Are Atheists Free Thinkers?

[PostmodernProph]

conflicted?.....

 

[thebrucebeat]

???...sorry.....they are exclusive to each other.....and agnostic says they haven't made a decision, an atheist has......

agnostic-
1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.

It does not have to do with belief. It has to do with being able to KNOW one way or the other.
The agnostic can be either a theist or an atheist, or neither.

an atheist denies the existence of a deity.....if you do not deny the existence of a deity you are not an atheist.....that is inherent in the origin of the word....."a" no....."theist" based on root word for god
agnostic..."a" no......"gnostic" based on root word for knowledge....

You just restated exactly what I posted to you.
That is exactly right.
Atheism is about belief.
Agnosticism is about knowledge.
Bingo.

 

[dblack]

conflicted?.....

Hmmm..... I call 'em as I see 'em.

 

[thebrucebeat]

???...sorry.....they are exclusive to each other.....and agnostic says they haven't made a decision, an atheist has......

agnostic-
1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.

It does not have to do with belief. It has to do with being able to KNOW one way or the other.
The agnostic can be either a theist or an atheist, or neither.

When you drive home from work using the same route as always you don't "know" that there isn't a sinkhole around the next bend but you "trust" that there isn't. You have faith that your ride home will be "business as usual."

Every day we place "trust and faith" in things that we don't know for sure.

What point are you trying to make?

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Being a free thinker would not include believing everything an ancient book says but questioning every word of it and applying objective critical analysis to all of your own presuppositions.

would believing it make you a free will-er?......

Yes, because of a willful suspension of skepticism.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Wow, I didn't realize there were so many benefits.

QUOTE]

See? That's my point!!

Yes, but you snipped the rest of my post. How am I supposed to come to belief? Choose despite lack of conclusive evidence or convince myself despite the lack of conclusive evidence?

 

[Coloradomtnman]

the person anticipating reasonable evidence.....

Is questioning the Bible free thinking?

not under the definition I was responding to...."Free thinkers from the standpoint that they expect reasonable evidence before they believe something to be true"....

Muslims question the Bible, Hindus question the Bible.....that doesn't make them atheists or agnostics.....

so no.....merely questioning the Bible does not make one a Free Thinker.......asking questions without thinking might make one a Free Thinker.....

Do you question whether or not there is a God? Or that Jesus is actually the Savior? Are you critical of your beliefs? Do you review them on a constant basis to be sure that you still feel that they match up with any new evidence or experiences you've had since choosing those beliefs? Are you critical about why you are a Christian instead of an agnostic, or Muslim, or Hindu, or etc.? Do you apply the same reasoning as to why you aren't of another faith to why you are a Christian? That would be free thinking. Thought free of dogma, orthodoxy, doctrine, and baseless presuppositions. Questioning everything is free thinking.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

???...sorry.....they are exclusive to each other.....and agnostic says they haven't made a decision, an atheist has......

agnostic-
1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.

It does not have to do with belief. It has to do with being able to KNOW one way or the other.
The agnostic can be either a theist or an atheist, or neither.

When you drive home from work using the same route as always you don't "know" that there isn't a sinkhole around the next bend but you "trust" that there isn't. You have faith that your ride home will be "business as usual."

Every day we place "trust and faith" in things that we don't know for sure.

For your example, we put "faith" into our everyday lives for practical purposes. That "faith" is based on experience. That particular way home didn't have a pothole yesterday, or the day before that, or the year before that. Potholes aren't extremely common - they don't crop all over the place constantly. In order to act, we have to make a decision.

Such practical, everyday concerns to act don't apply faith in things for which there is no conclusive evidence. Why make the decision to believe in something when it doesn't matter to whether you act in any practical, everyday occurrence. You can drive home any way you think best whether you're a Christian or not.

 

[MaxGrit]

Do you question whether or not there is a God? Or that Jesus is actually the Savior? Are you critical of your beliefs? Do you review them on a constant basis to be sure that you still feel that they match up with any new evidence or experiences you've had since choosing those beliefs? Are you critical about why you are a Christian instead of an agnostic, or Muslim, or Hindu, or etc.? Do you apply the same reasoning as to why you aren't of another faith to why you are a Christian? That would be free thinking. Thought free of dogma, orthodoxy, doctrine, and baseless presuppositions. Questioning everything is free thinking.

Yes. I question, God answers.

Matthew 7:7 (ESV)


“Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.

 

[HUGGY]

The gunos and the true believers of the world have trouble with 'faith' in the first case and skepticism in the second.

Work toward each others in kindness and humility.

I'm not inclined to "work towards" stupid.

The video clip is just willfully ignorant and flat wrong. The use of it as some kind of example or sample of atheist thinking is disengenuous and purposefully missdirection of an often used fact which makes the OP a liar or a fool.

The "saying" cause and effect is a scientific tool and part of the process of organizing elements of the scientific method.

The saying "cause and cause" is jibberish made up by the speaker in the video clip and it means nothing. It is not even a clever substitution...it is nonsense just like the bible.

 

[PostmodernProph]

agnostic-
1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.

It does not have to do with belief. It has to do with being able to KNOW one way or the other.
The agnostic can be either a theist or an atheist, or neither.

an atheist denies the existence of a deity.....if you do not deny the existence of a deity you are not an atheist.....that is inherent in the origin of the word....."a" no....."theist" based on root word for god
agnostic..."a" no......"gnostic" based on root word for knowledge....

You just restated exactly what I posted to you.
That is exactly right.
Atheism is about belief.
Agnosticism is about knowledge.
Bingo.

then why are you still getting it wrong?......

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Do you question whether or not there is a God? Or that Jesus is actually the Savior? Are you critical of your beliefs? Do you review them on a constant basis to be sure that you still feel that they match up with any new evidence or experiences you've had since choosing those beliefs? Are you critical about why you are a Christian instead of an agnostic, or Muslim, or Hindu, or etc.? Do you apply the same reasoning as to why you aren't of another faith to why you are a Christian? That would be free thinking. Thought free of dogma, orthodoxy, doctrine, and baseless presuppositions. Questioning everything is free thinking.

Yes. I question, God answers.

Matthew 7:7 (ESV)


“Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.

I appreciate that you responded, but you didn't really answer my questions.

 

[amrchaos]

I wonder--does any know the definition of "Free though"t?

According to Wiki Free thought is

Freethought or free thought is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, or other dogmas.[1][2][3] The cognitive application of freethought is known as "freethinking", and practitioners of freethought are known as "freethinkers".[1][4]


If that is the case, Free thought must some kind of basis or
Presupposition or else you can not think logically about the subject at hand.

The video is actually a waste of time. It implies that free thought is thought "free" or presuppositions when that is not the case at all. Whatever presupposition that a free thinker takes on must be logical and based on reason. The presupposition of "naturalistic" causes is a logical starting point. To suggest otherwise is to provide proof of a none naturalist cause in reality. The individual not only does not provide such a case, he even argues that assuming a naturalistic view point is non-free thinking dogmatism.


The problem with the video is that if you remove the "naturalistic viewpoint" then what "logical" viewpoint do you want to base a metaphysical discussion on? No suggestion, is there?

 

[DriftingSand]

I wonder--does any know the definition of "Free though"t?

According to Wiki Free thought is

Freethought or free thought is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, or other dogmas.[1][2][3] The cognitive application of freethought is known as "freethinking", and practitioners of freethought are known as "freethinkers".[1][4]


If that is the case, Free thought must some kind of basis or
Presupposition or else you can not think logically about the subject at hand.

The video is actually a waste of time. It implies that free thought is thought "free" or presuppositions when that is not the case at all. Whatever presupposition that a free thinker takes on must be logical and based on reason. The presupposition of "naturalistic" causes is a logical starting point. To suggest otherwise is to provide proof of a none naturalist cause in reality. The individual not only does not provide such a case, he even argues that assuming a naturalistic view point is non-free thinking dogmatism.


The problem with the video is that if you remove the "naturalistic viewpoint" then what "logical" viewpoint do you want to base a metaphysical discussion on? No suggestion, is there?

My version of "free thought" allows me of my own will to freely believe in God. He's never forced me to believe in Him nor has He ever forced me to read the Bible. I'm still free to accept or reject what I read. So I'm as much a "free thinker" as the next guy.

 

[DriftingSand]

Do you question whether or not there is a God? Or that Jesus is actually the Savior? Are you critical of your beliefs? Do you review them on a constant basis to be sure that you still feel that they match up with any new evidence or experiences you've had since choosing those beliefs? Are you critical about why you are a Christian instead of an agnostic, or Muslim, or Hindu, or etc.? Do you apply the same reasoning as to why you aren't of another faith to why you are a Christian? That would be free thinking. Thought free of dogma, orthodoxy, doctrine, and baseless presuppositions. Questioning everything is free thinking.

Yes. I question, God answers.

Matthew 7:7 (ESV)


“Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.

I didn't come to a belief in God until I was in the total depths of alcoholism. That's when I got on my knees and prayed for God's help. He literally sent help in the form of a coworker who invited me to an AA meeting just a few days after I prayed. I continued to pray for wisdom and truth and He's answered my calls and needs ever since.

 

[thebrucebeat]

an atheist denies the existence of a deity.....if you do not deny the existence of a deity you are not an atheist.....that is inherent in the origin of the word....."a" no....."theist" based on root word for god
agnostic..."a" no......"gnostic" based on root word for knowledge....

You just restated exactly what I posted to you.
That is exactly right.
Atheism is about belief.
Agnosticism is about knowledge.
Bingo.

then why are you still getting it wrong?......

Make your point, because this post says nothing and your last one proved mine.

 

[PostmodernProph]

You just restated exactly what I posted to you.
That is exactly right.
Atheism is about belief.
Agnosticism is about knowledge.
Bingo.

then why are you still getting it wrong?......

Make your point, because this post says nothing and your last one proved mine.

not that complicated....if an atheist denies the existence of deity and an agnostic does not, then they are not the same thing......

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Do you question whether or not there is a God? Or that Jesus is actually the Savior? Are you critical of your beliefs? Do you review them on a constant basis to be sure that you still feel that they match up with any new evidence or experiences you've had since choosing those beliefs? Are you critical about why you are a Christian instead of an agnostic, or Muslim, or Hindu, or etc.? Do you apply the same reasoning as to why you aren't of another faith to why you are a Christian? That would be free thinking. Thought free of dogma, orthodoxy, doctrine, and baseless presuppositions. Questioning everything is free thinking.

Yes. I question, God answers.

Matthew 7:7 (ESV)


“Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.

I didn't come to a belief in God until I was in the total depths of alcoholism. That's when I got on my knees and prayed for God's help. He literally sent help in the form of a coworker who invited me to an AA meeting just a few days after I prayed. I continued to pray for wisdom and truth and He's answered my calls and needs ever since.

Well, I'm glad that you have stopped drinking. Alcoholism is a nasty problem to overcome so good for you. That's a happy ending and I hope and think you should feel proud and good about it.

Your anecdote is the same for many of the born again religious. They are at their lowest point, whether drugs, alcohol, gambling, depression, in prison, homeless, etc. and thy turn to God or Allah, etc. and find the strength to turn their lives around and forever after they are zealously religious.

Why do you think that happens regardless of the religion? Could it be because it is emotional - you were as you described "in the total depths of alcoholism" and needed something to believe in. Your response was emotional. You were enculturated in a society the is predominately Christian. Had you been born and raised in India you would've prayed to a Brahmin, in Pakistan Allah, in Jerusalem Yahweh, in Italy the Catholic God, etc.

Could it be that your coworker got you to go to AA, isn't a miracle and it isn't even a coincidence, but that it just makes sense. You knew you needed help and he or she saw that you did.

This is, even from an unbiased perspective, not enough evidence to proclaim once and for all, that the Christian God is real and to commit all of your beliefs to this one dogma. It might be that IS the truth, but not conclusively. Therefore because there are more reasonable explanations for your conversion to Christianity, the story is not compelling to someone who doesn't believe.

It could be that in order to sustain your sobriety that you must whole-heartedly believe. Critical questioning would then only be a threat to your well being.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

then why are you still getting it wrong?......

Make your point, because this post says nothing and your last one proved mine.

not that complicated....if an atheist denies the existence of deity and an agnostic does not, then they are not the same thing......

I think this is just a quibble over definitions, but if we go by the way you and most Americans define the terms: you're right. However, neither atheists nor agnostics believe in God. Atheists believe there cannot be one, and agnostics haven't been convinced there is one. So they are very similar if not exactly the same.

 

[thebrucebeat]

then why are you still getting it wrong?......

Make your point, because this post says nothing and your last one proved mine.

not that complicated....if an atheist denies the existence of deity and an agnostic does not, then they are not the same thing......

Once again, you are making an argument no one has made. That is a strawman.
They aren't the same thing. They are different.
That's why they can co-exist.
One is what you believe.
One is what you can know.
Completely different issues.
You are looking very, very silly here.