena of science, but it goes unnoticed in the evolutionary camp. Again, somewhat clever but not quite clever enough to fool everyone.

And now here you are being just as clever by saying it is not a required belief for an atheist. Also somewhat clever, however no one (including myself) has ever said it is a requirement. I hope you do not assume I think atheists must all take an oath of allegiance, that includes an affirmation of faith in evolution, before they may receive a valid atheists license? But having said that, most evolutionists will agree if a fellow evolutionist thinks God created man (through the agency of evolution) then he must have a few loose screws rattling around up in his head. When an evolutionist is applying for a job or for funding, it's probably in his best interest to make no mention of a belief in God.

I don't know how to say this without it sounding like a silly understatement, but it doesn't take much common sense to see how an atheist would prefer a theory like evolution over the creation story outlined in Genesis. And despite a long standing world image of scientists being purely interested in the truth, and unswayed by personal beliefs and convictions, this too is mostly self serving BS. In most respects scientists are no different than anyone else.

Originally posted by lemon lime
Evolution has been getting squeesed into an ever tighter box over the past 40 to 50 years. Abiogenesis has been abandoned, and the reason given is it is unnecessary to the study of evolution. Don't need to prove an evolutionary process started in order to assume it did start, and so it's assumed all the focus may be on the development of evolution without ...[text shortened]... oo is mostly self serving BS. In most respects scientists are no different than anyone else.

Well, maybe you should join all of us clever people and attempt to actually understand my question. You know, the one that you purported to answer.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Well, maybe you should join all of us clever people and attempt to actually understand my question. You know, the one that you purported to answer.

I understood what you said. Was there something else I was supposed to understand?

Originally posted by lemon lime
.... And now here you are being just as clever by saying it is not a required belief for an atheist. Also somewhat clever, however no one (including myself) has ever said it is a requirement. I hope you do not assume I think atheists must all take an oath of allegiance, that includes an affirmation of faith in evolution, before they may receive a valid atheists license? ....

...however no one (including myself) has ever said it is a requirement...

Hmmm... Well actually you did.

I mean you didn't use the word requirement, but it is what you said meant.
If you didn't intend it to mean that then that is your fault and not ours.

You see you were asked this ...

Originally posted by SwissGambit

Can you give an example of a faith-based proposition that an atheist is committed to
merely by virtue of their atheism?

So we would expect that whatever you bring up is something that is a requirement of
atheism, that leads inexorably and inevitably from it, and that cannot not be rationally
disbelieved by anyone who is an atheist.

Otherwise an atheist wouldn't be logically and rationally committed to believing it.

You responded thus...

Evolution is the most obvious, and some other examples come to mind, but mentioning
them will only open up a pandoras box and inspire the same old arguments that have been
going on for as long as I have been alive... this debate has actually been going on for centuries,
but I cannot attest to any personal experience of what was happening before I was born.

Which, given the question you are replying to, means that you ARE saying that all atheists
are logically and rationally committed to belief in evolution simply by virtue of being atheists.
That, in other words, belief in evolution is a requirement of atheism.



If that is not what you meant then you should clarify what you did mean.
If it is what you meant, then your claim that you didn't say that belief in evolution was a
requirement of atheism was a lie.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Well, maybe you should join all of us clever people and attempt to actually understand my question. You know, the one that you purported to answer.

You asked:

"Can you give an example of a faith-based proposition that an atheist is committed to merely by virtue of their atheism?"

Is this the question you claim hasn't been answered? Or was it the question where you asked for a better example?

Not in so many words, but I already indicated (before you asked) that I do not intend to get bogged down in multiple arguments on the same subject. I'm sorry if you do no like this answer nor the answer I've already given, but not liking an answer is not the same as a question not being answered.

Originally posted by googlefudge

...however no one (including myself) has ever said it is a requirement...

Hmmm... Well actually you did.

I mean you didn't use the word requirement, but it is what you said meant.
If you didn't intend it to mean that then that is your fault and not ours.

You see you were asked this ...
[quote][i]Originally posted by Swi ...[text shortened]... claim that you didn't say that belief in evolution was a
requirement of atheism was a lie.

If someone expects you to believe in evolution because you are an atheist, that is an expectation and not a requirement. A requirement implies you have no choice, you must either believe in evolution or you are not a valid atheist. If the question is flawed that is not my concern, I answered the question as it was asked.


If you believe in evolution because it seems the most reasonable explanation for life on earth are you not excluding the possibility of a god or gods creating that life? And if you exclude that possibility are you not an atheist, or perhaps an angostic who purportedly doesn't know?

Originally posted by lemon lime
You asked:

"Can you give an example of a faith-based proposition that an atheist is committed to merely by virtue of their atheism?"

Is this the question you claim hasn't been answered? Or was it the question where you asked for a better example?

Not in so many words, but I already indicated (before you asked) that I do not intend to get bogged d ...[text shortened]... e already given, but not liking an answer is not the same as a question not being answered.

The question was

Can you give an example of a faith-based proposition that an atheist is committed to merely by virtue of their atheism?

and it hasn't been answered successfully.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
The question was

Can you give an example of a faith-based proposition that an atheist is committed to merely by virtue of their atheism?

and it hasn't been answered successfully.

Are you implying evolution (theory of) has nothing of value to offer the atheist, because there is nothing in the theory of evolution which is able to support what the atheist believes?

Originally posted by lemon lime
If you believe in evolution because it seems the most reasonable explanation for life on earth are you not excluding the possibility of a god or gods creating that life? And if you exclude that possibility are you not an atheist, or perhaps an angostic who purportedly doesn't know?

Well leaving aside for the moment the fact that the majority of people in the world
who accept evolution are not only theists but Christian theists and thus evidently
acceptance of evolution does not require not believing in god/s...

You have this ass backwards.

The question was not "does acceptance of evolution lead to atheism?"

The question was "are there any faith based beliefs that an atheist is committed to
simply by virtue of being an atheist?"

And atheism (the lack of belief in gods, or even the belief in the lack of gods) does
not lead [inexorably] to accepting evolution.

Rationally analysing the evidence does, but that evidence does not come FROM atheism.

It is trivially easy for example to imagine a hypothetical alternative universe, where evolution
didn't occur and where other processes drove diversity of life, that also contained atheists.
If you were correct and faith based belief in evolution is something that atheists were committed
to, then the atheists in that alternative universe would be also committed to accepting evolution
despite the fact that in that universe it didn't happen.

There is nothing about not believing in gods, or disbelieving in gods, that commits an atheist
to beliefs relating to anything not relating to the existence of gods.
If you lack a belief in gods, then you should also lack a belief that gods created the universe.
But there is no requirement to have any beliefs about how it actually came about.

And again, agnosticism is a claim about what you 'can or cannot', or, 'do or do not' know. (about
the existence of gods in this case)
A gnostic claims they do know.
An agnostic claims they don't or can't know.

Theism and atheism are claims about belief, not [necessarily] knowledge.

You can thus be both a gnostic or agnostic theist, or a gnostic or agnostic atheist.

agnostic and atheist are not mutually exclusive labels.

Originally posted by lemon lime
If someone expects you to believe in evolution because you are an atheist, that is an expectation and not a requirement. A requirement implies you have no choice, you must either believe in evolution or you are not a valid atheist. If the question is flawed that is not my concern, I answered the question as it was asked.


If you believe in evol ...[text shortened]... possibility are you not an atheist, or perhaps an angostic who purportedly doesn't know?

If you believe in evolution because it seems the most reasonable explanation for life on earth are you not excluding the possibility of a god or gods creating that life? And if you exclude that possibility are you not an atheist, or perhaps an angostic who purportedly doesn't know?

You seem confused on at least a couple counts. First, no, one's belief in evolution would not exclude the possibility of god or gods. Evolution is not handcuffed to any particular explanation of how life came about. So, for example, it's quite consistent for one to hold that life forms are subject to evolution but were ultimately ushered in through some divine creative act. Aren't there, like, lots and lots of theists that believe in evolution?

Second, you were supposed to give an example of a commitment that is implicated just in virtue of one's atheism. But here you're trying to argue (unsuccessfully) that a commitment to evolution implicates atheism. So, you're also arguing in the wrong direction.

Originally posted by lemon lime
Are you implying evolution (theory of) has nothing of value to offer the atheist, because there is nothing in the theory of evolution which is able to support what the atheist believes?

The question was about what atheists are committed to believing.

Specifically it was about faith based beliefs that atheists are committed to. [in your view]


I would agree that science (including evolution) and atheism are natural bed fellows.

And that while not a requirement, our scientific understanding of the universe makes atheism
easier.

But that's not the question.

Science (and evolution) are not faith based.

And atheists are not committed or required to believe in or accept them.