Does this forum qualify as an atheist forum?

Does this forum qualify as an atheist forum?

  • Yes
  • No
  • It depends (say why)
0 voters

Most of you are atheists here, and I am interested to know whether this forum can be regarded as an atheist one, even if it bears a neutral title. In other words, I am probing into the essence of this place.

Theology and philosophy are by definition incompatible.
It only makes sense that any philosopher worth his salt would be a-theist
That does not make this an ‘atheist website’ however, it makes it a philosophy website.

yeah…what he said…

btw: look at the # of posts!! how weird…

Wow. I don’t mean to hijack the thread but I just have to ask you to expand on this. If Sâmkhya wishes, maybe we should have you start a new thread on this apparent incompatibility between theology and philosophy, rather than take us space on this one.

I’d be very interested.

I don’t think it’s much of an atheist forum. There’s lots of other views. You have Christians, Muslims, followers of various eastern religions, etc. Then you’ve got at least one Deist (our own Future Man), too, maybe more.

I doubt Bob, Uccisore, & PoR wouldn’t consider it an atheist forum.

If philosophy is incompatible with religion then why is there a “Religion” section on a philosophy website in the first place?

Dr. S writes

I must also admit to being curious as to the reasoning behind this.

They are all post-christian thinkers who start from a religiously sceptical position. They want new “knowledge” to take the place of passe “myth” and “superstition”.

But these elements are part of the human experience, and I see no reason to be rid of them.

Poverty, disease, war and cruelty have also long been part of the human experience, yet many people want to get rid of them. Same reasoning. I enjoy mythology and fiction, but I don’t want to base my life upon it.

hi

How? I always felt that theology was the a part of philosophy. In theology they try to make rationalize religious claim. How is it not compatible with the love of wisdom?

I must disagree. I you are a philospher you must us rational thought to reach conclutions and if you rationally see that there is a God then how does that make you worse? A philosopher should question his world but would not have be an A-theist to be good.

EZ$

I don’t think religion and philosophy are completely mutually exclusive. Western JC religions are a bit hard to reconcile with the principles of rational inquirey, but there’s always Deism.

touche

I meant what is thought to be superstition, of course.

I take it you don’t think much of 1200 years of Scholasticism. (measured Augustine to Suarez)

mrn

Dr.Satanical

then how come Kant is a philosopher?

I do. I’m more referring to the fact that it’s easy in many ways to derive your answers from a dogmatic source instead of “searching” for truth. Of course, there are many questions of philosophy that the KJV doesn’t touch on.

You can certainly be a Christian and a philosopher. It just takes more work. :laughing:

Clearly, you can not both pursue philosophy honestly by intellectual means while adhering to a theology. The belief in the theology cancels out the freedom to do philosophy.

I’m glad you can draw such a clear conclusion.

Why can’t theology exist in the metaphysical realm of philosophy?

Far from being incompatible, the definition you have given us (thanks for the pronunciation key, by the way…) clearly shows that the “study of the nature of religious truth” can be undertaken using the tools of the philosopher (“rational and systematic study”). The two go hand in hand. Moreover, studying theology doesn’t necessarily mean studying one particular theology. It could be the study of theology in general. It could be that the “investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality…based on logical reasoning” might lead a philosopher to contemplate theological implications. Might? Actually the storied history of philosophy is filled with philosophers (worth their “salt”) who have done just this.

Your claim is asinine.

I’m sure none is able to look up a definition for “Kant” in the Oxford dictionary, but Nietzsche happened to define the man once in a book of his, and his definition happens to involve both religion and philosohy, here we go: “a cunning Christian trapped in a meta-physical cage”. So is Chritianity compatible with philosophy? Yes it does, but only with the meta-physical ones. The good philosophy crashes down onto Christianity like the theory of evolution, without mercy.

Who said anything about the ‘study’ of theology?
I was talking purely of people bound by it.
And those bound by theology, having all the right answers already (or at least the ‘right’ questions, that can only lead to certain conclusions, because all other conclusions are incompatible with their theology and thusly unacceptable) are not free to honestly do philosophy, which might take them anywhere.
Assinine from the point of view of a ‘prisoner of christ’ maybe, but logical to a real thinker. (thank you paul for my new favorite way to adress christians)

…maybe even take them to God?

Are there people bound by theology? Probably. Are there people using theology as a starting point? No more I would guess than people who use atheism as a starting point and consequently get bound by it. Either way might be considered bad philosophy.

You still haven’t shown why philosophy is incompatible with theology.

More significantly, I’m especially interested in why any philosopher “worth his salt” must necessarily be an atheist. History seems to speak in volumes against this idea of yours. Maybe you know something history does not know.