Does anybody here have an argument against atheism that doesn't include fedoras or autism...

does anybody here have an argument against atheism that doesn't include fedoras or autism? because these aren't arguments.

Other urls found in this thread:

americannaziparty.com/rockwell/materials/books/pdf/ThisTimeTheWorld.pdf
stdcheck.com/blog/stds-you-can-get-while-wearing-a-condom/
health.ny.gov/diseases/aids/consumers/condoms/faqs.htm
theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Atheism neglects spiritual teachings which can help a person build character.

Even in Buddhism, which can be treated secularly, the Atheists typically know nothing. They are usually just edgy nerds who revere science and Jewish psychology over all other explanatory frameworks of subjective experience that human beings have developed.

In short; they're ignorant, edgy teens.

Not an argument, filthy Jew

atheism has nothing to do with spiritual teachings only not believing in god

Nihilism
Not pragmatic
Ignorant of connectedness of personality

Pick one.

And they say inconsistent shit like this.

>does anyone have an argue net that doesn't include fedoras or autism
>t-they're all dumb kids XD
sasuga leafnigger

...

The argument from contingency.

...

Atheism is a decent mindset as long as you are morally centred around not being a prick.

Atheism as a 'group' is retarded because by gravitating towards a group, you are arguably becoming a religion.

It's why the true atheism doesn't exist since its contrary to human nature and human mindsets in general.

Agnosticism is the only true path for enlightenment because its a 'I don't care' mindset and thus you are both atheistic and non-religious at the same time.

Atheists are literally creating a religion for themselves through their actions.

The point of religion flies right over their heads.

The basis of their critique of Christianity is that the supernatural deity and events described in the bible are unprovable and unfalsifiable.

While this is true, it completely misses the point of religion, religion in the main isn't some hypothesis about metaphysics, but a value system, and mode of subjective thought. It isn't concerned with the realm of objectivity but with the realm of subjectivity, and so criticizing religion's lack of objectivity is fucking retarded.

I agree with this. I'm an 'atheist', I don't believe in God.

But I can have a normal conversation about it. I don't hate people for believing in God. And I generally understand why people too.

Creating a group based on disbelief is stupid, that's why the majority of high profile atheists have distanced themselves from the whole thing.

People only came to the conclusion the bible wasn't about objectivity because so many things in the bible are objectively wrong.

If you say so.

Kind of like how Feminism is about equality of genders, by definition, right?

Kinda. But I'd argue that those values came before your religion, not a result of it.

If you look at the history of Christianity, a lot of what we believe is "Christian", it actually record as an old pagan belief that was adopted. There are a lot of Christian traditions that are not in the bible and can easily be traced back to pagan cultures.

And Pagan doesn't even mean that people believe in more than one god per say. It just means that I worship a different God than you.

Maybe you should read the rest of the post and not just the hyperbole tl,dr

This.

They just don't get it. This is a smarter version of my post. Didn't feel like trying this hard, because I really don't care about atheists anymore

>If you look at the history of Christianity, a lot of what we believe is "Christian", it actually record as an old pagan belief that was adopted
This only applies to things like christmas, and some pagan holidays. The actual beliefs are very different, pagans worship idols and perform blood sacrifice.

I don't believe in god because I see grossly insufficient evidence, the bible being wrong and claiming impossible events outs it as a myth, as does its language and nature.

It's fake, base your life around reality instead.

I would say religion is more like feminism, because you believe in something (equal rights for genders) without any evidence (there's logical reasons for gender inequality in the workplace).

Atheism would be like not believing in feminism because there is no evidence of a gender bias. That doesn't mean there isn't a gender bias, but without evidence, there is no reason to believe in it.

I think thye know this, but the only argument against christianity is "hurr god isnt real" I think they purpsefully miss the point to frame their argument.

...

Thou art God
All living creatures are incarnations of existence

Kills birth rates, decreases community bonding, and Increases depression. SAD!

I'm surprised to see more religious threads recently. I thought we had once and for all established on this board, that religion is meaningless, stupid and dangerous even if it may help form a common ground among citizens.

Is this because of all the new shills who are beginning to get red pilled and religion is one major beginners red pill?

So to answer OP's question, it's basically impossible to debate atheism with reason, that's why some desperate theists try to use ad hominems. It's basically proof that they lost the debate a long time ago.

Most Atheists are philosphically illiterate and adhere to scientism, Modern atheists were created by tv scientists (who most are hardly intellectuals) and they usually regurgitate stuff that either A. Contradicts atheism or B. Arguments that have been proven wrong time and time again. The only way I could be an atheist is if I also encompassed nihilism a long with it, its the only logical way I can see myself or anyone being an atheist.

Prove to me that your great great great great grandmother existed.

Not at all. Most of the old testament comes from various Pagan religions, some stories even refer to a different God.

They are just similar in that they collected stories from the same, popular pagan belief.

>Baal was the name of the supreme god worshiped in ancient Canaan and Phoenicia. The practice of Baal worship infiltrated Jewish religious life during the time of the Judges (Judges 3:7), became widespread in Israel during the reign of Ahab (1 Kings 16:31-33) and also affected Judah (2 Chronicles 28:1-2).

You could also argue that the various sects of Christianity, which each adopted a different God into a Christian figure, were also Pagan prior to the Roman's deciding what is really Jesus, what was not.

There's a lot of destroyed literature about Jesus that does not fit the narrative.

The only way to argue morals with people is with a bullet.

No, that's a terrible analogy.

The problem is that Christian Conservatives see Atheism as a liberal idea, and not as a Conservative idea.

They ignore Sam Harris and how much Atheism attacks Islam.

Every single living organism on Earth with two sexes has a great great great great grandmother. That's how life works.

>religion is meaningless, stupid and dangerous even if it may help form a common ground among citizens
How are the negatives greater then the positives? Don't get me wrong, I'm a loose desist and can't stand the organized religion meme but they have higher birthrates and defend their own, unlike the cucked secular west letting in immigrants they know out breed them

The universe's existence requires that it has either always existed, or was created by an outside source; neither option is consistent with our understanding of all physical laws. That being said, either God poofed the universe into existence, or physical laws can be outright and completely broken, which could function in much the same manner as what we commonly refer to as God, right now.

To assume that any of those things are more likely not to involve a creator than to involve one has no logical basis. If you want to pretend to be logical, like most fedoras, you should be agnostic.

That might be true, I've seen many role playing christians on this board. I guess they pretend to be christian, because they link it to some other conservative values and it gives them some kind of comfy nostalgic feeling.

But christianity has long perished, our new enemy is islam now and it is an even greater enemy, those guys are pretty retarded and stubborn. I'm not sure if we can kill that idiology without gassing them all.

it kills free thinking and innovation. it destroys your freedoms and if you are lucky it kills you for the most retarded reasons. There are other ways to increase birthrates and group think. Just look on how the communists manage on basically patriotism even with a completely fucked up system.

I would never respect a God which allowed itself to spawn Sup Forums and specifically Sup Forums.

Atheists are more philosophically literate than Christians that treat one book like it's the word of god.

I think they see christianity as a banner under which, historically, the western world was united and conservative/ family values spread. I don't believe that these people actually believe in god per se, they only follow the message.

What is it with you autists? You can be a conservative and value families without being a christian.

This weird absolutist black and white way of viewing the world is guaranteed the realm of the retarded. If you weren't retarded, you'd be able to see that these things are way more nuanced than that.

>it kills free thinking and innovation. it destroys your freedoms and if you are lucky it kills you for the most retarded reasons.
Well it doesn't have too. And many non religious people are like that anyway.
>just look at how communists manage...patriotism
Which example specifically? Afaik most communists wherever they were actually hate their shit, OR are completely brainwashed to the point of it being a godless religion (North Korea) and it destroyed their free thinking, innovation, and is likely to get them killed in a stupid way...

>The only way I could be an atheist is if I also encompassed nihilism a long with it
I think this is the correct answer, the way I see spirituality is though fulfilling it's just a coping mechanism (a great one), but it accomplishes its task and gives the room for people to find meaning on their lives and that's fine

I agree about Islam.

My only major issue with Christians is they justify the existence of a deity telling them what to do.

When three people are in a room, and two people have their own God that tells them what to believe in, it's difficult for a different two to convince the third that his God is clearly wrong.

Basically, I can't argue against Islam in the fact that Allah obviously doesn't exist because Christian won't give up their notion that Jesus is coming back.

Since we have to mutually agree that magic is possible and Gods could be real, are argument become a whole lot more limited.

Actually user autists lean heavily atheist.

Think about that for a second, if people have a differant brain than you, magically, they don't believe in god.

Must mean god has something to do with your brain. Isn't he supposed to be omnipotent and not a result of chemicals in the brain? Really makes you think.

AQ = Autism Quotient

it doesnt matter if god existed or not, it doesnt explain anything, it only redirects the question. If god created the universe, the question automatically becomes who created god and his realm. Then you are exactly at the same position as before.

Christianity certainly had some value, but it's too late, you can't expect people still to believe in that shit. Christianity is mostly based on greek philosophy, so I see now reason why we couldnt make something new and less retarded out of it.

haha yeah you are right with the communism thing. I guess japan would be a better example. They have so many gods that nobody really gives a shit what anybody believes and they really care about their country. I guess they only need to find out how to artificially make babies for it to work again.

There was no substantive difference between the tl;dr and the rest of the post

Atheism is okay as long as people don't use it as an excuse to be a degenerate.

I wasn't speaking literally with the autism part, I meant the retarded part though. Not being able to see beyond black and white dichotomies is a trademark characteristic of stupid people. It takes intelligence to understand complexity and nuance compared to oversimplifications.

Faith is a personal choice. Can't really argue for or against it.

Are they really all that patriotic? I thought they had high depression/suicide rates do to work/stress. Besides come older politicians talking about countering China how patriotic are the younger generation? At leat they're keeping their borders closed but that's just old fashioned """racism""", which isn't limited to religious or non. Again I wouldn't spoon feed babies b.s. so to avoid but an easy cop out is "I believe God let people develop their own religions and interpret him as they needed depending on their historic context" that way my god is always right and theirs are viewed through a distorted lens. They can't win.
But that's only for this time and place. I'd imagine it would be different in earlier times when there was nothing but religion and autists argued about how many angels could dance on the head of a pin. How is AQ measured?

They are both philosophically stunted desu senpai

Or that religion has more to do with your social status? People who lack social skills tend to not believe follow group think, and more than likely default to "null", because there is no reason to believe in something if you are not surrounded by people pressuring you to believe.

Considering my post said atheists don't see the subjective merits of religions... Yea, I'm not surprised you see no difference.

What's philosophically stunted about not believing in Gods?

I'm an atheist and the major fault I've found in many atheists' philosophy is that they reject christian culture because it's "founded on lies". While it was founded on lies, like all religions the person who started it knew they were lying, but doing so for the good of mankind. You see religion is not about god, it's about controlling your population and making them more productive, happy, and courageous. It takes an extremely insightful mind to see under the facade of religion for the social engineering marvel that it is. Christianity is by far the best religion for living in peace with the rest of our world and advancing technologically, Islam is quite the opposite.

Organized religion provides a moral framework for society. Whether you like that framework or not, non-secular societies are more cohesive.

It's not on purpose, it's just poor education.

I kinda agree, but Christianity was more about controlling people during the dark ages, when they often predicted the return of Jesus and it never happened.

Christianity worships the Return of Jesus and the apocalypse. It's a cult focused on the end of times.

Atheism is lazy philosophy.
To be arrogant enough to say that god doesn't exist is the talk of a mental midget that doesn't scratch far beyond the surface of things.

If you don't know the answer to a question you don't say "Well I believe" like a fucking tool, you say "I don't know the answer to that question at this time"
I still haven't decided who is more close minded atheists, or Christians.
It's pretty close though.

Also although I'm not necessarily arguing it until I learn more, it could be people's belief system alters where they impact on the AQ scale, otherwise there should just be a divide between religious and not. Also I think religion is more determined by how people are raised, a Hindu isn't going to switch to Judaism because they aren't autistic.

Jesus Christ, this man is not suitable for the role of President. He is a fanatic and a racist pig, and belongs in jail.

There's grey area between agnostic and atheist.

I'm not saying god or gods aren't real, I just don't believe they are. If you want to be specific, it's called agnostic atheism. I just go with atheist because I think it's more accurate.

I see no evidence for gods and our surroundings can be explained without them, I'm just going to assume they aren't real.

The vast majority of professional philosophers are atheists. I guess they must be "philosophically stunted" because some guy on Sup Forums said so

Atheist think that you can be have secular morals and think morals are culturally reletive but fail to explain why secular morals always end up being the same as theological morals. Basic morality is things that make you happy are good. The ultimate happiness is the ultimate good. God is the ultimate happiness and the ultimate good.

Secular moralists are pursuing the same good as religious moralist but can not achieve the ultimate morality.

>Islam is quite the opposite.
It depends on how you practice Islam. For some reason religious texts can mean whatever the hell people want them to mean

My secular morals are not the same as theological morals, there's quite a large degree of deviation, especially with views on sexuality.

>I'm just going to assume they aren't real.
This is the exact reason I say it's lazy philosophy. This is what it essentially boils down to every time. Either this, or just good old generic autistic contrarianism.

More lazy philosophy. You're appealing to authority. If you actually studied philosophy at all you would realize this is a logical fallacy, and it makes you look like an idiot.
>South American intellectuals.

Give it time and a few stds and your ideas on sexuality will change.

Well in his defense he was talking about the average atheist and their philosophical depth, not professional philosophers beliefs. I can say most southerners weren't slave owners, but most slave owners were southerners and they're both true

>God is the ultimate happiness and the ultimate good.

Lmao

Wear a condom dipshit and stop fucking prostitutes. Just cause you were a retard doesn't mean you can ruin my fun

Always funny that you faggots have never heard of condoms or common sense when it comes to sex. Probably because you're not having sex.

It's not lazy philosophy, there is literally no way of knowing for sure. The lack of evidence says that gods are probably not real, so I'm going with that. It doesn't need to be more complex than that.

Subjective. Sex is handled many different was depending on the religion. From temple prostitution, to pregnant girls having sex with many partners because they need more life force, to complete celibacy.

Do I smell a deist? We have a way of dealing with deists

Even if it was, so what? In most religions the beliefs came after the value set, and since most whites, let alone shitskins, can't philosophy, religion is a very good societal device at creating a moral code for people.

Atheists like Dan dennet, Michael schumer, and Richard Dawkins have all argued that religion is a product of human biology and that society can now move on without it, which is always struck me as goofy coming from an evolutionary biologist. Saying that religion is unnecessary now because of technological progress, is the definition of a current year argument, society has been getting better for a few hundred years, should we have lost it then? What about during the roaring twenties? The fiftie? The space age? What's so special about the current time that makes him believe that it's okay for humanity to override biological impulses? it's also silly of him to think that you can get rid of religion without something else filling the void, for centuries the western world got along fine when it was overwhelmingly Christian, so it hasn't had that much of a detrimental negative impact on the west, so what would you fill the vacuum left by religion with? Also his point that it was an evolutionary crutch, but not

It also always annoyed me when Dawkins, jillete, Harris, or hitchens say/said that they could be good without God/religion, because they had a moral compass without realizing that the moral code in the west had its inception in Christianity.

You fucking retard. Read your own post. You claimed atheism is a view of the "philosophically stunted", which would mean you disregard nearly the entirety of actual contemporary philosophy. You provided no justification for your dumbass belief, my post was in no way a fallacy.

>Not an argument
You can and will say that as a response to everything. 2/10 lift your game.

He said atheism is a view for the "philosophically stunted". In no way he provides argumentation behind this retarded claim, he merely asserts it.

>Atheism is a decent mindset as long as you are morally centred around not being a prick.
Can't that be said for being religious as well though? Religious or not if you're a prick, you're a prick. We see this phenomenon literally every day in these religion threads, loads of asshole atheists and theists making it really unpleasant for all the nice reasonable people.

Right, and my lack of belief in celibacy or the need to power up pregnant chicks with cum is incongruous with theological morals.

Woah man that's crazy, I've never seen anyone on Sup Forums make a bold claim without any support.

I think everyone can agree that Christianity/buddhism generally promites values that are helpful to society, yes?
As to the actual argument of if god is real, its just a dumb circlejerk of "you cant prove god is real" and "well you cant prove he isnt" The truth is it is a nonscientific subject, and applying the scientific method to its logical conclusion only results the the idiotic argument mentioned above. Atheists are made fun of because they millitantly refuse to even think about the benefits of religion, and just go "lol u made the claim so u have the burden if proof blah blah blah" Normally they would be correct in that argument, but I dont think anyone is trying to scientifically prove god is real, so noone is making a scientific 'claim' and thus there is no burden of proof. But people just refuse to think that far, and these threads just devolve into people arguing on the basis of a scientific debate to a subject that sits outside the realm of science

>16th century French athéisme, from athée (“atheist”), a loan from Ancient Greek ἄθεος (átheos, “godless”), from ἀ- (a-, “without”) + θεός (theós, “deity, god”). First English attestation dates to 1587 (OED).

The word atheist litearlly means without god, that's it. If you're without god, you're an atheist (sorry "agnostics"). Meanwhile with feminism it very obviously just refers to the female gender (hence the fem part) making any claim it obviously means equality just sound ridiculous, that would be egalitarianism.

Since then, I have come still further along the road of understanding and realize that atheism is as bad as the
rantings of the religious fanatic. The latter says, "I was one of the luckiest human beings on earth and was born
into the only true religion. All the rest of you are damned sinners." The atheist makes the equally conceited
statement: "I have examined the entire universe and everything in it and am certain that there is nothing I cannot
know!"

From americannaziparty.com/rockwell/materials/books/pdf/ThisTimeTheWorld.pdf

>I'm not sure if we can kill that idiology without gassing them all.

Religious people have more kids, so enfranchising women+ living in a post Christian society is a dangerous cocktail if your fighting a religious people that have kids than you at a much higher rate, even though it'd be better if you won, demography is destiny and they have the numbers on their side

>hur durr
stdcheck.com/blog/stds-you-can-get-while-wearing-a-condom/
Not to mention how much more likely promiscuous girls are to cheat, be depressed etc. Just statistics though live your lives how you want, good judgement is probably more important than "morals"
anecdotal evidence but most atheists I know aren't philosophical. I don't know any high tier "Atheist Philosopher Kings"

Ive had my share of sex and the most enjoyable is with your wife, no condom is the best.

Athiesm is goat because the burden of proof lies on theologiniggers.
Why waste your time putting faith into something that has so consistently failed to provide any substantial proof and has a laughable track record compared to evodence based reasoning aka science?
Anybody who falls for the meme of edgy athiest fedora is gullible and insecure, why would you distance yourself from an ideological stance because of a percieved image it can give you?

Aside from the stereo types, it's truly the best, you're still open to adopt all good morals even religion can teach you, such as the golden rule, and you're not prohibited from acts such as premarital sex because of bullshit laws, it's top tier.

I blame the education system personally, people become so obsessed with getting things "right" due to all the endless testing so they can't get their heads around the idea that being right isn't actually the most important thing in the world, living a good life is.

I've often heard atheists argue that being atheist is objectively better because you don't waste your time with church which is obviously pointless if god doesn't exist, but religious people draw all sorts of benefits from going to church that aren't dependent on god's existence at all. Also any social interaction is inherently good, we're social creatures after all and developing good social skills is more of an asset in life then literally any other.

Because most people aren't "philosophical" in the first place. This in no way entails atheism is "philosophically stunted".

health.ny.gov/diseases/aids/consumers/condoms/faqs.htm
>Whether you use latex male condoms or female condoms, they are both very effective in preventing HIV and many other STDs when used the right way every time. Condoms may prevent the spread of other STDs, like the Human Papillomavirus (HPV, genital or venereal warts) or genital herpes, only when the condom covers the infected areas or sores.

Use latex faggot

>What is it with you autists? You can be a conservative and value families without being a christian.

Sure, but nothing is codifying the value set as heavy as religion would.

>all diseases with visible sores or HPV which everyone and their mother is vaccinated for

Lol the clueless ignorance about sex on this board is one of the funniest things on the internet.

If you don't want to get an STD, you don't have to get an STD. How many dozens of chicks or thousands of times is it going to take for me to get an STD user?

>Even if it was, so what?

It just proves that Christianity has nothing to do with any of the traits people associate it with.

I guess you missed their point. We don't need to fill the vacuum, religion doesn't actually do anything in a modern society.
Most people know that religion doesn't cure disease.
Most people know that God doesn't speak them in their sleep
Most people know Jesus isn't actually going to return in their lifetime, and the world isn't actually going to come to an end.

What Christianity is on paper, what we associate with Christianity (things that are not actually Christian, like Christmas and law) and how people behave is enough evidence to support that traditional religion no longer exists.

Most people have a "personal" God, and their own "personal" interpretation of the Bible.

Where traditional religion DOES exist, is Islam. That's where you actually take your religion literally. The result is barbaric 10th century behaviour.

When Christian behave the same way and start preaching about the world coming to an end (which is the bases of the Christian faith), they get similar ridicule.
theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/06/end-of-world-7-october-ebible-fellowship


And this ALWAYS happens, but being really good before Jesus returns generally has far less impact than Muhammad recommending killing everyone that doesn't agree.

So everyone's philosophically stunted? How's about we all just stop with the generalizations before we say things even more idiotic then that.

This board has been flooded with newfags from reddit and "muh heritage" white nationalists.
There was an ironic resistance to atheism because of the fedora memes, but the newfags thought people were being serious. I've seen about a dozen posts by people who claim to have converted to Catholocism because they thought people were genuinely locking them on an anonymous imageboard.

Explain to me how an atheistic society avoids the paradox of hedonism

>I've seen about a dozen posts by people who claim to have converted to Catholocism because they thought people were genuinely locking them on an anonymous imageboard.

Oh it's more than just a dozen user. In every thread on the subject I see people talk about how Sup Forums made them religious, and it started happening exactly when the fedora meme caught on here.

It's fucking hilarious.

> I just go with atheist because I think it's more accurate.
Nah atheist is the objectively better term because agnosticism doesn't actually deal with religion specifically, to use it as your answer to a question on your religious beliefs is simply an inaccurate use of the word, also theists can be agnostic too so even on that particular subject you're not using it accurately. "Agnostics" are real silly billys.

Define hedonism chief.

>implying that ad hominem fashion arguments aren't super effective
get out

Exactly, that's why I use it instead of agnostic. I don't believe in gods.

No shit retards what part of "good judgment" in my post did you two not understand?