Atheism/Agnosticism: Pros & Cons

I have been told time, and time again that Atheism and Agnosticism are evil, horrible things. I've also been told that they are the only way to become enlightened. I made this topic to list both sides of the argument. I would also like people that think one way about it to list reasons in the opposing side, just to see what kind of variety we could get in the responses.

Might as well crack this barrel open.
I'm an atheism. Going to give my reasoning for why. I fully understand some of the needs for believing in a deity, it makes the weight of the world just a tad lighter. Sometimes things don't go your way, it gives you something to blame. I think that there is nothing that we should faith in beyond ourselves and those that care and support us. Pretty much that's what I believe. When times get tough, doing something about it can go a long way compared to waiting for a 'miracle'. It's more like God is the curtain that keeps the common man in ignorant bliss. One just living your life never really wondering, just believing that everything will be okay, and that someone was a plan, so there is no worry involved. Without God, I feel that you are more open the ugliness of mankind, at the same time helps you to appreciate the beauty of it.

To be honest, I think 'God' was created out off the basic fear most of humanity feels, the unknown is scary. Simple as that. To cope with death, mysteries of the earth ans such, god was the basic answer. To know all was basically to know God was behind it all. Humanity was curious but still unable to find the answers it searched for.

Nowadays, it's something that feel holds us back. I feel it's time for mankind to leave it's cradle and cast aside certain traditions. One of which is the belief in an omnipotent being.

What makes me wonder is that in all the grandeur of the universe that exist and we, on this tiny speck of dust still consider ourselves 'tough shit.' If the Earth we to disappear tomorrow I doubt the universe would care for the eradication of a primitive species and it's playground.
Hmm well, I think I might have gone on a bit of tangent. Sorry for that.

Still, there friendly 'non-believers', just as there are A-holes. Same goes for deity followers, meet some friendly ones that don't push their beliefs on me and just let me be. Have also meet the ones that seem that their lives will not be complete without my conversion. Meh, I just live my life. I do good for the sake of doing good, not out the fear of punishment (since I believe that makes it bit less heart-felt.) One doesn't need God to be a good person, one just has to be.

I don't see a problem with either. I personally do believe in god, but it's really not my place to say if you believe or not. I've said this many times before you want to believe in nothing, fine. You want to believe in god, fine. You want to believe in the fucking flying spaghetti monster, fine. Just don't be a dick about it and don't condemn someones else beliefs. I do believe that god does give you something to turn to in time of need (or at least someone to blame), so there's that.

i dont think it's my place to say that there is no God or anything similar, but i go on with the mentality that everything that happens is not because it is God's will or it is an act of God or that not believing the before mentioned will send me to hell.

As for MrShadowzs' argument about condemning people for not having the same beliefs, is right. Mainly because, nobody has the right to impose their own knowledge and beliefs on someone unwilling. If they do impose, atleast they should not be persistent. For example, a strong believer asks you to join and you reject. He comes every single day to your place just to get you to believe in whatever he believes in. My country has been suffering long enough because of the mentality that everything is in God's hands.

I cant call myself an Aethiest because I believe there is a creator, but I dont reject him all out either. I just dont believe that everything is God's fault. I think logically why it happened. I know that I am opposing myself right now but deal with it.

Between the Big Bang and God, I personally think they're both bullshit. One revolves around theory, the other revolves around faith. Either one is 100% uncertain. Atheism and Religion are simply excuses for people who are to afraid to live. People who can't let go of the past, and those who fear the future. Those are my thoughts. Feel free to throw a science book or holy water at me.

You're chock full of bullshit. The Big Bang is a "theory", only as far as the "theory" of gravity is. There is a wealth of evidence for both. For fuck's sake, stop gurgling down the idiocy of people who don't know shit about the scientific method and read at the least the damn Wikipedia articles.

Claiming that atheism is on the same ground as any form of deism/theism is misguided. An atheist doesn't believe in God(s) as there's no evidence to make him do so. It's far from the status of religion, where people chose to believe, even in the absence of evidence.

An Agnostic accepts that there could be a God(s), however he won't believe in one(s) until there's evidence for one, but they don't outright deny the possibility.

As for the "drawbacks" of either atheism or agnosticism:
You might be ridiculed & prosecuted by religious people. Yeah, that's the only "real" drawback, as reality has this tendency to remain just as it is, even if you choose to disbelieve it.

Oft cited "drawbacks" of atheism & agnosticism that are not true:

Claim: Your life will be AIMLESS without religion!
Response: Let me get this straight. If I believe that my life has a meaning it does, and if I don't it doesn't? What if I believe my life has a meaning yet I don't require a higher power to believe so?

Claim: Without religion you will be IMMORAL!
Response: Bullshit. Morals have arisen to fulfill our need to live as social animals. Even apes have morals, humans don't have a monopoly on possessing a moral compass. (Read the Selfish Gene from Richard Dawkins if you're interested).

Claim: Religion has answers for the great questions of life. Atheism doesn't compare!
Response: Suuure... This is actually just the issue of moral redressed. The Judeo-Christian culture is more then the rote recital of the Bible/Talmud and as living thing, doesn't require blind adherence to 2000 year old (actually outdated, often patched and reinterpreted) doctrine to function. Why should I need to accept all the bullshit and garbage that was passed down through the ages, when I can just take the best of what it has to offer? Do I need to believe that Jesus will resurrect me after death (but only if I believe in him) to appreciate the teachings of the new testament about love and forgiveness?

Claim: You will go to hell!
Response: ...probably. If you're right. However even if you were, would you be comfortable spending an eternity with a petty tyrant, whose sole bias for justice is that you worship him? What about so called "religious" morals? Why would a being that literally created existence as we know it care where I put my penis or whether I work on Sunday?

I would like to point out two things for future reference:

#1 - Agnosticism is not a belief, it is the lack of belief about god. Many people also consider Atheism as pretty much the same thing, even though I'm unsure if the dictionary definition agrees or not.

#2 - The Big Bang Theory, The Theory of Evolution, The Theory of Gravity, etc., are not the kind of theory that most people think it is. It is a scientific theory, which actually has a completely different definition: a theory that explains scientific observations. That means that it is an explanation based on current scientific evidence and has not yet been proven wrong.

Are we really doing this again? Seriously? Am I asleep? Is this a nightmare?

What are you talking about?

this topic has been beaten to death.

it seems there are very few true atheists. in reality, most are agnostics and/or anti-christians. a true atheist wouldn't care one way or the other and doesn't make an issues about it.

You've yet to meet Darwin's pit-bull. That man has a passion about his atheism that's going to floor you: http://richarddawkins.net/

I wasn't trying to make an issue out of it, I just wanted to know what your guys opinions were. And even if I was, how would that make me not an atheist? I had no idea that this topic was already discussed except for one time, and I don't think that made it beaten to death.

Relevant video:

I wonder if it would fit me..

pastafarian

Agnostic is the way to be. You can give a shit without giving too much of a shit.

Meh. In the words of Stephen Colbert: "Agnostics are Atheists without balls." and I'm Agnostic. Can anyone help me find my missing pair?

Definition of Agnostic:
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.

Definition of Atheist:
A person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Doesn't that mean that you could be both an atheist AND agnostic?

What we've pretty much concluded, since the Enlightenment (18th century) was that you need to practice skepticism, in order to actually gain knowledge. If truths are simply up for grabs (faith, dogma, etc), then we really have no way of saying "okay, which truth is THE truth then?".

One way to look at it, is that there's a shit load of potential explanations for everything. The reason why the light turns on in my refrigerator is that there's tiny people that live in there and flip a switch. Maybe there is an portal in my closet, that just happens to disappear when I open the door.

Lil' Crime Stoppers
Tags: SOUTH
PARKmore...

Point is, is that we need to simply say "No" to an explanation or possibility, before evidence is provided.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_skepticism

There's a few assumption we need to make though. I assume that I exist, that this reality exists, that this reality is stable and constant (the rules of the world don't just change every second), and that my conscious experience is a reliable reflection of that reality.

Then, I can start observing patterns in the world. For example, I can drop an apple and then a bowling ball, over and over again, and see that they fall at the same speed. Once I've done this enough, and other people do this enough, we safe "Okay, we're pretty sure that stuff falls when you let go of it". You can then start measuring how long it takes for objects to fall, and express it as an equation. Then you can use that equation, to start making prediction for huge objects. Maybe if you have the resources, you'll even try to push a boulder off a cliff or something, and see if that model still works. That's a really, really rough and dirty explanation of how we try to gain knowledge.

There's 3 more things I want to emphasize. We call what I described as gravity, but we don't really say that "Things get attracted to each other, BECAUSE of gravity". Gravity is simply a phenomenon, an event. It's something that we simply observe happening over and over again. Nobody ever explains "WHY things fall to the ground". And you really can't, and explanations that claim to do so shouldn't be accepted (because there's no proof).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_best_of_all_possible_worlds

Science also can't explain anything SUPERnatural. The very concept itself makes it impossible. You observe things in the natural world, to try to understand the natural world. SUPERnatural things are outside of our nature. We can't observe them (if we can, it's not supernatural), we can't measure them, etc. If you sort of envision our natural reality as a bubble, and the supernatural as another bubble outside it (think the ending in Men in Black) who knows what's going on out there. Maybe there's pink unicorns shitting ice cream out there. Maybe there's an utopia out there. Maybe. But there's absolutely no proof of any of those possibilities as being true. Anything's possible out in the supernatural (since we don't know what rules and restrictions that reality has). And because we have no evidence or anything, there's no method to start slashing some of those options. In short, that means we have no method to gain knowledge about the supernatural (if such things even exist).

Think of gaining knowledge as an criminal trial. We ASSUME innocent until proven guilty. Until there's enough evidence, we simply don't accept (but we DON'T REJECT) the proposal (guilt).

Pros: Don't know yet
Cons: People find out and you're done, at least socially. I live in the California Bible Belt, and when word got out I was Atheist, I had to change school because no one talked to me