The Fall of Theism | 103 comments (103 topical, 0 hidden)
Data (none / 1)

Well, I don't actually have any data proving the rise of atheism or the decline of theism.  I suppose I could do some research, but it's late where I am right now and I'm kinda tired :) The reason I wrote the initial blog was because I've been hearing a lot about atheists being the fastest growing minority in America currently, but like I say, I don't have the stats to back that up for now...

Maybe tomorrow :)

by DaeguBill on 06/17/2009 12:34:23 PM EST

[ Parent ]
''Rising'' Atheism (4.00 / 2)
Personally, I'm not an atheist, although I'm not a theist, either.  Nor am I an agnostic.  I am a nontheist.  However, I think that some definitions of "God" are synonyms for "Universe", i.e., the object that contains the universal set of everything (including the empty set) and, in those cases, I can't really deny the existence of God, can I?

I'll concede that the ideas of atheism certainly seem to be "on the rise".  But that may be only because the social stigma with giving voice to those ideas is on the wane.  Religious people seem to be a bit more tolerant of atheists.  They're not trying to pass laws against atheism so much anymore.  And with so many TV preachers giving voice to really crazy ideas, it's no wonder that atheism is tolerated more.

by EveningStarNM on 06/17/2009 03:08:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Atheist vs. Nontheist (none / 0)
I think you're splitting hairs where you don't have to.  I imagine that you might have some subtle distinction in mind, but I actually think that such distinctions are counterproductive. 

If you go around saying that you're a "nontheist" and not an "atheist", then you're implying that "atheism" entails something more than "lack of belief in God."  This leads to nothing but strawmen arguments and distractions when it comes to debates about the existence of God.

by BlueRondo on 06/17/2009 07:30:32 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Differences (none / 0)
I don't deny the existence of "God".  "God" can be defined in such a way that its existence can be proven beyond any doubt.  I'm just saying that it matters only to the person doing the defining.  I, on the other hand, chose to not define "God" other than by using every definition of God.  And that's where set theory comes in handy.  But I'm just a lay nontheist.  You should ask our priests if you need more information.

I should note that I've been accused of being a member of The Church of God The Utterly Indifferent.  I'm not.  I don't like their rituals.

Atheists also must be distinguished from antitheists, but that's another subject altogether.

by EveningStarNM on 06/17/2009 08:20:20 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Skirting around the issue. (none / 0)
I don't deny the existence of "God".  "God" can be defined in such a way that its existence can be proven beyond any doubt.  

Given that this is a thread about theism - i.e.: conceiving of God as a "person" or "mind" of some sort - I don't see why all definitions of God are relevant to the present discussion.

by BlueRondo on 06/17/2009 09:21:49 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Skirting the issue? (none / 0)
You brought it up.  You accused me of splitting hairs where I didn't have to.  I tried to show that it wasn't one hair that got split.  It was really two different hairs.

I was just following your lead.  If you don't like where you led us, you're welcome to turn this wagon around.

by EveningStarNM on 06/17/2009 09:43:02 PM EST

[ Parent ]

The Fall of Theism | 103 comments (103 topical, 0 hidden)