Area 51 » Culture

followers

Follow It!

26 Example Questions (2 closed)

active oldest votes

up vote 13 down vote

added by jcolebrand Feb 8 at 6:11

This is one that I see as an interesting topic that should be able to target specific countries, generating a few areas of active expertise. – jcolebrand Feb 8 at 6:13

This is almost the only question I could come up with directly that I would even ask Atheism.SE personally. I may replicate it a few times, once for each of a few countries, but overall this is the only topic that's solely A.SE related as far as I can tell. – jcolebrand Feb 8 at 6:34

up vote 11 down vote

added by Zoltan Berg Feb 14 at 19:49

Pascal's Wager used to bother me too at times. The other way to look at it though is that it involves gambling your entire life. Since I think this life is the only one I will ever have I would rather not dedicate it to an entity whose existence I cannot confirm. – James O'Neill Mar 29 at 22:45

Oh come on. How can someone be bothered by Pascal's Wager? God is supposed to be just. You are not saved by simply believing in him or not believing in him. Imagine there are two people, one who believes yet does evil deeds and another who disbelieves but does good. It is ridiculous to think that God loves the believer more. Plus, belief in God cannot be used as an insurance policy, God is smarter than that, he knows who TRUELY believes and who is hedging his bets, surely. – Sachin Kainth Apr 15 at 14:50

@Sachin Kainth hmmm how can you proove that if the god would exist it would be just??? – Zoltan Berg Apr 18 at 16:34

@Zoltan Berg Because to be God he MUST be just, otherwise he is not God. God is the highest of all beings, we are human and we are just to our neighbours, to our friends, to our wives and husbands, even to our enemies sometimes. Then surely, the greatest of all beings must be infinitely just. – Sachin Kainth Apr 19 at 13:17

@Sachin Kainth could you post a source for your claims? – Zoltan Berg Apr 19 at 16:49

show 2 more comments

up vote 10 down vote

added by jcolebrand Feb 8 at 6:07

	This is one of the few first questions I thought of seeing this topic, and it would probably be as well suited for a couple other SE sites, so this is sadly borderline after a bit of time thinking about it. :-\ – jcolebrand Feb 8 at 6:33
	That seems to pre-suppose both a certain definition of "religion" and "atheism" that might make an objective answer difficult however. I mean we wouldn't call "monotheism" or "polytheism" "a religion" would we? Might Atheism be too broad of a definition to be meaningful under that label? (Not answering the question so much as trying to give a heads-up on problems with the ideas of answers to it.) – Chris Travers Mar 8 at 4:40
	Excellent point Chris, and yet, wouldn't that be the answer? Atheism isn't a religion. It's a classification of religious beliefs, at best. – jcolebrand Mar 13 at 14:15
	more or less, but see my question below, "Can one be a religious Jew and an atheist at the same time?" I believe the answer is probably yes but this gets right into the heart of the difficulty. – Chris Travers Apr 30 at 13:35

up vote 10 down vote

added by Bertrand Lefort Mar 6 at 1:04

Just like to talk about books in a society marked by audiovisual culture – volkerjaan May 26 at 21:42

up vote 10 down vote

added by sarahm Mar 28 at 22:52

Possiblly leading to flame wars, agnostic can call atheists religion believing in lack of god without evidence, and atheist would call agnostics cowards fearing to be honest about their atheism. – volkerjaan May 26 at 21:44

up vote 9 down vote

added by sharksfan98, edited by Rob Hyndman May 27 at 2:49

Can this be generalized to "How do I leave [religious order/faith] in [country/region]"? – sarahm Apr 20 at 22:15

can we include traditional rituals for renouncing baptism culled from documents on early witchcraft? (evil grin) – Chris Travers Apr 30 at 13:36

You ask about 2 different things. First how to be officially proclaimed confessionless and the second, how to be removed by Catolic Church from their papers? – volkerjaan May 26 at 21:45

up vote 6 down vote

added by frafl Mar 10 at 21:48

up vote 5 down vote

added by jcolebrand Feb 8 at 6:08

This question assumes there's something wrong with the person on the other side of the discussion, and should not be tolerated. If you're going to deal with other people, then let them be themselves until they are a active harm to you and your well being (notice the use of engage above). – jcolebrand Feb 8 at 6:12

@jcolebrand On the contrary, this question (your own question??) just assumes that there is a way to talk to religious people about their beliefs without automatically offending them. That is certainly true at least some of the time...hopefully more often than not! I don't see how the question "assumes there's something wrong with the person on the other side of the discussion". (I also don't see how you end up saying your own question "should not be tolerated. lol) – A.M. yesterday

Because almost every atheist I know that engages religious people (versus the other way around) about religion does it to attack them. – jcolebrand yesterday

up vote 5 down vote

added by jdm Apr 23 at 9:35

	There are a lot of communities which doesn't enforce belief systems, such as puzzle-solvers, so I think this question isn't very clear. – volkerjaan May 26 at 21:46
	The question was a nod to this "atheist church" in London: bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21319945 . They have a nonreligious sunday service. There's only so much explanation I can give in the title... – jdm May 27 at 6:57

up vote 4 down vote

added by volkerjaan Feb 8 at 21:06

Even assuming this correlation exists, I don't see how a causal relationship could ever be proven. – Beofett Feb 11 at 18:05

Why don't you ask about other correlations? Much more interesting and much less speculation. – frafl Mar 10 at 21:51

If there is a correlation, it's by how Christian/conservatism makes the lives of some Western biologists more difficult. – Muz Mar 29 at 5:14

up vote 3 down vote

added by sarahm Mar 28 at 22:57

up vote 2 down vote

added by James O'Neill Mar 29 at 23:32

up vote 1 down vote

added by sarahm Mar 28 at 23:02

I'm thinking the 'extrapolating the universe from a piece of cake' scene from hitchhikers guide to the galaxy here... not everyone can think that through and just shrug off the experience. – sarahm Mar 28 at 23:05

up vote 1 down vote

added by MDMoore313 Apr 1 at 12:02

(proposed answer) You can't prove a negative (unfortunately, in this case). See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot – A.M. yesterday

up vote 1 down vote

added by Chris Travers Apr 30 at 13:34

(intended to probe the distinctions between religion and belief a bit. I am not sure the answer to this is as obvious as it seems.) – Chris Travers Apr 30 at 13:34

up vote 1 down vote

added by Xitcod13 May 9 at 8:29

Yes. Agnosticism means thinking it is not possible to know whether there is a god (or gods). Even if you think that, you still live your life according to whether you think there is one. In most cases, people who call themselves agnostic are atheists as well (they don't pray etc.). They are just choosing to use the term they think is 'softer'. – A.M. yesterday

up vote 1 down vote

added by Xitcod13 May 9 at 8:35

up vote 0 down vote

added by Xitcod13 May 9 at 8:16

up vote 0 down vote

added by Xitcod13 May 9 at 8:20

up vote 0 down vote

added by Xitcod13 May 9 at 8:42

up vote 0 down vote

added by Zetta Suro May 19 at 20:35

up vote -1 down vote

added by volkerjaan Feb 8 at 21:08

what is "preferred faculty"? – jcolebrand Feb 8 at 21:12

the faculty one have to study, in contrast to which one simply got, which are not always the same say someone whant to study biology, this is one's prefered facultz – volkerjaan Feb 8 at 21:27

up vote -2 down vote

added by jcolebrand Feb 8 at 6:09

closed as not constructive by Nicol Bolas, Robert Cartaino♦ Feb 10 at 2:01

This question is not a good fit to our Q&A format. We expect answers to generally involve facts, references, or specific expertise; this question will likely solicit opinion, debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion.

This is a very discussiony question. – Nicol Bolas Feb 8 at 18:40

I know, but if we don't describe what are bad questions, then people will think they are "fair game". Better to illustrate the bad spaces before we begin. – jcolebrand Feb 8 at 18:57

what is responsible interaction? that causing response? – volkerjaan Feb 8 at 21:09

@volkerjaan and now you see why I proposed this as a bad question ;-) But these are the sorts of questions that "the atheists I know" might ask [they're not very good people from time to time :-( ] – jcolebrand Feb 8 at 21:10

up vote -3 down vote

added by volkerjaan Feb 8 at 20:59

This is way too open-ended and prone to discussion. – Beofett Feb 11 at 18:07

Introduce them to Pascal's Wager? – jcolebrand Feb 11 at 22:14

Better yet, introduce them to the Homer Simpson solution: "Suppose we're worshiping the wrong god. Every time we go to [place of worship], we're just making him madder and madder!" – Jules Mazur Feb 13 at 6:09

up vote -3 down vote

added by volkerjaan Feb 9 at 13:47

This question is intended to be subjective and argumentative and cause people to feel highly disparaged. This is not a constructive activity. – jcolebrand Feb 10 at 19:33

It could possibly be reworded to be constructive, however (i.e. "What evidence/arguments exist that demonstrate or support the idea that atheists can be just as moral as those who believe in a diety or dieties?"). However, it seems to be just as suited to philosophy.se in that case. – Beofett Feb 11 at 18:10

I've changed, however with gods and not diets, diets are making me thinking of food :P – volkerjaan Feb 11 at 18:33

How to you counter the claim that there is no morality if there is no God. I think is a better question which covers similar underlying question of morality. – Xitcod13 May 9 at 9:16

up vote -16 down vote

added by jcolebrand Feb 8 at 6:10

closed as not constructive by BenjiWiebe, CoffeeRain, Robert Cartaino♦ Feb 8 at 15:26

No. If you want to post memes or the like, then you should find a more recreational outlet for your unexpressed tensions in life. – jcolebrand Feb 8 at 6:11

fwiw I expected this to be closed as not constructive. I just wanted to make it part of the record of discussion. – jcolebrand Feb 8 at 18:57

Congratulations. It's on record as an example of a question irrelevant to this site's purpose. – Jules Mazur Feb 13 at 6:07

This is what i'm worried about. This community taking a stride towards reddit and making us seem arrogant. Please join us above to discuss our separation from /r/atheism. – sharksfan98 Feb 18 at 17:26

This would be on topic for Skeptics SE. – Eva Mar 13 at 7:54

show 2 more comments