As an active atheist what is your "thing"?

Prang
Prang's picture
Posts: 18
Joined: 2007-07-04
User is offlineOffline
As an active atheist what is your "thing"?

I couldn't find a short and sweet summary to put into the subject line but I will clarify...

In your discussions and/or arguments about atheism/theism. What is your favorite approach. Or at least the principle that your atheism is based on? Some atheists are very well versed in (insert holy book here) errancy and other theological arguments. Some are focused on evolution, cosmology, that kind of thing.

Me personally, I used to argue bible errancy. But now my go to argument to a theist is,"prove it" show me objective proof of god, the supernatural, astrology. Put up or shut up. I really have no patience for blind faith, even less, blind faith as a badge of honor.

I have to admit that pointing out the myriad of holes in the bible is good for a giggle but ultimately without objective proof, the whole premise is absurd.


V1per41
V1per41's picture
Posts: 287
Joined: 2006-10-09
User is offlineOffline
I'm with you for the most

I'm with you for the most part.  I consider myself a pretty good evolution buff and could probably destroy the majority of creationists "arguments" off hand without any trouble.

Past that I just go with the "Do you have any reason to believe what you just said?"  approach.  I treat religious claims just like that of any other, if there is no evidence then there is no reason to believe.  I also have a pretty good knowledge of logial fallicies so when someone presents a piece of "evidece" I can usually come back very quickly with "well that is an argument from ... or that is the ... logical fallacy" and then explain why their argument doesn't hold water.

 The biggest problem I have is that people around where I live don't care that much about religion.  Most people believe, but they rarely ever have a reason, and even more rarely do they ever want to participate in any kind of discussion about religion.  So I get a lot of "well I can't prove my position and you can't prove I'm wrong so let's just stop now."

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan


Jarem Asyder
Jarem Asyder's picture
Posts: 153
Joined: 2007-06-18
User is offlineOffline
I prefer to throw the

I prefer to throw the morality issue in their face, pointing out the utter horrific morals in the bible. I really want people who haven't explored their religion to really think about it. I'm pretty well versed on evolution and I know the basics of cosmology, but I prefer bringing up the political and moral issues of religion. 


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
I usually go straight up

I usually go straight up logic, ontology, syllogism.  This way, I can incorporate biblical errancy, evolution, etc, into the argument without relying on them -- since I am admittedly not an expert on the subjects.  Logic, however, I can do very well, and it's something that everyone can relate to, even if they don't know that they understand it.

The main problem I have with errancy as an approach is that as soon as you run into a liberal theist, you lose a lot of thunder.  They don't care that the bible is errant.  Same with evolution.  Liberal theists usually accept science, including evolution, until it crosses the boundary of faith as a virtue.  When you get there, you're talking  about the origins of knowledge, or simply, logic.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


V1per41
V1per41's picture
Posts: 287
Joined: 2006-10-09
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: ... The

Hambydammit wrote:

...

The main problem I have with errancy as an approach is that as soon as you run into a liberal theist, you lose a lot of thunder. They don't care that the bible is errant. Same with evolution. Liberal theists usually accept science, including evolution, until it crosses the boundary of faith as a virtue. When you get there, you're talking about the origins of knowledge, or simply, logic.

 

That's why I don't just rely on evolution.  The first thing I always ask is "do you have any reason to believe what you just said?"  and let them lead the discusion with me pointing out logical fallicies or facts that are just plain wrong.

The big point with evolution is that I feel like the #1 evidence given by born-agains is that creation proves a creator, and if you can't strike that point down with ease then they just continue to force this issue and you can't really move on to the logic questions.

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
This is a little off-topic,

This is a little off-topic, but it might be interesting to have mock debate / conversations one-on-one to hone effectiveness.  I had, like, twenty years of training on the other side.  So I bet I can still play the part of a fundy. 

I have good reasons for abandoning faith, but sometimes I'm not so good (in the heat of the moment) at defending them.  I'm talking about real world encounters that happen in real time.  I tend to feel emotional and lose my ability to reason.

Just an idea. 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


djneibarger
Superfan
djneibarger's picture
Posts: 564
Joined: 2007-04-13
User is offlineOffline
though i know this will

though i know this will draw criticism from most theists and disagreement from some atheists, i personally consider the argument against the existence of god and the debate over the man-made nature of the bible/religion a done deal. it's just truth against denial, at this point.

my primary focus, now, is the removal of religion from american schools and government. there are others who are more skilled than myself at debating the historical and scientific aspects of atheism.

www.derekneibarger.com http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=djneibarger "all postures of submission and surrender should be part of our prehistory." -christopher hitchens


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
I'll be happy to debate you

I'll be happy to debate you if you want.  We could do it in FTA so as not to be disturbed by theists... I'll take either side you want.  It's a good mental exercise.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
It really depends upon the

It really depends upon the individual to whom I am speaking.

For the most part, my own skepticism about why they believe is enough to get the ball rolling.

I fancy myself to be a polymath so any topic they are interested in is fine with me. I listen until they make an error such as a presupposition and then go from there. Ultimately, the conversation comes down to conditioned responses on both of our parts and then I shock them by analyzing that part of the conversation.

Dawkins has been doing that way in the public eye for a couple of years. I've been talking to rednecks, wait staff, and gas station attendants for WAY longer than that. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


snafu
atheist
snafu's picture
Posts: 101
Joined: 2006-12-17
User is offlineOffline
If all else fails I fall

If all else fails I fall back on the line, "if there is a God then don't you think He would be much happier if we just all got along trying to live together peacefully rather than trying to force people into believing something you can't prove?"

"The World is my country, science my religion" - Christiaan Huygens


ParanoidAgnostic
ParanoidAgnostic's picture
Posts: 402
Joined: 2007-05-20
User is offlineOffline
I'm generally a defensive

I'm generally a defensive atheist. I wait for a theist attack then respond to whatever it is, usually by pointing out where each piece of faulty logic in their argument is. This get's a little repetetive as it seems like they only have a handfull of arguments but it's still fun to recognise each and show its flaws within the context they provide.

I'm qualified as a highschool mathematics and science teacher (although I work as a computer programmer) So I have a broad (although not deep in many areas, my passion is really for mathematics rather than science) knowledge and understanding of science and the logic behind it and some grounding in psychology (mostly developmental psychology) this helps me be the all-rounder I needed to be prepared to counter any argument they present since generally they choose the battle ground. I could probably use better knowledge of history, that's my weakness.

When I do go on the offensive it's usually about the negative efects of religions rather than their falsehood. I focus on the redardation of moral/mental development and individuality and on the stupid and horrible things religion motivates and justifies.  

 

Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!


V1per41
V1per41's picture
Posts: 287
Joined: 2006-10-09
User is offlineOffline
djneibarger wrote: though

djneibarger wrote:

though i know this will draw criticism from most theists and disagreement from some atheists, i personally consider the argument against the existence of god and the debate over the man-made nature of the bible/religion a done deal. it's just truth against denial, at this point....

I think we are all with you on this one.  The problem is how do you convince the deniers? 

 

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan


Jarem Asyder
Jarem Asyder's picture
Posts: 153
Joined: 2007-06-18
User is offlineOffline
Apparently I need to brush

Apparently I need to brush up on my arguments.

I recently got into a discussion with my mom and sister, who are both liberal theists. And got caught up in the circular logic fight with them cherry picking the bible and claiming most everything in it was meant to be metaphorical. Well, when I pointed out the fallacy and explained you have to take the bible in full and not cherry pick, I got hit with this little tidbit:

"Well I know my dad would be utterly horrified by what you're saying and I hope you're happy with yourself." This coming from my mom, who hasn't quite gotten over her fathers death 20 years ago to lou goerig's disease.

I really wanted to point out that her god would have caused that, but I was simply ignored after that.

I'm usually pretty good at arguing, but with my family its like it falls on completely deaf ears.  


xamination
xamination's picture
Posts: 420
Joined: 2007-02-01
User is offlineOffline
Jarem, that is why you

Jarem, that is why you should never argue with your mother on topics of religion - you will never win.  They are all accomplished emotional terrorists, and trying to point out her logical fallacies just makes you feel like a dick.

As for myself, I tend to let theists start the arguements - they have the experience at that.  And since I don't have a real problem with theism, I usually let people believe what they believe, unless I am challenged or they get in my way. 

I hope that when the world comes to an end I can breathe a sigh of relief, because there will be so much to look forward to.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 16425
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Prang wrote: I couldn't

Prang wrote:

I couldn't find a short and sweet summary to put into the subject line but I will clarify...

In your discussions and/or arguments about atheism/theism. What is your favorite approach. Or at least the principle that your atheism is based on? Some atheists are very well versed in (insert holy book here) errancy and other theological arguments. Some are focused on evolution, cosmology, that kind of thing.

Me personally, I used to argue bible errancy. But now my go to argument to a theist is,"prove it" show me objective proof of god, the supernatural, astrology. Put up or shut up. I really have no patience for blind faith, even less, blind faith as a badge of honor.

I have to admit that pointing out the myriad of holes in the bible is good for a giggle but ultimately without objective proof, the whole premise is absurd.

What is my favorite tactic? Any of my close friends will tell you that it is my "One trick poney".

ATTACK THE MAGIC!

What I have learned is that all theists dodge absurdities by attempting to rectify history and science with absurdities.

I've heard a Muslim claiming that a verse in the quran proves Allah's existance because it talks about mountains moving. How does observing an earthquake constitute knowing WHY an earthquake happens?

I've heard everything from "this person existed" to "second law" from multiple apologists and not just from one religion. They all do it.

Tell me how Jesus existing constituts God tapping his friend Gabe on the shoulder saying "Hey Gabe, go tell Marry I have a Barry White album ready for her" Tell me what peer revied medical evidence we have for dead human flesh surviving rigor mortis and carcus decay after 3 days.

When one has their crap dectector set on "If it makes no sense" it is pretty easy.

Although I deal with mainly religion rooted in ancient history, I still apply the same skepticism to things like vampires, ufos, ouiji boards, tarrot cards, Loc ness.

ATTACK THE MAGIC! That is my thing.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog


Detritus
Posts: 2
Joined: 2007-07-12
User is offlineOffline
I go to a college in the

I go to a college in the south, where most people are VERY conservative and VERY religious, so I get into those sorts of arguments a fair amount. 
My new approach is to have the theist look up the verse where it says followers of jesus can drink poison and not die, and then offer them a little tin of strychnine to see how strong their faith is.


Bornright
Bornright's picture
Posts: 22
Joined: 2007-07-11
User is offlineOffline
I hardly ever get a chance

I hardly ever get a chance to debate, discuss, or argue with theists face to face. It's pretty rare for me considering where I frequent myself, I suppose I wouldn't mind an encounter or two on a monthly basis. Most all interaction in this sence has been over teh internets.

I generally don't get too deep into discussions, biblical discussions that is, or dive into any other thiest literature. My approach stays within the present as much as possible. I'll remind the thiest that they aren't god, didn't write the book they quote, and can't perform miricles. So there's really not much credibility to what a thiest says regarding the invisible masters of the universe, unless of course they're talking about Heman.

After that it's just separating everything they've entangled and attached with the supernatural, which is really nothing if you think it about it. But you still have to talk about it, and man what a waste of time that is!

"There was a 100% chance I was going to write this" - Heisenberg.


Adraedan
Adraedan's picture
Posts: 27
Joined: 2007-07-12
User is offlineOffline
I like to think I am fairly

I like to think I am fairly decent, though amaturly trained, at attacking logical fallacies and using the socratic method of argument. I keep asking questions to answer questions and attempt to make my target basically prove themself wrong.

 

I've also been told I'm really good at making people angry without insulting them... so I use that to make my opponent falter or flat out threaten me, kind of making their own validity fall apart. 

Have no pity for those mired in the prophet delusion, content to be servile for a lifetime; tis better to be king for a day


ObnoxiousBitch
Superfan
ObnoxiousBitch's picture
Posts: 115
Joined: 2006-02-22
User is offlineOffline
Most of my arguments are

Most of my arguments are more slanted toward church-state separation and the need to end the official endorsement of Christianity implicit in slapping big-G God's name into or onto things meant for all Americans, in violation of our first Amendment rights.

Sure, I'll express my opinion that god-belief is ridiculous whenever given the opportunity, but for the most part I'd be happy for people to believe whatever the hell they want at home and in church as long as their religious rules aren't being used to make laws we have to live under. 

I'll have to get much more familiar with the arguments of the resident experts around here before I'll really feel comfortable using them in debate against theists I come across.

Invisible friends are for children and psychopaths.


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Hi Detrius and Adraedan and

Hi Detrius and Adraedan and welcome to the forums.

When you get a chance, we'd love it if you'd hop over to the General Conversation, Introductions and Humor forum and introduce yourselves. 

 


Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.