The Atheist Lie Machine–When Bad Memes Rely on Fallacious Memes in an Attempt to Win
Why are you an atheist? Thats the substance…thats the justification…thats the why. Thats belief.
Is there a why behind the belief? Is there justification? Thats what defines a worldview, ideology, or belief system?
Well, that would call into question question your baseline atheism belief. It would also define all Christians as atheists.
Saying NO to everything….is still belief. Also the necessity to justify it (ie the undelying belief) is part of the system. If atheism wasn’t a belief system….there wouldn’t be
3) meaningful conference
4) people calling themselves atheists with some sort of meaning there.
Moreover, your no thanks generally comes with a why…..or some context of history which provoked the feeling or ideology or belief or philosophy. The way you both describe it sounds honestly more like a causal feeling….not the way I’ve heard it defend or “justified” on Quora. And I know you think its more than a feeling or emotion. That seems a little intellectually problematic for me.
If you really believed the “no thanks” part…I would just get blank stares (aka no responses in the digital ether.
You can have thoughtful versus thoughtless beliefs. My guess is most atheists at least have some thought as to what they belief in and don’t believe in.
Thoughts are the basis of beliefs. They are the building blocks of beliefs and belief systems.
Certainly atheists come from a number of different belief perspectives…..but the similarities are unmistakable in my experience reading what atheists write about and how they argue and the patterns their arguments follow.
Moreover, this diversity is not all that unlike the diversity within Republicans and Democrats who can to a certain extent be said to be both Pro and Anti various things. And I’ve already listed those similarities with no real response from either commentor.
At a atheist event….or just meeting an atheist out…..I don’t think the statement “I don’t agree about anything you think about atheism or life or faith” ever rears its head. Otherwise, massive dissent would exist (the conferences, communication, and conversations would resemble the tower of Babel or the UN, but without translators).
I’m confused how you can believe in memes and think that atheism isn’t a meme. At that level you turn atheism into a unicorn of sorts…which it really isn’t given that humans are the operating systems we’re talking about at the end of the day.
What do you believe about atheism?
What do you believe about Darwin?
What do you believe about religion?
What do you believe about Jesus?
You’ve thought about it.
You’ve probably shared about it.
You’ve probably read about it.
You’ve probably noticed similarities and differences between you and other Atheists in terms of your beliefs and belief structures.
• How much time do you spend on your atheism?
• What financial investment have you made in Atheism?
• What ego-involvement do you have in atheism?
• How much does atheism influence your identity?
• How many atheist blogs to you read?
• How many atheists books have you read?
That brings to mind the question: what is your past-time? Some might say…I don’t have a past-time…but its precisely that lack of a past time that is in fact your past-time (its just unconscious….its just your default). In the same way you can’t avoid having a past time…you can’t avoid having beliefs….particularly with such a controversial issue as atheism.
First, there is definitely a belief system at the level of:
2) sub-group (as discussed & semi-agreed to before)
3) cultural community
You are correct atheism exists as an identity category as subgroups. Yes, thank you. Those subgroups are communities. Those communities have to have something in common, or they wouldn’t exist.
At least two core beliefs:
2) Many apparently don’t believe they have beliefs (which is itself a belief)
Your analogies and examples don’t really get you anywhere–they are just explanatory (aka they are pretty much useless) they are just helpful if you win the top level of the argument.
The question is one of: what will I fill my glass with……how will I live my life, how will I fill my time, what are my core commitments. At an individual and group level–your claims simply don’t make any sense.
The logical extension is:
3) anti-discovery or anti-eureka moment.
Those simply are non-sensical entities….which your theory seems to miss the point of.
Yes, atheism is different than pro groups….but all con groups have a core identity. You can widen what you call atheism (equivocate)–but thats just shifting definitions….plus it still has all the theoreitcal problems I’ve outlined in this thread.
You can’t apply this same logic in the case of anti-groups I pointed to. I seem to remember listing a half-dozen.
You couldn’t call yourself an atheist group or atheist community. Groups form for reasons (i.e. motives) and shared reasons. Atheism wouldn’t have any endurance or sustainability if people joined up “just cause” because for instance they just liked groups. All of social movements literature to my knowledge indicates that movements are formed on the basis of shared beliefs, histories, enemies, or stories.
• Does it have a beginning?
• Does it have a founder?
• Does it have advocates?
• Which advocates do you read or follow?
Yeah…BTW, you talking about other sub-groups who are dis-alike from you isn’t really much of an argument.
• If you don’t have a belief or worldview…..what is it you as an individual stand for?
• Why is taking a stand at all so anti-thetical?
• Why all this time and effort and communication over a non-belief belief?
• Why are you making the term atheism so meaningless?
• Why are you making the atheism community so meaningless?
This just cause notion is still a belief….its just one based on bias and emotion….rather than grounded on reason. And if I know or intuit anything about you…..I don’t think that’s the type of person you are.
The belief in an anti-thought or anti-belief is a farce (IMHO) made up to make atheism more tenable….but only by actually just proves that atheists will make up bad and fallacious arguments to support their identities. This is formally known as a distinction without a difference. At the other parts the argument takes on flat out denials of the way in which the human brain operate. Humans are belief machines. That’s what the theory of memes say. That’s how our brains stores beliefs (something like folder in a folder). So at a biological and neurological level….this argument is simply groundless. Not to mention it goes against EVERYTHING we know about groups and identities.