Butch Femme Planet - View Single Post - Atheist support, discussion, and information sharing thread

tapu · 07-04-2011, 04:32 PM

I was thinking last night about the distinction between a "soft atheist" and a "hard atheist." Hmm, I really should have looked it up before I came in here today, but I want to think about the possible distinctions that came to me already so here goes:

Say a soft atheist is committed to there being no deity in the sense of a superior being, but allows for the possibility that there might be one. Sort of an atheist without the arrogance. >;-) I think, though, that it may be less simplistic than this. Maybe a soft atheist believes that there IS an organizing principle in the world, just not a cognizant (thinking) being. I always think of this kind of atheist when someone says they are atheist but "believe there is more out there." I'm not sure if they mean an afterlife, or an organizing principle or being, or both.

I think I may be a hard atheist, but again there are fine distinctions. I don't think there is "more out there." I believe that this life is it. And I live with the idea that the likeliest scenario is that the generation of my great-grandchildren may not even know my name. If you think about it, that is generally true. How many here can rattle off the names of their great grandparents. How about "maiden" names?

Now, thinking about my own transience like that can depress me more than a Sartre short story, but it is what I believe. But I grow more comfortable with what I think is the reality because I also believe that it's better to address that reality--better in the sense of a life fully lived--than to assuage that reality with belief systems constructed to deny it.

The hardest of hard atheists believe that everything is random. No organizing principle, even. I am pretty close to that, but to some degree it depends on how "organizing principle" is defined. For me, a scientific (as opposed to mystical) principle is the only possibility. Then, I am left to ponder how much is heredity and how much environment. I'm reading Pinker's "The Blank State" right now for help in how to think about that.

07-04-2011, 04:32 PM	#54
tapu Senior Member How Do You Identify?: Understated butch. Preferred Pronoun?: I Relationship Status: Party of One Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Maine Posts: 1,654 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 1,324 Thanked 3,112 Times in 1,103 Posts Rep Power: 21474850	I was thinking last night about the distinction between a "soft atheist" and a "hard atheist." Hmm, I really should have looked it up before I came in here today, but I want to think about the possible distinctions that came to me already so here goes: Say a soft atheist is committed to there being no deity in the sense of a superior being, but allows for the possibility that there might be one. Sort of an atheist without the arrogance. >;-) I think, though, that it may be less simplistic than this. Maybe a soft atheist believes that there IS an organizing principle in the world, just not a cognizant (thinking) being. I always think of this kind of atheist when someone says they are atheist but "believe there is more out there." I'm not sure if they mean an afterlife, or an organizing principle or being, or both. I think I may be a hard atheist, but again there are fine distinctions. I don't think there is "more out there." I believe that this life is it. And I live with the idea that the likeliest scenario is that the generation of my great-grandchildren may not even know my name. If you think about it, that is generally true. How many here can rattle off the names of their great grandparents. How about "maiden" names? Now, thinking about my own transience like that can depress me more than a Sartre short story, but it is what I believe. But I grow more comfortable with what I think is the reality because I also believe that it's better to address that reality--better in the sense of a life fully lived--than to assuage that reality with belief systems constructed to deny it. The hardest of hard atheists believe that everything is random. No organizing principle, even. I am pretty close to that, but to some degree it depends on how "organizing principle" is defined. For me, a scientific (as opposed to mystical) principle is the only possibility. Then, I am left to ponder how much is heredity and how much environment. I'm reading Pinker's "The Blank State" right now for help in how to think about that. __________________ Really? That's not funny to you?