If they don't believe god/s then sure, they can believe in the superanatural, and some atheists do have some concept of a supernatural realms. But I'd say the majority don't, I'm part of a number groups that essentially require one to be an atheist (skeptics, rationalists and secular humanist). The people in these groups won't believe in any supernatural things. Then you have the casual kind of atheists (being in New Zealand we have a lot of these), they don't believe in god/s but they mostly don't think too much about the question, but amongst this group you may find quite a few more that think there might be something spiritual.
I think many Buddhists are considered atheist so I don’t think it’s a contradiction. Atheists merely don’t believe in a god, but that doesn’t exclude the possibility of spirits or other supernatural phenomenon. That said, many atheists do not believe in a god or anything supernatural.
I'm an atheist as well, but I agree with the speaker in this video. That we're all, on some level spiritual, even though you might not be conciously aware of it. Humans are evolutionary hardwired to be that way.
@@henk-3098 Until someone can CLEARLY define what “spiritual” means, I don’t see how you can make the claim you know what is going on in other people’s minds better than those people do. I find that extremely problematic, if not outright dishonest.
Disbeliever: "I firmly believe no gods exist." Xian: "Can you justify your belief?" Disbeliever: "Of course I can, but you lack the standing to offer such a challenge. You believe that only one god exists and no more. Can you rationally justify _that_ belief?" Xian: "Uhh...no." Disbeliever: "Then you're in the same boat so shut up."
I'm an atheist, and I always felt it was weird when people said they weren't religious but were "spiritual" because it basically implied a god. That said, I'm not immune from supernatural thinking - like if my plane hits turbulence, I'll have the urge to pray. I just intellectually think it's an emotional response that's not based in reality, similarly to how I might feel 'lucky' if I roll five sevens in a row but intellectually know it's just chance.
The implications of the word "supernatural" are outside of/beyond Nature. That in itself, i.e., that there is a Force and that this Force is outside of Nature or beyond Nature....that is itself an assumption. In other words, the very word "supernatural" may be quite misleading.
If you have the urge to pray in-flight, I recommend you seek out a god as you'll eventually get there anyway. There are zero gods, but if you are praying to one or more of them, you might not be atheist. You might have reasons for disbelief, but it sounds like you are just saving it for you're old.
I’m a former Christian. I’m now atheist, but as spiritual as ever or even more so. I admit the word has lots of baggage. Through a combination of occasional psychedelic experiences and Buddhist-style meditation, I’ve learned that it is indeed possible to lead a rich spiritual life without believing in superstition or magic. By “spiritual” I mean that my practice has expanded my mind, brought deep inner peace (without any false consolations), relieved nearly all of my psychological suffering, helped me see through many delusions of the mind, and healed traumas of the past (including my religious upbringing). It sounds zany but it is even possible to have insights and literal visions which bring about wisdom and greater perspective on the big questions of life. I’m more present and grateful for what I have and orient my life far less around consumption or ego. I’m much more compassionate to other people, myself, and other living things. I literally haven’t been bored in several years. I no longer fear death. I’m scientifically literate and understand that all this is happening solely in my mind; but at the end of the day, that is where we all experience our life, whether well-being or suffering. Being spiritual without religion is not only possible, but for me it’s improved my life in all the ways religion promises to without the BS. Sorry to get on my soapbox (or appear to boast) but that’s why I’m spiritual and not religious. Although I think most people mean they like to relax in the woods and put up crystals in their house.
As an atheist, while I myself have no belief in the supernatural, I don't see why holding a belief in it would be incompatible with being an atheist. I can easily envision being able to believe magic is a real thing, or ghosts, or psychic powers and yet not believe in any gods. I find the speaker's interpretation that using cultural expressions - such as euphemistically saying something was "not meant to be" or "bless you" or " oh my god" indicate any actual belief in the divine. These expressions are woven into every facet of our culture - it would be extremely hard to grow up in America and not hear them constantly. At the end of the day, we use language the people around us understand and these phrases are part of that shared understanding of how to communicate certain emotions that are not necessarily theistic in origin.
You cannot prove a negative. Atheist destroy faith hope and well being. A secret of atheists is that they do have god's; success, pleasure, science, charity, or even good things like charity, without their gods they too could not live. Also they cannot deny that evil exists; just as darkness points to the fact that somewhere light exists even if no one has ever seen it! There are many things in the universe man has never seen. I have never seen Donald Trump but I believe he exists based on the accounts of others. The holy Spirit is a reality within us that we can feel sense and even hear!!!! We Christians know this!!!
3:19 I think it's perfectly normal that negative thoughts produce negative feelings, even if it involves some imaginary creature. If I try to imagine Donald Duck murdering my mom it would create negative feelings as well.
Good point. For what it's worth, they tried to control for this by comparing physiological responses to negative thoughts that involved god and ones that did not. The original study is here if you are interested: sci-hub.hkvisa.net/10.1080/10508619.2013.771991
Hello, I want to explain why I am not believing: What is the boiling point of water ? If it is pure water under 1 atm atmosphere pressure, it is 100 degrees Celsius. You can repeat it 1000 times and you will find out that it is always the same result. But as soon as you change the atmospheric pressure, e.g. by doing the heating on mount Everest, you will find out it is boiling earlier, you can again repeat it and get the same results. By adding salt, you will find out that it is now boiling later. But under same conditions you will again get the same results. That's why it is possible to make measuring devices like a thermometer. Imagine you try to measure a temperature and you get different results under the same conditions; the measuring device would be useless. So under same conditions you get the same results F(x), under different conditions or initial variables or parameters (x) you get different results. Now to the problem, religions are promising two different results, heaven (F1) or hell (F2). What are the parameters for going to heaven (or hell), being good, having faith, being patient, being helpfull, being adequate intelligent (to have faith or not to have faith), live long enough to go to hell (babies go to heaven) etc. So, if there are two results, the initial (given) parameters (or the resultant of them) cannot be the same. So if the initial parameters for heaven or hell are differntly distributed to people, can we speak about a fair god ? Do you believe in an unfair god ? I don't.
I do cover this topic slightly differently. If all the books and knowledge of gravity were lost, it could be rediscovered. And the newly discovered facts of gravity would match the old facts of gravity. If all books and knowledge of god was last, it would be gone forever.
@jamesparson but even if all the books of God are gone and unrecoverable, as you say, does that erase the existence of God? Just because you don't believe doesn't mean that he cease being who he is. Just like if I say that you're not real, having not ever met you, doesn't make you dissappear. The reality is even IF the books of God are gone and nobody could read about God, the presence of God will remain and mankind will always search for God... even if a few do not. There will always be at least one who will search... and they will find. We can't reason him away because it sounds logical to us. But we are all entitled to what we believe.
Several of the "atheists" in his lists wouldn't be considered "atheists" at all. It really is an issue of "do you believe in deities or not". If you're not sure, or have some sort of "maybe", then you aren't an atheist. I'm agnostic. I don't know one way or the other,...because there isn't any way to factually determine whether something like "a deity" exists at all...or even could exist in reality...or especially "outside our understanding". And yes, some atheists might use colloquialisms..."not meant to be"...or even "thank god", but don't at all say that in a way that says "they believe in an actual god".
If Earth (& therefore humans) did not exist, would Christians still believe in God? Said another way, is God's existence independent or dependent on humans?
Silly nonsense. The theism/atheism debate is about the acceptance vs the rejection of the existence of gods. Don't complicate it. "Social" atheists? "Emotional" atheists? No. Most atheists are neutral nonbelievers. Some are disbelievers who think gods probably don't exist. An ultra-rare few are deniers who think gods _definitely_ don't exist. I imagine this is somewhat similar to the demographics of those who don't accept the existence of Martian microbes: Mostly nonbelievers, some disbelievers and a rare few deniers. Wiki got it right.
Why does it matter, anyway. There have been atheists and believers. Both of them died. Believers cannot prove there is a god. Atheists cannot disprove that there is a god. But atheist are more in-line with objective reality.
@@deepdsingh1994 I'm an old atheist. I can prove man has been creating religions and gods in a timeline since before Mesopotamia, around the world. These gods overlap and they come and go. Is this not fact? Where did I go wrong? Am I lying? Am I disingenuous?
@@deepdsingh1994 There are no gods, we've been creating them since we first noticed the Sun cast our shadows. We literally have a timeline of religions and their gods dating back since before Mesopotamia and around the world since then. They come and they go. They help explain complex questions with simple answers. The god you were born into is just as fake.
Does anyone have a source to the study he cites where researchers asked participants to ask God to hurt their friends? I can't find any sort of study like this anywhere.
Hey there! Here's a link to the study on ResearchGate: www.researchgate.net/publication/271670348_Atheists_Become_Emotionally_Aroused_When_Daring_God_to_Do_Terrible_Things
It's hard to pinpoint what to call myself really, I was pagan at first, then humanist, then spiritual atheist, now I guess just atheist will do, but I am interested in spiritual questions, and I am open to the possibility of supernatural phenomena such as reincarnation and ghosts. I don't just throw it all aside. I'm waiting for adequate evidence. These things are not proven not to be, so I don't throw them out. God however, is just too far fetched to me. There is no evidence either however, that our universe is not actually a microbiome in the gut of a much larger organism, either. But a God that listens to your thoughts? Na-ah. It's too loaded, and explainable by psychology, the human need for an all-knowing father, or memories of the womb, and for someone to be in control and have all the answers. And con artists and megalomaniacs take advantage of that. So you're saying we're more alike than we know. If only Christians knew that. They're always trying to "save" me. It's insulting.
If you're waiting on "adequate" evidence for the existence of God, you'll need a lot of patience. There is none, none either for or against the existence of God. Where would someone begin looking for proof of the existence or the absence of God? In the air, space, in the sea, within the earth, within the human psyche, in the lab of whatever kind, in some book, holy or otherwise .....where? No one knows and no one will know where to look. What instruments would we use? What tests, what would evidence look like or be like? If evidence is what you're waiting on, you'll have a lifelong wait.
I'm not 100% sure at age 50.. Since I'm not sure I still don't believe in the devil as well... I lean more to not believing.. I went along with it throughout childhood days, I just believe once we 6 feet under that's it.. That program HOW THE UNIVERSE WORKS makes me question religion...
I wonder if "teleological thinking" is actually just atheists using common cultural idioms as shorthand to describe their experiences? Ask a linguist or a theologian to observe the same behavior and they will likely come to different conclusions about why certain words or phrases are used. Also, of course the idea of wishing harm on loved ones would cause physiological distress, just like in believers. Just because you don't believe it will happen, that doesn't mean the idea of it isnt still distressing.
Redefining terms is a phase of someone questioning their belief in gods. If you are a believer, that is very insightful. Have an atheist, a scientist, and a theologian after a NDE and I'll you get three different experiences. As a Hindu, Jew, Muslim, and a Christian and the same is true. I've had several on dialysis and once during a big procedure. All I got was warmth and a bright light and those are explainable by the dilation of the eyes (extreme) and the chemical spill on the brain. If a Hindu woman sees Brahma in her NDE, it's not evidence Jesus or Heaven are real.
I'm sceptical of the claim that because atheists sometimes speak in teleological terms that that implies an underlying or innate compulsion toward belief in purpose or design in their affairs. The historical development of teleological phrases in a given language, its norms of use, convention, and cultural influence heavily contribute to, even limit the way we express ideas. For example, even serious athiests frequently invoke God in their impulsive utterances. "Oh my God!" and "Jesus Christ!" are two of the most common. But that doesn't have to indicate an unconscious impulsion toward faith in God. That claim bears striking similarity to the Muslim belief in the 'fitrah'; the innate, pre-programmed inclination to believe in God, which is either nurtured or 'corrupted' through life experiences. Both the fitrah, and the inbuilt faith/spirituality claim are metaphysical claims, not scientific claims. If you're a physicalist or an athiest, you don't believe in metaphysical beings, which means you can't possibly think that faith or spirituality are anything other than brain-based emergent phenomena.
Where does the boundary between atheism and theism lie? In seeking useful philosophies to draw from, I stumbled upon spiritual beliefs I already held. One would imagine it a rare sight, for an atheist to discover that they already believed.
It's not a line, it is a gap. This gap represents the differing levels of doubt there are any gods. One might have a small suspicion there are no gods another may be almost convinced there are no gods, and everything between. A person's doubt in gods can vary over the course of their lifetime. Some become disbelievers and others gain a hold on their faith.
Only one thing, the existence of gods. If they exist in your mind, you are a theist. An atheist is "a-theist" or not a theist. Like a-typical or a-political. Adding any more to the definition of atheist is pointless as you'll never get any other definition, they will all agree to except that one.
I agree that every human being has some level of spirituality in them. That's part of being human, always 'seeing' patterns and trying to come up with reasons of why things happen. It's what made us survive as primitive hunter/gatherers. People have to find a substitute for that. You can find meaning in science, in philosophy. But if you can't, that's when you fall into the rabbit hole of conspiracy theories. When you're anxious and you don't understand the world anymore, I think it's understandable that thinking that the world is secretely controlled by a group of wealthy businessmen who watch everything you do, creates a weird kind of psychological comfort. While the idea that the world is a chaotic mess and that we're all just a bunch of incompetent nitwits that don't know what the f*ck we're doing, is absolutely frightening.
I have zero perception of the supernatural and the concept of spirituality is alien to me. It has been this way for me since my teens back in the late 1970s. We flourished because we survived long enough produce offspring and protect them until they could protect themselves.
This seems too simplistic on first pass…although they may be because of time constraints on a video this short. But I don’t think this encompasses the full picture. The definition of “atheism” vs “theism” is very muddied. Atheism by definition is an absence of belief in deities. You can argue that what constitutes as a “deity” means different things to different people, but generally there is a line. People who identify as atheist but believe in God and simply reject religious institutions, are still theists. Although, this lends itself to the argument that a lot of atheists don’t understand themselves or their religious identity. Even so, this video also fails to talk about the people that truly have no spiritual beliefs, and see no need to place personal value in them. They actually do exist. I’m also unconvinced that atheists are not okay with saying things like “I wish God would destroy my friends” because they secretly hold value in spiritual practices. Wouldn’t just thinking about that type of thing make the average person uncomfortable/stressed enough for a polygraph to pick up (which: reminder, polygraphs only record physiological responses, they aren’t true “lie detectors”)? Whether you believe in God or not, it’s hard to joke about hurting someone you love. The stakes are too high. Even if you don’t believe in God, why would you risk saying something so horrible and then a friend ended up in a freak accident? Even if i didn’t believe I had a hand in it, it would haunt me for the rest of my life.
Good points. For what it's worth, they tried to control for nonreligious emotional reactions to the prompt by comparing physiological responses to negative thoughts that involved god and ones that did not. The original study is here if you are interested: sci-hub.hkvisa.net/10.1080/10508619.2013.771991
The ism is the problem. We atheists rejected the ism for decades, but it ultimately became part of the English language. Atheist as a word is similar to any adjective, like green or soft. It is driven only by the existence of the word, theist. A person is a-theist if they are not a theist. If belief in gods was identified by wearing a hat, an atheist man would not be wearing a hat. Making it an -ism changed the meaning and believes using it to mean many things other than just simply a person who has no belief in gods or disbelieves gods exist (like myself). If someone is saying they believe gods exist, but call themselves atheist, this is errant. If someone hates their god, they are also not atheist. An atheist can believe in anything else and can still be atheist, even ghosts and an afterlife. The belief in a 'high-power' does not lend itself to being atheistic, but there is no authority to make that determination. Again, anything goes except belief in gods.
Atheists are ONLY those who are not believers in gods. The speaker has no clue what he is talking about. Again, it is best to ask the atheist about disbelief and a believer about belief.
I mean yes we are animals of believing and the core of beliving is our social and more importantly PERSONAL VALUE vision of the world, so none of our actions are coherent from a factual point of view but always from a VALUE point of view. However value is not a religion it's a belief system but not a belif on supernatural things, the atheist who physiologically respond to religious things are 100% conditionned by social belief, this didn't proove that our brain is a religion believer by nature, by nature our brain is built on value and beliefs and religion is shaped on this basics but religion is not hardwired thait is the fact of believing in therms of values thait is hardwire, otherwise this is not scientific but just a fake religious argument.
An atheism that likes spiritual practices is not an atheist. But in the eyes of God all atheists and former believers are the same. They all rejected Jesus Christ, The only way to heaven and eternal life. A Holy man is a sinner in Gods eyes, and in our eyes too. Most people are hypocrites, they tarnish the justice of god with a brush that they do not use on themselves. Gods justice overrules all forms of everything, from mentality to personality to relationships, morals, etc. he proves He is sovereign by exciting pure justice but attached to mercy. A fake god thinks only about himself and his needs. Satan incarnate. A true God the Christian God thinks about everyone involved in each action.
It is amazing how misunderstood this simple concept becomes when you bend over backward in order to avoid offending people. Atheists dont believe in God. Naturalism or materialism is a different belief. An atheist could be a Wiccan, or believe in supernatural phenomenon. A materialist does not. This video does not define three atheists. It just muddies the water. Using slang terms like "Hardcore" does nothing to help understanding.
@@jamesparson I do and as an atheist this often comes from believers as to what atheists believe, but this is not true for the vast majority of disbelievers. We are rarely narcissists or nihilists. Saying there are no gods, does not mean we consider ourselves gods. Most of us consider humans to be just as insignificant as the other animals.
@@matthewtaylorbrown I still don't know what a "higher self" is. Is this something testable or observable? To me it like "spirituality". I have no clue as what someone with spirituality is vs one who doesn't have it. It is like if I said, I am an atheist, but I still believe in "something". What that "something" is can't be described, but it is there.
@@jamesparson I have no clue about a higher self or what might all be included in being spiritual. I can only speak for myself, I am not spiritual, I have no perception of the supernatural or how I could redefine my terms to even label myself as spiritual. It all sounds the same to me. There are no gods.
Do you think that atheists can believe in the supernatural, or is it contradictory?
If they don't believe god/s then sure, they can believe in the superanatural, and some atheists do have some concept of a supernatural realms. But I'd say the majority don't, I'm part of a number groups that essentially require one to be an atheist (skeptics, rationalists and secular humanist). The people in these groups won't believe in any supernatural things. Then you have the casual kind of atheists (being in New Zealand we have a lot of these), they don't believe in god/s but they mostly don't think too much about the question, but amongst this group you may find quite a few more that think there might be something spiritual.
I think many Buddhists are considered atheist so I don’t think it’s a contradiction. Atheists merely don’t believe in a god, but that doesn’t exclude the possibility of spirits or other supernatural phenomenon. That said, many atheists do not believe in a god or anything supernatural.
An atheist can believer in ANYTHING except the existence of gods.
Can theists believe in honest discourse, or is it contradictory?
Of course they can! They are humans and humans are never safe from mistakes…
Kind of seems like this video didn’t leave any room for atheists who AREN’T actually spiritual.
Like me
I'm an atheist as well, but I agree with the speaker in this video. That we're all, on some level spiritual, even though you might not be conciously aware of it. Humans are evolutionary hardwired to be that way.
It's simple, Ryan. We don't exist. It's all an illusion.🤣
Everyone has an opinion. There are zero gods and I am in no way, spiritual. I'm just secular with no perception of the supernatural.
@@henk-3098
Until someone can CLEARLY define what “spiritual” means, I don’t see how you can make the claim you know what is going on in other people’s minds better than those people do. I find that extremely problematic, if not outright dishonest.
Disbeliever: "I firmly believe no gods exist." Xian: "Can you justify your belief?" Disbeliever: "Of course I can, but you lack the standing to offer such a challenge. You believe that only one god exists and no more. Can you rationally justify _that_ belief?" Xian: "Uhh...no." Disbeliever: "Then you're in the same boat so shut up."
We hold everything up to the same standards. Theism fails. Why is that difficult for you?
I'm an atheist, and I always felt it was weird when people said they weren't religious but were "spiritual" because it basically implied a god. That said, I'm not immune from supernatural thinking - like if my plane hits turbulence, I'll have the urge to pray. I just intellectually think it's an emotional response that's not based in reality, similarly to how I might feel 'lucky' if I roll five sevens in a row but intellectually know it's just chance.
The implications of the word "supernatural" are outside of/beyond Nature. That in itself, i.e., that there is a Force and that this Force is outside of Nature or beyond Nature....that is itself an assumption. In other words, the very word "supernatural" may be quite misleading.
If you have the urge to pray in-flight, I recommend you seek out a god as you'll eventually get there anyway. There are zero gods, but if you are praying to one or more of them, you might not be atheist. You might have reasons for disbelief, but it sounds like you are just saving it for you're old.
I’m a former Christian. I’m now atheist, but as spiritual as ever or even more so. I admit the word has lots of baggage. Through a combination of occasional psychedelic experiences and Buddhist-style meditation, I’ve learned that it is indeed possible to lead a rich spiritual life without believing in superstition or magic.
By “spiritual” I mean that my practice has expanded my mind, brought deep inner peace (without any false consolations), relieved nearly all of my psychological suffering, helped me see through many delusions of the mind, and healed traumas of the past (including my religious upbringing). It sounds zany but it is even possible to have insights and literal visions which bring about wisdom and greater perspective on the big questions of life.
I’m more present and grateful for what I have and orient my life far less around consumption or ego. I’m much more compassionate to other people, myself, and other living things. I literally haven’t been bored in several years. I no longer fear death. I’m scientifically literate and understand that all this is happening solely in my mind; but at the end of the day, that is where we all experience our life, whether well-being or suffering.
Being spiritual without religion is not only possible, but for me it’s improved my life in all the ways religion promises to without the BS. Sorry to get on my soapbox (or appear to boast) but that’s why I’m spiritual and not religious. Although I think most people mean they like to relax in the woods and put up crystals in their house.
@@acslater017 Finally, someone gave a description. :)
@@acslater017 please read your Bible- JESUS CHRIST IS REAL! As is Heven AND Hell!
As an atheist, while I myself have no belief in the supernatural, I don't see why holding a belief in it would be incompatible with being an atheist. I can easily envision being able to believe magic is a real thing, or ghosts, or psychic powers and yet not believe in any gods. I find the speaker's interpretation that using cultural expressions - such as euphemistically saying something was "not meant to be" or "bless you" or " oh my god" indicate any actual belief in the divine. These expressions are woven into every facet of our culture - it would be extremely hard to grow up in America and not hear them constantly. At the end of the day, we use language the people around us understand and these phrases are part of that shared understanding of how to communicate certain emotions that are not necessarily theistic in origin.
You cannot prove a negative. Atheist destroy faith hope and well being. A secret of atheists is that they do have god's; success, pleasure, science, charity, or even good things like charity, without their gods they too could not live. Also they cannot deny that evil exists; just as darkness points to the fact that somewhere light exists even if no one has ever seen it! There are many things in the universe man has never seen. I have never seen Donald Trump but I believe he exists based on the accounts of others. The holy Spirit is a reality within us that we can feel sense and even hear!!!! We Christians know this!!!
3:19 I think it's perfectly normal that negative thoughts produce negative feelings, even if it involves some imaginary creature. If I try to imagine Donald Duck murdering my mom it would create negative feelings as well.
Good point. For what it's worth, they tried to control for this by comparing physiological responses to negative thoughts that involved god and ones that did not. The original study is here if you are interested: sci-hub.hkvisa.net/10.1080/10508619.2013.771991
Hello, I want to explain why I am not believing:
What is the boiling point of water ? If it is pure water under 1 atm atmosphere pressure, it is 100 degrees Celsius. You can repeat it 1000 times and you will find out that it is always the same result. But as soon as you change the atmospheric pressure, e.g. by doing the heating on mount Everest, you will find out it is boiling earlier, you can again repeat it and get the same results. By adding salt, you will find out that it is now boiling later. But under same conditions you will again get the same results. That's why it is possible to make measuring devices like a thermometer. Imagine you try to measure a temperature and you get different results under the same conditions; the measuring device would be useless.
So under same conditions you get the same results F(x), under different conditions or initial variables or parameters (x) you get different results.
Now to the problem, religions are promising two different results, heaven (F1) or hell (F2). What are the parameters for going to heaven (or hell), being good, having faith, being patient, being helpfull, being adequate intelligent (to have faith or not to have faith), live long enough to go to hell (babies go to heaven) etc.
So, if there are two results, the initial (given) parameters (or the resultant of them) cannot be the same. So if the initial parameters for heaven or hell are differntly distributed to people, can we speak about a fair god ? Do you believe in an unfair god ? I don't.
I do cover this topic slightly differently. If all the books and knowledge of gravity were lost, it could be rediscovered. And the newly discovered facts of gravity would match the old facts of gravity. If all books and knowledge of god was last, it would be gone forever.
@jamesparson but even if all the books of God are gone and unrecoverable, as you say, does that erase the existence of God? Just because you don't believe doesn't mean that he cease being who he is. Just like if I say that you're not real, having not ever met you, doesn't make you dissappear. The reality is even IF the books of God are gone and nobody could read about God, the presence of God will remain and mankind will always search for God... even if a few do not. There will always be at least one who will search... and they will find. We can't reason him away because it sounds logical to us. But we are all entitled to what we believe.
Several of the "atheists" in his lists wouldn't be considered "atheists" at all. It really is an issue of "do you believe in deities or not". If you're not sure, or have some sort of "maybe", then you aren't an atheist. I'm agnostic. I don't know one way or the other,...because there isn't any way to factually determine whether something like "a deity" exists at all...or even could exist in reality...or especially "outside our understanding".
And yes, some atheists might use colloquialisms..."not meant to be"...or even "thank god", but don't at all say that in a way that says "they believe in an actual god".
If Earth (& therefore humans) did not exist, would Christians still believe in God? Said another way, is God's existence independent or dependent on humans?
I am an atheist. I am not angry at a god I don't think exists. I am angry at grifters. As far as I can tell all priests and pastors are grifters.
Y ou are polytheistic. Y ou worship the state, the earth, blackness, dr. fauci and many more.
Silly nonsense. The theism/atheism debate is about the acceptance vs the rejection of the existence of gods. Don't complicate it. "Social" atheists? "Emotional" atheists? No. Most atheists are neutral nonbelievers. Some are disbelievers who think gods probably don't exist. An ultra-rare few are deniers who think gods _definitely_ don't exist. I imagine this is somewhat similar to the demographics of those who don't accept the existence of Martian microbes: Mostly nonbelievers, some disbelievers and a rare few deniers. Wiki got it right.
Why does it matter, anyway. There have been atheists and believers. Both of them died. Believers cannot prove there is a god. Atheists cannot disprove that there is a god. But atheist are more in-line with objective reality.
There are no gods! It is mostly us older atheists, pre-Internet that believe this way.
@@deepdsingh1994 I'm an old atheist. I can prove man has been creating religions and gods in a timeline since before Mesopotamia, around the world. These gods overlap and they come and go. Is this not fact? Where did I go wrong? Am I lying? Am I disingenuous?
@@matthewtaylorbrown yes, there is no god or a supreme being as described in the Scriptures. Explore what is enlightenment and yoga,.
@@deepdsingh1994 There are no gods, we've been creating them since we first noticed the Sun cast our shadows. We literally have a timeline of religions and their gods dating back since before Mesopotamia and around the world since then. They come and they go. They help explain complex questions with simple answers. The god you were born into is just as fake.
Im a social atheist. I believe in all human beings able to live their lives the way they choose.
Does anyone have a source to the study he cites where researchers asked participants to ask God to hurt their friends? I can't find any sort of study like this anywhere.
Hey there! Here's a link to the study on ResearchGate: www.researchgate.net/publication/271670348_Atheists_Become_Emotionally_Aroused_When_Daring_God_to_Do_Terrible_Things
Everybody is an athiest when it comes to not believing in, understanding or respecting other people's religion or belief or non-belief.
athiest?
We believe all sorts of things.
It's hard to pinpoint what to call myself really, I was pagan at first, then humanist, then spiritual atheist, now I guess just atheist will do, but I am interested in spiritual questions, and I am open to the possibility of supernatural phenomena such as reincarnation and ghosts. I don't just throw it all aside. I'm waiting for adequate evidence. These things are not proven not to be, so I don't throw them out. God however, is just too far fetched to me. There is no evidence either however, that our universe is not actually a microbiome in the gut of a much larger organism, either. But a God that listens to your thoughts? Na-ah. It's too loaded, and explainable by psychology, the human need for an all-knowing father, or memories of the womb, and for someone to be in control and have all the answers. And con artists and megalomaniacs take advantage of that.
So you're saying we're more alike than we know. If only Christians knew that. They're always trying to "save" me. It's insulting.
If you're waiting on "adequate" evidence for the existence of God, you'll need a lot of patience. There is none, none either for or against the existence of God.
Where would someone begin looking for proof of the existence or the absence of God? In the air, space, in the sea, within the earth, within the human psyche, in the lab of whatever kind, in some book, holy or otherwise .....where? No one knows and no one will know where to look. What instruments would we use? What tests, what would evidence look like or be like?
If evidence is what you're waiting on, you'll have a lifelong wait.
@@grantsmythe8625 I didn't say that. I said God was too far fetched. I said I was waiting for evidence on reincarnation and ghosts.
I'm not 100% sure at age 50.. Since I'm not sure I still don't believe in the devil as well... I lean more to not believing.. I went along with it throughout childhood days, I just believe once we 6 feet under that's it.. That program HOW THE UNIVERSE WORKS makes me question religion...
I wonder if "teleological thinking" is actually just atheists using common cultural idioms as shorthand to describe their experiences? Ask a linguist or a theologian to observe the same behavior and they will likely come to different conclusions about why certain words or phrases are used.
Also, of course the idea of wishing harm on loved ones would cause physiological distress, just like in believers. Just because you don't believe it will happen, that doesn't mean the idea of it isnt still distressing.
Redefining terms is a phase of someone questioning their belief in gods. If you are a believer, that is very insightful. Have an atheist, a scientist, and a theologian after a NDE and I'll you get three different experiences. As a Hindu, Jew, Muslim, and a Christian and the same is true. I've had several on dialysis and once during a big procedure. All I got was warmth and a bright light and those are explainable by the dilation of the eyes (extreme) and the chemical spill on the brain. If a Hindu woman sees Brahma in her NDE, it's not evidence Jesus or Heaven are real.
Then refute fifth dimensional physics, because we need to stop imposing OUR physics on the cosmos.
I'm sceptical of the claim that because atheists sometimes speak in teleological terms that that implies an underlying or innate compulsion toward belief in purpose or design in their affairs. The historical development of teleological phrases in a given language, its norms of use, convention, and cultural influence heavily contribute to, even limit the way we express ideas. For example, even serious athiests frequently invoke God in their impulsive utterances. "Oh my God!" and "Jesus Christ!" are two of the most common. But that doesn't have to indicate an unconscious impulsion toward faith in God. That claim bears striking similarity to the Muslim belief in the 'fitrah'; the innate, pre-programmed inclination to believe in God, which is either nurtured or 'corrupted' through life experiences. Both the fitrah, and the inbuilt faith/spirituality claim are metaphysical claims, not scientific claims. If you're a physicalist or an athiest, you don't believe in metaphysical beings, which means you can't possibly think that faith or spirituality are anything other than brain-based emergent phenomena.
Where does the boundary between atheism and theism lie? In seeking useful philosophies to draw from, I stumbled upon spiritual beliefs I already held. One would imagine it a rare sight, for an atheist to discover that they already believed.
It's not a line, it is a gap. This gap represents the differing levels of doubt there are any gods. One might have a small suspicion there are no gods another may be almost convinced there are no gods, and everything between. A person's doubt in gods can vary over the course of their lifetime. Some become disbelievers and others gain a hold on their faith.
Only one thing, the existence of gods. If they exist in your mind, you are a theist. An atheist is "a-theist" or not a theist. Like a-typical or a-political. Adding any more to the definition of atheist is pointless as you'll never get any other definition, they will all agree to except that one.
I agree that every human being has some level of spirituality in them. That's part of being human, always 'seeing' patterns and trying to come up with reasons of why things happen. It's what made us survive as primitive hunter/gatherers. People have to find a substitute for that. You can find meaning in science, in philosophy. But if you can't, that's when you fall into the rabbit hole of conspiracy theories. When you're anxious and you don't understand the world anymore, I think it's understandable that thinking that the world is secretely controlled by a group of wealthy businessmen who watch everything you do, creates a weird kind of psychological comfort. While the idea that the world is a chaotic mess and that we're all just a bunch of incompetent nitwits that don't know what the f*ck we're doing, is absolutely frightening.
I don’t know what spirituality is. I don’t know how to test if I have it
I have zero perception of the supernatural and the concept of spirituality is alien to me. It has been this way for me since my teens back in the late 1970s. We flourished because we survived long enough produce offspring and protect them until they could protect themselves.
This seems too simplistic on first pass…although they may be because of time constraints on a video this short. But I don’t think this encompasses the full picture.
The definition of “atheism” vs “theism” is very muddied. Atheism by definition is an absence of belief in deities. You can argue that what constitutes as a “deity” means different things to different people, but generally there is a line. People who identify as atheist but believe in God and simply reject religious institutions, are still theists. Although, this lends itself to the argument that a lot of atheists don’t understand themselves or their religious identity. Even so, this video also fails to talk about the people that truly have no spiritual beliefs, and see no need to place personal value in them. They actually do exist.
I’m also unconvinced that atheists are not okay with saying things like “I wish God would destroy my friends” because they secretly hold value in spiritual practices. Wouldn’t just thinking about that type of thing make the average person uncomfortable/stressed enough for a polygraph to pick up (which: reminder, polygraphs only record physiological responses, they aren’t true “lie detectors”)? Whether you believe in God or not, it’s hard to joke about hurting someone you love. The stakes are too high. Even if you don’t believe in God, why would you risk saying something so horrible and then a friend ended up in a freak accident? Even if i didn’t believe I had a hand in it, it would haunt me for the rest of my life.
Good points. For what it's worth, they tried to control for nonreligious emotional reactions to the prompt by comparing physiological responses to negative thoughts that involved god and ones that did not. The original study is here if you are interested: sci-hub.hkvisa.net/10.1080/10508619.2013.771991
The ism is the problem. We atheists rejected the ism for decades, but it ultimately became part of the English language. Atheist as a word is similar to any adjective, like green or soft. It is driven only by the existence of the word, theist. A person is a-theist if they are not a theist. If belief in gods was identified by wearing a hat, an atheist man would not be wearing a hat. Making it an -ism changed the meaning and believes using it to mean many things other than just simply a person who has no belief in gods or disbelieves gods exist (like myself). If someone is saying they believe gods exist, but call themselves atheist, this is errant. If someone hates their god, they are also not atheist. An atheist can believe in anything else and can still be atheist, even ghosts and an afterlife. The belief in a 'high-power' does not lend itself to being atheistic, but there is no authority to make that determination. Again, anything goes except belief in gods.
Atheists are ONLY those who are not believers in gods. The speaker has no clue what he is talking about. Again, it is best to ask the atheist about disbelief and a believer about belief.
Atheists believe all kinds of things.
Imaginary gods are not one of them.
Why is this a problem?
Everyone is born an atheist. Unless you "feel" like you have a connection to "god" but at that point you should get your head checked
There are many different types of Christians also.
I mean yes we are animals of believing and the core of beliving is our social and more importantly PERSONAL VALUE vision of the world, so none of our actions are coherent from a factual point of view but always from a VALUE point of view. However value is not a religion it's a belief system but not a belif on supernatural things, the atheist who physiologically respond to religious things are 100% conditionned by social belief, this didn't proove that our brain is a religion believer by nature, by nature our brain is built on value and beliefs and religion is shaped on this basics but religion is not hardwired thait is the fact of believing in therms of values thait is hardwire, otherwise this is not scientific but just a fake religious argument.
An atheism that likes spiritual practices is not an atheist. But in the eyes of God all atheists and former believers are the same. They all rejected Jesus Christ, The only way to heaven and eternal life. A Holy man is a sinner in Gods eyes, and in our eyes too. Most people are hypocrites, they tarnish the justice of god with a brush that they do not use on themselves. Gods justice overrules all forms of everything, from mentality to personality to relationships, morals, etc. he proves He is sovereign by exciting pure justice but attached to mercy. A fake god thinks only about himself and his needs. Satan incarnate. A true God the Christian God thinks about everyone involved in each action.
The three types are igtheist, hard atheist, and agnostic, but you can be any combination of them at the same time.
So i am a devil's advocate 😂
It is amazing how misunderstood this simple concept becomes when you bend over backward in order to avoid offending people.
Atheists dont believe in God. Naturalism or materialism is a different belief. An atheist could be a Wiccan, or believe in supernatural phenomenon. A materialist does not.
This video does not define three atheists. It just muddies the water. Using slang terms like "Hardcore" does nothing to help understanding.
Just another label. You don’t actually have to adhere to any one thought or idea. All words are just human invention anyway.
True, but the facts remain without a label. One either believes in gods or they do not. No label needed.
I'm non religious, I only believe in my own, higher self.
I have no idea what that means.
@@jamesparson I do and as an atheist this often comes from believers as to what atheists believe, but this is not true for the vast majority of disbelievers. We are rarely narcissists or nihilists. Saying there are no gods, does not mean we consider ourselves gods. Most of us consider humans to be just as insignificant as the other animals.
@@matthewtaylorbrown I still don't know what a "higher self" is. Is this something testable or observable?
To me it like "spirituality". I have no clue as what someone with spirituality is vs one who doesn't have it.
It is like if I said, I am an atheist, but I still believe in "something". What that "something" is can't be described, but it is there.
@@jamesparson I have no clue about a higher self or what might all be included in being spiritual. I can only speak for myself, I am not spiritual, I have no perception of the supernatural or how I could redefine my terms to even label myself as spiritual. It all sounds the same to me. There are no gods.