What Would Convince You To Not Believe?

Originally posted by CLL53
No, "I think, therefore I am" was stated by Descartes in the 17th century, I can take no credit for that part. Per my extrapolation, the fact that I, me, a human being (mostly) exist is proof enough to me that God exists, without even having to look outside oneself at other miracles of creation. If there is other meaning or play on words, it was not designed ...[text shortened]... tes all that is deemed for us to know, or indeed all that we can comprehend of the infinite.

Yeah was that not the same book in which he gave the circular argument concerning the existence of God.

I wish He had stopped with 'Ergo Cogito Sum'.

-Removed-

I do not think it possible to believe and convince oneself that you don't believe. I think those are mutually exclusive. Not sure if that problem is best defined/resolved as a psychological issue or philosophical one. To me at least, it seems the issue being if one could both believe and not believe, as I don't see how one could convince themself that he/she did not believe and yet believe. The second part of your question is easier. If one was indeed an atheist, it makes no sense trying to convince theists to not believe, an effort doomed to abject failure, provided the theists in question really do believe. The only possible real "win" for the atheist would be in having the forum to attack the theists for the goal of convincing those that neither believe or not believe (fence sitters, don't know either way and/or don't care either way).

Originally posted by CLL53
I think you are correct. I have never heard of a single Christian that became an atheist, while I have heard of many athiests that became Christian. That should be a tip-off to thinking people.

Seriously?

While it is the case that a majority atheists in the UK (where I am) probably have
always been atheists, in other countries, notably the USA where theism is much
more prevalent the majority of atheists used to be believers and are now not.

And several/many of the atheists on this site used to be believers.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Seriously?

While it is the case that a majority atheists in the UK (where I am) probably have
always been atheists, in other countries, notably the USA where theism is much
more prevalent the majority of atheists used to be believers and are now not.

And several/many of the atheists on this site used to be believers.

Well, it is not my place to make statements about whether anyone were ever serious about their beliefs or really believed, but I will say there are those that can "talk the talk" but cannot "walk the walk" in the sense that anyone can claim to be, or believe, anything they wish, but the truth rests only with them and their creator. Just me, of course, but I don't see how anyone could ever really believe a thing and then "un-believe" the thing, without some serious overt action/activity really disproving the thing.

Originally posted by CLL53
I do not think it possible to believe and convince oneself that you don't believe. I think those are mutually exclusive. Not sure if that problem is best defined/resolved as a psychological issue or philosophical one. To me at least, it seems the issue being if one could both believe and not believe, as I don't see how one could convince themself that he/sh ...[text shortened]... elieve or not believe (fence sitters, don't know either way and/or don't care either way).

Wow is this wrong on oh so many levels.

First. While I agree that you probably can't believe and not believe at the same time, you can definitely
change your mind, so the you used to believe and now don't, or vica verca.

Second. AS an atheist, I can tell you that there are a whole host of reasons for wishing that people didn't
believe in gods.

And while I would never force, or condone/permit others to force, someone to stop believing...
That does not stop me from wanting to convince others that their beliefs are wrong and harmful, both to
themselves and others, via reasoned argument.

And it is a far from futile effort because people can and do change their minds.

Third. Theism is the positive belief that a god exists.
Atheism is the absence of that belief.
Thus a 'fence sitter' who doesn't know either way/care either way IS an atheist.

You are only a theist if you actually have a belief (a firm conviction) that a god or gods exist.
Everyone else is an atheist.

Originally posted by CLL53
Well, it is not my place to make statements about whether anyone were ever serious about their beliefs or really believed, but I will say there are those that can "talk the talk" but cannot "walk the walk" in the sense that anyone can claim to be, or believe, anything they wish, but the truth rests only with them and their creator. Just me, of course, but I d ...[text shortened]... lieve" the thing, without some serious overt action/activity really disproving the thing.

This guy "Matt Dillahunty" just to name one example. I can name examples all day.

YouTube

He was training to be a minister after a lifetime of being a Christian.

He is now an outspoken atheist.

If he didn't qualify as someone who used to believe then nobody does.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Wow is this wrong on oh so many levels.

First. While I agree that you probably can't believe and not believe at the same time, you can definitely
change your mind, so the you used to believe and now don't, or vica verca.

Second. AS an atheist, I can tell you that there are a whole host of reasons for wishing that people didn't
believe in gods. ...[text shortened]... have a belief (a firm conviction) that a god or gods exist.
Everyone else is an atheist.

The response was to a question phrased per both at the same time, not a case of changing ones mind, see the original post replied to.

Per the "fence sitter", NO, you are wrong, Agnostics do neither, they simply do not care, but have no firm belief in a God or against said belief, this does not make them atheists. Athesist, by definition, do not believe in God, the agnostic won't commit either way. This isn't a binary situation, one or the other, the agnostic effectively just does not care which is right.

Originally posted by CLL53
The response was to a question phrased per both at the same time, not a case of changing ones mind, see the original post replied to.

Per the "fence sitter", NO, you are wrong, Agnostics do neither, they simply do not care, but have no firm belief in a God or against said belief, this does not make them atheists. Athesist, by definition, do not believe in ...[text shortened]... ary situation, one or the other, the agnostic effectively just does not care which is right.

No I am not wrong. go read my bio.

atheist means not-theist.

A theist is someone who actively believes in a god or gods.

To not be a theist, and thus be an atheist, you simply have to not have a belief in a god or gods.

Gnosticism relates to knowledge not belief, it's a separate question.

An agnostic is someone who either claims not to know if a god exists, or that it's impossible to know.

A gnostic is someone who does claim to know that a god either does or does not exist.

Thus you can be gnostic or agnostic about the existence of god (you can claim to know or not know
if a god exists) in addition to believing or not having a belief in god or gods.

It works out like this.

If you believe in a god or gods and claim to know it or they exist then you're a "gnostic theist".

If you believe in a god or gods and don't know if it or they exist then you're an "agnostic theist".

If you don't believe in a god or gods and don't know if it or they exist then you're an "agnostic atheist".

If you don't believe in a god or gods and claim to know if it or they doesn't exist then you're a "gnostic atheist".

Atheism is not the position of claiming to believe or know that all gods don't exist (although that is included)

Atheism is simply the position of not being a theist. Of not having a belief in a god or gods.

And you either have a belief in a god or gods or you don't. If you don't know if you believe then you don't.

You can't have a firm conviction about something and not know it.

Originally posted by CLL53
The response was to a question phrased per both at the same time, not a case of changing ones mind, see the original post replied to.

Per the "fence sitter", NO, you are wrong, Agnostics do neither, they simply do not care, but have no firm belief in a God or against said belief, this does not make them atheists. Athesist, by definition, do not believe in ...[text shortened]... ary situation, one or the other, the agnostic effectively just does not care which is right.

No point in arguing with googlefudge, he worships himself as a god. He doesn't need God. Ha ha 😀

Originally posted by RJHinds
No point in arguing with googlefudge, he worships himself as a god. He doesn't need God. Ha ha 😀

I really don't worship myself.

I can't imagine ever doing something so narcissistic or asinine.

People sometimes talk about someone having a god shaped hole in their hearts,
and needing to fill it with something.

And there is a joke about religions punching a god shaped hole in peoples hearts
before putting a god into it.

I don't however have a god shaped hole.

I have no void that needs filling and no need of god or god replacement.

I get on just fine with human to human social interaction.

And it is incredibly insulting for you (and this is common among theists you are just
particularly bad) to keep telling people who don't believe that it's because we're
narcissists or wilfully evil or really do believe but don't like god and just pretend
or any of the other made up by theists reasons for people not believing in god.

I don't tell you why it is that you believe what you believe. I ask you.

You don't get to tell me why I believe what I believe. Especially when you have been
told better so many times.


Whether you agree with me or not, you could at least do me the curtsey of respecting that
I genuinely don't believe and do so for what seem to me to be rational reasons.

And I would kindly thank you not to tell people lies about me.

I am open minded.

I can and do change my mind if presented with a good argument/evidence.

So there is every reason to argue/debate with me if you think that you have good a good
argument/evidence.

Originally posted by vivify
So would it be fair to say, that people like RJ Hinds are correct; that no matter what evidence is given to you and atheists like you, that you will always refuse to believe?

No, it's not fair to say that. I think you are misinterpreting my position. First, I didn't say "no matter what", I said, "I don't see belief in deity coming to me that way." If it comes, by any route, it comes.

Second, I wonder what you mean by "atheists like you." I don't resist the notion that I may be a theist someday. When the question arises, I just report on my current belief, or lack of belief, that there is a deity. For most of my life, including this moment, I lack belief.

Third, your use of the word "refuse" is at the least, interesting. I don't see belief as something we can "refuse." I find myself forming beliefs right and left, without any active decision point about them. I can see refusal to look at evidence or listen to reason, is that what you mean? Maybe I do get tired of reading everything that is presented in support of theism, but I get tired of reading pro-atheism things, too.

Originally posted by RJHinds
No point in arguing with googlefudge, he worships himself as a god. He doesn't need God. Ha ha 😀

We should compile a list of one-liners by which we dismissively stereotype one another on this forum.

Originally posted by RJHinds
No point in arguing with googlefudge, he worships himself as a god. He doesn't need God. Ha ha 😀

There may come a time when he does need God. The question may become, when/if he does need God someday, will God listen then, after being summarily dismissed for years/decades?

Originally posted by CLL53
The response was to a question phrased per both at the same time, not a case of changing ones mind, see the original post replied to.

Per the "fence sitter", NO, you are wrong, Agnostics do neither, they simply do not care, but have no firm belief in a God or against said belief, this does not make them atheists. Athesist, by definition, do not believe in ...[text shortened]... ary situation, one or the other, the agnostic effectively just does not care which is right.

"Athesist, by definition, do not believe in God, the agnostic won't commit either way."

Do you think "do not believe in God" is the same as "believe there is no God"? They aren't the same.

Sometimes, one liner dictionary definitions or definitions from the pulpit do not tell the whole story. An encyclopedia of philosophy (or religion) would be a better source.

Originally posted by JS357
"Athesist, by definition, do not believe in God, the agnostic won't commit either way."

Do you think "do not believe in God" is the same as "believe there is no God"? They aren't the same.

Sometimes, one liner dictionary definitions or definitions from the pulpit do not tell the whole story. An encyclopedia of philosophy (or religion) would be a better source.

If there is an issue with phrasing, the fault was mine per synopsizing/paraphrasing, not with the source.