The WP Strident Atheists

Post Reply New Topic

Well, I'm back from holidays...

Well, i'll have to raise my hand and in a real annoying and whining way, say "Oooh, can I join can I join can I join"

The issue behind the Strident thing is kinda funny. The term got plastered to the early strong feminists. It was put on them in a VERY derogatory way, implying that they WERE whinny. They never actually were, if you ask me, but the social conservative out there wanted to paint them in a bad way. So they labeled them with a big word that they figured the feminists wouldn't really understand... Well the the word really is (or at least was) a rarely used word... And people didn't understand the real meaning, and they didn't have the google-god to check the definition. so unless they went to a dictionary... they just looked at the group being called strident, and figured it meant loud and obnoxious, because that's all the bra-burners really appeared to the mainstream, NOT whinny.

So, since the feminist issue, the word has taken on new colloquial meanings. And since the Dawkin's incident, has taken on a very issue-specific meaning...

I guess it's something taken upon themselves like the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Invisible Pink Unicorn, that Atheists do, just to be contrary, and being that "loud and obnoxious" those are just the kinds of things we WOULD do.

In the ERA, the strident feminists played an enormous role in the liberation of women from the harsh yoke of oppression by their male superiors. However they are sadly overlooked by history, who has consistently downplayed their roles.

If you're an atheist, there is nothing saying you have to be this strident, (or the other strident either) But respect those who are, because in the battle that lies ahead between science and religion in the wake of new levels of information availability (ie the internet) Those who stand stridently will hopefully be enough to tip the balance in our favour so that rationality trumps over superstition.

Our ideas are our gods. They are what made us. If we had different ideas, we would be different people.
Any theist version of a god is quite impossible. The universe is inconsistent with such a possibility.
If enough of our understanding of the laws of the universe is flawed, that the above statement isn't true, then any god that COULD exist is either impotent and thus not worthy of being a god, or an utter and complete as*hole.
You know what he would be.. Here is a GREAT example...
You know that guy that plays "The Sims" just to see how horrible he can make life for his people, and keep them surviving. He toys with them too, picks things back up, and then slams them into the ground again, just for laughs.
Only thing is.. he's playing with self-conscious real beings.

So, if there is a god with real power, he can sit on my finger and rotate.
I'm a proud anti-theist, and i think to be such, you have to fall into "strident atheism"
I see pathetic christians, muslims and jews who don't really believe, they just want to believe. They try desperately to believe. They only believe because their society expects them to believe. And because of the fear bred into them by their society. My heart bleeds for them too. Because they know better, but can't break away. They're torn by internal conflict, which forever makes their life miserable, as they try forever to find a way to bridge that inconsistency between what they can observe in the real world and their paradigm. Most just take the convoluted reasoning at face value, so that they don't have to think themselves... But it is the tortured soul who has to pore over a faded copy of the family bible for hours and hours and hours trying to find a way to read something into an archaically written phrase that makes it seem like less of a contradiction.
They delude themselves into believing the tripe. They live with an internal inconsistency and can as a result never achieve their full potential in the world....

Strident Atheists may have a similar set of issues too, myself included here, in that we too are internally torn, because the brainwashing we once were subjective to, still left residual foundational beliefs that we have not yet rid ourselves completely of. (like how we personify things that shouldn't be, and we do often still imply intent where there is no intent... heck our language is almost incapable of talking about cause and effect without implying intent) So long as we have all this, and social pressure still on top of all that, maybe we do waste a lot of our time that could possibly be spent better other places championing the cause... Maybe if we'd shut up we'd contribute more to society... But, what better gift can one give society than the truth?
If you don't want the truth, you don't have to listen... You know that!
But society DESERVES the truth. at least to be offered the truth anyways. As someone else said in different words, if we don't stridently oppose religion, then we fail to keep that truth alive as long as we can.... And truth will whither and die if left unprotected, in favour of the easy and mindless.

Look, I don't believe in a hard line on atheists and agnostics. Rather, I tend more towards a scale of theistic belief:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_o ... robability

If you look at the scale, you'll see what is there. I think I could tolerate a 5 that acts outspokenly against existing religions. 6s are ideal, and I think a lot of members are 6s of some sort. 7d can also be taken in, but I tend to be more suspicious of anybody who gets a 7.

Since I can no longer edit the list, here is an updated version:

Members
Awesomelyglorious
Fuzzy
skafather84
Sand
Master_Pedant
DentArthurDent
Exclavius
Ergo Proxy

As someone who doesn't possess much stridency I fear I might not make the list, but I'm a solid 6 on the theistic probability spectrum.

I think I am 4 or perhaps 3.8 or 9, therefore I can't be a member, does strident anti-creationist count?

I have to pull into that scale at somewhere around 6.9999999
I figure it's about as likely that there is a god, as the chance of walking through a wall (which is conceivably possible with quantum physics.)
I am a 7 as far as the biblical god goes, or as far as any previously conceived god. They cannot exist, they violate the laws of nature. But a deist variety of god has that quantum chance. Complexity within DNA gives rise to life, complexity in the brain gives rise to consciousness, complexity in the consciousness and the ideas within that consciousness could (and imo WILL or has already) give rise to another, which in turn will give rise to another. The universe itself could have some level of consciousness (which COULD have given rise to us). But that is about the only possibility for an extant god.

However, I do believe it possible that there one day be a god. and that probability would approach unity if the universe were to last, in a stable manner, long enough. (essentially using the above reasoning)

Of course, we, or similar sentient entities (actually much more sentient and evolved) would have to create this god. It would likely have to be created from ourselves too. It is just as likely that it would evolve from us naturally.
The question is, at what level of evolution does something become a "god"?