Support NeoGAF

[Bildocube]

There are two types of atheists, weak (also known as implicit or negative) atheists whom simply have the absence of belief in the existence of deities and strong atheists (explicit or positive) which is the belief that no deities exist.

My question to you is, which type of atheist are you? How did you come to this belief?

I have yet to meet anyone who is a strong atheist, one who not only doesn't have a belief in a deity but also strong conviction that there is not one.

 

[sprsk]

put me in the "realist" group

 

[iapetus]

Really? Plenty of strong atheists on GAF, though you may find you have a slightly harder time getting some of them to admit that's what they are.

 

[Nerevar]

weak, although I have a cousin who is most certainly in the strong camp. It's hard to call yourself a strong atheist because there is no empirical evidence to suggest either the absence or presence of any sort of deity, and atheists don't apply any sort of faith-based argument to justify the lack of existence like religious people.

Edit: or at least, they shouldn't.

 

[MrAngryFace]

Im a weak athiest for sure. I dont doubt there's higher powers out there, I just live my life placing importance on things that demand my reaction in some capacity. If something exists outside that sphere of influence fuck it. None of my business.

 

[WHOAguitarninja]

I suppose I'm probably a weak atheist. I don't really beleive in any god, I personally think the idea is quite silly(not trying to open a can of worms here, so I'm not going to elaborate on this). I'm the type that doesn't beleive something until I see it. I just can't, often times.

I like the idea of some being out there that is pure good, and a place that is perfect and free of sorrow and pain. I don't think they exist, but it would be nice.

But as for why I don't beleive in any god, it's simply because I can't find an argument as to why he should exist that makes sense. With all the religions in ancient history that have now been completely cast aside(i don't see anyone worshipping zeus anymore), I can't help but think the religions of now will suffer the same fate.

 

[OpinionatedCyborg]

Weak atheism seems to border on agnosticism, which I think is more logical.

 

[Shogmaster]

I'd say I'm a strong Atheist. I just can't bring my self even to entertain the traditional concept of the creator. It seems pretty obvious to me that we made our gods in our own image, and not the other way around.

I mean, I can see that creation of new lifeform by another lifeform can happen (we are on the verge of that ourselves), but not in the biblical sense. The concept of all knowing all powerful god that created everything is just a feable minded nonsense IMO.

 

[Shazapp]

I'm a strong atheist, but I'm not an asshole about it. If you want to believe in god(s), have at it. Just don't try to get me to believe the same way.

 

[MrAngryFace]

Yes but then comes the question, do you entertain the idea of beings greater than yourself? Capable of more than yourself? While you may not call them gods most would consider beings a certain degree greater than ourselves to BE gods of a fashion.

Personally I think strong athiesm is a little short sighted and full of itself.

 

[cubicle47b]

I believe that no deities exist but admit that I can't know either way. I always thought this was the definition of weak atheist.

 

[Shogmaster]

Yes but then comes the question, do you entertain the idea of beings greater than yourself? Capable of more than yourself? While you may not call them gods most would consider beings a certain degree greater than ourselves to BE gods of a fashion.

I think I already answered that. Atheism to me does not mean that I believe we are the height of existance. It just means that I deny the tranditional concept of gods and deities.

Personally I think strong athiesm is a little short sighted and full of itself.

Don't confuse Atheism with arrogance. I am humble about the insignificance of my existance in the big picture. I just don't fool myself into believing the established BS about all knowing all powerful god.

 

[saelz8]

Im a weak atheist my self

 

[MrAngryFace]

Cubicle:
So you admit that you have faith in no dieties existing?

Shog:
Do you think it impossible for an organism to attain all the requirements to become all-knowing? Or do you just reject the gods humanity has created?

 

[Shazapp]

Do I think that humankind is the be-all, end-all or highest possible intelligence in the universe? No, I don't. Just like insects don't worship humans, I wouldn't worship a race or species that was superior to humans if we encountered one.

 

[sprsk]

So you admit that you have faith in no dieties existing?

UDRRRRRDUURUDURRDURDRUDURDRUU

 

[MrAngryFace]

Well im sure if ants were capable of a thought level near humans they'd view us as gods. However we'd only be gods by definition, but it wouldnt mean we dont exist.

 

[Shogmaster]

So you admit that you have faith in no dieties existing?

WTF is a deity anyways? Ever ask yourself that? Are we deities to our pets? We shape every facet of their existance, don't we (especially to hamsters and such)? Does that make us deities to them? Gods and deities are such primitive concepts. I challenge you to give me a good definition of one.

 

[ArcadeStickMonk]

I believe there was\is a powerful creative force. I mean, we here ain't we?

But attaching motives, morals, and a personality to that force is something I just cannot get behind.

 

[gigapower]

strong here. its just a matter of time before the current religions get proven false and join the religions of the ancients in textbooks for everyone in modern time to laugh at in mockery.

 

[MrAngryFace]

Well thats what I mean. What do you mean by saying I dont believe in god. Are you saying you dont believe anyone IS a god, or that things greater than you by complete multiples dont exist.

Im honestly just trying to figure out which athiests are against the definition of god, and which are against beings greater than themselves.

Arcade: well, morals/motives WE understand, probably not.

 

[WHOAguitarninja]

Well im sure if ants were capable of a thought level near humans they'd view us as gods. However we'd only be gods by definition, but it wouldnt mean we dont exist.

I sure as hell hope they don't get they way or we'd get all them satanic, heavy metal listenin ants ganging up on us causing us much itchiness.

 

[Late Stage Marxist]

Neither. I'm a weak Catholic. Haven't been to mass in over a year.

 

[Shogmaster]

Well thats what I mean. What do you mean by saying I dont believe in god. Are you saying you dont believe anyone IS a god, or that things greater than you by complete multiples dont exist.

I'd be sorely dissapointed if we turn out to be the most advanced lifeform in this universe. That there are those way more advanced than we, it's a given. But is that enough qualifications for "deities" and "gods"? If that's the case, I declaire myself a god to every living creature below primates. Or at the very least, my nephew's hamsters.

Im honestly just trying to figure out which athiests are against the definition of god, and which are against beings greater than themselves.

Can't speak for others, but I am against the whole antiquated primitive concept of god/gods/deities.

 

[Drinky Crow]

Weak atheist. I really don't want to be the guy who has the burden of proving ANYTHING.

 

[cubicle47b]

So you admit that you have faith in no dieties existing?

It's a belief that's not based on evidence so I guess it would fall into the faith category. I admit that the existence of deities is possible (equally possible, even - based on logic) but find the whole idea a ridiculous human invention and would love to be able to completely dismiss it.

edit: I pretty much agree with Shogmaster.

 

[MrAngryFace]

OK, so youre against the CONCEPT of A god/diety, see that clears things up nicely.

The title of a god is given by the believers, or self titled by insane people WITH 1,000 YEARS OF POWER!

 

[iapetus]

I believe that no deities exist but admit that I can't know either way. I always thought this was the definition of weak atheist.

Sounds like one measure weak atheist, one measure agnostic.

 

[cubicle47b]

I don't know. By his definition weak atheists have a lack of belief in deities whereas I take the stong atheist stance that deities do not exist but admit I can't know (the agnostic part).

I'm like a negative deist (if this was a set of numbers where agnostic was 0).

 

[Instigator]

'Weak atheist', I guess. A strong atheist borders on faith. You're more likely to find the latter with people who are formerly from one religious faith and got burned by it.

 

[McLesterolBeast]

An absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

Faith in the absence of evidence is evidence of the absence of intelligence.

 

[OpinionatedCyborg]

strong here. its just a matter of time before the current religions get proven false and join the religions of the ancients in textbooks for everyone in modern time to laugh at in mockery.

How the hell can a religion be proven false when it's based on the unproveable?

 

[Shogmaster]

OK, so youre against the CONCEPT of A god/diety, see that clears things up nicely.

The title of a god is given by the believers, or self titled by insane people WITH 1,000 YEARS OF POWER!

So it's all up to the hamsters eh? BOW DOWN TO MY INFINITE POWAHZ HAMSTERS!!!

 

[MrAngryFace]

They work against us my friend.

 

[Shogmaster]

How dare they?!? I shall smite them!! FEAR THE ANGRY SHOGMASTER!!! *squish*

 

[Macam]

I've never even heard of strong/weak atheists but until given any real evidence to the contrary, I reject the idea of any "higher power", deity, etc. As to how I came to that belief, well, I can't really pinpoint to anything specific save for just over the years realizing the increasing absurdity of it all.

 

[Diablos]

put me in the "realist" group

 

[Zaptruder]

My question to you is, which type of atheist are you? How did you come to this belief?

I'm a moderate atheist...

in the sense that, I'll assert that none of the current religions are representative of what is actual... but that rather they're creations of people. I'll qualify that by saying that I have an incredibly slim, but not none, chance of been wrong about that.

I derive that assertion on the idea that, what we do know is next to nothing, but that here we are in a state of existence... so that we know that existence was somehow initiated... apart from that we know no characteristics of the creator; we can only guess at what created us... and thus far, most of our guesses have derived from other facets of logic... mostly characteristics of human construct.

But I won't go so far as to say that there can't be a creator entity... afterall, the creator could be a bastard, creating false memories, evidence, impressions and all that just to 'test' us, and sadly, as illogical as that is from most points of view, it's actually logically self contained, and has a chance of been true, given the nothing we know about the cause of the original creation of the matter and the behaviour that governs that matter in the universe.
But the view I tend to favour from an aetheist standpoint is that, although something has been created, the creator doesn't necessarily have to be anything sentient. Infact, it could be a void that has overtime a chance to create something, anything. It has infinite time to do so, and as such will over the course of that infinitum create every single concievable configuration, including this universe... infinite times no less.

I was once a Christian... and I reinforced my logic with what I thought were compelling arguments... including the ontological one, the argument by intelligent design, and what not... after taking a class in philosophy of religion, those arguments were firmly and utterly shaken...
And coupled with what I learnt in psychology, I came to see, understand that many of the facets of religion, can be related to in a human way... how those things came about to exist, as a function of human behaviour, psychology and what not.
Ultimately, after distancing myself from Christianity for a period, I came to realise that it wasn't for me... it no longer made sense to me, could not supply me with answers to basic questions about why things are the way they are in the world...
Or rather, science, history, psychology, anthropology and logic all work together to provide me with far better answers than religious dogma ever could.

 

[Gorgie]

I'm in the 'strong' catagory. There's no need for a creator in the universe.

Has anyone clicked on that pantathist link from google ads? I certainly don't fall in that subdivison either. :lol

 

[demon]

An absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

Faith in the absence of evidence is evidence of the absence of intelligence.

I can't tell who you're referring to, the atheists or the theists.

I'm a bit more than a weak atheist myself, closer to weak atheism than strong atheism. Just call me an agnostic. I'm aware that the origin of life and the universe is still a huge mystery, but religious people should realize that the burden of proof lies on the "Well God did it!" theory just as much as the evolution/big bang/etc theory. I will not believe in anything merely out of faith; faith is a belief based on spiritual need and desire at the expense of reason, logic, and acknowledgement of empirical evidence.

 

[White Man]

Agnositc. Whitey doesn't know, Whitey doesn't care.

 

[Trident]

Weak atheist. I don't know how anyone can assert anything about what exists outside our universe. Are they selling a really good telescope that I'm missing out on?

 

[slayn]

I'm not really sure whether to call myself strong or a weak atheist.

I don't belive in any sort of all powerful god merely because of all the choices for 'belief' it just makes the most sense. Perhaps I'd be more convinced if any relgion had remained static and true to its original beliefs without ever wavering, but I've just never seen that to be true. The details have been changed too often for very obvious reasons. I find it idiotic to even comprehend the idea of an all powerful all knowing being changing his mind. Hence for me to accept any sort of religion, the morals and beliefs need to remain exactly the same for all time.

Plus the fact that I laugh to myself as I imagine a person being pulled into a hospital nowadays trying to explain how they talked to a burning bush.

I've never seen that, so I just have sort of gone with the 'default.'

I used to argue for atheism all the time. And still will if someone challenges me but I speak more from an enjoyment for philisophic debate than for any sort of conviction on faith. I have no faith. I merely took all the options for belief, crossed out all the ones that seem idiotic or don't make sense to me, and found that when I went to make my final choice, I had no choice.

I don't consider something more powerful than me to be gods. If advanced aliens created this world, they are aliens, not gods. To me a god is something so entirely different from the force of life as we know it that it can't even be placed on this scale of power that compares a human to a hamster.

 

[Spencerr]

The definition of being an atheist is believing there's not a God... you're "weak" atheists aren't atheists at all, probably more along the lines of agnostic.

Agnostic f0 lyfe.

 

[Zaptruder]

The definition of being an atheist is believing there's not a God... you're "weak" atheists aren't atheists at all, probably more along the lines of agnostic.

Agnostic f0 lyfe.

A strong atheist is simply a person that asserts that there isn't a god of any sort whatsoever, no how no chance.

A weak atheist will say, there probably isn't a god, at least based off what I know.

an agnostic will say, I don't know what to believe... but not necessarily follow it up with, "so I won't believe anything."

 

[Hitokage]

The definition of being an atheist is believing there's not a God... you're "weak" atheists aren't atheists at all, probably more along the lines of agnostic.

Agnostic f0 lyfe.

No, it's just that the definition offered in this thread isn't adequate. Both kinds of atheists are indeed atheists in that they share the conclusion that there is no supreme being*, the difference lies in how and why they think so. Strong atheists make the assertive negative claim that no supreme being exists, taking the burden of proof upon themselves, while weak atheists believe that the burden of proof lies with those making the positive claim of a supreme being's existence and that burden has not been met. Agnostics believe that a conclusion cannot or should not be made, one way or the other.

* It's fundamental to point out that we're talking about a generalized supreme being, not any specific claimed deity.

 

[SpoonyBard]

All evidence points to the fact that there are no gods existing in our universe, so realizing this probably makes me a strong atheist. I am, however, not sure wherever my computer is run by invisible pixies or just electricity, so when it comes to computers I'm agnostic.

 

[RonaldoSan]

I'm tired of being called an atheist. I say I don't believe in god because I don't follow any religion. The real truth is I don't know shit. I have no clue to how or why things are they way they are. I could read a million books about the subject, study every religion and still be just as dumb. The truth is not for man to discover. I have come to the conclusion that it's okay to not know. Ignorance is truely bliss. I will live life by my heart and if it turns out there is a god, he may punish me for doing so.

 

[Hitokage]

I'm tired of being called an atheist. I say I don't believe in god because I don't follow any religion. The real truth is I don't know shit. I have no clue to how or why things are they way they are. I could read a million books about the subject, study every religion and still be just as dumb. The truth is not for man to discover. I have come to the conclusion that it's okay to not know. Ignorance is truely bliss. I will live life by my heart and if it turns out there is a god, he may punish me for doing so.

*hands Ronaldo a ticket to Agnosticism* Sorry you found yourself on the wrong bus.

 

[maharg]

I self identify as agnostic in so far as I just don't think it matters to me what created the universe. What matters is what is observable.

However, in so far as I know relatively more about christianity than other faiths, I am dead set against the judeochristian god. If it exists, I do not approve of it on moral grounds.