Is there a God of atheism?

[Emily Lake]

I basically agree that atheists don't have Gods that they are aware of, but I think that many if not most atheists have "God substitutes." That is, atheists have idols of sorts that they use to replace God and religion with.

Such as?

I asked this already, and you just pretended like you didn't see it. What sort of "idols" do you think atheists have? In what way do atheists employ "god substitutes"?

 

[Shadowy Man]

I think people are losing sight of the big picture and allowing themselves to be distracted by whatever tangent this fool throws in front of us. There is no God of atheism. If someone wants to argue there is, hold their feet to the fire and make them show their work.

He wants us to believe in a circle with corners,,,. As least that’s what I think he wants.

He doesn’t want to commit to definitions that preclude his conclusions. So, we just have to open up our thinking so that atheists can believe in gods, atheism can be a religion, bachelors can be married, circles can have corners, etc. he doesn’t seem to want us to take the “easy way out” and say these things can’t be true by definition.

Shad, if I pay you $1,000, will you stop attacking me and stick with the subject?

Sure. That'd be worth it. PM me and I'll give you an address to which you can send a cashier's check.

But, seriously, I am sorry you see it as an "attack". I'm just trying to understand your logic and it seems that you are trying hard to define atheism as just another religion, and accuse atheists of still believing in gods, just replacing the god of other religions with some other 'deity' worthy of worship.

It seems you just don't understand the way I, and other atheists here, think about the subject.

Religion and gods do not come up in my everyday life. The only exposure I really get to those subjects are on this very forum. If I stopped posting here I figure I'd pretty much never think about gods at all.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I think people are losing sight of the big picture and allowing themselves to be distracted by whatever tangent this fool throws in front of us.

The tangents come up whenever he is cornered.

Actually, the whole business of corners on a circle was raised by Shadowy Man on Post #2. It was there that he asked:

Are there corners on a circle?

So will you admit you're wrong by accusing me of coming up with tangents? Something I never did but that Shad is guilty of?

I was attempting a simple analogy to answer your question. I guess a simple "no" would have been better.

But, speaking of tangents: A corner of a polygon does not have a well-defined tangent, whereas each point on a circle has a well-defined tangent; therefore a circle doesn't have corners, like a polygon does.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I basically agree that atheists don't have Gods that they are aware of, but I think that many if not most atheists have "God substitutes." That is, atheists have idols of sorts that they use to replace God and religion with.

Such as?

I asked this already, and you just pretended like you didn't see it. What sort of "idols" do you think atheists have? In what way do atheists employ "god substitutes"?

You just need to stretch the definitions of "idol" and "god". Then we can see how atheists simply replace "God" with another "god", therefore, atheism is a religion.

 

[Emily Lake]

Could you explain what you mean by "God substitutes"?

Absolutely! Typical "God substitutes" include things like people we see as heroes or idols. Such heroes or idols can be individuals or groups. We can also use things like science or philosophy to replace God with. I remember a man I know who was seeking a "higher power" which turned out to be psychology.

I disagree. People can have heroes regardless of whether or not they believe in a deity. Virtually all religionists have people they view as idols or heroes, in addition to the deity they accept as a cornerstone of their religion. Since a religionist and an atheist are equally likely to view Martin Luther King Jr. as a hero (for example), then holding a human being in veneration is not a substitute for a deity.

Science is not a god substitute. I agree that it can replace a deity, but it's not a substitute for a deity. Science is based on testable hypotheses, objective observation, and proof. All of those things will displace the role that a deity holds. And again, this isn't limited to atheists, nor do atheists raise science to a level of worship akin to that held by deities within religions. For example, almost every religionist accepts that our planet revolves around the sun, and that the planets aren't painted on a some magical dome surrounding a flat earth. Scientific knowledge - testable and falsifiable evidence - has replaced the role previously held by deities, and has done so for both religionists and atheists.

 

[ideologyhunter]

This is getting dumber and dumberer, but what did anyone expect?
Look, I love Otis Redding -- he brought more power and authority to the stage than any other ten singers I can think of. He taught Respect and Security and My Lover's Prayer and capped it all with Amen.
But Otis wasn't a god. He couldn't fly.

 

[Gospel]

But Otis wasn't a god. He couldn't fly.

If the ability to fly is the yardstick for divinity, you owe almighty Otis an apology. He flew through the cosmos at 828,000 kilometers per hour for 26 years to abandon this cursed realm.

 

[Emily Lake]

But Otis wasn't a god. He couldn't fly.

If the ability to fly is the yardstick for divinity, you owe almighty Otis an apology. He flew through the cosmos at 828,000 kilometers per hour for 26 years to abandon this cursed realm.

Well hell. I was going to try something or other about Redding being fly... but your post is way better than anything I could come up with.

 

[Tigers!]

Oddly (or perhaps not) there actually is a religious sect, mostly in Georgia (where Stalin was born), who do worship Stalin as a God.

Is that Georgia, Caucasus Mountains or Georgia, USA? (I know where Stalin was born but some people are stupid)
Asking for a friend.

 

[Tigers!]

I basically agree that atheists don't have Gods that they are aware of, but I think that many if not most atheists have "God substitutes." That is, atheists have idols of sorts that they use to replace God and religion with.

Such as?

I asked this already, and you just pretended like you didn't see it. What sort of "idols" do you think atheists have? In what way do atheists employ "god substitutes"?

Themselves, money, power, sport, some sort of 'ism', good health etc.
The list is endless.

 

[Gospel]

There is no god of atheism.
No definition of “god” that is recognizable by any theist is a part of the world of atheists.

Tricksy clever wordplay is defined, for atheism, as humor or attempted humor. Not as god.


Is there a god of atheism?
No. By definition.

I basically agree that atheists don't have Gods that they are aware of, but I think that many if not most atheists have "God substitutes." That is, atheists have idols of sorts that they use to replace God and religion with.

Granting that's the case, my deity doesn't assert exclusivity as the sole divine entity. This, I believe, is a step up from a deity who demands adulation out of ego, lashes out in jealousy , and resorts to cataclysmic abortion measures like floods and plagues to punish noncompliance with directives that could be deemed both ethically questionable & impossible to swallow like a unicorn between two slices of wonder bread.

 

[Tigers!]

Science is not a god substitute. I agree that it can replace a deity, but it's not a substitute for a deity. Science is based on testable hypotheses, objective observation, and proof. All of those things will displace the role that a deity holds. And again, this isn't limited to atheists, nor do atheists raise science to a level of worship akin to that held by deities within religions.

Its a fine line between replacement and substitution. It it works then fine. if not keep looking.

 

[gmbteach]

You're playing armchair psycholgist with Our Armchair Psychologist. God knows where that will lead.

Circle with edges…. That’s the new god…

 

[gmbteach]

Absolutely! Typical "God substitutes" include things like people we see as heroes or idols. Such heroes or idols can be individuals or groups. We can also use things like science or philosophy to replace God with. I remember a man I know who was seeking a "higher power" which turned out to be psychology.

So because I admire Carl Sagan, he's a substitute God to me?

Only if the meaning of "God" becomes stretched to meaningless, I think.

Do you worship Carl Sagan? Do you believe that he can help you in your daily life (despite being dead)? Do you think that his writings are perfect and cannot contain any mistakes or inaccuracies?

I rather doubt it.

Sagan was entertaining, well informed, and very good at helping others to become better informed about reality. But he wasn't a God in any sense, and he doubtless made some mistakes - because everyone makes mistakes* - and so it would be the height of foolishness to accept his word for anything, without checking against the reality he purports to describe.

Nullius in Verba, as they say at the Royal Society.







* Even me. I made a mistake once; I thought I was wrong about something, but it turned out that I wasn't.

there was one time….and it was in front of your sister so I have a witness….

 

[Shadowy Man]

I basically agree that atheists don't have Gods that they are aware of, but I think that many if not most atheists have "God substitutes." That is, atheists have idols of sorts that they use to replace God and religion with.

Such as?

I asked this already, and you just pretended like you didn't see it. What sort of "idols" do you think atheists have? In what way do atheists employ "god substitutes"?

Themselves, money, power, sport, some sort of 'ism', good health etc.
The list is endless.

Sure, but by calling it a "god substitute" we are at least agreeing that they aren't "gods". Yes?

The whole line of argument being presented here (and in other threads) by Unknown Soldier seems to be that if a semantic similarity can be made between two concepts, we might as well state that the concepts are actually the same. If that's not the point then I'm not sure what the point is in saying that atheists, though they don't believe in god, may have other things that they hold in high regard in a similar fashion to how theists regard their gods. Is there supposed to be some kind of surprising conclusion there? So what?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I think people are losing sight of the big picture and allowing themselves to be distracted by whatever tangent this fool throws in front of us.

The tangents come up whenever he is cornered.

Actually, the whole business of corners on a circle was raised by Shadowy Man on Post #2. It was there that he asked:

Are there corners on a circle?

So will you admit you're wrong by accusing me of coming up with tangents? Something I never did but that Shad is guilty of?

That point was "on top of" your head: there are an infinite number of tangents to a circle.

 

[DBT]

There is no god of atheism.
No definition of “god” that is recognizable by any theist is a part of the world of atheists.

Tricksy clever wordplay is defined, for atheism, as humor or attempted humor. Not as god.


Is there a god of atheism?
No. By definition.

I basically agree that atheists don't have Gods that they are aware of, but I think that many if not most atheists have "God substitutes." That is, atheists have idols of sorts that they use to replace God and religion with.

Catagories don't count?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

A corner of a polygon does not have a well-defined tangent

In calculus we learn that a "corner" on a curve has an undefined tangent--it's not just a case of not being well defined. For example, if we graph the function f(x) = |x|, the curve has a V-shape with a sharp corner at x = 0. The derivative is f'(x) = x/|x|. The slope of the curve at x = 0 is then f'(0) = 0/|0| which is undefined. In other words, the tangent line to the curve at x = 0 is undefined.

...whereas each point on a circle has a well-defined tangent...

That is correct depending on what you mean by "tangent." The equation of a circle on the Cartesian plane with its center at the origin and radius r is x^2 + y^2 = r^2. The function for the upper-half of this is f(x) = √(r^2 - x^2), and its derivative is f'(x) = -x/√(r^2 - x^2). Note that when x = r, then f'(r) involves division by 0. That means that the derivative and hence the slope of the tangent line at x = r is undefined. The tangent line is vertical.

...therefore a circle doesn't have corners, like a polygon does.

Yes, circles don't have corners, but like I've already explained, the set of points that make up a circle can include points that are vertices on other curves. In fact, you can trace out an entire circle using vertices on right triangles.

So it seems that you have the basic concepts about right, but you're not adept at communicating what you mean. To say there are no corner points on a circle is not the same as saying a circle has no corners.

 

[EricH]

Oddly (or perhaps not) there actually is a religious sect, mostly in Georgia (where Stalin was born), who do worship Stalin as a God.

Is that Georgia, Caucasus Mountains or Georgia, USA? (I know where Stalin was born but some people are stupid)
Asking for a friend.

In Georgia USA they worship Kirby Smart as a god that has tamed the evil Nick Satan across the border in Alabama.

 

[bilby]

Oddly (or perhaps not) there actually is a religious sect, mostly in Georgia (where Stalin was born), who do worship Stalin as a God.

Is that Georgia, Caucasus Mountains or Georgia, USA? (I know where Stalin was born but some people are stupid)
Asking for a friend.

America has no shortage of religious idiots, so I will go with "both".