Sentences with phrase «understanding of atheism»

«Atheism: The View from Cognitive Science» Cognitive Science is the interdisciplinary study of the mind and is in principle and in practice relevant to our understanding of atheism.

I'm agnostic, certainly not religious, but I have a limited understanding of atheism, short of people on these belief boards and what we see in the media.

Either way, you're flat wrong and need to re-evaluate your understanding of atheism and perhaps also your belief in god.

Wickman's credentials as a scientist and engineer are impressive, but his understanding of atheism and logic is less so.

Not exact matches

The loudest factions of Christianity and atheism aren't the largest, which presents the occasion for mutual understanding: open, honest, introspective and rational discussion between groups of people who share more in common than not.

If as you say you have talked to others who claim to be Atheist the way you describe it then they are IDIOTS who also don't understand Atheism and yes at that point since they are claiming «no God» to be true, then by all means call their point of view a «religion».

Fellow Christians, please understand that these posters are just the «lunatic fringe» of atheism.

Richard Dawkins believes Darwin was a genius, yet claims, «The more you understand the «significance» of evolution, the more you are pushed away from the agnostic position and towards atheism.»

using the semantics of atheism I could say there are unseen components to us we have yet to quantify or understand but that there is indeed more to us than meets the eye and a connectedness that is hard to describe but is like concrete once you are in tune with it

But understand that atheism qualifies as a belief also — a belief of «non-belief» if you will.

people really need to study the bible — not for Christianity sake but for theirs - the athiest would like everyone to understand them and used this phrase — But when I explain that atheism is central to my worldview — that I am in awe of the natural world and that I believe it is up to human beings, instead of a divine force, to strive to address our problems — they often better understand my views, even if we don't agree.

I asked the question to understand how (and if) it is possible to separate science from atheism in the minds of believers so we can truly discuss the concepts based on their evidentiary merits, not necessarily their philosophical implications if indeed there are any to be had.

All the survey demonstrates is that a large number of people are ignorant and have no understanding of what atheism is.

its not really atheism or religion that I have a problem with, its the hate, control, and fear that goes along with it that I have a problem with, you say that those who are spiritual are into new agey, crystal ball, stuff, see that's what I'm talking about, you assume to know what something is about when you don't understand something you naturally fear it, your self righteous clouds you, don't you get that by being narrow minded in your view towards things, you really act no better than religious fundamentalists, being spiritual is a lot more than just the new agey, think positive all the time that you think it is, its about being aware of who you are?

Instead of affirming the idea of evolution as supporting atheism or rejecting it because it did so, some Christians took the position that its acceptance changes the way we understand God's work in the world.

your brain is relatvely soo simple and therefore its comprehension is also very limited, you believe in evolution so religion itself is an evolutionary process.Even atheism also evolved, The arguments today is just part of the evolutionary process of change through dialectecal methods.The moment humans begin to understand and appreciate the dialectics then the solution to the problems argued is near.

If we are to understand atheism in its right perspective we have to quit the approach of condemnation.

Already in the nineteenth century Blake and Dostoevsky proclaimed a Christ who can be known only by passing through the death of God, and, if we are radical enough, we might understand that Hegel and Nietzsche were Christian thinkers who grasped the necessity of a theological atheism.

it looks like you're sort of understanding at least that it wasn't straight up atheism but instead a spin on atheism to promote marxist theory and communism.

I really feel that the organization is going about this in the wrong way... I don't understand why they are trying to make atheism into a religion... if they want to have a billboard then let them have a billboard but it should be more passive instead of attacking other religions... live and let live

While theists can learn by listening to atheists more, atheists themselves can foster greater understanding by not just emphasizing the «no» of atheism — our disagreement over the existence of any gods — but also the «yes» of atheism and secular humanism, which recognizes the amazing potential within human beings.

Unless you choose to believe you can never understand what I believe and though I don't agree with the position of atheism I don't call you stupid but we don't get that same respect.

I don't entirely disagree with the posts above, but my understanding is that for plain - old main - stream atheism, it is best defined by talking about belief versus lack of belief.

Belief in God enables me to understand the orderliness of the world, and no form of atheism does so.

And Chad, if you actually understood what you were quoting, you would realize that they prove clearly that Communism was not born of atheism, but simply took it as a tool to combat one of many rivals — because that was what communism did.

@Johnny Blammo «And Chad, if you actually understood what you were quoting, you would realize that they prove clearly that Communism was not born of atheism, but simply took it as a tool to combat one of many rivals — because that was what communism did.»

@Pope Francis Look, I do understand science, and I am absolutely of the opinion that to frame «religion» vs. «atheism» in light of «belief in the * supernatural *» vs. «science» is somehow misguided.

I understand why you would say Atheism isn't healthy for kids, but in that same school of thought, you would have to deduce that NO belief system is healthy for children.

Maybe you don't really understand the concept of atheism.

Actually, atheism in the way it is currently understood, really only goes back to the time of David Hume.

If that willful misunderstanding of atheism helps you sleep at night, Sly, you are welcome to it, though I do find it sadly ironic how poorly you seem to understand atheism while simultaneously railing that atheists are only atheists because they misunderstand god.

But I don't think you understand the definition of «atheism».

What you people don't seem to understand is that Atheism is at the heart of the greatest societies that have ever been.

But atheism which worships science as the only viable path is in such ignorance of the state of science itself, given that 95 % of the Universe is made of dark matter and dark energy which science knows absolutely nothing about, and other possible dimensions of existence which are utterly beyond sceintific understanding except in theory, all that makes atheistic blind conviction in science a form of religion in itself.

Really, instead of pointlessly calling atheism the «antichrist» you could have just gone to Google and researched those things you don't understand for yourself.

I understand that atheism is all cool right now, kinda like a Justin Beiber of the religious world, but is this really news?

It's OK Mr. Obama, your fellow Atheists understand why you need to keep up a front of belief eventhough your Atheism shows through..

I don't think you know what atheism is or at least you don't understand some of the debates you've found youself in.

Chris, I think that you're spot - on when you write that,»... atheists themselves can foster greater understanding by not just emphasizing the «no» of atheism — our disagreement over the existence of any gods — but also the «yes» of atheism and secular humanism, which recognizes the amazing potential within human beings.»

In the context of equality I understand religion to be any religion or absence of religion e.g. atheism.

In an alliance with Christian conservatives against the atheism that has made a sick and paltry joke of each of their respective and joint traditions and that has begun like a swarm of termites to eat away the underpinnings of this democratic republic, the new Jewish conservatives have come to understand that any alienation they felt as children in Christian America is as nothing compared with the danger they sense to themselves and their progeny, along with their uncomprehending coreligionists, in atheist America.

But as Novak rightly points out, «after this concession (and despite Grotius» disclaimer of any atheism on his part), it is not too difficult to understand how Kant saw theology as having validity only when it is made to serve the ultimate ends of ethics.»

If you had your preacher here to tell you the meaning of the words I wrote, you would understand my words to have meant that anytime anything mentions atheism it sends the christians into a tizzy, like its an assault on their personal beliefs, Atheists have know for ever that there are christians around.

Atheism is abhorrent, amoral, and anarchic, and those who truly understand this will find their way back to religion like Francis Bacon and many other highly intelligent folk who once fell for the supposed enlightenment of aAtheism is abhorrent, amoral, and anarchic, and those who truly understand this will find their way back to religion like Francis Bacon and many other highly intelligent folk who once fell for the supposed enlightenment of atheismatheism.

At least the hardcore atheists understood that if we are truly sincere in our atheism, the whole web of meanings and values that have clustered around the idea of God in Western culture has to go down the drain along with its organizing center.

if you want to argue about the merits of theism or atheism you should atleast understand the basic playing field.

You seem determined to «show» that atheism is some complicated, subversive, twisted evil agenda, that seeks to obscure some sort of «ultimate truth» that ONLY YOU know and understand!

Both are important in every person's life — even humanism / atheism is a set of beliefs and morals, both have been used for great good and great evil, thorough understanding and acceptance of both is essential to thriving in today's multicultural world.

Hi Toivo $, Although I do understand your argument and your concern for the feeling of others is admirable, I would have to counter that argument, however, with the fact that your atheism should be just as acceptable to others with likewise respect.

I am always amazed at the ignorance of people who do not understand the basic definition of atheism, and who must resort to straw man attacks against atheists.