Atheism = Naturalism?

[The-universe]

Knowing this is NG I'm sure it'll sprawl into a "does god exist?" topic or nitpicking about the definition of Atheism/Agnosticism. So I'll kindly ask you refrain from the former and I'll give a basic definition of what I think Atheism is under the hopes it'll be agree'd upon.

In an abstract sense I believe that Atheism is not accepting the assertion that a god or gods exist. Depending on the definition of what classes a god considering how nebulous the term can be without resorting to semantics over dictionaries. And what objects can be classed as agreeable existence since we haven't observed anything to exist outside the universe so the term would only be applicable to something in the universe itself.

Now that's out of the way and open for dialogue, I have a question. Does one have to be a Naturalist in order to be an Atheist?

This question stems from several (anecdotal) observations, one in particular is I've seen amplitudes of Atheists generally conform to Naturalism and using that as a basis for not accepting a god(s). But on the other hand I've seen plenty of Atheists reach the same conclusion but use dumb fuck reasons.

Another reason this question has risen is simply because, I've also (anecdotally) noticed Atheists proclaim belief in intelligent alien life, ghosts, big foot/loch ness monster and even ridiculous conspiracy theories etc etc. They can happily deny one fable and then gleefully accept the next.

I've also noticed that in discussions with some Theists that they automatically assume you're a Naturalist and then use this as a basis for their assertions. Although it's generally to do with what caused the Big Bang or debating morality.

Thoughts?

[MultiCanimefan]

While not identical, they tend to overlap heavily. You don't need to be a Naturalist to be an Atheist, but it's certainly integrated for the vast majority.

[Entice]

Atheism is as broad as theism and being an atheist doesn't implicate any of the things you just listed.
What could ever make you think that the majority of or even a significant number of atheists believe in mythical monsters and shit? "Gleefully accept fables"? Lol.

[The-universe]

At 6/18/12 02:22 PM, GuerrilleroHeroico wrote: What could ever make you think that the majority of or even a significant number of atheists believe in mythical monsters and shit? "Gleefully accept fables"? Lol.

I'm currently living with such a person and have the unfortunate circumstance of being related.

His opening line is "95% of statistics are made up".

He's either real life trollng or an idiot.

[X-Gary-Gigax-X]

Maybe quarantine your posts from the other thread to here? You trolled that other thread to oblivion.

[Iron-Hampster]

I wonder how a Naturalism vs Nihilism thread would work.

[Ericho]

At 6/18/12 12:37 PM, The-universe wrote: Another reason this question has risen is simply because, I've also (anecdotally) noticed Atheists proclaim belief in intelligent alien life, ghosts, big foot/loch ness monster and even ridiculous conspiracy theories etc etc

How can atheists believe in ghosts? Ghosts are beings that can only exist if there's something that happens after you die, which atheists obviously don't believe in.

[Poniiboi]

At 6/19/12 12:02 PM, Ericho wrote:

At 6/18/12 12:37 PM, The-universe wrote: Another reason this question has risen is simply because, I've also (anecdotally) noticed Atheists proclaim belief in intelligent alien life, ghosts, big foot/loch ness monster and even ridiculous conspiracy theories etc etc

How can atheists believe in ghosts? Ghosts are beings that can only exist if there's something that happens after you die, which atheists obviously don't believe in.

Do atheists believe in nothing happening after you die? Cuz that would kind of mean they disbelieve science as well (energy can not be created or destroyed)

This also begs the question of what "you" is, because if your energy is preserved, atheists must find some way to dissociate that energy from consciousness and the "I-being" of the Tao te Ching, which they can't prove, so really, atheism is as empty a belief, from a scientific standpoint, as deism is, if they can't come up with a decent answer to this question.

[Feoric]

At 6/19/12 01:47 PM, SenatorJohnDean wrote: Do atheists believe in nothing happening after you die? Cuz that would kind of mean they disbelieve science as well (energy can not be created or destroyed)

what does the conservation of energy have to do with dying and how does that somehow prove an afterlife?

[Entice]

At 6/19/12 01:47 PM, SenatorJohnDean wrote: This also begs the question of what "you" is, because if your energy is preserved, atheists must find some way to dissociate that energy from consciousness and the "I-being" of the Tao te Ching, which they can't prove, so really, atheism is as empty a belief, from a scientific standpoint, as deism is, if they can't come up with a decent answer to this question.

They don't have to disassociate anything because there's no evidence that those things are connected in the first place.
The burden of proof is on the believer, because disproving even the silliest of ideas can be difficult.

Again, questions like "do atheists believe in an afterlife?" can't be answered because atheists aren't united. It's a term for all people that have no belief in a deity or deities, nothing more.

[Iron-Hampster]

At 6/19/12 01:47 PM, SenatorJohnDean wrote:
Do atheists believe in nothing happening after you die? Cuz that would kind of mean they disbelieve science as well (energy can not be created or destroyed)

This also begs the question of what "you" is, because if your energy is preserved, atheists must find some way to dissociate that energy from consciousness and the "I-being" of the Tao te Ching, which they can't prove, so really, atheism is as empty a belief, from a scientific standpoint, as deism is, if they can't come up with a decent answer to this question.

Energy can not be created or destroyed, but it can be converted. Mechanical energy can slowly be transferred to thermal energy through friction would be one example. Energy can also become matter, and matter can become energy.

[Ericho]

In terms of conspiracy theories, I actually think atheists are probably more likely to believe in them. The most prominent person for them is probably Jesse Ventura, who is also known for being against religion. A few weeks before George Carlin died, he said that he actually SUPPORTED the conspiracy theorists that were thrown out of Bill Maher's show and he's again, one of the most noted atheist icons.

[Earfetish]

At 6/19/12 02:30 PM, Feoric wrote:

At 6/19/12 01:47 PM, SenatorJohnDean wrote: Do atheists believe in nothing happening after you die? Cuz that would kind of mean they disbelieve science as well (energy can not be created or destroyed)

what does the conservation of energy have to do with dying and how does that somehow prove an afterlife?

pwn

Although it is very easy to say 'duh atheism just means no belief in God, you can believe anything other than that there is a God and be an atheist', I would reckon an overwhelming majority of atheists would definitely believe in evolution and the big bang, and would also not believe in an afterlife. Although they could believe in the Loch Ness Monster, I would reckon it would be safe to say most wouldn't, and intelligent alien life would be believed in because it would fall into their naturalist viewpoint about the universe being very big and old and evolution probably happening on a few other big space-rocks.

People who are ambivalent about these issues but who don't believe in a religion tend to describe themselves as agnostics in my experience.

Although factually, atheism is just a lack of belief in a God and does not imply other beliefs.

[Camarohusky]

Naturalism is a very very broad word. Could you define what exactly you mean by naturalism?

[Earfetish]

At 6/20/12 03:00 PM, Camarohusky wrote: Naturalism is a very very broad word. Could you define what exactly you mean by naturalism?

going around naked

[bismuthfeldspar]

Statistically atheists are smarter but only because people who have lived comfortable lives with sufficient nutrition and access to education have less need for religious community.

Becoming atheist won't cure your dumbness. That said, no matter how many Dawkins worshippers convert to the religion of atheism it probably won't skew the statistic that much, religious people are still dumber, statistically.

[Thecrazyman]

My thoughts on the problem with Atheism are very simple, people need to see Religion more differently.

Why see Religion more differently? That's simple, what if people living in the United States of America actually saw Freedom as there Religion? What if some people see Technology as there Religion, what if they even see Bungholioism as there Religion and worship Beavis as there Deity because of it?

What dose this have to do about Atheism? They don't know where to turn to, feel betrayed from the organized religions because many of those organized religions just don't see Religion itself as differently as it's suppost to be.

[The-universe]

At 6/20/12 03:10 PM, Earfetish wrote:

At 6/20/12 03:00 PM, Camarohusky wrote: Naturalism is a very very broad word. Could you define what exactly you mean by naturalism?

going around naked

I agree with this definition.

[HipnikDragomir]

I don't believe in a god yet I don't call myself an atheist. I go by nature and the nature of things, yet I'm not a "naturalist". Those are all just labels and shit. Calling someone that would rather live in the real world a naturalist is kinda contradictory.