Skeptic groups trying to marginalize atheists

[Doktor Howl]

It's nice to see some people who share my view, I always get accused of fence sitting when I try to explain my view. As dok said, it cannot be tested via the scientific method so to me it would be violating intellecual honesty to assume a position. 
It's not like either position should they be true changes anything at all.

Thing is, when a particular position (ie, skepticism) becomes popular or even well-known, fanatics in search of a cause line right up to jump in.  Within 6 months at best, if you aren't in complete agreement with the fanatics' take on the subject (or whatever they've hijacked it into), then you're a fucking blasphemer, and all of their efforts will be put into attacking you until you change your tune or leave.

It's a monkey thing.

[Triple Zero]

It's nice to see some people who share my view, I always get accused of fence sitting when I try to explain my view. As dok said, it cannot be tested via the scientific method so to me it would be violating intellecual honesty to assume a position. 
It's not like either position should they be true changes anything at all.

I'd also be in complete agreement, especially on the intellectual honesty part, if I were to be completely honest and rational about it.

Fact of the matter is, I usually find myself unable to answer the question with a straight face, one way or another.

Hence, Discordianism.

[the last yatto]

What's it called when you believe in god but think he's dead

[Precious Moments Zalgo]

I've always been one of those that find militant atheists just as irritating as their theist counterparts.

Yeah, but I think they are even more fun to troll.  They always seem to be itching for an e-fight at the slightest whiff of religious sentiment.

I consider myself agnostic only because the word 'god' doesn't have a proper definition, its not rooted to any observable effect or quality that can be tested so to debate for or against the existence of one is meaningless and goes against intellectual honesty.

If asked whether I believe in "god", I can't answer without knowing what the asker means by that word.  If by "believe in god", they mean do I feel a sense of awe and reverence when I consider the majesty and splendor of the universe, then yes.  If they mean do I believe there is a healing power within ourselves that we can get in touch with through meditation, prayer, or visualization, then yes again.  If they mean do I believe there is an invisible man who lives on a cloud, watches me when I pee, and sentences me to eternal torment if I shake one too many times when I'm done, then no.

[Cainad (dec.)]

Pretty sure Dok's hammer found the nail's head.

"No evidence of God" is not the same thing as "Evidence of no God."


Cainad,
trying to be all succinct and witty and shit

[Elder Iptuous]

I agree with what has been said regarding the tendancies of atheists to be self defeating as useful skeptics, but it strikes me as odd that you can say one can't be a skeptical atheist.  the non-existence of god can be taken as an article of belief without being an article of faith by virtue of the extreme improbability of a sky daddy in conjunction with lack of any evidence.

I would guess that if most of the atheists were to come in contact with some tremendous power of proportions that dwarf anything in their imagination, and it claimed to be god, they would become true believers. (despite the fact that it isn't really iron clad proof that what they experienced was the alpha and the omega...)
This is as opposed to what the religious zealots might do if they encountered a similar entity that made a claim counter to their articles of faith.  i.e. they might think it was a test, or the devil, or what-not...

[Doktor Howl]

I agree with what has been said regarding the tendancies of atheists to be self defeating as useful skeptics, but it strikes me as odd that you can say one can't be a skeptical atheist. 

You can be a skeptical WICCAN for all I give a shit.

But if you're an atheist, then you aren't a skeptic with any credibility concerning religion.  You can still pick on truthers, though.

[Kai]

What's it called when you believe in god but think he's dead

Roman Catholicism.

[Elder Iptuous]

Dok, maybe it's my understanding of the terms.
i would have said that if someone were to claim, "given my experiences, i do not see any reason to believe in a deity, and given the seeming absurdity of the claim, i am willing to say that i do not believe in a deity", they would be an atheist,  whereas an agnostic would adamantly stick to the position of "i cannot know whether there is a deity or not, and therefore do not have any belief one way or the other"
both reasonable positions, and both that wouldn't blow skepticism cred in my estimation.

also, do you think the hypothetical that i put out in my previous post is naive, or doesn't illustrate a difference for some reason?

(personally, i am of the same mind as Faust, in that the term is meaningless as nobody can ever nail down the definition of 'god' when pressed on the topic...)

[Doktor Howl]

Dok, maybe it's my understanding of the terms.
i would have said that if someone were to claim, "given my experiences, i do not see any reason to believe in a deity, and given the seeming absurdity of the claim, i am willing to say that i do not believe in a deity", they would be an atheist,  whereas an agnostic would adamantly stick to the position of "i cannot know whether there is a deity or not, and therefore do not have any belief one way or the other"
both reasonable positions, and both that wouldn't blow skepticism cred in my estimation.

also, do you think the hypothetical that i put out in my previous post is naive, or doesn't illustrate a difference for some reason?

(personally, i am of the same mind as Faust, in that the term is meaningless as nobody can ever nail down the definition of 'god' when pressed on the topic...)

1.  Absurdity isn't evidence of absence (the proof of which is that the US government is absurd as fuck, yet seems to exist).  Either you base your beliefs on evidence, or you don't.  If you don't, you're not really a skeptic.

2.  Atheists base their (usually shrill) beliefs on the idea that absence of evidence is evidence of absence, which is patently a fallacy.

If you say "Given my experiences, I do not see any reason to believe in a deity, and given the seeming absurdity of the claim, I am willing to say that i do not believe in a deity", then great.  You're an atheist.  And you might even be a skeptic...On any other subject.

[Kai]

What is this god thing you're all talking about? I don't have a clue.

Time to change the subject, maybe?

[Precious Moments Zalgo]

But if you're an atheist, then you aren't a skeptic with any credibility concerning religion.  You can still pick on truthers, though.

Heh.

PMZ,
has a friend who is both an atheist and a truther.  Oh, and also against vaccines.

[Doktor Howl]

What is this god thing you're all talking about? I don't have a clue.

Time to change the subject, maybe?

God is this really big dude with an anger management problem.  His kid was pretty cool, but he fell in with a bad crowd, and now apparently hates homosexuals.  Or so I am told by - I shit you not - The Cool Church.

http://www.thecoolchurch.com/

Run by a jackass named David Mcallister, who is at once a self-loathing homosexual, and a horrible example of a mid-life crisis gone horribly horribly wrong.

He's a Tucson legend.  And by "legend", I mean, "target for horrible pranks".

[Doktor Howl]

But if you're an atheist, then you aren't a skeptic with any credibility concerning religion.  You can still pick on truthers, though.

Heh.

PMZ,
has a friend who is both an atheist and a truther.  Oh, and also against vaccines.

Wow.  That's like the trifecta of poor logic.

[Iason Ouabache]

Dok, maybe it's my understanding of the terms.
i would have said that if someone were to claim, "given my experiences, i do not see any reason to believe in a deity, and given the seeming absurdity of the claim, i am willing to say that i do not believe in a deity", they would be an atheist,  whereas an agnostic would adamantly stick to the position of "i cannot know whether there is a deity or not, and therefore do not have any belief one way or the other"
both reasonable positions, and both that wouldn't blow skepticism cred in my estimation.

Yeah, this. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. Nothing more, nothing less. Most agnostics are also atheists because they don't have a belief in any gods. Some people take it too far and become anti-theists. Fuck those guys.