If you don't believe in god, does it follow that you must believe in the reverse

[Nero]

If you don't believe in god, does it follow that you must believe the reverse is true - no god, no creator, nothing?


Nero - questioning Christian-oriented agnostic

[finewine]

Depends very much on definitions, I'm afraid.

If one doesn't believe in god yet defines god as the creator then yes.  If one doesn't believe in the conventional definition of god (as some kind of anthropomorphic supreme being in the common religious sense) then one could still have room for "something else" I guess.

I can only speak for myself.  I do not believe in god, gods, creators, supreme beings or any supernatural entity (super-natural being literally "outside nature" - beyond physics etc.).

[Miniar]

Nope.

"I do not believe in god." is a different thing than "I believe god does not exist."

For most the atheists I know, it's not a "there is no god" type assumption, but a "I have never seen god, nor any poof of god, and so I doubt his existence, until proven otherwise".

(on a personal note, I'm not an atheist.. not really)

[Just Kate]

statement p = I believe that a God exists.

therefore -p = I don't believe that a God exists.

Pretty cut and dried to me.  Seems if one doesn't believe in the possibility of a God's existence, then one doesn't believe in the possibility of a God's existence.

An agnostic might believe in the possibility of a God's existence without actually believing in any currently recognized deity.

[FairyGirl]

If you don't believe in god, does it follow that you must believe the reverse is true - no god, no creator, nothing?

Not sure I understand this logic, it seems very linear. Maybe there's more than one god. In fact, maybe everything is god (my personal belief). If everything is god (otherwise known as 'All That Is') then there is no 'God', nevertheless God exists.

[Nero]

Thanks for your posts.
Well, as hard a time as I have believing in god, I seem to have an equally hard time believing in nothing. 

[FairyGirl]

Just because you don't believe in god as its usually defined doesn't mean you believe in nothing.

[finewine]

Two common arguments for why god exists...

"It's all too amazing to happen by chance, therefore god exists!"
- argument from incredulity
- misunderstanding of what "chance" means

"Science can't explain X, therefore god exists!"
- argument from ignorance ("god of the gaps")

For a longer list (some quite funny) of arguments for god, see:
- http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm

And a more seriously worded yet quite good summary:
- http://www.godlessgeeks.com/WhyAtheism.htm

(I have no particular preference for these sites, they just provided useful links).

Fundamentally, though, they all ultimately seem to boil down to the two I explicitly mention above and they are, in turn, founded on confirmation bias...proponents just want to believe!  Of course, it doesn't have to be just good ol' Jehovah etc. you can insert any pseudo-deity or similar belief in here and have exactly the same irrational arguments put forward (I'm looking at you wiccans here...poke poke)

[FairyGirl]

I bet you wouldn't say that to the Invisible Pink Unicorn

[finewine]

Hehe, true!  All hail the Eye-Pee-You!

[Ellieka]

I don't believe in religion and I have serious reservations about the bible but I more and more I am rediscovering my belief and trust in God.

[heatherrose]

It is an undeniable fact that Communism exists but I do not believe in it.
There are portions of the Communist ideology that I do agree with but because
of the way human beings have interpreted and twisted the tenets of the ideology
the real world practice of Communism has produced some very horrific results.
As long as there are people who believe that they are "more equal than others',
Communism will never produce the nirvana which it's forefathers envisioned.
The same goes for the human interpretation of "God"

[lisagurl]

Thanks for your posts.
Well, as hard a time as I have believing in god, I seem to have an equally hard time believing in nothing. 

Why does it have to be one or the other? Why believe anything? People need to use facts to guide their lives not beliefs.
Post Merge: October 09, 2009, 02:13:52 PM

It is an undeniable fact that Communism exists but I do not believe in it

Poor choice of words. You do not subscribe to it. Or you do not believe that the intent of communism will bring about a result as in the hopes of those that praise it.

[heatherrose]

People need to use facts to guide their lives not beliefs.

The fact is, I was born with male genitals but I believe I am a woman.
Which should I use to guide my life, the facts or my belief? Religion is the same.
True belief is very personal, based on personal experience and insight.

Poor choice of words.

You say tomato, I say pogo stick.

[FairyGirl]

As long as there are people who believe that they are "more equal than others',
Communism will never produce the nirvana which it's forefathers envisioned.
The same goes for the human interpretation of "God"

girl that is right on the money. If there is a god surely that god would not be so petty as to actually favor one arbitrary group of people over another. It's all a shell game. I prefer a religion or philosophy where hatred and bigotry towards those who are different isn't even possible within its tenets. If anything is god, then everything is god. If there is god then god must be beyond our wildest dreams and can never be put in a box, no matter how many religions try to do so.

How is it they live for eons in such harmony-
the billions of stars-

when most men can barely go a minute
without declaring war in their mind against someone they know.

There are wars where no one marches with a flag,
though that does not keep
casualties from mounting.

Our hearts irrigate this earth.
We are fields before
each other.

How can we live in harmony?
First we need to
know

we are all madly in love
with the same
God.

-Thomas Aquinas

[heatherrose]

If anything is god, then everything is god. If there is god then god must be beyond our wildest dreams and can never be put in a box, no matter how many religions try to do so.

...and if "God" is everything (which I believe it is) we, being made of stardust, are "God".

How is it they live for eons in such harmony-
the billions of stars-

when most men can barely go a minute
without declaring war in their mind against someone they know.

There are wars where no one marches with a flag,
though that does not keep
casualties from mounting.

Our hearts irrigate this earth.
We are fields before
each other.

How can we live in harmony?
First we need to
know

we are all madly in love
with the same
God.

-Thomas Aquinas

That was beautiful. Thank you for sharing it with us.

[Kaitlyn]

If you don't believe in god, does it follow that you must believe the reverse is true - no god, no creator, nothing?

Nope.  "I believe there is no god" is logically distinct from "I do not believe there is a god".  The former is the belief of absence, the latter the absence of belief.

[finewine]

Nope.  "I believe there is no god" is logically distinct from "I do not believe there is a god".  The former is the belief of absence, the latter the absence of belief.

I'm chewing on this a little...

Imagine I am looking at an empty glass.  "I believe there is no beer" compared with "I do not believe there is beer" may be grammatically distinct but I'm not sure what the logical distinction is, as it  is only a transposition, not a differentiation.  Eg:

belief := no beer
no belief := beer

Logical equivalence remains despite the transposition of the negative, no?

[placeholdername]

I'm chewing on this a little...

Imagine I am looking at an empty glass.  "I believe there is no beer" compared with "I do not believe there is beer" may be grammatically distinct but I'm not sure what the logical distinction is, as it  is only a transposition, not a differentiation.  Eg:

belief := no beer
no belief := beer

Logical equivalence remains despite the transposition of the negative, no?

No.

The culprit is an illusion of duality.  What you're thinking is similar to this:  If a person is either good or evil, then saying I do not believe they are good implies that I believe they are evil, *only* if you have to believe one or the other.  You can say *both* 'I do not believe they are good' and 'I do not believe they are evil' if you aren't sure one way or the other.

The same applies to 'God'.  You can believe there is God, believe there is no god, or you can be unsure either way.  If I am unsure I can say 'I do not believe there is God', without implying that 'I believe there is no God'.

This is the difference, respectively, between theistic religion, atheism, and agnosticism.  (And yes, traditionally Atheism is defined as the positive belief in the absence of god, not the lack of belief in the existence of God.)

[Kaitlyn]

I'm chewing on this a little...

Imagine I am looking at an empty glass.  "I believe there is no beer" compared with "I do not believe there is beer" may be grammatically distinct but I'm not sure what the logical distinction is, as it  is only a transposition, not a differentiation.  Eg:

belief := no beer
no belief := beer

Logical equivalence remains despite the transposition of the negative, no?

Let's put it this way... are you actively denying the existence of all the specific people you've never heard of, or do you merely have no positive belief in their existence?

The negation of belief is the absence of belief.
If you say "God does not exist", that's a positive statement of belief and not the negation of belief.
Whereas "I do not believe in God" is the absence of a positive belief in God, just the same as the absence of a positive belief in all the people you've never heard of.

b(x) := I believe x is true
`b(x) := `(I believe x is true) = I do not believe x is true
b(`x) := I believe `x is true = I believe x is not true
`b(x) != b(`x)