• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Atheism

Logician Man

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2018
Messages
42,137
Reaction score
27,437
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Is everyone born an theist ? Why or why not? Make your case.
 
Is everyone born an theist ? Why or why not? Make your case.

If you mean is everyone born an atheist, yes. No one pops out of the womb believing in any gods.
 
We are all born as clean slates...nature and nurture both molds us...
 
If you mean is everyone born an atheist, yes. No one pops out of the womb believing in any gods.

I don't think newborns are capable of belief. It requires a certain amount of brain development. But it is certain they know nothing about the concept of god. That has to be learned one way or another.
 
Is everyone born an theist ? Why or why not? Make your case.

I'm told I was born under a bad sign. Then a doctor smacked my butt.

Some woman bit an apple a long time ago? So what?
 
I don't think newborns are capable of belief. It requires a certain amount of brain development. But it is certain they know nothing about the concept of god. That has to be learned one way or another.

It doesn't matter. Atheism is the LACK of belief in gods. Newborns LACK belief in gods. They LACK belief in everything. They are atheists by the definition of the word.
 
It doesn't matter. Atheism is the LACK of belief in gods. Newborns LACK belief in gods. They LACK belief in everything. They are atheists by the definition of the word.

That is true.
 
Is everyone born an theist ? Why or why not? Make your case.
Yes, even if you later come to believe god(s) are all make believe you will at first see your own subjective imagination as reality. In your own subjective reality there is not a distinction between natural and supernatural all evidence is experiential. Personification is learned before objectification and as such the unknowns will be seen as conscious rather than the result of non-personalized forces. Additionally you will assign a god as the ability to distinguish events as non-personal comes much later in life and will be very diffcult without a fully devloped frontal lobe. The degree by which you embrace this Theism will be most influenced by the language you are taught about it, as this is formative in shaping how your mind interprets and understand your relation to the outside world & internal mindscape. Language in this context, is not type like english or french, but rather the meanings and associated associations one picks up during their early developmental phase.

edit: To the question of lack of belief being defult atheism. The absence of belief is not atheism. It is a neutral state and is thus best judged by associated likelihood of outcome based on the likely experiences which will establish a later belief.
 
Last edited:
If you mean is everyone born an atheist, yes. No one pops out of the womb believing in any gods.

That would make them ignostics,.
 
That would make them ignostics,.

Nope. An ignostic is someone who thinks the entire concepts of gods is meaningless and nonsensical. Babies don't have the ability to even consider the possibility. It makes them atheist.
 
Nope. An ignostic is someone who thinks the entire concepts of gods is meaningless and nonsensical. Babies don't have the ability to even consider the possibility. It makes them atheist.

Not quite. An ignostic is someone who says 'I don't know what you mean when you say the word 'GOD'
 
Nope. An ignostic is someone who thinks the entire concepts of gods is meaningless and nonsensical. Babies don't have the ability to even consider the possibility. It makes them atheist.

Not quite. An ignostic is someone who says 'I don't know what you mean when you say the word 'GOD'
 
I'm told I was born under a bad sign. Then a doctor smacked my butt.

Some woman bit an apple a long time ago? So what?

I was conceived under a keep off the grass sign.
 
Which is exactly what atheism is. A lack of belief in gods.



Atheism is still a choice, ie., an arrived at point of view.

A baby hasn't reached even that stage, that's what I mean by a clean slate.

I don't believe in a personal god, but I believe that life has a spiritual basis. By definition, I'm not religions nor am I an atheist, nor am I an agnostic. I might be considered as a pantheist by some.

But I don't pretend to live in a "clean slate" state of being, either.

IN fact, arguing that what a baby is and what an atheist is, that they are the same, is rather silly.


They are not the same.
 
Atheism is still a choice, ie., an arrived at point of view.

A baby hasn't reached even that stage, that's what I mean by a clean slate.

I don't believe in a personal god, but I believe that life has a spiritual basis. By definition, I'm not religions nor am I an atheist, nor am I an agnostic. I might be considered as a pantheist by some.

But I don't pretend to live in a "clean slate" state of being, either.

IN fact, arguing that what a baby is and what an atheist is, that they are the same, is rather silly.


They are not the same.

Yes, they are. Atheism doesn't have to be a choice, someone who goes their entire life on a deserted island somewhere and never even comes into contact with the idea of religion, the concept of gods, they are still an atheist. The religious don't like this because they want to cast atheism as the "enemy". It isn't. It is the default. So they insist that it has to be something that it isn't, which is not only not honest, it's absurd. But this is religion we're talking about, where absurdity is pretty much the name of the game.
 
Yes, they are. Atheism doesn't have to be a choice, someone who goes their entire life on a deserted island somewhere and never even comes into contact with the idea of religion, the concept of gods, they are still an atheist. The religious don't like this because they want to cast atheism as the "enemy". It isn't. It is the default. So they insist that it has to be something that it isn't, which is not only not honest, it's absurd. But this is religion we're talking about, where absurdity is pretty much the name of the game.

well spoken
 
I understand that it’s an uphill battle to convince other people to define words differently, but I’m not alone in suggesting it is more meaningful to think of atheism as a ‘considered lack of belief in any gods’, precisely because I don’t think it is meaningful to talk about infants being atheists or for that matter my cat or my couch, who, as far as I know, also lack belief in any gods. (I would be disappointed in my cat to learn otherwise.)

I’m more than willing to give up whatever rhetorical points might be gained by claiming infants for team atheist in exchange for the clarity I think this additional word brings to what I think we’re really talking about.

I would place no requirements on how much consideration is required, just like I wouldn’t require any particular bar of consideration to qualify as a theist.
 
While I get the philosophical answers to what it means to be an atheist, I also think they tend to ignore the social factors. In another sense: ‘an atheist is someone who self identifies as an atheist’. I don’t think this is as meaningless as it may sound at first glance. There are in fact a lot of people who don’t believe in any gods but don’t identify as atheists due to stigma against atheism or a desire to distance themselves from anti-religion activism, out of a wish to be perceived as more open minded (on the assumption or cultural stigma that atheists are close minded) etc.

To self identify as an atheist has implications beyond the philosophical abstractions. We could either declare everyone wrong and apply the labels generated by our philosophical definitions or we might examine all the factors involved in self identifying as an atheist and consider them a meaningful part of the definition of what it means to be an atheist.

I would argue that neither approach is right or wrong.
 
Is everyone born an theist ? Why or why not? Make your case.
Why does it matter? I'm not convinced there is any significance to any socio-political opinions of new born babies. :cool:
 
Back
Top Bottom