Atheism
| |
Anonymous comments allowed.
145 comments displayed.
#207 to #17
-
veryfahnyjokes (01/05/2016) [-]
This does not apply here fagit. Incorrectly used meme alert!
#140 to #17
-
blitzblitz (01/05/2016) [-]
But, it literally said the easiest ones to troll. He directly implies that he's trolling in the tweet. The people are not understanding the joke and that's their own fault.
#146 to #140
-
magicmace (01/05/2016) [-] Atheism isn't a religion.
Its the direct equivalent of saying Theism is a religion.
Atheism is a word that describes all religions that do not believe in a god.
Theism is a word that describes all religions that do believe in a god.
The original tweeter was being a retard to try and troll people.
Its the direct equivalent of saying Theism is a religion.
Atheism is a word that describes all religions that do not believe in a god.
Theism is a word that describes all religions that do believe in a god.
The original tweeter was being a retard to try and troll people.
#184 to #167
-
mutantunicorn (01/05/2016) [-] so what you were saying is that Christians are the best Muslims?
#175 to #146
-
lathyrusvii (01/05/2016) [-] How the hell did his tweet, extrapolated and dissected in front of you, get to you as well?
It's presumed that the people who don't reply
1. Understand what atheism is.
2. Ignore the obviously inciteful statement, showing self-restraint.
He wants people to comment that he's wrong. He knows he's wrong. He said it, purposefully, to incite the urge in others to respond, and in anger.
...How did you fall for the trap when it was clear as day from ten miles away? <<
It's presumed that the people who don't reply
1. Understand what atheism is.
2. Ignore the obviously inciteful statement, showing self-restraint.
He wants people to comment that he's wrong. He knows he's wrong. He said it, purposefully, to incite the urge in others to respond, and in anger.
...How did you fall for the trap when it was clear as day from ten miles away? <<
#155 to #146
-
iamchicken (01/05/2016) [-] Well I mean the United States officially holds it as a religion.
#128 to #19
-
innocentbabies (01/05/2016) [-]
No we don't, I mean, it's not like we have a history of feeding *********** and then complaining about their existence.
Isn't that right biebersgotswag, uchihalover, levvy, uzumakilover, kingbradleylover, joshlol, itumblr, and ever anon ever?
Isn't that right biebersgotswag, uchihalover, levvy, uzumakilover, kingbradleylover, joshlol, itumblr, and ever anon ever?
#131 to #130
-
innocentbabies (01/05/2016) [-]
Oh God, you're right. It's even worse! You're joshlol.
#16
-
europe (01/04/2016) [-] >make retarded statement
>people point out that it's incorrect
10/10 trolling
>people point out that it's incorrect
10/10 trolling
#117 to #16
-
innocentbabies (01/05/2016) [-]
>giving these kinds of people attention
Doesn't matter whether they're trying or not, if you ignore them, they'll go away. Otherwise, you're doing exactly what they want, which is all that really matters, regardless of how "elegant" their trolling was to you. Even if he's just retarded, ignoring him is still the better choice.
Doesn't matter whether they're trying or not, if you ignore them, they'll go away. Otherwise, you're doing exactly what they want, which is all that really matters, regardless of how "elegant" their trolling was to you. Even if he's just retarded, ignoring him is still the better choice.
#141 to #99
-
blitzblitz (01/05/2016) [-]
But the guy in the tweet is directly implying they're easiest to troll. I understand that he COULD be not joking, but it seems like he's directly implying that he's trolling in the tweet.
#144 to #141
-
chinchulines (01/05/2016) [-]
yeah, thats a good point and it may be true, but the way i understood it, he said it as in trolling atheist in general and not in that particular tweet, i might be wrong but thats my opinion
#104 to #102
-
chinchulines (01/05/2016) [-]
you're assuming he's a troll, some people do believe atheism is a religion, didnt you knew of kent hovind?
#31 to #16
-
ireallylikepotatoe (01/04/2016) [-] If it pisses people off it works. And this statement very much pisses people off.
It's a religion based version of calling Link, Zelda.
It's a religion based version of calling Link, Zelda.
#246 to #223
-
haroldsaxon ONLINE (01/05/2016) [-] Yeah, I'm absolutely furious. I even commented twice!
#45 to #10
-
tarabostes (01/04/2016) [-] I dunno , last time I saw your ass posted it look pretty hurt ;*
#135 to #70
-
duelknight ONLINE (01/05/2016) [-] Fedora tippers anonymous?
isn't that just usual FJ?
isn't that just usual FJ?
#202
-
wcpapier ONLINE (01/05/2016) [-] if you wanna know how smart and trollable the fj community is, check the comments below
#43
-
Tyranitar ONLINE (01/04/2016) [-] Atheism has become just as annoying as any religion. For every religious person I see pushing their beliefs and being a general nuisance, I see 4 atheists that are doing the same thing, and then complaining about what the religious guy is doing.
#98 to #43
-
haroldsaxon ONLINE (01/05/2016) [-] On FJ, I ONLY see people attacking atheism for that reason. Never have I seen that reason. I occasionally see people misinterpret Christianity or Islam, but that's pretty much the only thing other than "these guys are bad >" that I see here.
Say what you will, but that is my experience. I don't read enough comments outside FJ, and there's nothing like this at all IRL, so my experience is strictly FJ
Say what you will, but that is my experience. I don't read enough comments outside FJ, and there's nothing like this at all IRL, so my experience is strictly FJ
#58 to #43
-
krobeles ONLINE (01/04/2016) [-] You have to give the American atheists some credit, though.
I'm an atheist myself, in the sense that I just dont give a **** . I dont believe theres a god, but then again, religious people never bothered me IRL nor tried to effect policy in my country, so I say live and let live. Only hardcore religious people I ever met were really chill.
On the other side of the coin though, the Christians in America seems to be constantly pushing for one stupid discriminatory law after the other, useing the bible as justification for doing so. I'de imagine I'de feel a bit more vindictive about my atheism, if I had Christians come up every other day and either remind me what a horrible sinner I am, or try to pass some law that mandates I start shaveing my pubic hairs into the shape of a cross or whatever else the bible mandates this week...
I'm an atheist myself, in the sense that I just dont give a **** . I dont believe theres a god, but then again, religious people never bothered me IRL nor tried to effect policy in my country, so I say live and let live. Only hardcore religious people I ever met were really chill.
On the other side of the coin though, the Christians in America seems to be constantly pushing for one stupid discriminatory law after the other, useing the bible as justification for doing so. I'de imagine I'de feel a bit more vindictive about my atheism, if I had Christians come up every other day and either remind me what a horrible sinner I am, or try to pass some law that mandates I start shaveing my pubic hairs into the shape of a cross or whatever else the bible mandates this week...
#63 to #58
-
Tyranitar ONLINE (01/04/2016) [-] I believe that two wrongs don't make a right. If an atheist becomes an intolerant bigot, they lose the right to complain about intolerant bigots. But that's my issue: if a person of religion pushes their belief onto people, or insults others for their beliefs, they immediately get looked down on and insulted. That's fine, but whenever I see an atheist do almost the exact same thing, they are praised and treated like a hero.
Billboards advertising churches are protested and called to be destroyed, but anti-religion billboards saying "Stop teaching your kids fairy tales, grow up" are just fine, and protesting THOSE is called a violation of freedom or religion.
Billboards advertising churches are protested and called to be destroyed, but anti-religion billboards saying "Stop teaching your kids fairy tales, grow up" are just fine, and protesting THOSE is called a violation of freedom or religion.
#136 to #63
-
slycoop (01/05/2016) [-] The complete opposite of what you just said is true. People on my college campus are allowed to scream about the word of the Bible constantly, and I also see billboards preaching that everyone should go to Church or they will go to Hell. Meanwhile, atheists are some of the most hated groups in America.
Even if you don't want to believe that that is true about America, let's keep the focus on just FJ. In these comments, you'll find a bunch of people (you included) talking about how atheists are way worse than the Christians they complain about, and you never see an atheist speaking up without getting thumbed down insane amounts, because there is a strong bias against them in this community, just like there's a strong bias against things that are remotely progressive or liberal ever since the extreme liberals have ruined it for everyone else.
Even if you don't want to believe that that is true about America, let's keep the focus on just FJ. In these comments, you'll find a bunch of people (you included) talking about how atheists are way worse than the Christians they complain about, and you never see an atheist speaking up without getting thumbed down insane amounts, because there is a strong bias against them in this community, just like there's a strong bias against things that are remotely progressive or liberal ever since the extreme liberals have ruined it for everyone else.
#139 to #63
-
anon (01/05/2016) [-]
You see though, there are actually studied proving children raised with religious influences in their lives have difficulty distinguishing between fantasy and real life. There is also the intellect comparison among atheist and religious adults... it seems to me religious people get mad because god doesn't endow his followers with automatic intelligence, even when prayed for
#56 to #43
-
organiclead (01/04/2016) [-] I dunno, I have yet to see atheists come to my door during dinner time or try to feed me with moral lessons instead of tips. I have seen a few close off a street because they were protesting, but they're nowhere near as common as Christian protesters. They're annoying as hell, but they have yet to reach the Fundie Christian level of irritating yet.
#177
-
furiousmarshmellow (01/05/2016) [-] A lot of people in the comments seem to not get the joke.
#179
-
FacePubes (01/05/2016) [-] Atheist is a religious belief. It is the opposite of theist. Believing there is no god is no different than believing in God or many gods, the point is the field is filled. Think of it like this:
Do you believe in a form of higher power?
A) yes
B) no
C) I have no idea
It is a simple question, and there is no reason to leave the question unanswered. Religion is simply one's religious beliefs.
Do you believe in a form of higher power?
A) yes
B) no
C) I have no idea
It is a simple question, and there is no reason to leave the question unanswered. Religion is simply one's religious beliefs.
#189 to #182
-
Silver Quantum (01/05/2016) [-] atheism is as much a religion as not collecting stamps is a hobby
#195 to #193
-
Silver Quantum (01/05/2016) [-] atheism is as much a religion as not having a hobby is a hobby
#200 to #199
-
Silver Quantum (01/05/2016) [-] passing time is not a hobby. a hobby is when you perform an activity for the specific reason of performing that activity, not for passing time.
#204 to #200
-
FacePubes (01/05/2016) [-] Hobby:
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hobby
Defined : an interest or activity engaged in for pleasure. Syn: Pastime
Athiest:
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheist
Defined : One who believes there is no diety
Religion:
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion
Defined: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group
There are definitions that include a belief in god, I'll admit, but that is a fallacy of language, evolution of words.
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hobby
Defined : an interest or activity engaged in for pleasure. Syn: Pastime
Athiest:
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheist
Defined : One who believes there is no diety
Religion:
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion
Defined: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group
There are definitions that include a belief in god, I'll admit, but that is a fallacy of language, evolution of words.
#206 to #204
-
Silver Quantum (01/05/2016) [-] a hobby by definition is a pastime, but passing time is not the purpose. so passing time in itself is not a hobby.
here's a much more accurate definition of atheism:
Atheism is the absence of a claim, not the claim of a negative
which is why atheism isn't a religion. it's not the belief of the opposite of religion. it's the absence of belief.
here's a much more accurate definition of atheism:
Atheism is the absence of a claim, not the claim of a negative
which is why atheism isn't a religion. it's not the belief of the opposite of religion. it's the absence of belief.
#209 to #206
-
FacePubes (01/05/2016) [-] You say it is a more accurate definition, yet what you describe is more of an agnostic or someone who lives in a world sans religion.
Take the word "Atheist"
a-theist
a non-theist
similar to asymmetrical. non-symmetrical. Atheist by it's form means non-god-believing.
Take the word "Atheist"
a-theist
a non-theist
similar to asymmetrical. non-symmetrical. Atheist by it's form means non-god-believing.
#210 to #209
-
Silver Quantum (01/05/2016) [-] tbh there is a very fine line between atheism and agnosticism. most people who say are atheists are really agnostics. but since most people either aren't aware of the word agnostic or its implication, or they just don't give a **** what they are called. point is they don't believe in god and don't bother to contemplate the probability of his existence.
"Atheist by it's form means non-god-believing."
again, the point is the absence of the claim that god exists, not the belief in the negative of that claim
"Atheist by it's form means non-god-believing."
again, the point is the absence of the claim that god exists, not the belief in the negative of that claim
#214 to #210
-
FacePubes (01/05/2016) [-] I think we've both said everything that really needs to be said, and I'm tired, and in all honesty I'm more fascinated by the terms, words, and construction of language.
Religion is one of the greatest tools given to man. It has the potential of peace. Supposedly, Jesus dined with whores and washed the feet of thieves or something. If people didn't take the words that have been translated countless times, and bits removed from the whole, and take it so damn literal, I think the world would be an ok place. But at it's core, man tends to corrupt. Religion has sparked too many wars and costed too many lives. Religion is a great tool, help or harm. If it wasn't apparent, I am fairly conflicted about my own beliefs.
Religion is one of the greatest tools given to man. It has the potential of peace. Supposedly, Jesus dined with whores and washed the feet of thieves or something. If people didn't take the words that have been translated countless times, and bits removed from the whole, and take it so damn literal, I think the world would be an ok place. But at it's core, man tends to corrupt. Religion has sparked too many wars and costed too many lives. Religion is a great tool, help or harm. If it wasn't apparent, I am fairly conflicted about my own beliefs.
#216 to #214
-
Silver Quantum (01/05/2016) [-] what you're thinking about what the world needs is morality, like a lot more of it. you don't need religion to remind yourself of how to behave in society. most of the commandments are common sense. don't kill or steal. well no **** . basically what the world needs is the following kind of mentality: be a decent human being to me and i'll be a decent human being to you. all the tools you need to achieve that are within yourself. the biggest tool you really need is reason. it's a kind of a deal that stands at the very core of any free society.
#65
-
tollund (01/05/2016) [-] saying "atheism isn't a religion" by no means declares the speaker an atheist, rather that they are just not retarded.
#152
-
Elk (01/05/2016) [-] I've always been bothered by posts like these because all the comments are, "THEY HAVEN'T BEEN TROLLED. THEY'RE JUST CORREEEEECTING HIM."
How heated you guys get kiiiiiinda makes me feel that he was successful.
How heated you guys get kiiiiiinda makes me feel that he was successful.
#169 to #168
-
manofparody (01/05/2016) [-] So I guess he was successful like the german police force is successful:
Shoot everybody, and you'll eventually get your target.
Shoot everybody, and you'll eventually get your target.
#171 to #170
-
manofparody (01/05/2016) [-] Probably not, but you also can't assume they won't get mad about it. It's targeted towards atheists, but he also misused the word, "religion" which could irritate anyone.
#213
-
anon (01/05/2016) [-]
For all of you saying it's a retarded statemant to begin with: atheism bears such strong indictors for religion that it can easily be mistaken for one. Atheism (at least strong pure atheism) isn't a "lack of belief" in god. No. It is a belief that there's no god. Based on more or less **** . Agnosticism is way closer to a "lack of belief + maybe, maybe not". Crushing majority of atheists however BELIEVE that there is no god and all they have is a belief. Seems like religion to me. I'm agnostic. Because I'm not arrogant enough to be absolutely sure that there is no god. Yeah, all seems to indicate there is no god of any kind but that alone isn't proof. Hell, there might be whole new layer of reality that we're not aware of (now or ever). There might be something we're missing. And there are scientific indicators that there's more to existence that we're aware of now. So being sure about such thing as a lack of existence of this god dude is arrogant. Humans are too stupid in general for now to answer such questions. Hell, I even doubt that we will ever be because if there's some cosmic intelect responsible for the shape of our slice of reality it always will be +1 level of existence above us no matter what. We would have to become gods to experience god (in the shape, form and with features that we more or less all agree). So god = not likely but who knows. Dosn't be an arrogant dick about it no matter if pro or against.
#219 to #213
-
dancingdoggy (01/05/2016) [-] You can be an agnostic atheist. Being an atheist does not mean you believe there is no God. It does mean you have a lack of a belief in a God. Being gnostic or agnostic are whether or not you believe there is proof for your side.
I'm an agnostic atheist. One of my best friends is an agnostic theist. She actually resents when people try to claim they have "proof" that God exists, because to her, that goes against the whole idea of faith.
TL,DR: Atheism and and Gnostic Atheism are two different things. I actually find gnostic people of either belief to be incredibly annoying.
I'm an agnostic atheist. One of my best friends is an agnostic theist. She actually resents when people try to claim they have "proof" that God exists, because to her, that goes against the whole idea of faith.
TL,DR: Atheism and and Gnostic Atheism are two different things. I actually find gnostic people of either belief to be incredibly annoying.
#222 to #219
-
cognosceteipsum (01/05/2016) [-] Gnostic and agnostic atheism ultimately have no bearing on a position of faith.
Ragnarfag
Ragnarfag
#225 to #222
-
dancingdoggy (01/05/2016) [-] Did I say they did?
I was trying to say what the picture says - Gnostic = think there's proof for your beliefs, and Agnostic = Can't find certain proofs for your beliefs
I was trying to say what the picture says - Gnostic = think there's proof for your beliefs, and Agnostic = Can't find certain proofs for your beliefs
#228 to #226
-
dancingdoggy (01/05/2016) [-] I didn't say I was making the definitions. I was trying to explain what the words meant.
I'm not really sure what you're arguing about.
I'm not really sure what you're arguing about.
#230 to #228
-
cognosceteipsum (01/05/2016) [-] You seem to not know. Everyone is an agnostic atheist/theist. There are no gnostic theists or atheists.
#231 to #230
-
dancingdoggy (01/05/2016) [-] There are people who believe that they have proof for their beliefs. Even if their beliefs are wrong and I do think those beliefs are wrong, I would argue that there is no proof either way , you can't say that there aren't people who won't try and argue their proff for their side. These people are Gnostic.
#233 to #231
-
cognosceteipsum (01/05/2016) [-] Gnosticism or whatever you want to call it (not the boho mil Cathar ******** ) is not about belief, it is always about knowledge. Therefore the name is really a misnomer.
#235 to #233
-
Sethorein (01/05/2016) [-] Cogy, the dude just saved a viral image, I doubt he really cares that much about gnostic philosophy...
Besides, atheism isn't about agnostics vs gnostics.
There's theist, agnostic, and atheist, perhaps antitheist too.
Theist - have faith in God
Agnostics - have no faith but hope God exists
Atheists - have no faith.
Anti-theists - view faith as destructive.
Besides, atheism isn't about agnostics vs gnostics.
There's theist, agnostic, and atheist, perhaps antitheist too.
Theist - have faith in God
Agnostics - have no faith but hope God exists
Atheists - have no faith.
Anti-theists - view faith as destructive.
#236 to #235
-
cognosceteipsum (01/05/2016) [-] Well alright, so it's like the black box in aeroplanes, never actually been black but still has that name to date
#238 to #236
-
Sethorein (01/05/2016) [-] Uhhh... you lost me there, bud. What are you trying to say is like a black box?
Just reminds me of early behaviourism and thinking the mind was a black box... which has weird correlates to this kinda discussion. After all, they claimed you cannot make claims about the inner workings of the mind without using proper tools to quantify them. In their time no tools existed to quantify cognition so they referred to that dark spot of the literature as the black box.
To all theists arguing that just because we cannot quantify God with current tools does not mean God cannot be quantified, my response is "we leave our claims to be made when we have the data to make them. We do not assume a God before we can quantify him". But that's just an aside...
Just reminds me of early behaviourism and thinking the mind was a black box... which has weird correlates to this kinda discussion. After all, they claimed you cannot make claims about the inner workings of the mind without using proper tools to quantify them. In their time no tools existed to quantify cognition so they referred to that dark spot of the literature as the black box.
To all theists arguing that just because we cannot quantify God with current tools does not mean God cannot be quantified, my response is "we leave our claims to be made when we have the data to make them. We do not assume a God before we can quantify him". But that's just an aside...
#241 to #238
-
cognosceteipsum (01/05/2016) [-] The black box is the name for the thing that records the sounds that are made during the flight, but the thing is, that box is and has always been red.
Likewise, gnostic and agnostic originally is about knowledge and not faith, therefore nobody is actually a gnostic atheist or theist because it would require knowledge of God which no one has. But maybe it's like the box, it holds certain properties but the name may trick you into thinking otherwise. Does that make sense?
Also that's interesting. But now we kinda can quantify consciousness I guess. But. My question is, how the hell did we figure out all this stuff about neurotransmitters?
Likewise, gnostic and agnostic originally is about knowledge and not faith, therefore nobody is actually a gnostic atheist or theist because it would require knowledge of God which no one has. But maybe it's like the box, it holds certain properties but the name may trick you into thinking otherwise. Does that make sense?
Also that's interesting. But now we kinda can quantify consciousness I guess. But. My question is, how the hell did we figure out all this stuff about neurotransmitters?
#247 to #245
-
cognosceteipsum (01/05/2016) [-] Well that's cool. But there's the thing in science where I presume no matter how many observations we will make, how many times it has happened, we can never actually know if something is true or not.
I mean all of the times it happened could have been coincidences, each time, or some kind of anomaly. And the normal thing, whatever it may be, will never be observed nakedly.
I mean all of the times it happened could have been coincidences, each time, or some kind of anomaly. And the normal thing, whatever it may be, will never be observed nakedly.
#252 to #250
-
cognosceteipsum (01/05/2016) [-] Some kind of study of the synthesis only the senses?
#258 to #257
-
cognosceteipsum (01/05/2016) [-] So basically to check which one registers first and so
#234 to #233
-
dancingdoggy (01/05/2016) [-] Ah, I get it.
That's making my inner philosopher contemplate true knowledge versus the belief that we know something.
But I get what you're saying now.
That's making my inner philosopher contemplate true knowledge versus the belief that we know something.
But I get what you're saying now.
#242 to #234
-
cognosceteipsum (01/05/2016) [-] True knowledge is an impossibility as far as I see it. There needn't be anything that actually exists. Well, I guess you could say the illusion of something exists, since we exist.
#243 to #242
-
dancingdoggy (01/05/2016) [-] If we start discussing philosophy now, I'm never going to get to bed.
But, good conversation, internet stranger.
But, good conversation, internet stranger.
#244 to #243
-
cognosceteipsum (01/05/2016) [-] Aight ain't got much more to say anyway. Thanks. Having had mental problems and all kinds of **** made me fall behind 3 years on my edumacation. So, now I'm spending a lot of time with people 2-3 years younger than me. But even people who are my age or even older than me don't seem to care that much for these kinda discussions. Good night, as a GMT 1+ I'mma go get some coffee ;)
#232 to #213
-
Sethorein (01/05/2016) [-] it is not a claim to say nothing is there.
the null assumption is that there is nothing. That's how science works.
It's impossible to prove a negative so no one wastes their time "claiming" negatives, they just assume it until proven wrong.
Atheism is the understanding that there is no proof of God, so we have no right to assume there is a God.
Agnostics are just atheists with hope.
the null assumption is that there is nothing. That's how science works.
It's impossible to prove a negative so no one wastes their time "claiming" negatives, they just assume it until proven wrong.
Atheism is the understanding that there is no proof of God, so we have no right to assume there is a God.
Agnostics are just atheists with hope.
