Since Atheists are completely in denial about having faith in what they believe, can they admit to ignorance?

Question

faith
–noun
1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.

n.

1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief, trust.
3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
4. often Faith Christianity The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6. A set of principles or beliefs.

Since Atheists don't have proof in what they believe, aren't they also trusting in their own belief?

Why do Atheists attack and don't answer questions about Atheism?
Don't Atheists know how to read a dictionary?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/faith

Answer 1

Seriously, I believe the answer lies in egotism.

Atheists do not believe that they are accountable to any higher power for their own actions. And since their ONLY moral judge is themselves, of course they are going to be in denial of the faith that it takes to be an atheist. I know. I used to be one.

And they are also going to be much less considerate of others. It all has to do with egotism.

"I'm right over God.... since 'God' doesn't exist," is what they think.

See, just look at all the attacks. Rather than reading it as a sincere question, they take offense. Upon that offense, they make vast overgeneralized assumptions about you, your cognitive abilities, and everything else that has nothing to do with the question and that could be construed as an insult.

I just feel sorry for them.

Answer 2

I will try to really answer you here. You're creating a false argument, you cannot see the wood for the trees.
Atheists are not in denial about having faith in themselves and their beliefs, they are in denial about the existence of a supreme being or beings. For them to be ignorant, there would have to be evidence of such existence which they were ignoring, and for an Atheist no such evidence exists.
You are correct that an atheist really has no proof of their belief in no supreme beings, but that's the whole point of belief/faith that you have defined!
Yes they trust in their belief, being an Aethist doesn't mean you can't believe in something! An Atheist belives the sun will rise tomorrow and that their cola will taste the same as last time!
Not all Atheists attack, and I would say as a fairly neutral observer, they are often less inclined to do so than most religious people. I would prefer open and honest debate and discussion than the slander and lies that both parties (religious and atheist) often throw at each other.

Answer 3

I understand your point, and I think of it at times...

But then I remember that much of what we do is based on faith in things. We even technically have faith in causality. The difference, however, is that we have observed patterns in the physical world that suggest certain things happen and will continue to happen, whereas we have not had such experiences with any sort of deity, whatever its definition may be.

As an agnostic trying to be open-minded, I do not condemn others' claims of experiences with God, though I am skeptical. I respect your belief in God if and only if it is not based merely on faulty logic or upbringing alone.

It is the other beliefs that people have, i.e. God loves us all but will send some of us to eternal torment simply because we saw no reason to believe in our brief mortal lives.

Our theories, facts, rationality, etc. are based on the faith that things continuously test to be true. We do not observe this tendency in some things; therefore, we do not accept them. That is one of our simplest reasons. There are more, but please do not accuse us of having faith without evidence.

I believe that, if logic and science cannot prove something, it is up to a personal experience to show it to be true. I understand that drugs, drowsiness, mental illness, forced effects, etc. can all be legitimate explanations, but I am willing to accept the possibility that there is something more. Please keep in mind, however, that a personal experience is just that: personal. You cannot share it with us in such a way that we will believe. It is up to us to have it.

In the meantime, have compassion for those of us who have had no such experiences, because that would mean we are the lost ones...

Answer 4

It is a weak argument that is based on quoting the dictionary.

Atheists do not have faith or "belief that is not based on proof". That is an absence of faith. If I don't have proof I don't believe or have faith.

You should read "The End of Faith" by Sam Harris, who expounds on this at length.

Answer 5

Faith also requires belief in a THING. Atheism is not a THING. YOU are the one presenting an argument that there is a magical being living in the sky. We don't believe you. How is that "faith"?
You are assuming that atheism is a set of beliefs of some sort. It's not.
It's unbelievably arrogant to suggest that someone not believing in YOUR fairy tale takes "faith". Not only doesn't it take "faith", it doesn't even take a second thought.

Answer 6

To say a person is ignorant because they have no faith in a god is absurd.

actually to the fact it could be said that those who still hang on to primitive beliefs, such as gods, would be the more ignorant.
The concept of gods are very very primitive in nature, and those that belive in deities, are in my opinion a evolutionary throw back.
primitive cultures from the dawn of time have always viewed things thier tiny little minds couldnt understand as acts of one angry god or another.

LISTEN UP! its the 21st century, religions were created as a way to controll the masses, our civilization is far to evolved for everyone to continue to believe in fairytale gods. It is time that we as a race, step up to our next level of evolution, when these old primitive false faiths are finally discarded worldwide, we will have achived what no other culture has in the entire history of man.

im not an athiest, I am a rational, educated, EVOLVED human.
I hold no belief in anything but myself.

Answer 7

I think the Atheists are going to put this question on their drinking list.

You still don't get it. It is really simple, if you just apply yourself here.

Atheists believe in nothing. If God is proven to exist, then the Atheists will have faith. Right now, they have no faith at all.

Atheism is not a faith practice. Can you begin to wrap your brain around that?

Answer 8

It is about disbelief of the existence of an omnipotent creature.

disbelief does not equal belief.

It is the same as Christians or Muslims disbelieving in other gods other then their own, does that mean you have faith in other gods too because you disbelieve them? Kind of rubbish isn't it?

By the way, no proof of god = proof of no god, do you not understand? It is like no proof of the toothfairy = proof of no toothfairy. If you think otherwise, does it not mean you have to pray to the next 2000 gods since there are no proof they DO NOT exist (that is based on your theory).

Answer 9

i'm an atheist, and this is no longer that i'm that offended with the aid of the "below God" ingredient of the pledge. and you're stunning: You *shouldn't* be prevented from asserting it, merely as we ought to continuously no longer be *compelled* to assert it, ought to our thoughts on the priority be accurately good. yet posting the ten Commandments in a courthouse is somewhat too lots. The business enterprise Clause of the US shape reads: "Congress shall make no regulation respecting a company of religion...or prohibiting the loose workout thereof." To submit this variety of blatantly Christian record of precepts and injunctions able it is nominally unaware of religious persuasion merely isn't cool. I agree that, in many situations, the ten Commandments rather are not a foul place to start once you try to steer a ethical existence. needless to say, "Thou shalt have not have been given the different gods previously me" is very superfluous in that regard; and, all issues seen, this is possibly the part of the ten Commandments that i could have the biggest situation with if I observed it in a court docket of regulation. "Wow...those adult adult males are gonna be out to get me! i do no longer think of their God!" this is merely pointless.

Answer 10

The lack of belief means you don't have anything to prove because something that doesn't exist does not need to be proven. The burden of proof lays on the believe who say there is something when evidence shows there is nothing.

Answer 11

That's called a fallacy of ambiguity. Nice change from the usual straw man arguments, but just as dishonest.

Have a great day!