Weak and Strong Atheism?

At 6/22/2010 4:39:40 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 4:29:06 PM, annhasle wrote:
And maybe I am an irrational, close-minded, fundamentalist Atheist. LOL But I don't think that its necessarily fair to categorize all strong atheists as close-minded or stupid. I don't think that "true believers" of religion are stupid; I believe that they have a different outlook and experience of life... I mean, I'm a "strong atheist" but I still debate with others about religion and I like to think that I'm flexible enough to at least understand their views, even though I may not believe it. Am I still close-minded?

strong atheism is irrational because you make knowledge claims that you can't support with fact or evidence... how can anyone know with 100% certainty that there is no god?

i don't think it makes you closedminded but it is a little foolish since the position is basically indefensible.

And the same can go with Fundamentalist Christians/Muslims/Jews....whoever. But I think, for myself at least, it would be more foolish to say I believe that there could be a God when I don't believe that. I'm not hurting anyone by being this way, (I think) and I don't hate those who are religious. It's just my way of life. And if it's indefensible, then it's even more fun to debate! :D Gives me a hobby, right? LOL

At 6/22/2010 5:06:15 PM, annhasle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 4:39:40 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 4:29:06 PM, annhasle wrote:
And maybe I am an irrational, close-minded, fundamentalist Atheist. LOL But I don't think that its necessarily fair to categorize all strong atheists as close-minded or stupid. I don't think that "true believers" of religion are stupid; I believe that they have a different outlook and experience of life... I mean, I'm a "strong atheist" but I still debate with others about religion and I like to think that I'm flexible enough to at least understand their views, even though I may not believe it. Am I still close-minded?

strong atheism is irrational because you make knowledge claims that you can't support with fact or evidence... how can anyone know with 100% certainty that there is no god?

i don't think it makes you closedminded but it is a little foolish since the position is basically indefensible.

And the same can go with Fundamentalist Christians/Muslims/Jews....whoever. But I think, for myself at least, it would be more foolish to say I believe that there could be a God when I don't believe that. I'm not hurting anyone by being this way, (I think) and I don't hate those who are religious. It's just my way of life. And if it's indefensible, then it's even more fun to debate! :D Gives me a hobby, right? LOL

well in that case you're just wrong. because it is possible there is a god. its just extreeeeeeeeeeeeemely unlikely.

At 6/22/2010 5:08:38 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 5:06:15 PM, annhasle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 4:39:40 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 4:29:06 PM, annhasle wrote:
And maybe I am an irrational, close-minded, fundamentalist Atheist. LOL But I don't think that its necessarily fair to categorize all strong atheists as close-minded or stupid. I don't think that "true believers" of religion are stupid; I believe that they have a different outlook and experience of life... I mean, I'm a "strong atheist" but I still debate with others about religion and I like to think that I'm flexible enough to at least understand their views, even though I may not believe it. Am I still close-minded?

strong atheism is irrational because you make knowledge claims that you can't support with fact or evidence... how can anyone know with 100% certainty that there is no god?

i don't think it makes you closedminded but it is a little foolish since the position is basically indefensible.

And the same can go with Fundamentalist Christians/Muslims/Jews....whoever. But I think, for myself at least, it would be more foolish to say I believe that there could be a God when I don't believe that. I'm not hurting anyone by being this way, (I think) and I don't hate those who are religious. It's just my way of life. And if it's indefensible, then it's even more fun to debate! :D Gives me a hobby, right? LOL

well in that case you're just wrong. because it is possible there is a god. its just extreeeeeeeeeeeeemely unlikely.

I'd rather be wrong than be religious. Sorry. :P

At 6/22/2010 5:10:52 PM, annhasle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 5:08:38 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 5:06:15 PM, annhasle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 4:39:40 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 4:29:06 PM, annhasle wrote:
And maybe I am an irrational, close-minded, fundamentalist Atheist. LOL But I don't think that its necessarily fair to categorize all strong atheists as close-minded or stupid. I don't think that "true believers" of religion are stupid; I believe that they have a different outlook and experience of life... I mean, I'm a "strong atheist" but I still debate with others about religion and I like to think that I'm flexible enough to at least understand their views, even though I may not believe it. Am I still close-minded?

strong atheism is irrational because you make knowledge claims that you can't support with fact or evidence... how can anyone know with 100% certainty that there is no god?

i don't think it makes you closedminded but it is a little foolish since the position is basically indefensible.

And the same can go with Fundamentalist Christians/Muslims/Jews....whoever. But I think, for myself at least, it would be more foolish to say I believe that there could be a God when I don't believe that. I'm not hurting anyone by being this way, (I think) and I don't hate those who are religious. It's just my way of life. And if it's indefensible, then it's even more fun to debate! :D Gives me a hobby, right? LOL

well in that case you're just wrong. because it is possible there is a god. its just extreeeeeeeeeeeeemely unlikely.

I'd rather be wrong than be religious. Sorry. :P

...wow. So, you really aren't concerned with the truth, are you?

At 6/22/2010 5:13:59 PM, popculturepooka wrote:

At 6/22/2010 5:10:52 PM, annhasle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 5:08:38 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 5:06:15 PM, annhasle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 4:39:40 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 4:29:06 PM, annhasle wrote:
And maybe I am an irrational, close-minded, fundamentalist Atheist. LOL But I don't think that its necessarily fair to categorize all strong atheists as close-minded or stupid. I don't think that "true believers" of religion are stupid; I believe that they have a different outlook and experience of life... I mean, I'm a "strong atheist" but I still debate with others about religion and I like to think that I'm flexible enough to at least understand their views, even though I may not believe it. Am I still close-minded?

strong atheism is irrational because you make knowledge claims that you can't support with fact or evidence... how can anyone know with 100% certainty that there is no god?

i don't think it makes you closedminded but it is a little foolish since the position is basically indefensible.

And the same can go with Fundamentalist Christians/Muslims/Jews....whoever. But I think, for myself at least, it would be more foolish to say I believe that there could be a God when I don't believe that. I'm not hurting anyone by being this way, (I think) and I don't hate those who are religious. It's just my way of life. And if it's indefensible, then it's even more fun to debate! :D Gives me a hobby, right? LOL

well in that case you're just wrong. because it is possible there is a god. its just extreeeeeeeeeeeeemely unlikely.

I'd rather be wrong than be religious. Sorry. :P

...wow. So, you really aren't concerned with the truth, are you?

Truth is so subjective. You believe you have the truth; I believe I do. And look at that, they're different beliefs. Once again; subjective. So...why do you even bother to post that? o_0

Oh dear.

At 6/22/2010 5:16:21 PM, annhasle wrote:
Truth is so subjective. You believe you have the truth; I believe I do. And look at that, they're different beliefs. Once again; subjective. So...why do you even bother to post that? o_0

so how come even though i believe i am eating a ham sandwich i am still hungry? :(

At 6/22/2010 5:17:36 PM, Puck wrote:
Oh dear.

Lol. This.

At 6/22/2010 5:19:58 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 5:16:21 PM, annhasle wrote:
Truth is so subjective. You believe you have the truth; I believe I do. And look at that, they're different beliefs. Once again; subjective. So...why do you even bother to post that? o_0

so how come even though i believe i am eating a ham sandwich i am still hungry? :(

Believing it and actually experiencing it is a little different. If you believe you are eating a sandwich when you're not.... hopefully you're getting help. If you are eating a sandwich and believe you are...good. If you're still hungry after that, make another one. :P

At 6/22/2010 6:55:25 PM, annhasle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 5:19:58 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 5:16:21 PM, annhasle wrote:
Truth is so subjective. You believe you have the truth; I believe I do. And look at that, they're different beliefs. Once again; subjective. So...why do you even bother to post that? o_0

so how come even though i believe i am eating a ham sandwich i am still hungry? :(

Believing it and actually experiencing it is a little different. If you believe you are eating a sandwich when you're not.... hopefully you're getting help. If you are eating a sandwich and believe you are...good. If you're still hungry after that, make another one. :P

well you implied that the truth of a statement is dependent on belief that it is true. if thats not what you mean you should clarify, because "truth is subjective" is an extremely loaded statement.

At 6/22/2010 3:37:12 PM, annhasle wrote:
I recently was talking to a family friend of mine who said he was a "weak atheist." I asked him to elaborate on that, since I had not heard of that term before. He said that it was the belief - "We cannot say a god can or cannot exist.". I asked if he meant he was Agnostic but apparently Agnostics are characterized as "weak atheists".

The other category is "Strong atheist", which is the belief that "no god exists". Non-negotiable in my mind. I find myself in this category and maybe that's why I'm so annoyed.

It seems to be pretty straight forward, you either;

theism

a) Believe in a God
or

Atheism

b) You don't believe there is a god.

b1: you also believe there CANNOT POSSIBLY be a god
b2: you wouldn't say the notion's completely impossible... You just don't see why anyone should think that there is.

At 6/22/2010 7:23:30 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

At 6/22/2010 3:37:12 PM, annhasle wrote:
I recently was talking to a family friend of mine who said he was a "weak atheist." I asked him to elaborate on that, since I had not heard of that term before. He said that it was the belief - "We cannot say a god can or cannot exist.". I asked if he meant he was Agnostic but apparently Agnostics are characterized as "weak atheists".

The other category is "Strong atheist", which is the belief that "no god exists". Non-negotiable in my mind. I find myself in this category and maybe that's why I'm so annoyed.

It seems to be pretty straight forward, you either;

theism

a) Believe in a God
or

Atheism

b) You don't believe there is a god.

b1: you also believe there CANNOT POSSIBLY be a god
b2: you wouldn't say the notion's completely impossible... You just don't see why anyone should think that there is.

To say it's completely impossible would be stupid but I'm strong enough in my belief to be 99% sure. Why? Because that's how it worked out... I think it's a mixture of my personality, experiences with religion and my general environment. I know that I'll probably be flamed by those religiously inclined but I welcome the criticism.
Bring it on! XD

I will say with complete honesty and conviction; I do not believe in any God. I don't believe I need one nor would ever want one. I don't believe it would enrich my life but instead it would be hypocritical, false and a mockery to any religious person.

However, do not misunderstand my intentions. Just because I do not believe in religion, I do not condemn or belittle those who do. To those who need and have faith, I'm glad you have what you were looking for. I understand that you want to pass on the word of the Lord. But if you try it on me; it'll be like banging your head on a brick wall. I am stubborn and convinced; a deadly combo. :D

Any comments? LOL

At 6/22/2010 7:34:40 PM, annhasle wrote:
To say it's completely impossible would be stupid but I'm strong enough in my belief to be 99% sure.

then strictly speaking you are a weak atheist. that doesn't imply that you are even a little bit religious or that you think a god is likely or necessary. only that you are realistic in your appraisal of what we are able to know.

At 6/22/2010 7:43:08 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 7:34:40 PM, annhasle wrote:
To say it's completely impossible would be stupid but I'm strong enough in my belief to be 99% sure.

then strictly speaking you are a weak atheist. that doesn't imply that you are even a little bit religious or that you think a god is likely or necessary. only that you are realistic in your appraisal of what we are able to know.

I do not consider myself to be a weak atheist. People have been telling me all day (even you) that it's impractical to believe 100%. I'm willing to concede 1% that there may be something out there but I STRONGLY doubt there is. I do this out of respect to those religious and to show that I can be, albeit very little, open-minded. Am I kidding myself, most likely. But that 1% is probably what keeps me coming on this site to see new perspectives...

At 6/22/2010 7:58:42 PM, annhasle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 7:43:08 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 7:34:40 PM, annhasle wrote:
To say it's completely impossible would be stupid but I'm strong enough in my belief to be 99% sure.

then strictly speaking you are a weak atheist. that doesn't imply that you are even a little bit religious or that you think a god is likely or necessary. only that you are realistic in your appraisal of what we are able to know.

I do not consider myself to be a weak atheist. People have been telling me all day (even you) that it's impractical to believe 100%. I'm willing to concede 1% that there may be something out there but I STRONGLY doubt there is. I do this out of respect to those religious and to show that I can be, albeit very little, open-minded. Am I kidding myself, most likely. But that 1% is probably what keeps me coming on this site to see new perspectives...

i understand and i even agree. but the strong atheist believes it is 100% certain that there is no god. as you don't believe that, i don't understand why you would call yourself that. the value in the weak atheist position is that you can still argue strongly against popular conceptions of god without having to claim anything you can't back up with evidence or logic. on the other hand, the strong atheist position requires that you assert things that you can't support. you can be a weak atheist and an anti-theist a la christopher hitchens if you like... but to call yourself a strong atheist when you aren't one is to misuse the distinction.

At 6/22/2010 8:03:30 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 7:58:42 PM, annhasle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 7:43:08 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 7:34:40 PM, annhasle wrote:
To say it's completely impossible would be stupid but I'm strong enough in my belief to be 99% sure.

then strictly speaking you are a weak atheist. that doesn't imply that you are even a little bit religious or that you think a god is likely or necessary. only that you are realistic in your appraisal of what we are able to know.

I do not consider myself to be a weak atheist. People have been telling me all day (even you) that it's impractical to believe 100%. I'm willing to concede 1% that there may be something out there but I STRONGLY doubt there is. I do this out of respect to those religious and to show that I can be, albeit very little, open-minded. Am I kidding myself, most likely. But that 1% is probably what keeps me coming on this site to see new perspectives...

i understand and i even agree. but the strong atheist believes it is 100% certain that there is no god. as you don't believe that, i don't understand why you would call yourself that. the value in the weak atheist position is that you can still argue strongly against popular conceptions of god without having to claim anything you can't back up with evidence or logic. on the other hand, the strong atheist position requires that you assert things that you can't support. you can be a weak atheist and an anti-theist a la christopher hitchens if you like... but to call yourself a strong atheist when you aren't one is to misuse the distinction.

Ugh... I just hate the name "weak atheist". It sounds as though I don't believe in atheism when I could be a friggin' poster child for it. Therefore, I will call myself an atheist... This is why I had problems in the beginning, about dealing with the different sects of atheism. My level of belief is high and yet I'm "weak"... WTF. >.>

Yeah but you get to laugh at strong atheists. So it all evens out in the end.

At 6/22/2010 8:21:32 PM, Puck wrote:
Yeah but you get to laugh at strong atheists. So it all evens out in the end.

why would I laugh at strong atheists when I considered myself as one?? I'M HAVING AN IDENTITY CRISIS PEOPLE. D:

You are 17, you are supposed to. :P

At 6/22/2010 8:27:48 PM, Puck wrote:
You are 17, you are supposed to. :P

lmao.

At 6/22/2010 8:27:48 PM, Puck wrote:
You are 17, you are supposed to. :P

Great... before I was a 17 year old "strong atheist". Now I'm a 17 year old, atheist-that's-close-to-being-a-strong-atheist-but-is-actually-weak-because-I-believe-in-atheism-only-99%-and-not-100%. >_<

It's a definitional distinction, not a belief one. Not really sure what the crisis is apart from you don't like the label. Not punk enough for ya? :P

At 6/22/2010 8:34:18 PM, Puck wrote:
It's a definitional distinction, not a belief one. Not really sure what the crisis is apart from you don't like the label. Not punk enough for ya? :P

Punk enough? You sound like my grandpa... -_-

Fine, I'm a weak atheist. But what I've said before still stands. I do not believe in any God. I don't believe I need any God. Viola. I'm eternally damned. Lol

At 6/22/2010 8:11:41 PM, annhasle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 8:03:30 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 7:58:42 PM, annhasle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 7:43:08 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 7:34:40 PM, annhasle wrote:
To say it's completely impossible would be stupid but I'm strong enough in my belief to be 99% sure.

then strictly speaking you are a weak atheist. that doesn't imply that you are even a little bit religious or that you think a god is likely or necessary. only that you are realistic in your appraisal of what we are able to know.

I do not consider myself to be a weak atheist. People have been telling me all day (even you) that it's impractical to believe 100%. I'm willing to concede 1% that there may be something out there but I STRONGLY doubt there is. I do this out of respect to those religious and to show that I can be, albeit very little, open-minded. Am I kidding myself, most likely. But that 1% is probably what keeps me coming on this site to see new perspectives...

i understand and i even agree. but the strong atheist believes it is 100% certain that there is no god. as you don't believe that, i don't understand why you would call yourself that. the value in the weak atheist position is that you can still argue strongly against popular conceptions of god without having to claim anything you can't back up with evidence or logic. on the other hand, the strong atheist position requires that you assert things that you can't support. you can be a weak atheist and an anti-theist a la christopher hitchens if you like... but to call yourself a strong atheist when you aren't one is to misuse the distinction.

Ugh... I just hate the name "weak atheist". It sounds as though I don't believe in atheism when I could be a friggin' poster child for it. Therefore, I will call myself an atheist... This is why I had problems in the beginning, about dealing with the different sects of atheism. My level of belief is high and yet I'm "weak"... WTF. >.>

These distinctions are important and necessary because the distinction is real between people who say there is absolutely no God and those who say God probably doesn't exist but its possible.

Then there's anti-theists and people like Cerebral who I consider wishful-atheists.

I'm actually disappointed at Dawkins for taking the weak Atheist position by conceding he can't say 100% there is no God.

At 6/22/2010 9:00:06 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
I'm actually disappointed at Dawkins for taking the weak Atheist position by conceding he can't say 100% there is no God.

see... I'd say that if God exists he must have a nature... and that if he had a nature.... he'd be caused...

I think the only possible "god" is a pantheist god like a "Conscious Universe" kind of thing...

Though I'd say theres ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO THINK IT'S SO.

At 6/22/2010 9:00:06 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
I'm actually disappointed at Dawkins for taking the weak Atheist position by conceding he can't say 100% there is no God.

because strong atheism isn't a reasonable position to take :P

wanna debate the topic?

At 6/22/2010 9:04:12 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

At 6/22/2010 9:00:06 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
I'm actually disappointed at Dawkins for taking the weak Atheist position by conceding he can't say 100% there is no God.

see... I'd say that if God exists he must have a nature... and that if he had a nature.... he'd be caused...

I think the only possible "god" is a pantheist god like a "Conscious Universe" kind of thing...

Though I'd say theres ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO THINK IT'S SO.

though I'd also be the first to admit that my understanding of what can and "cannot" be is completely limited by my own nature... and so even those things which seem to have to be cannot be claimed to really have to be... they just seem to.

At 6/22/2010 9:06:09 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 9:00:06 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
I'm actually disappointed at Dawkins for taking the weak Atheist position by conceding he can't say 100% there is no God.

because strong atheism isn't a reasonable position to take :P

wanna debate the topic?

That would be interesting. :)

At 6/22/2010 9:32:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:

At 6/22/2010 9:06:09 PM, belle wrote:

At 6/22/2010 9:00:06 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
I'm actually disappointed at Dawkins for taking the weak Atheist position by conceding he can't say 100% there is no God.

because strong atheism isn't a reasonable position to take :P

wanna debate the topic?

That would be interesting. :)

cool. i'll write up the challenge and send it to you within a few days.

No, no, no...

Theist: God exists.
Ignostic: What do you mean by God?
Agnostic: I don't know if God exists.
Strong-Agnostic: I don't/can't know if God exists, and you don't/can't either.
Atheist: God doesn't exist.
Apatheist: Who the hell cares?