Strong Atheism starts from faith

[Faith?]

In this post, I’m going to assert that strong atheism is foundationally a position of faith.

The scope of this post is not to argue that there is a God, though of course being a Christian I already have an answer for that particular argument!

No, this post is strictly to assert that being a strong atheist explicitly implies a starting position of faith and that is ALL this post is about.

So that we have clear terms of engagement, and to be fair, could the strong atheist please answer the following:
(1) Please define what you consider to be the basis or method for establishing fact
(2) Please define what you consider to be faith, and how do you see this is different from fact?

Once we've agreed on those two we'll continue.

[Hierophant]

Hang on there, you can't just take a position as strong as you do and then not say anything further.

Your position that strong atheism is necessarily a form of faith (I don't deny that for some people it can be, but it is not necessarily so) is left hanging in favour of questions which seem to have no direct relevance.

If you're going to start by insulting us and then refusing to justify the insult, what's the incentive for us to continue?

[vertigo]

... so what if it is (a faith-based position)?

[Faith?]

Hang on there, you can't just take a position as strong as you do and then not say anything further.

Your position that strong atheism is necessarily a form of faith (I don't deny that for some people it can be, but it is not necessarily so) is left hanging in favour of questions which seem to have no direct relevance.

If you're going to start by insulting us and then refusing to justify the insult, what's the incentive for us to continue?

My two questions are foundational to demonstrating my assertion that ALL strong atheists are necessarily starting from a position as faith. And you are incorrect to assume that I am insulting strong atheists by making the assertion their starting position is from faith because I don't see that as an insult at all - unless you are insulted?

[Faith?]

... so what if it is (a faith-based position)?

Why - nothing at all! What I want to demonstrate though is that ALL, not just some, strong atheists start from a position of faith. There are some who believe they don't start from a position of faith.

[vertigo]

(1) Please define what you consider to be the basis or method for establishing fact
(2) Please define what you consider to be faith, and how do you see this is different from fact?

Fact is what happens. If a spaceship lands on the moon, that is fact. If Jesus floats down and lands in my backyard, that is fact. The basis for fact is that it actually happens. Otherwise it is speculation.

Faith is belief for the purpose of action. So if you act as though you are Napoleon, you have faith that you are (just like) Napoleon. If you act as though God is watching you and judging you, then you have faith that God is watching you and judging you.

Quite clearly, someone who acts as though there is no god, has faith that there is no god.

[Faith?]

(1) Please define what you consider to be the basis or method for establishing fact
(2) Please define what you consider to be faith, and how do you see this is different from fact?

Fact is what happens. If a spaceship lands on the moon, that is fact. If Jesus floats down and lands in my backyard, that is fact. The basis for fact is that it actually happens. Otherwise it is speculation.

Faith is belief for the purpose of action. So if you act as though you are Napoleon, you have faith that you are (just like) Napoleon. If you act as though God is watching you and judging you, then you have faith that God is watching you and judging you.

Quite clearly, someone who acts as though there is no god, has faith that there is no god.

Can I hold you to your definitions of what you claim fact is? I am very curious you would define it that way in relation to you being a strong atheist (I assume you are one). Likewise, your definition of faith is absolutely fascinating to me - can I ask you if I can hold you to that definition for it as well? I wish to apply both of your definitions to your views on strong atheism.

[vertigo]

You may apply my definitions to my views on strong atheism. They will show that I have faith that God does not exist. I am more faithful an atheist than any Christian I have met is faithfully a Christian, or any Muslim I have met is faithfully a Muslim, or any Jew I have met is faithfully a Jew. I am so faithfully an atheist, if Jesus be alive, let him strike me down write now. Let him bend me over his knee and spank me for eternity. Fuck you Jesus.

[Faith?]

You may apply my definitions to my views on strong atheism. They will show that I have faith that God does not exist.

I hope you can understand why I have deleted the remainder of your sentence ha ha! Got all of that off your chest now?

Okay - you've taken the soft stance I see by saying that you "have faith that God does not exist". Is this the same as saying that God definitely does not exist? Because to me they are two very different statements.

[vertigo]

I thought we were discussing faith. If the sky is blue, my faith doesn't make the sky blue. Your faith doesn't make God exist, and my faith doesn't make God not exist. Whether God exists or not, and whether I have faith that God exists or not, are entirely unrelated. I'll only respond if you want to discuss faith.

[Brad Reddekopp]

In this post, I’m going to assert that strong atheism is foundationally a position of faith.

The scope of this post is not to argue that there is a God, though of course being a Christian I already have an answer for that particular argument!

No, this post is strictly to assert that being a strong atheist explicitly implies a starting position of faith and that is ALL this post is about.

So that we have clear terms of engagement, and to be fair, could the strong atheist please answer the following:
(1) Please define what you consider to be the basis or method for establishing fact

The specifics will depend on the context but, generally, reason and/or evidence that can be examined in some way are the basis for identifying something as a fact.

(2) Please define what you consider to be faith, and how do you see this is different from fact?

Once we've agreed on those two we'll continue.

To accept something by faith is to accept it as fact in the absence of confirming evidence and/or reason or even despite contrary evidence and reasoning. The opposite of faith is to accept something as fact because of reason and evidence.

We also need to define fact. In this context, I use the word as I understand it to be used in science. To describe an idea as a fact is not necessarily a claim of absolute certainty. When an idea is so strongly supported by evidence and reason that to deny assent would be perverse, then it is a scientific fact.

[Hierophant]

I agree with the definitions posted by Brad and vertigo.

And you are incorrect to assume that I am insulting strong atheists by making the assertion their starting position is from faith because I don't see that as an insult at all - unless you are insulted?

Don't act so coy. You know very well that calling strong atheists "based on faith" is an attack, otherwise you wouldn't even be raising the issue at all, especially not the way you did. You barged on an atheist board, challenging us. You are our newest Don Quixote in a long line of Don Quixotes.

Well, my dear, please proceed in your charge of the nearest windmill. We'll always be here to criticize your aim.

[Hierophant]

For the sake of completion:

(1) Please define what you consider to be the basis or method for establishing fact

There is not one method for establishing fact. There's not even one "scientific method," let alone one singular method altogether. So that is quite impossible.

There is one basis for establishing fact: the uniformity of nature. This basis is wholly incompatible with Christianity and its belief in non-natural creative minds.

(2) Please define what you consider to be faith, and how do you see this is different from fact?

Vertigo and Brad pointed out two different definitions of the word "faith," although in vertigo's case I prefer to use the word "belief." I would say I have a great deal of beliefs, and one could even call me religious, but I absolutely deny faith, where I follow Mark Twain when he said: "Faith is believing what you know ain't so." Faith, in my view, cannot exist without indoctrination, and necessarily contradicts or aggresses our true self.

[vertigo]

I think it's about time that Faith! tells us what he (or she) thinks faith is. We have all given our definitions now.

There are many positions for Faith! to argue against. He can argue against the empirical position, by saying that those who insist that evidence to prove God's existence cannot exist are merely ignoring the signs, and are therefore being unnecessarily faithful. I've yet to see water turn into wine myself, but I'm always ready to see it performed.

Or he can argue against the rational position, that even if there was a God we could say nothing definite about him, so any positive statement would be an assumption. The easy way out is to say "God is love" or "God is existence" or something like that, which dodges the issue entirely. If you know God exists, then you know definite facts about him. What are they? Knowing that something exists without knowing the manner in which that thing exists is irrational.

Or he can argue against the emotive position, that no god worthy of worship would make a world like this one, that no explanation for this world makes sense. Saying that we can't appreciate God's plan begs the question, how can we understand God's nature if his plan makes absolutely no sense to us?

But he has said that this thread is very strictly about whether strong atheism starts from faith. Well if faith means belief evidenced by action, then yes, strong atheists are faithfully atheistic. They profess that no god exists and act that way too. I hope this doesn't surprise him. Perhaps this is something he even admires.

And if faith means action against all the evidence, then strong atheists are certainly not faithful. Atheists are usually more ready to accept new ideas.

[Faith?]

In this post, I’m going to assert that strong atheism is foundationally a position of faith.

The scope of this post is not to argue that there is a God, though of course being a Christian I already have an answer for that particular argument!

No, this post is strictly to assert that being a strong atheist explicitly implies a starting position of faith and that is ALL this post is about.

So that we have clear terms of engagement, and to be fair, could the strong atheist please answer the following:
(1) Please define what you consider to be the basis or method for establishing fact

The specifics will depend on the context but, generally, reason and/or evidence that can be examined in some way are the basis for identifying something as a fact.

(2) Please define what you consider to be faith, and how do you see this is different from fact?

Once we've agreed on those two we'll continue.

To accept something by faith is to accept it as fact in the absence of confirming evidence and/or reason or even despite contrary evidence and reasoning. The opposite of faith is to accept something as fact because of reason and evidence.

We also need to define fact. In this context, I use the word as I understand it to be used in science. To describe an idea as a fact is not necessarily a claim of absolute certainty. When an idea is so strongly supported by evidence and reason that to deny assent would be perverse, then it is a scientific fact.

Do you have a scientific background? Because you use some key terms here quite loosely, especially fact, evidence, reason, and certainty, but never mind, I would like to ask you if I can hold you to your definitions that you have given here regarding fact. I only ask this because as a professional mechanical engineer of 10+ years I have very precise definitions for what I would call fact, evidence, reason, and certainty in the development of engineering designs for my clients. If I portray these terms in my work I can breach a contract, waste my client’s money, or worse, injure or kill someone.

Also on that same note, can I please hold you to your definition of faith?