Not believing may be a belief, but does it matter?

Question

This is not meant to be offensive, just an honest question, mainly for atheists or theists that have an objective answer.

I'm an atheist and don't necesarily agree that not believing is a belief, but don't really care if theists think it is, because it doesn't make anyone's story more plausible. I don't believe that the fantasy novel I just finish was true whatsoever, I guess you could call it a belief but does that make any difference? It is still a story.

So fine, I don't believe in anyone's god or gods, as far as I can see they were all built on holes in human knowledge and fear. You can find a point in time when almost any god or religion materialized, and you can find points in time where peices of his/her religion were disproved, but that religion still exists. So as far as I can see, as we learn more religion becomes less useful, effectively showing that at its roots it is just there to explain the unknown. So why does my nonbelief being a belief make it less credible?

I'm not really here to debate my "beliefs", just asking why it matters at all whether or not a fact based belief is a belief or not, and how anyone thinks it makes a difference. I'm not trying to use my beliefs to makes yours wrong, so calling them beliefs doesn't offend me at all.

wuzzup(a bunch of numbers here), a monkey never put anyone here. I'm not sure if you are just showing that you haven't learned about evolution or trying to make fun, but it doesn't work. For reference, monkeys and humans came from a common ancestor, neither evolved from the other, just like your cousin didn't evolve into you. And as for life beginning, I don't know, I mat never know, but that isn't enough to make me believe in the supernatural.

Answer 1

If you look at the definition of the term Atheist it is the "belief" that there is no god. By defining yourself as an atheist you assert a "belief" there is no god. So yes you have a belief but does it matter that you don't believe there is a god? the answer is no it doesn't matter one bit and shouldn't matter to anyone else either. Your belief is as credible as any other. What I find is that when the word god is used it is always christians that assume it is their god that is being referenced and I would imagine that those who are causing you to ask this question are those same christians. A belief in anything is a personal choice and an individuals choice should be respected and not attacked. It is hypocritical of those mouthing a belief in god to deny you your choice after all that very god granted those believers the right of freedom of choice. Also the questioner is not promoting his belief nor is he trying to convince anyone his view it the only one he merely asked the question "does it matter" and those of you who assume he views his opinion as a religion are hysterical and reactive without really reading what this questioner is asking. Dial down the religious proselytizing people his question is does it matter if what he believes is a belief.

Answer 2

I agree with you completely, and I think the problem is that many "believers" wrongly think that atheists are saying "I KNOW there is no god". That isn't what atheism means. Atheism means not believing in god. NOBODY knows if there is a god or not. Nobody knows that there isn't one because it just can't be proven, even though there is no evidence to support the idea. Nobody knows that there is one because there isn't a single episode in anyone's life that can with full certainty be attributed to divine intervention and not to something else. So everyone believes one thing or another. And you are right, it just doesn't matter that we have beliefs.

Answer 3

There's nothing inherently wrong with believing things. The contention is with the concept of faith, where a belief is formed irrationally.

I can rationally conclude there are no gods. Other people can rationally conclude that there are (based on evidence they find compelling even though I don't). But it isn't possible to arrive rationally at belief in gods simply because you want it to be true.

Answer 4

There are some subtleties at work here that seem to escape the notice of most people. They have to do with the nature of 'belief'.

A rational person might say "I believe in the Big Bang." A religious person might say "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis." But these statements are not even remotely similar, with respect to what is meant by the word 'believe'.

For the rational person, the statement of 'belief' in the Big Bang means that they understand that the concept provides a scientifically and mathematically consistent explanation, congruent with the evidence, which accounts for the evolution of the universe from a fraction of a second after the initiating event, up until the present. When the 'inflationary model' came to the fore, rational people said "Well, good... that clears up a few questions and makes things even more coherent." NOBODY threw up their arms and wailed "Oh, no... oh, no... ain't so... ain't so... the Big Bang is the inerrant truth... not this ridiculous, atheistic 'inflationary' model."

See... when we say "I believe in the Big Bang", we don't really mean the same thing as the religious person means when he says "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis," or "I believe in God." Our 'belief' in the Big Bang (or anything else) isn't really a 'belief'... it is more properly a 'paradigm'... a useful way of looking at something, or thinking about something. If additional information is uncovered that adds to the conceptual model, that is a good thing... not a disaster. If part of the conceptual model is discovered to be incorrect, and must be tossed in the trash and replaced with something completely different... that is also a good thing... not the end of the world as we know it. And often, no matter how highly confident we may be of the accuracy or completeness of a particular paradigm, we may have reason to apply a DIFFERENT paradigm to the same thing, in an effort to tease out new insights; for example, we might want to contemplate the potential implications of a change to a theory from the perspective of the Tao Te Ching, the Gaia hypothesis, or ecological homeostasis. We KNOW that all theories are approximations... and that is OK. We KNOW that we don't have all the answers... and that is OK, too. There is nothing wrong with saying "We don't know... yet; but we're working on it."

But these modes of thinking, perceiving, contemplating and understanding are utterly alien to the 'religious' mind. For the religious mind, a 'belief' is not a paradigm... not a useful way of thinking about something... it is an internalized conviction that one knows the absolute 'truth' pertaining to some aspect of existence and/or fundamental reality. 'Beliefs' are one of the key interpretive component filters of the religious person's 'self-description'... a part of what DEFINES them as a person... the very thing that creates their world-view... an underpinning of their 'subjective reality'. Any challenge to one of these internalized 'beliefs' is perceived and interpreted as a vital threat... an attack upon the 'self-description'... and an assault upon their subjective reality.

And here is the key difference: When there is a change in one of the paradigms dealing with a scientific concept, or a new insight into the workings of the universe, to the 'rational' person it merely constitutes an interesting new piece of knowledge and understanding... a new insight. However, if that same new insight, or piece of information (a feature of the universe, for example) seems to threaten a tenet of Christianity, everybody goes to battle stations, goes into 'damage control' mode... for fear that the whole edifice will come crashing down. And, ultimately, it will.

So, when a fundie disparages evolution, for example, it really has nothing to do with a genuine, intellectual dispute regarding scientific details... they are generally scientifically illiterate, anyway. Any 'scientific' arguments that they present are inevitably not even understood... they are just lifted from the pre-packaged lies and misrepresentations that are found on dozens of 'Liars for Jesus' (LFJ) web sites, and parroted. They are in a battle. They are trying to sink science before science sinks them. They are desperate... and science is (mostly, and unfortunately) oblivious to the fact that they are even in a fight, and that somebody is trying to sink them. They are just blithely bopping along, doing what science does... figuring out how nature works.

No... none of this has anything to do with a mere disagreement pertaining to evidence and understanding. It has to do with minds that deal with fundamental issues in an entirely different way. It has to do with a flexible, open-minded, intellectually honest (willing to question and doubt one's own presumptions) curiosity about the universe, contending with a rigid, unyielding world-view that depends from a certainty that certain delusional faith-based (willful ignorance and magical, wishful thinking) 'beliefs' represent the absolute 'truth' of reality.

We might as well be talking to an alien species, from a distant planet.

When the religious enter a venue like this one, they are (generally) NOT seeking answers, or new information... these might cause them to QUESTION their beliefs, or might put their beliefs at risk. No... they are seeking VALIDATION... of their beliefs, and hence, of their self-description.

Answer 5

Everyone has SOME opinion about SOMETHING. Your belief is not less credible because it is just a belief like any other and can't be proven; however, I can tell you that you do happen to be long winded for someone who chooses to believe in nothing-believe it or not. =)

Answer 6

My "belief" is that to be a religion the practice must believe in something beyond what can be seen and have faith in that something. So I've never considered Atheists to have a religion because they/you believe in nothing. The whole concept of "my belief is that I don't believe." is utter nonsense. If you don't want to believe something, fine, more power to you. But don't try to convince me that not believing is a belief, it's oxymoronic. It's the epitome of those who don't fit in trying to fit in anyway.

Answer 7

i think it has to do with the section - religion/spirituality. and the argument whether atheism is a belief or not. but like you said you BELIEVE not in anyones gods. i myself am agnostic so i try to look at things from each side ^^ its quite itneresting.

Answer 8

You believe that there is no god, that sounds like a belief to me. As to whether it matters, well if there is no god then you are not accountable to anybody for your actions, but then you also have no hope for the future, does that matter to you?

Answer 9

A non-belief matters just as much as a belief.

Answer 10

well who put you here. a MONKEY? everyday you wake up its a blessing, if he hadnt blessed you to live you would have woke up in HELL and then believing and ask for another chance.