Does God exist? (William Lane Craig vs Peter Atkins debate) (14 Viewers)

[Juventino[RUS]]

If atheist parents brought their kid(s) up to be atheist you wouldn't have a problem with it. Double standards.

No, since my parents/family are believers and i'm not because some parents don't force their children to believe or not but I was baptized when i was 40 days old cause it's tradition around here

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[ZoSo]

Do you or do you not have a problem with parents bringing up their child to be atheist?

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

If atheist parents brought their kid(s) up to be atheist you wouldn't have a problem with it. Double standards.

It wouldn't be a problem because it is a reasonable position. When it comes to religion, you would never teach your children about all religions and let him pick one for himself. Neither would you wait until he reaches adulthood before you indoctrinate him. Doing any of those would be detrimental to the progress of the religion you believe in.

Religion relies on the gullibility of children to establish its belief rather than relying on reason and evidence.

 

[Fred]

Good point. Let me rephrase that question: What do you call someone who unconsciously lacks a belief in a deity?

I wouldn't call him an atheist, thats for sure.

 

[ZoSo]

It wouldn't be a problem because it is a reasonable position. When it comes to religion, you would never teach your children about all religions and let him pick one for himself. Neither would you wait until he reaches adulthood before you indoctrinate him. Doing any of those would be detrimental to the progress of the religion you believe in.

Religion relies on the gullibility of children to establish its belief rather than relying on reason and evidence.

You either believe parents can bring up their child as whatever the parents are (religious or atheist) or nothing at all. Nothing at all does not mean atheist, more like oblivious to religion.

You CANNOT say they can bring them up as athiest but not religious.

 

[Fred]

It wouldn't be a problem because it is a reasonable position. When it comes to religion, you would never teach your children about all religions and let him pick one for himself. Neither would you wait until he reaches adulthood before you indoctrinate him. Doing any of those would be detrimental to the progress of the religion you believe in.

Religion relies on the gullibility of children to establish its belief rather than relying on reason and evidence.

Reason is subjective, i'm sure you'd agree with that.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

I wouldn't call him an atheist, thats for sure.

But Atheist means someone who lacks belief in god. It does not specify whether the lack of belief is conscious or unconscious. So unless you find a new word to describe an unconscious non-believer, 'atheist' will have to suffice.

You either believe parents can bring up their child as whatever the parents are (religious or atheist) or nothing at all. Nothing at all does not mean atheist, more like oblivious to religion.

You CANNOT say they can bring them up as athiest but not religious.

'Nothing at all' actually does mean atheist.

OK, continue this later. Match time.

 

[Fred]

But Atheist means someone who lacks belief in god. It does not specify whether the lack of belief is conscious or unconscious. So unless you find a new word to describe an unconscious non-believer, 'atheist' will have to suffice.


'Nothing at all' actually does mean atheist.

OK, continue this later. Match time.

How would you define an Agnostic then?

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

How would you define an Agnostic then?

An agnostic is one who believes that the truth of a claim is unknowable. But in order to be an agnostic, you need to KNOW the claim whose truth you think is unknowable. Children cannot be classed in that category.

 

[ZoSo]

'Nothing at all' actually does mean atheist.

No it doesn't because they're oblivious to religion & atheism etc.

As I said, you can't say they can be bring them up as atheist but not religious. It's either both or none.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

No it doesn't because they're oblivious to religion & atheism etc.

Yes it does because a belief in a god is still non-existent in them. So they can still be called an atheist. Whether they are oblivious to the concept of god or religion, they still lack the belief in it.

As I said, you can't say they can be bring them up as atheist but not religious. It's either both or none.

I don't understand. Can you clarify?

 

[ZoSo]

Yes it does because a belief in a god is still non-existent in them. So they can still be called an atheist. Whether they are oblivious to the concept of god or religion, they still lack the belief in it.


I don't understand. Can you clarify?

Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities

First sentence off wikipedia of atheism.

They can't reject something they don't know about. Now don't argue bullshit semantics over this with me. No belief because of ignorance to the fact of deity/no-deity doesn't mean atheist.



You can't say a child can be brought up as atheist but not religious because you are also deciding for them as an atheist.

It's either:

1. You decide (religious, atheist, jedi, sith, whatever)

2. They decide (i.e. don't put any ideas into their head at all and explain to them that it's their choice when they're old enough to understand and make a decision themself).

 

[Juventino[RUS]]

Villain go pray for Juve to win or i will destroy ur god

 

[Fred]

An agnostic is one who believes that the truth of a claim is unknowable. But in order to be an agnostic, you need to KNOW the claim whose truth you think is unknowable. Children cannot be classed in that category.

and in order to be an atheist, you need to know the claim whose truth you are refuting.

Atheism is a position, not a lack of one.

 

[ZoSo]

Villain go pray for Juve to win or i will destroy ur god

Haha obviously you must have some faith then if you want me to pray so Juve can win because you want it to make a difference

I don't think you or any amount of people can destroy god.

 

[Martin]

Whats there not to get? you're espousing a black and white logic. I think its more complex than that. You can't call newborns atheists imo.

If they don't have a religion they're by definition atheist.

What you're talking about is being opposed to or rejecting religion and that's a different thing, which is being anti-theist.

 

[Martin]

Martin, atheism is excluding the possibility of a higher being. That is just as nonsensical as claiming there has to be one. Either attitude is based on belief.

No, it's not and I'm surprised you would be so badly informed. It's simply not believing in one.

I really don't get what's so hard about grasping that.

---------- Post added 11.08.2012 at 15:40 ----------

we go back to the same argument, where did it start then? and why have cultures/civilizations all across the globe had and maintained belief throughout recordable history? freddy has a point here

If you're looking for an anthropological explanation of "where did it start" they do exists, at least hypotheses do.

What does that have to do with the meaning of this word, though?

 

[Martin]

Look, there's a lot of psychological baggage various people associate with the word "atheist", some examples:
- they are mad at god
- they are mad at their parents
- something terrible must have happened in their lives
- they are immoral
- etc.

These are purely attempts by people who can't comprehend how not believing in god is even possible to explain what they consider to be such a surprising viewpoint.

It is still completely beside the point.

 

[ZoSo]

If they don't have a religion they're by definition atheist.

What you're talking about is being opposed to or rejecting religion and that's a different thing, which is being anti-theist.

Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities

..If you never knew about religion you can't be athiest.

 

[Martin]

..If you never knew about religion you can't be athiest.

http://www.wordreference.com/definition/atheist

Concise Oxford English Dictionary © 2008 Oxford University Press:
atheism
▶noun
disbelief in the existence of God or gods.


happy?