Are Atheist or Christians closed minded?

Question

The way I see it a person has two options. He can either believe in God or he can refuse to.

So what's the point in calling either side close-minded? Both sides close off the other side's position so doesn't that make them both close minded?

Perhaps theists can be seen as taking a wide view of the universe as they accept the possibility of there being more than simply the material universe. Opposite of that, atheist can be seen as taking a narrow view accepting only the material universe.

I propose we call theist "wide-minded" and atheist "narrow minded"

What do you think?

Answer 1

an atheist is a person who thinks rationally and behaves rationally and not a slave like a believer to the tenets of his religion. an atheist has scientific temper and expresses his opinions on any field after thinking rationally but where as the believers of any religions think dogmatically as they can not question their basic tenets of their religion even if they know that their religious texts contain unscientific dogmatic tenets.so the believer's minds are closed.

Answer 2

I think everyone can be close minded. No offense, but this:

"Perhaps theists can be seen as taking a wide view of the universe as they accept the possibility of there being more than simply the material universe. Opposite of that, atheist can be seen as taking a narrow view accepting only the material universe.

I propose we call theist "wide-minded" and atheist "narrow minded".."


is close minded because it assumes much on the the way athiests view the universe. I've seen plenty of Christians close their minds to anything not in the bible and I've seen plenty of athiests refuse to listen to anything of a spritual nature. On the other hand, I've met people from both camps who are willing to listen to the other's ideas. It depends on the person, not their religious (or lack thereof) belief.

Answer 3

J T said, "Atheists are waiting for theists to prove their claims." If theists are allowed to only use the kind of evidence athiests allow, then will always be waiting. Many atheists warrant atheism based on the lack of evidence for the existence of God. The problem with that is in an atheistic worldview, one cannot obtain evidence for the existence of God, which leads to circular reasoning. The argument goes something like this:

1.) The natural world is all there is.
2.) Because the natural world is all there is, the supernatural (God) doesn't exists.
3.) Therefore there is no evidence for the existence of supernatural (God).
4.) Therefore the supernatural (God) does not exist.

A weaker form may look something like this.

1.) The natural world is all that is knowable.
2.) Because the natural world that is knowable, the supernatural (God) can't be known.
3.) Therefore evidence for the existence of God is unobtainable.
4.) Therefore the supernatural (God) is unknowable, so there is no reason to believe.

The problem with these areguments argument is that no evidence for God existence can ever be obtained so it is therefore frontloaded with the notion that God doesn't exist or is unknowable rather than actually proving anything about God . The conclusion is the same as the premise, which is circular reasoning.

Second, the statements make an ontological judgment: God doesn't exist or one cannot have belief in God. Such statements can't be made empiricist framework, because empirical conclusions require evidence. If evidence doesn’t exist, then no conclusion can be made and the concept of God is meaningless because it can't be described.

However if an atheists wants to make an ontological judgment about God, he or she has to concede that one can have some sort of knowledge about God, which opens the door for some type of transcendental knowledge outside of empirical knowledge. So the atheist has to allow non-empirical evidence as valid evidence.

Rationalists call such knowledge, a priori -- that which is knowable independent of experience. This type of knowledge is embedded in the mind of over reasonable human being. Evidence for this tpe of knowledge would be the something like rape or murder being wrong, universally. Or that all people would consider a vista of the Grand Canyon to be beautiful. This raises the question, "Where did they come from?" By definition of a priori, they didn't originate in nature, so they orginated in the supernatural realm.

Answer 4

I don't agree. To begin with, there aren't only two options. A third one is not to give a damn about whether god exists or not. That doesn't mean you believe he doesn't exist. It just means you cannot be bothered to make up your mind about it.

Besides, I think that "IN GENERAL", with lots of exceptions and remarkable cases, believers have to accept something that goes beyond their logic, and without complaining. That just HAS to close up your mind. On the other hand, unbelievers don't believe because they don't see why they should. They rely on their minds, and that makes them open-minded. Anyway, I insist: this is only a broad generalisation, with many exceptions.

I don't agree either on your idea that accepting "the possibility of there being more than simply the material universe" is a sign of open-mindedness. It is not open-minded to take something without proof as a FACT. It is open-minded not to be close to alternatives. But stating as a fact and with absolute conviction that something exists, in spite of your absolute lack of proof is rather a sign of wishful thinking, not a sign of open-mindedness. And atheists are taking a realistic viewpoint (not a close-minded one) when they will not trust the existence of anything that their eyes and instruments of measuring can perceive.

Answer 5

Speaking as someone who has been on both sides, I can say that I did not become an Atheist until I looked at all evidence and made a rational decision based on what I objectively learned.

I simply say there is not god like the one people worship, but don't deny the possibility of life in other realms or dimensions.

How is that being closed minded?

Answer 6

Theists are so open minded to gods it's a wonder their brains don't fall out. There's a difference between being open minded and being gullible.

The difference is that most atheists would change their minds if you could prove that a god actually exists and that your holy scriptures are indeed the word of that god..

The theists tend to believe their holy scriptures, even though there is much evidence to indicate that the scriptures are not true or there is a lack of evidence regarding their veracity. Creationism vs. evolution is a prime example.

The other strike against them of course, is quoting their scriptures to others while making little effort to adhere to those scriptures themselves. That also greatly devalues any message they may try to impart to others.

Answer 7

Who says atheists refuse to accept anything except the material universe. I just don't believe in the imaginary friends people make up. I don't make any claims that only material things exist. I just don't see any credible evidence for these god stories people clearly have invented. Its way too much of a coincidence that all these contradictory gods that people believe in all seem to hate the same things the believers do for one thing.

Answer 8

I think you are making up your own definitions.

Atheists are waiting for theists to prove their claims.

Atheism isn't a belief or philosophy, it is a word used to describe people like me who are waiting for theists to prove their claims. Until such time, the only logical assumption is that their God does not exist.


BTW, theists do not claim it is possible God exists, they assert it as an established fact. I am an atheist and consider all things possible, but the only things I accept as factual are the things that can and have been proven.

Answer 9

No atheists are not close minded. Coz some of us have read the bible and been to church and other stuff. And just the whole god thing doesn't make any sense. So we decided to go the other route which seems more logical.

So you see we have explored the fantasy world too. Lol And now we live in reality.

Answer 10

I think both sides of those of narrow and broad minds. It's not a religion that dictates how open or closed a person is but that individual.

Answer 11

I HAD been open minded. I've been on both sides and in the middle. I took my time and looked through all the information I could get my hands on. NOW I'm "narrow minded" in that I've seen and heard pretty much every argument. I was open to all of it and I've already accepted what makes sense. I'm not going to continue to leave my mind open for possibilities I've already evaluated and discounted.