The debate "Atheist/Agnostic=open minded. Belief in religion=close minded." was started by
March 5, 2016, 12:20 am.
19 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 41 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
project_mayhem posted 7 arguments, RyanWakefield posted 2 arguments, danielle posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
ototoxic posted 1 argument, Voidiq posted 1 argument, MrShine posted 1 argument, agent posted 2 arguments to the disagreers part.
project_mayhem, danielle, RyanWakefield, absureality, sgilmour2001 and 14 visitors agree.
ototoxic, NaggingNut, MrShine, ronan_nestor, TheFalseEnigma, TheNorthStar, xaveragexjoesx, carlos1ja, wmd, Voidiq, PoliticsAsUsual, NerdTagz, agent, fadi, nawl, YMayy, ElisaXO, neveralone and 23 visitors disagree.
Agent, project_mayhem is comparing the belief in God to the belief in unicorns. Both lack proof supporting the claim, but one is generally discounted as fiction whole the other is accepted as a fundamental truth. (S)He is saying that if presented with evidence, belief is logical, but until that evidence is given both claims cam be said to be equally false.
I was pretty clear in my explanation. What exactly did you not understand?
I mean explain properly what you think
I dont understand your question.
instead of talking about unicorns can you say me what you think about it?
Well i cant certainly speak for other people, but what would it take for me to believe in unicorns? Probably the same as yourself, any evidence to confirm one exits. Theres a distinct difference between having an open minded and being gullible. I try and be as open minded as possible. I dont believe in unicorns because thats a big claim and no evidence even suggest one exits. But religion is full of extraordinary claims.Just to list a few: a God exists and created us, this god intervenes in our daily lives,we can telepathically communicate with him ,decides if we are tortured or not based on if we believed in its existence without good evidence , and the list goes on. Now based on what we do know about our existence, none of these even sound reasonable. These sound like myths created by people who had no clue about our nature and place in the universe. So to accept this claims that religion accepts without any evidence, is not being open minded but extremely gullible. To be fair, most religious people have been indoctrinated to accept the claims or face eternal punishment. This type of fear isnt easy to get rid of.
So while you would say that atheism and agnosticism is open minded because you are able to open up to other options, but once you've decided to settle on an option, you are closed minded? Then how would you know that you are open to the belief of a God?
And then define any religious belief by comparing it to the belief in a mythical creature. I want to know, if you believe that you are open minded when it comes to religion or non religion, do you ever consider if you are wrong? Religious people I've seen struggle with the belief of if and which God. All I've ever seen in athiests is a laugh off, or ask religious people that question back.
I wouldn't say atheism is open minded if it promises religion as fiction and fantasy,after all, what would it take for an atheist to believe in unicorns or Lord of the Rings?
Thats like saying people who dont believe in unicorns are close minded.
Yup, just what I've been saying.
Theists do know about science as well, though.
They only depend on science
Atheism is technically just as closed minded lol
Then you can't really generalise billions of people into a closed minded catagory. I think, if there was definite evidence against God, then many theists would become atheists.
Atheism would be a closed minded belief. Atheism says there isn't a God. Some atheists say it is possible that there is, but they believe there isn't. However, atheism itself says 'there is no God'.
Theism is similar. While some theists say it is possible that they are wrong, but believe they are right. However, theism itself says 'there is a God'.
Therefore, as I keep saying, you can't call theists closed minded but say that athiests aren't.
I've specifically stated that theists who do not buy into a literal reading of the Bible can be very open minded....
Then you can't call theists closed minded in the same way, as I fully know that it is possible there isn't a God.
Agnostic just answers a different question than an atheist. Do you believe a god exists? Yes= theist. No= Atheist . Do you claim to know whether a god exists? No= Agnostic. Yes= youre an idiot.
And to be open minded, you simply have to be willing to accept new ideas and dismiss previous ones. Most religious people are not willing to change their mind despite the lack of evidence and even dismiss real evidence that contradict their belief.
atheism doesn't say there definitely is no God. why do you keep repeating that despite numerous people, including myself repeatedly correcting you.
I am atheist.
I do not believe there is a God
I understand that there very well MAY be a God, but considering the evidence, I lean against it.
Noone is saying that there absolutely is no God because that is an indefensible statement. please do not make that wrong assumption again.
As in 'this ISN'T biased'.
ISN'T. I MEANT ISN'T.
To be honest, atheism is closed-minded as well, as it says there definitely is no God. Agnosticism is probably the only open-minded belief.
And this is biased towards agnosticism, I'm religious myself.
if course, even a group that is labeled open minded can have closed minded individuals. but it is unlikely that a group labeled closed minded would have open minded people unless those people are there with an ulterior purpose.
things can be proved wrong just as easily
that isn't true at all, non literal reading theists are clearly open minded as they were able to adjust their beliefs to new evidence.
most atheists are very open to the idea of god, they just feel the evidence isn't there and chose that God is unlikely.
being openminded has nothing to do with being unable to make a decision without full evidence, it means your open to changing your decision in the presence of new evidence.
agnostics simply don't want to decide, and are demanding more evidence that will never come. (unlike beliefs regarding the nuclear capabilities which even at the time we could detect and measure, detection of the divine is nowhere near being possible, if the divine even exists.)
indecisiveness =/= open mindedness
I think it should be more
atheist/theist = close minded
agnostic = open minded
We went years before we could demonstrate the theory of relativity experimentally and many scientists were sceptical while it was only a model. Many scientists did not believe nuclear weapons were possible until they were created and demonstrated. Just because we don't have sufficient evidence now doesn't mean we never will. We can never predict what we will learn, so saying we must come to a firm decision based on limited to no evidence is saying that we must close our minds to other possibilities.
sufficient evidence will likely never happen. why does that have any bearing at all? it just means that I will never know the answer, not that I should decide what the answer is without sufficient evidence.
although that is normally true, when are you expecting to get "sufficient evidence?" As far as this question goes, you have all the evidence your ever gonna get.
besides, if contrary evidence ever does come, you know you can change your mind... people lose or gain faith all the time.
your argument is that if we don't make a hard conclusion without evidence that we are cowards. I would say that coming to a firm decision without sufficient evidence makes you closed minded.
I'm not talking the cowardly way out, I have made an educated decision after hours apon hours of thinking (having been a theist and an athiest), that it is impossible to understand existence based on the infinitesimal knowledge we possess.
100% evidence is impossible, check out the "brain in a jar" paradox.
any intelligent atheist will say the existence of God is always a possibility, BUT BASED ON THE EVIDENCE AT HAND, one makes a decision.
for the question of god, one has all the evidence one will ever attain within our lifetimes. waiting for evidence that will never come is not open-mindedness, that's just indecisiveness and defensive political correctness.
if your agnostic, your an atheist with commitment issues.
I am agnostic because I have not seen any evidence of God, but I have not discarded the possibility. Billions of people believe in God and whole they could all be wrong it is also possible that they know something I do not. I read up on religious scholars as well as scientific discoveries because there is always the possibility that I will come across something that will definitively sway me to one side or the other.
It is neither that I am afraid or lazy, it is that when presented with insufficient evidence to form a conclusion reliably, I choose to defer judgement.
It depends on which definition of atheism you are arguing. If you define atheism as a lack of belief in a deity, there is no functional difference from agnosticism. If you define it as the belief that there is no deity, it is a different story. For the purposes of this debate I was using the second definition since otherwise saying both agnostic and atheist is redundant.
how is agnostic lazy or scared. there is no evidence one way or the other. therefore not taking a firm belief without any evidence seems like the logical choice.
theism + literal reading of the bible = closed minded and ignorant
theism + subjective reading of the Bible = open minded and chose faith
atheism = can open or closed mind
agnosticism = too lazy/scared to choose and taking the cowardly way out.
Atheism isn't the denial of God outright, atheism is simply a lack of believe in any deity. There is nothing preventing the atheist from accepting God given proper reason to do so. Now, there is a small, but outspoken minority of the atheist community, often referred to as the "new atheists" which do directly challenge the notion of God and proudly claim that there is no such thing as God and that no such thing can exist. However, most atheists will accept the notion that one cannot prove a negative and therefore the question will always remain open to some degree. Although, for some, that degree is about as plausible as Santa clause....
A theist however, must deny the truth claims of other religions and science if they directly conflict with their belief system. That's why you have such a backlash against evolution from the Christian community. If evolution is real, then there was no Adam and eve, if there was no Adam and eve, then there was no original sin, if there was no original sin, then there is no need for a savior, if there is no need for a savior, then Christianity is irrelevant....
Again, faith is something that has no need of evidence. I'm faithful in God but I cast my mind to science.
Truly atheists are pretty damn brave. I can either be faithful to God and go to heaven, or be faithful to a god that doesn't exist and die like everyone else. Atheists don't believe in a god and risk suffering in Hell for eternity, or take a gamble that God doesn't exist and die like everyone else.
Nothing about religion is close minded, in fact it's kind the opposite since it requires faith and trust. But to each his own, right?
By being atheist, you are denying any possibility of a God in any form. That is simply faith against God rather than for.
Faith is just believing in something without evidence. I dont think science will ever prove/disprove unicorns or vampires either. Man isnt meant to figure out anything. The universe is under no obligation to make sense to us.
But youre missing the point of the topic and video.
People can believe in God with an open mind, and disbelieve God with a closed one. Agnostics would, by definition, have open minds since the definition is not being sure, but many people misuse the term. Atheists are just as capable of closed mindedness and ignorance as any religious person, they simply substitute which areas they are closed minded about.
I'm religious and science is my life. You can believe in a god without proof. It's called faith for a reason. I don't think science will ever prove or disprove God, but I do belive that man is meant to figure out the secrets of the Universe.