Why would there be atheists in a setting with provably real gods and afterlives?

Why does it have to be atheists, why not agnostics? Haven't felt the embrace of a greater power and simply don't worry too much about it.

I guess atheists could just consider them to be ethereal beings which science simply can't explain yet, but not true all-powerful gods worthy of submission.

For the same reason you have a resurgence of flat earth shit today. Or those who think remembering things wrong is proof for a multiverse.

Some people naturally gravitate toward retardation and irrationality that goes against what's normal in the setting.

If I could see the entirety of that political cartoon I could tell you.

The man was Kratos. He killed the gods.

Now there is atheism.

Keep up, senpai.

Atheism can be translated from "gods doesn't exist" to "Gods doesn't deserve to be worshipped"

In mtg, they did this by having the cat men obviously aware of the giga ass gods in the sky, they just couldn't see why they should worship what we're just Giants in their eyes with horrible egos and bad attitudes. That was a good way to go about it.

Real Talk? Because a lot of gamers are atheists and came from really bad religious backgrounds and wouldn't even want their fantasy character to be a believer, even in a world where it's objective truth.

So, assholes.

Because they see gods as just extremely strong wizards, and the afterlives as their creations.

i remember it's some fundimental christian bullshit about prayer not allowed in public school.
which is missing the fact that government endorsed prayer is not allowed in public schools.
I don't get why atheists exists in setting where the gods are and there servants can show up.
even when it's explain it's fucking stupid.
Like not believing in the afterlife in the Dragonball universe.

What's the difference between a god and any other kind of outsider? The town wizard can make things out of thin air

Atheists of the setting may question the definition of God and the term would likely change to fit those who do not worship Gods or accept them as true deities.

>If I could see the entirety of that political cartoon I could tell you.

It wouldn't help much.

Sounds about right.

You can believe gods exist without thinking they're worth worshiping.

Because gods don't show themselves often enough.

I don't think the artist understands how political cartoons are supposed to work.

Welcome to human beings 101;
people can be irrational, or atleast seem irrational to you.
Just because there is Empirical proof doesn't mean that somebody has to accept it. There's proof of global warming, and for a million and 1 reasons people deny it. Heck, even if global warming was a sham and pure coincidence then there'd be a billion people out there believing it. It's really not strange for people to have different world views changing from one person to another.

What constitutes a "proof", anyway? People have claimed they can prove God in this world, and there are still atheists.

Or, more importantly, schools.

Define "provably". Most setting with "provably" gods also have non divine guys doing greater deeds than most of that of the gods.

Most of them are probably like the witches and wizards of discworld.

They know the gods exist, hell they've even met with them on occasion, but they don't worship them the same way we don't worship the postman.

They see the god as a being that does a job, sometimes well, sometimes poorly, and they give them the respect they feel the god has earned, but they don't give them their faith because they know the god can fuck up, has fucked up, or probably had to clean up a mess the god in question left lying around.

If you can't find a god worthy of your faith, why worship at all?

Or how crucifixes are supposed to work.

Why is the California Department of Education a monkey?

>transgender druids
>militant homosexual ranger with wolf companion
>awakened ape
>sorceress with parasitic worm symbol on the robe

M: Brah, you know I haven't lost a game of monopoly in three years?
A: Shut up and roll man.
[He rolls]
M: You know what that sound is? That's me buying Parkplace.
A: ...
M: Mother fucker.
A: I hate you sometimes.
M: And now come the hotels!

>Why is the California Department of Education a monkey?

Because evolution is a hoax invented by Satan.

What, are you new to this?

Piss easy. Just have someone who doesn't see the point in worship.

Knowing something isn't having faith in it.

I thought thats Obama.

In Forgotten Realms you can be an atheist because the afterlife fucking sucks.

the difference between proving/disproving God's existence in this world is bullshit because you're trying to use Phyiscal evidence to prove/disprove the existence of a being that is beyond the Universe and our understanding.
In fantasy setting, a wizard can go to the a certain plane of existence and talk to the gods themselves, and clerics can use same abilities to do likewise.
the only problem with games like that is that their is a way to become a god, which can make people a little suspicious of the gods in general.

I mean, how much evidence are we talking here? Do the gods regularly show up and talk to mortsls?

Because let's face it, if some dude on the street just rushes up to me, ranting and raving he had a talk with god, I'm going to think he is a fucking lunatic.

I don't get it. If Sorcery actually existed I can guaran-fucking-tee that EVERYONE would be doing it. This shit drives me up the wall.

And then you get put in The Wall.

Didn't think that one out, didja?

Oh jeez, of course. Thanks.

It's not disbelief then, it would be a refusal to worship, or a distrust that creation is a result of a God or God's plan.
The Gods are merely extremely powerful beings who grant resources in exchange for worship. An atheist character might either see this as immoral, or refuse to worship them as beneath their dignity, or possibly casually offer worship to many gods in a practical, bargaining manner.

Or you can just go the flat-earth route of them refusing to believe in something that clearly exists.

Because setting designers don't know the term "Maltheism"

>If Sorcery actually existed I can guaran-fucking-tee that EVERYONE would be doing it.
Man, science exists that lets you do some insane ass shit and barely anyone does.

Hell, we have a problem with people going to school to read and you think everyone would try to learn magic?

The funny thing is, the position of the catholic church has always been that magic isn't real. I guess some denominations of protestantism didn't get the memo.

They may reject the gods as not worthy of worship.

Buddhism recognize gods as a part of the world, and argues that gods are not fit for adoration because they embody the nature of their domain and are thus not able to switch between different stages of being like humans are. Because the gods cannot alter their own nature they do not achieve enlightenment as humans can. This means the gods are not examples to be followed, but something to stay away from.

We might conceive of an atheist fantasy ideology on the same lines. If the gods cause suffering and bicker among themselves why would you venerate them? They are clearly not better than humans even though they might have more magical power. These beings are therefore not worthy of your time, and not worshiping gods is the only way to be truly free from their influence.

What about our oriental kin? What's their take on it? I know the neo-proties have been all over the place but what's going on in Greece and beyond?

it's more "don't put faith in things other than God" , but I guess that comes more to fortune telling things than magic.

I believe that the Orthodox/ Coptic Church believes the same as the Catholic Church.

*tips fedora*

Strictly disbelieving in the existence of gods when you could empirically experience their existence is kind of silly.

But why do you insist on being a simple-minded literalist? An "atheist" in such a world could simply refuse to accept the "divinity" of such beings. There's a lot of really great story and world building potential in such an idea.

You could really explore what exactly "divinity" and being a "god" means, and whether or not belief consists of recognizing the existence of a thing, or recognizing the thing as other people recognize it, or recognizing the thing as it wants to be recognized.

But more than likely, it would get chocked up to some hamfisted, half-brained bullshit with pseudo-sci-fantasy-math garbage, because most people attempting to explore these ideas are as brain-dead when it comes to creative thinking as you seem to be.

when it comes to stuff like that, mind you. the three churches are vastly different .

Because they intervene capriciously and are not to be relied upon or worshipped when you can go out and do things yourself?
Because you don't want to get tied up with cosmic bickering between multiple gods?
Because magic already exists that can produce "miracles"?
Because eternity of existence in an afterlife might be worse that just ending?

That all explains people who don't worship.
People who don't believe though, probably haven't seen proof. Adventurers may see gods all the time, but most people probably won't see any real evidence in their lives.

Actually the Orthodox stance at the moment is something closer to 'HO DON'T DO IT' with a focus in necromancy as of late, not sure about the Copts though.

>The funny thing is, the position of the catholic church has always been that magic isn't real.

I mean, aside from the whole witch trials thing. AFAIK one of the first gotcha questions is "do you believe in witches".

Unless you think witches aren't strictly magic, which I could see working as an argument.

in a setting with provable gods people would wonder about even higher entities and atheists would be sceptical about the existences of those and/or atheists would be the ones who don't recognize actual divinity (as in omnipotence, omnipresence etc) in the provable entities.

I Don't Call That Much Of An Argument

In none-quote form: "gods" may be as real as you or I, but we don't have to worship/respect/acknowledge them. Atheism in a world with gods works better if you're lightning-proof

>"The gods are more trouble than they're worth."

What you're looking for is called either dystheism or misotheism (don't remember which), where God or the gods are believed to be malevolent or at least unworthy of worship, regardless of their existence.

>Unless you think witches aren't strictly magic, which I could see working as an argument.

While I can't remember the exact details, I recall that "witch" had a very specific connotation back in the Middle Ages through the 17th/18th Century. There were different types of "magicians," and "magic" was definitely considered a real thing by the Catholic Church, at least in a form.

"Witches" were females who sold their souls to the Devil in order to further their station and gain earthly power. They cavorted with Demons and engaged in black rituals, and engaged in what was essentially "black magic" - curses, hexes, omen-telling, etc.

There were other forms of magic, like alchemy, healing, and warding magic, but the problem is that it's a very slippery slope from those forms of magic to black magic, and, from a theological point of view, it's not necessary with the sacrifice of Christ and the Lords protection of your immortal soul. By engaging in any sort of magic, you risk falling prey to demons and devils and other spirits (which definitely existed de facto in the Catholic mindset) and undermined the Churches authority.

"Witchcraft" has come to mean anybody who wields magic in modern times, but it did have a very specific definition back when it was relevant.

> Why would there be atheists in a setting with provably real gods and afterlives?
The Devil made them disbelieve God.

Well, in some cases you can't trust the government to keep things in check. There was this mess in Ukraine recently, when tenth of thousands of kids got injected with faulty vaccine, because someone had been cutting corners.

I've had people play impious characters in fantasy settings with very clear and present deities.
But that's about as far as it's gone.

That was the official stance of the Church, iirc. Basically, a Witch was a heretic/pagan whose primary crime was a disbelief in the true God, as opposed to one with the actual power to affect the natural world.
After the Protestant thing kicked off and the Wars of Religion started, witch trials started to be more what we tend to think of with people making random accusations of incubus summoning and milk spoiling and what have you.

Because some motherfuckers always gotta swim upstream.

Atheism would just be the argument that gods as they're perceived don't exist.

Your "provable gods" are charlatans using acts of science and trickery to appear more powerful than they are. By amassing followers, all they've done is become political leader.

It then becomes the belief that no true god exists. There is no one true creator and all these deities of various sorts are not worthy of worship.

/thread

...

>Well, in some cases you can't trust the government to keep things in check.

This does not mean that vaccines are dangerous. This means that low quality vaccines were administered. Anti-vaxxers tend to find these outlier points and use them are arguments for their whole movements.
While the government shouldn't be able to force you to vaccinate your children with faulty vaccines, you are still responsible as a parent to ensure they're immunized from diseases that can kill them during their developmental years.

IIRC, the whole "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" thing used a word that could also be translated as "poisoner". It was about people who used magical curses to inflict sickness and death upon others.

This.
Also the difference between the Ukrainie and the US is that the US has a decent health system, and aren't fighting a huge war in there country right now.

They decide they dont like gods and dont want any of their shit.

>This does not mean that vaccines are dangerous. This means that low quality vaccines were administered.
The thing about that is, while something can be greatly beneficial if done right, you have to account for the chance of it going wrong. Ideals are only practical if they're achievable; the risks are something you'll have to deal with if you go through with them.

Well, with prices like that it better be damn good.

>Why would there be atheists in a setting with provably real gods and afterlives?
I don't know, why do we have flat earthers in an era where we can go to space and take pictures of a spherical earth?

To be contrary.

>Why would there be atheists in a setting with provably real gods and afterlives?

I don't know. Why are there religious people in a world without any proof of gods or an afterlife?

> the difference between proving/disproving God's existence in this world is bullshit because you're trying to use Phyiscal evidence to prove/disprove the existence of a being that is beyond the Universe and our understanding.
There are also philosophical arguments in this world that don't rely on specific physical evidence but on concepts like "causality" or "comparative" from which one can reason to God. (Whether one accepts the reasoning is a different matter, but that brings us back to the question of what constitutes a proof.)

> In fantasy setting, a wizard can go to the a certain plane of existence and talk to the gods themselves, and clerics can use same abilities to do likewise.
I declare the guy renting the second floor of the house from me a god, and the second floor itself to be a plane of existence. Now I can use the ability of "ladder" to go to another plane of existence and talk to a god, in this world too!

In a fantasy setting, why is Plane Shift any more impressive than a ladder? It's magic, but so is the ladder I just made with Fabricate.

It is actually, pic related. Health insurance covers most of the cost, too

I payed 10 dollars for one last year, and generally speaking, It can be free or even cheaper when flu season starts.
What makes me laugh about flat earth believers is that their basing their ideas on two people who were mocked by their peers, both religous and scientific, at the time they made their claims.

The chance of it going right far outweigh the risk of it going wrong.
People have died getting their tonsils removed but for the vast majority its totally harmless.

Easy: They're anti-theists.

See Imperium from Anima.

Same answer as always: in that case of gods walking the earth, why would you think they're somehow more special than the odd dragon or demon or whatever kind of absurdly powerful being? There's a difference between not believing in their existence and not believing they're gods. I mean, you really only have their word they created all that stuff around you.

Huh, it does look efficient.

They decide that the real gods are not worthy of being called deities, either because they know too much about them or, on the contrary, they're completely misinformed.

Deities aren't actually divine, just superpowered individuals, they aren't "gods" and they don't deserve worship. Miracles you say? Any high-leveled mundane wizard can do this shit.

There you go, atheism.

The world is on an oval shaped orbit. Sometimes it will be closer to the sun and sometimes it will be farther away. It might be getting hotter now but it wont stay that way.

No one pays the sticker price except suckers, they don't even expect you to. They purposefully over charge because they get to claim the difference between sticker price and what is paid to the federal government and they get a percentage back.

You need a lawyer or insurance company to negotiate for you usually, or just let them ding your credit for a couple years and come back that you don't have the cash and settle for a reasonable amount.

This shit's not free, it is a couple thousand bucks, you've got someone monitoring you for most of the day, call that like $500, and another $500 for the bed, and the doctor that actually did whatever is, say, $3k? $5k? Think about how much it'd cost to get a transmission rebuilt for your car, or major body work? Is it not even much more than that?

People bitch and whine about going to the dentist and how much that shit costs. I'm like, what the fuck are you talking about? It's $85 out of pocket for me to have my teeth cleaned. That is perfectly in line with the hourly rate of skilled labor. It's not even highly skilled/specialist labor like say a custom cabinet maker or network technician (Like $150-$200)

There are a fair share of idiots in that 'movement' but most I've met have problems trusting government and big pharma, not the idea of modern medicine.

And don't think the campaign to discredit and ridicule anyone who doesn't get their flu shot is turning them around.

Never mind that drugs are expensive as balls and they have to pay for that shit somehow.

Witch trials were not a thing in the inquisition. They were more common in protestant or mixed countries than in mostly catholic countries like Spain, where you can count the trials against witches with your hands.

But trials against blasphemers and stuff like that are a-ok.

...

At the time a 'witch' was someone who sold their soul to the devil in exchange for some kind of power.

Not a wiccan.

I would be more worried by polio than the flu.

>No one pays the sticker price except suckers, they don't even expect you to. They purposefully over charge because they get to claim the difference between sticker price and what is paid to the federal government and they get a percentage back.
So a system that charges people hundreds of thousands of dollars for life necessities works because the government pays for it instead.

Being atheist in a setting with provable, commonplace deities is about the same as denying climate change.

It... doesn't make sense and yet there are those that stick to their guns.

> 'make good'
> 'good' as is defined by him and what everyone around him thinks is good

Pfft, horsefaced Thor a fgt

>Only he can define what is good
Seems like he wants to be a god.

It's more like... they are able to charge more than what the market will bear for their services. They can charge so much because they have setup a monopoly protected by the government, and the excesses are paid for by the taxpayer, whether he wants them to or not.

The hospitals and doctors are for-profit institutions and they can use a man in washington to force people to pay them, so they do. Changing who the man is or the arrangement won't substantially change anything.

Two things that would actually change them: Break the AMA's stranglehold on universities, and accreditation. There are fewer medical universities now than a hundred years ago, despite much higher demand. And make it legal to form health-coops again. Like a bank is a for-profit financial service company, right? But there are credit-unions that are not for-profit, but offer most of the same services. There's insurance companies that are for profit, but coops are illegal because they BTFO of insurance companies at the beginning of the 20th century and they didn't like that in washington.

You've got Full Fedora.