The accusation leveled at atheists that profess atheism seems to be that they are a mirror of a religious fundamentalist, that they carry an identical closed minded bigotry and discriminatory attitude to the religious.
I am self-critical, I will recognise that gaps in knowledge are huge and that there may be unanswerable questions, for which evidence one way or another is absolutely impossible. That attitude (which makes most atheists technical agnostics) does not match with fundamentalism around revealed truth. It may be a form of reductionary fundamentalism, scientism or strict materialism but it is not equivalent to religious fundamentalism.
I'm a little confused--where in the linked material is there evidence for an association between the two? Are you inferring that from the forum it appears on?Association between atheism and libertarianism?
I'm a little confused--where in the linked material is there evidence for an association between the two? Are you inferring that from the forum it appears on?
I think that represents scientists invoking poor philosophy in a metaphysical argument.I think one of the few times I think scientifically-minded atheists start to approach that of religious fundamentalism is when some invoke the "Anthropic Principle" haphazardly to stifle questioning. Admittedly, I'm not much of a fan of it.
Melon, I think that you are taking a skewed selection of libertarians, I read a number of American libertarian blogs and none of them are overtly religious. In the words of Instapundit aka Glen Reynolds "Personally, I'd be delighted to live in a country where happily married gay couples had closets full of assault weapons."
Well OK, but it's not as if all people who aren't atheists are fundamentalists or social authoritarians. Do you not think there might be an association between 'Socially Authoritarian, Economically Statist' and atheism as well?It is social liberalism vs. authoritarianism, read the axis
I think that represents scientists invoking poor philosophy in a metaphysical argument.
The universe is the way it is because if it wasn't the way it is then it wouldn't be the way it is.
It is a tautology, why our universe exists and why it has the conditions it does are tough questions. They may not be the right questions, and when being discussed it is clear that people have different ideas of what is being meant and what the implications are.
This example wasn't an individual it was a population of web denizens, in general for this population that wasn't apparent.Well OK, but it's not as if all people who aren't atheists are fundamentalists or social authoritarians. Do you not think there might be an association between 'Socially Authoritarian, Economically Statist' and atheism as well?
In debate saying that you just don't know or that it is an eternal mystery opens the door to abuse, one only has to look at how Einstein gets attributed to see how some intellectually dishonest groups will distort views to religious ends.I agree, really. I think I'd be happier with them saying, "I just don't know." The Anthropic Principle, really, is just intellectually lazy garbage, for the most part.
There is a difference.
A religious fundamentalist would continue to believe even if there was persuasive evidence to the contrary, they know that their beliefs are right.
I don't know that there is no God, I can't prove a negative, "certainty" is really a high confidence level because the evidence to think God exists isn't there and naturalistic explanations for processes are grounded. A nuanced believer will reconcile naturalism and theism; I simply think that theism is superfluous, because there is no need for God n the universe it ought not exist.
I am self-critical, I will recognise that gaps in knowledge are huge and that there may be unanswerable questions, for which evidence one way or another is absolutely impossible. That attitude (which makes most atheists technical agnostics) does not match with fundamentalism around revealed truth. It may be a form of reductionary fundamentalism, scientism or strict materialism but it is not equivalent to religious fundamentalism.