Is being atheist the most arrogant statement one can make?

Is being atheist the most arrogant statement one can make?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_atheism
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

It's more a statement of skepticism if you ask me.

There's nothing wrong with being an atheist by definition, but it will always be something wrong with being smug and arrogant.

Given that the statement is "I don't believe without evidence", no, not really.

Being an atheist is perhaps not a statement

FAST 'N' BULBOUS

Most of them say "I know" instead of "I don't believe"

Yes indeed, insofar as it is tied to a humanist tendency. It is also a failed diagnosis of the crisis of our times when the atrocities of our times are equated with theism. The inhuman acts of thougtlessness we see and hear everyday is not a matter of a lack of progressive humanism; rather it is a lack of humanity, a lack of decent human beings.

Atheistic humanism is a belief and faith in the unmatched capabilities of human Reason and placing the human being as the Highest. But the prerequisite for humanity, what it requires to be a decent human being, is humbleness: Or, to put it more strongly, piety.

This does not wash the hands of the dogmatics clean; for this arrogance is indeed tied to the tendency of the Divine to reveal itself in ways, that does not show the human its place; mostly we do not see more in divinity than our own pettiness amplified in size.

There is also evidence to the contrary

Where?

No, Christian.

So basically - at least for now - agnosticism is much more reasonable than commitment to any religion or downright denying and insulting the possibility of divine beings?

...

Any number of scientific journals and essays, for one, unless you wish to fully marry faith with science.

What are humanist tendencies?
What is the crisis of our times?
What are the atrocities of our times?
Who is equating them with theism?
What inhuman acts do we see and hear everyday?
What is "humanity," what is a "decent human being"?
Is atheistic humanism really the belief and faith in the unmatched capabilities of human Reason?
Why is humility the prerequisite for humanity? What does prerequisite mean here? What do you mean by humanity?

tl:dr
stop spouting shit please, and try and construct a coherent fucking idea - something intelligible to a person outside your usual church echo chamber perhaps.
Why not try and think critically for once? I may be wrong, but I reckon it's a safe assumption that you can't answer those questions.

No, it's the most humble statement one can make. They're saying they don't know enough about the universe to conclude that a god created it. Theist appear arrogant by comparison with their absolute certainty that it was all designed by god. The atheist says I don't know, and therefore I can't believe. The theist says I know, and therefore I believe.

you're describing an agnostic not an atheist

I've been meaning to read picrelated. Can you point me to any secondary literature to help me prepare/understand more deeply?

If every minute detail was to be explicated in its entirety every time you communicate, it would be near impossible to build up a discourse that is somewhat to the point and gets a clear message across. Those questions you pose point to some implicit assumptions behind my assertions indeed, but it is not hard to decipher what those assumptions are. I could spend my time explicating them to you, but I won't bother with my time. You just seem to be pissy because someone is articulating ideas that clash with your worldview.

Btw, I do not spend my time in echo chambers, neither religious nor academic. I do not affiliate with organized religion. So much for being that 'unassuming skeptic', mr.

Was the Captain an atheist?

Agnostics are atheists (i.e., they don't believe in god).

Atheism is absensce of belief first and foremost.

Agnostic atheists are atheists too.

okay thanks

I don't think being an atheist is a bad thing, but there's a difference between a healthy and evaluative skepticism (also applicable to agnostics which I think they get a harder time than they deserve - nothing is certain, after all) and the outright arrogance of a shitty atheist who flaunts it, criticising every religion as bullshit without seeing the hypocrisy between himself trying to convert people to atheism and the religious peddlers who knock on your door in the hope of providing the seeds of conversion. That lack of self-awareness with some atheists really activates my almonds, fellas.

Any militant is a cunt, no matter what they're militant about.

Since it is a reply to french existentialism in general and Sartre in particular, 'existentialism is a humanism'. Also, perhaps some pre-knowledge of later heideggerian thought, especially his re-working of the aletheia concept from its original meaning in §7 of Sein und Zeit, to taking on a double meaning (the unconcealment of truth also being a concealment) when paired with the concept of Ereignis. So 'Beiträge zur Philosophie' perhaps? and Was ist Metaphysik.

The last third of that work (the humanism letter) is basically another articulation of the position I presented in my first post; in a different context of course.

Retard

Im not so sure if arrogance is really a product of the disparity in cognitive dissonance.

Gandalf, language is magic
I've been studying and casting spells all my life, I'm pretty good at using the arcane art that makes people think your an autist.

Agnostic? I think I have a cream for that.

>I don't think being an atheist is a bad thing
Actually It kinda is, being a atheist is positively and highly collaborated with tons of negative inflictions.

Correlation does not imply causality, though.

What if you don't personally believe in God, but believe that religion is good for society and respect people who are religious?

That's weird because being an atheist is choosing to believe without absolute evidence.

Yes. Atheism literally created the fedora meme.

new atheism is quaint

Atheism meant much more in the days before Darwin or any other scientific discoveries like that.

is he right?

Yes indeed he is

the kind of comment you made demonstrates exactly the sort of thinking that makes it hard to 'build up a discourse that gets to the point and gets a clear message across.'
I asked you lots of questions to highlight how vague your statement is.
I'm not annoyed because we disagree. What I would say is that, yes, you could certainly be right, but you're so inept at articulating your point, or constructing an argument, that I can't really either agree or disagree with you.
I mean, I reckon you also happen to be completely wrong.
You basically argue that atheism is arrogance because you have some idea of 'decent human beings,' which is clearly lifted straight (and uncritically) from theistic dogma or some other prevailing source of social norms. And of course you give no reason to think atheists necessarily don't conform to this idea.

Yeah pretty much
He expressed it in an extremely reddit way but he's correct

>using pseudo-profound language to mask the retardness of your argument
>unironically using fedora in that way
>"atheist can not know if there is god THEREFORE there is god checkmate atheists"

really ejaculates my sperm

What gets me is when an atheist tries telling an agnostic they're actually atheist because they lack a positive belief in God, even though atheism is predicated on the positive belief in the absence of god which is why the distinction is there in the first place.

>what is a "decent human being"?
Read "Romans" in "the Bible".

quotable

You're still an atheist.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_atheism