Religious Skepticism

[abaddon]

The word atheist is just another way of saying, I'm NOT a theist. It's not an affirmation... Can you understand that?

I think a theist's answer to that would have to be "no". They're seeing past your stance of skepticism, thinking "but you have a whole materialist worldview that makes being 'NOT a theist' seem justified to you".

We just see the supernatural world as a fairly tale or a dream etc., without any credible evidence to support it.

That looks a lot like an affirmative statement of a metaphysical belief in a godless materialist universe.

But, at least try to understand that your beliefs aren't any more special than any other set of religious beliefs.

Yikes, that's a whopper of a request. "At least try to understand that what informs your life with meaning is false".

The "whopper" requests make me wonder if atheists see themselves from the theist perspective well-enough to describe clearly why atheism is not and cannot be, in and of itself, a whole worldview. We tend to treat it like it's a stand-alone item where the theist's focus will always go to the battle of metaphysics: the meaningless godless materialist worldview versus the meaningful god-filled supernaturalist worldview.

 

[Lion IRC]

But you do make the affirmative claim that you are an atheist.

Weak retort. The fact remines Christians can not doubt and be skeptical of ancient writings and claims.

Why not?
The ancientness of a writing, by itself, tells us nothing of its truth or validity.

I'm highly skeptical of the ancient writings of Diogenes Laërtius

 

[Lion IRC]

What's the "duality"?

Light dark, short tall, atheist theist.

OH ok. Good.
I agree that atheism versus theism is a duality.
There's no 'opposite' of stamp collecting.
But there IS an opposite to the claim that God does not exist.

And for me my response is to the affirmative claims of theists. I do not make such an affirmative claim for atheisms. For me no different then Big Foot or alien abductions.

Theists create the duality that labels me atheist.

You said light/dark, tall/short...
How is the atheist or the theist creating the duality?
We can't just sit there accusing each other of creating the duality.

...you started it, you invented atheism, no YOU started it, you invented theism, no you did,
did NOT! DID TOO!!!

This is a nil-all-draw.

If you say theism has the entire burden of proof, then you are in fact asserting that atheism the default truth position - which is a claim in and of itself.

 

[abaddon]

You said light/dark, tall/short...
How is the atheist or the theist creating the duality?
We can't just sit there accusing each other of creating the duality.

...you started it, you invented atheism, no YOU started it, you invented theism, no you did,
did NOT! DID TOO!!!

This is a nil-all-draw.

If you say theism has the entire burden of proof, then you are in fact asserting that atheism the default truth position - which is a claim in and of itself.

Accusation isn't the point. Skepticism is the point.

If someone claims x then not-x is a result of this. That's simply descriptive of what happens.

The burden of proof is on the people who claim x. Not-x doesn't become a metaphysical claim about the whole universe just because x is a metaphysical claim.

If you claim there's another earth just like our but it's always on the other side of the sun and that's why we never see it, then "I don't believe that" doesn't become an entire alternative cosmology.

Theists need to figure out that if you want to criticize one or another atheistic worldview, then you must specify that atheistic worldview. Because whatever that atheistic worldview is, it is not atheism. The worldview you have in mind is either scientific materialism or scientism or metaphysical naturalism.

That SOME atheists fit into one or more of those categories does not make atheism synonymous with those categories.

 

[steve_bank]

Light dark, short tall, atheist theist.

OH ok. Good.
I agree that atheism versus theism is a duality.
There's no 'opposite' of stamp collecting.
But there IS an opposite to the claim that God does not exist.

And for me my response is to the affirmative claims of theists. I do not make such an affirmative claim for atheisms. For me no different then Big Foot or alien abductions.

Theists create the duality that labels me atheist.

You said light/dark, tall/short...
How is the atheist or the theist creating the duality?
We can't just sit there accusing each other of creating the duality.

...you started it, you invented atheism, no YOU started it, you invented theism, no you did,
did NOT! DID TOO!!!

This is a nil-all-draw.

If you say theism has the entire burden of proof, then you are in fact asserting that atheism the default truth position - which is a claim in and of itself.

You creaky do not understand?

Some say Big Foot exists. If asked I say the evidence is weak. The believer Big-Foot-ist might say I am A-Big-Foot-ist.

Get it, theist - atheist? The theist claim creates the duality. I see the atheist theist debate entirely bogus.

 

[Tigers!]

But, at least try to understand that your beliefs aren't any more special than any other set of religious beliefs, religious or non-religious.

FIFY.

 

[Tammuz]

I think Christians can be skeptics, but then they have a massive blindspot when it comes to Christianity. This is rather common. People with a passion for a political ideology will have similar blindspots for their ideology.

Consider Martin Gardner, who despite acknowledging that the atheists had the best arguments, nonetheless remained a deist purely out of desire, which he was open about. I don't know what to make of that. He was certainly a skeptic though. But then his deism never intruded upon anything scientific.

I would consider it best to not identify with any ideology (I consider religion to be a subset of ideology). It is better to focus on the process (i.e skepticism, critical thinking, science, empiricism), and be very flexible when it comes to any particular conclusion. Try to avoid having any emotional investment in any particular belief or conclusion. Emphasize the process instead, that's what matters the most.

 

[ronburgundy]

Do Christian believers have skepticism?

A Christian can be highly skeptical of scientific evolution yet believe without question the Genesis creation story written thousands of years ago with a few sentences by an unknown author.

Is there a skepticism for atheists or non believers and a skepticism for Christians, or is there just one skepticism?

Is it possible to be a Christian theist and be truly skeptical? I do not think so. All questions and answers must fit theology in the end. In comparison science has undergone a number of transformations in the last 300 years.

Is it possible to be a theist and be skeptical, does skepticism even apply to theists? Religious faith is belif in something unprovable.

While not universal, an answer to evolution was to make it part of god's plan. Conflict between science and theology resolved.

In terms of an epistemology rather than merely a adjective for an isolated behavior, skepticism is a principled commitment to question all claims and require evidence. It is not selective doubt about specific claims in protection motivated by a desire to protect your emotionally held beliefs. The motives in doubting a claim are central to skepticism. The skeptic is trying to avoid false beliefs. The Christian who doubts evolution is trying to preserve emotionally preferred beliefs, even if they are false, and since they aren't based in reason, are almost certainly false.

Notions of a creator God and afterlife cannot be believed without "faith" that entails believing based upon emotional preference and actively suppressing reasoned thought and ignoring mountains of fact. That is the anti-thesis of skepticism and rational thinking which are closely aligned. So, no, theists cannot have any kind of principled, honest commitment to skepticism or rational thinking. They can take a skeptical or rational stance on a particular topic, so long as it has no possible implications for their faith based beliefs, but those are very central beliefs with lots of implications for many things, not to mention beliefs in other Christian notions like miracles, etc.

Since atheists lack commitments to those particular anti-skeptical anti-rational beliefs, they lack those particular obstacles to being skeptical and rational. However, they may still not generally be a skeptic or rational, b/c they may choose to commit to other non-theistic beliefs that require faith, or they may simply not accept that skepticism and reason are the path to the most accurate knowledge. That said, I think there is a correlation between atheism and skepticism and rational thinking in the US, b/c the cultural pressure toward theism is strong and resisting it requires some motive, and a principled commitment to skepticism and reasoning is one such motive.