Words of encouragement from scientism

No, I don't actually. I don't believe in God, just like I don't believe in blood-letting as a cure-all or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. As far as I can tell, both atheists and agnostics don't believe in God in exactly the same way - they see no reason to do so. But some people use the word "agnostic" in order to bypass the corollary believers always seem to want to add..."and I'm close-minded about this". This idea that atheists take it on faith that there is no God is just one of those straw men believers seem to insist on using in order to draw a false equivalence.

People don't believe stuff without evidence (i.e. "faith") without it offering up something for them. It might not always be "comfort", but it is one of the most common reasons which seems to pop up. That and "palatability".

Linda

Linda, while I wasn't directing my last post at you exclusively, you were clearly part of the motivation.

See the above.  Any move from agnostic to atheist requires faith since science is of no use in making the atheist case.  Again, lack of evidence does not equate to non-existence.  If one is into semantics they can find a word other than faith but that word can't be science.

Yeah, those are the original definitions. They don't make much sense or seem to represent how the words are used, though.

As an example, which of those definitions would you use to describe your feelings about Thor?

Linda

I couldn't use atheism because I believe in God and I couldn't use agnosticism with regards Thor because I believe there is no Thor.  I also accept that it is a belief and that, although it is based on reason, there is a slim theoretical chance that something exists that one might call Thor.  My personal certainty in my own God negates the possibility in my mind of course, but it doesn't negate Thor himself, should he actually exist.

Would it be okay to say you are an atheist with respect to Thor? When atheism comes up it’s often with respect to a specific god anyways. Would confined atheism be reasonable to you?

It’s not a trick question - I’m looking to understand the way you think about the word. 

Linda

I can't really see the word applying to an individual god but if I could, then yes, I would call myself an atheist in that respect.  To me, the term means that you don't believe in any god so I wouldn't use it that way.

It takes some determination to ignore thousands of (resuscitated) credible witnesses  who've all seen and experienced what they're certain is a divine intelligence. The changes in these people are remarkable and lasting, something not attributable to hallucination, we are told.  

Call it whatever you like (with due respect) but it seems highly unlikely that whatever it is, it's the last gasp of misfiring brain cells.

Are we really supposed to believe that our resident sceptics would experience it any differently or be changed any less?

That sentence isn't saying that atheists believe there is no God, and that belief is not faith-based. That sentence is saying that atheists don't believe there is no God...at least not in any way that is different from you saying there is no Thor.

But my disbelief in Thor is, indeed, faith-based.  I have no scientific proof on which to assert Thor doesn't exist.  I actually can't speak to his existence one way or the other without resorting to an "ism" being materialism or Nordic multi-theism.

Both of us might view this as a silly example, made sillier still if we substituted the spaghetti monster.

However, the point remains the same: A materialist has no stronger ground on which to disbelieve in the existence of God/meaning/spirit/soul than the theist (or any of the wide range of extended consciousness 'isms').  The materialists appeal to science to bolster his or her view is simply an appeal of faith: Faith that science will ultimately prove materialism to be true.

Faith that science will ultimately prove materialism to be true.

There must be an official logical fallacy there - we only look at physical matter so our results are physical, proving that matter is all there is.