Ah, but its foundations are singular: There are no deities.
Yes, and that is the one and only thing that all atheists have in common. You might as well start an "Ask a Vegetarian" or "Ask a Conservative" thread.
Regardless of individual interpretation I was asking on a technical basis,
But there is no technical connection between atheists but that they have no religion.
so answer the question if you would.
I am an atheist. I don't believe in karma, spirits, ghosts, deities, religions, hell, heaven, the veracity and/or objectivity of Fox News, or anything else of that matter.
The only thing atheists have in common is that they don't believe in any religion(I'm defining atheists, here, as people who have no religion, not people who don't believe in a God, because there are religions that do not have gods/God).
Which would be an inaccurate definition. Those who are in a religion that do not have gods/God are still atheists.
You can believe in UFOs, astral projection, mental telepathy, ESP, clairvoyance, spirit photography, telekinetic movement, full trans mediums, the Loch Ness monster and the theory of Atlantis and still be an atheist. (cookie for the quote)
Atheism is a lack of belief in a deity, how does this apply to supposedly cosmic forces such as karma?
Considering such things have about as much evidence for them as a deity, I think it would be a bit hypocritical to not believe in one supernatural agent because of lack of evidence but believe in another.
WOW really? Atheists believing in Karma? Seems odd that one could deny the existence of any form of deity but at the same time believe in supernatural phenomenon like karma. Where is the basis for the rejection of god when one accept the supernatural?
To truly reject god, one must reject all else that cannot be measures, tested or observed.
Why? As far as i see it Karma could be treated as some sort of force, like gravity? Even a scinetific law if you will, not to say I believe in it, but these things should be considered
Why? As far as i see it Karma could be treated as some sort of force, like gravity? Even a scinetific law if you will, not to say I believe in it, but these things should be considered
Write this up as a proposal for a PhD thesis. Who knows, maybe someone might fund this research. Prove the existence of karma, and describe the sub-atomic particles karma is comprised of. Who knows, maybe they'll even give you time on the CERN Large Hadron Collider.
WOW really? Atheists believing in Karma? Seems odd that one could deny the existence of any form of deity but at the same time believe in supernatural phenomenon like karma. Where is the basis for the rejection of god when one accept the supernatural?
It's not that odd really. It's on the same line of how a theist can hold two contradictory views.
It's not that odd really. It's on the same line of how a theist can hold two contradictory views.
No, not quite. A theist who holds contradicting views is still a theist as long as they hold the belief in god. One cannot hold diametrically opposed beliefs of equal weight at the same time. A theist could never hold a belief contradictory to the existence of god, or they would cease to be a theist. Also, if one believes in supernatural forces such as karma, then unless they accept a that there is a scientific explanation of such phenomenon, they fall back onto a belief in a deity to explain the phenomenon, even if only superficially.
So if someone believes in karma, and believes it to be a force comparable to gravity, then one would have to also believe that science could explain karma. At this point it is no longer a supernatural force, but rather a new scientific theory.
I guess the commonly accepted definition of what an is an atheist is loose enough to allow for spiritual beliefs, although I would not consider a Buddhist to be a true atheist. To me, an atheist rejects all that is supernatural and accepts only the material. What can be seen, observed, measured and tested exists. We know gravity exists as we feel its effects every minute of the day, but we are only beginning to understand it's mechanisms. But gravity can be observed and measured. What units would karma be measured in?
The problem therein is that you're holding theists and atheists to different standards on the same issue. Just as theists can believe in traditional scientific theories, atheists can be spiritual.
While I grant that most arguments for atheism have do to with the lack of proof as to the existence of God, not all of them do, for example as a child, I didn't believe in deities simply because I couldn't fathom their existence, it was only when I applied logic to it, that my current reasons came about.
While I grant that most arguments for atheism have do to with the lack of proof as to the existence of God, not all of them do, for example as a child, I didn't believe in deities simply because I couldn't fathom their existence, it was only when I applied logic to it, that my current reasons came about.
I began to think the same way around the age of 11. What's funny is that another reason why I didn't believe at the time was because I associated God with Santa Clause. Just another story to keep people good and in line except it kind of backfired
The standard I hold for an atheist is that they reject that which cannot be observed, seem measured or tested. It would be impossible to hold a theist to this same standard as they believe in the supernatural in some form.
So yes, a different standard MUST be applied. A theist who believes in science (at least the science that does not contradict his religion) is still a theist. The theist who believes in the contradictory parts of science really doesn't believe in his religion completely.
One cannot hold diametrically opposed beliefs of equal weight at the same time.
Well yes one can. For example the belief that God is all loving and is vengeful and hates sin. These are qualities that are opposing one another.
Also, if one believes in supernatural forces such as karma, then unless they accept a that there is a scientific explanation of such phenomenon, they fall back onto a belief in a deity to explain the phenomenon, even if only superficially.
You don't need to fall back on the belief of a deity to hold a supernatural belief.
To me, an atheist rejects all that is supernatural and accepts only the material. What can be seen, observed, measured and tested exists.
In most cases I would say this would be the case, however that doesn't mean those who aren't this way aren't atheists or aren't true atheists. I think trying to define atheist as without religion or without supernatural beliefs of any sort only helps to confuse the meaning of the word.
a-: without, not theist: belief in a god or gods atheist: without belief in a god or gods It's that simple.
We can get more complex by adding to the term as I suggested for the purpose of this thread sticking with answering questions from a secular atheistic view aka "an atheist rejects all that is supernatural and accepts only the material." This does cover most atheists and gives more focus to cover points.
The notion of atheists believing in supernatural phenomenon just bothers me. It's like a fiscal conservative arguing to increase funding to the military.
