Famous Atheists, Agnostics, Free-Thinkers and Diests

[Proud_Democratt]

I had no idea about Ernest Hemingway.
His quote:
"All thinking men are atheists."

On page 144 of Paul Johnson's book Intellectuals, it states that despite being raised in a strict Congregationalist household, Ernest "did not only not believe in God but regarded organized religion as a menace to human happiness", "seems to have been devoid of the religious spirit", and "ceased to practise religion at the earliest possible moment."
Other's have pointed out that Hemingway used the non-existence of God as a theme in his books.

- Ernest Hemingway, American author (1899-19

http://www.wonderfulatheistsofcfl.org/Quotes.htm

[Nomad559]

1. The Celebrity Atheist List

http://www.celebatheists.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

:)

[Proud_Democratt]

5. That's a longgggggggggg

list.

[Strong Atheist]

34. Where's Carl Sagan? nt.

[arwalden]

62. Marion Lorne's Name Was Missing

Awww. :(

[OldLeftieLawyer]

2. No kidding

How any sentient human being can believe in some guy in the sky - usually, at the same time denying the possibility of extraterrestrial company or visitors out there - has always been beyond me, and I had a solid religious upbringing. In fact, I got a Jesuit education - which did even more to clear my head of the claptrap that had been fed into it while I was a small, impressionable, trusting child.

It's a scam, nothing but another way to control the masses, and if people choose to surrender their personal responsibility to the idea of a god and a rewarding afterlife, provided they chant the right words on the right days, attend the correct services in the right places at the right time, and make sure they do as they're told, well, that's a matter of faith.

A smart Jesuit lawyer/teacher of mine once told me, as we were speaking about this exact idea, that faith could be characterized thusly:

To those who have it, no proof is necessary.

To those without it, no proof is possible.

I chose to sign up for the latter.

[Proud_Democratt]

3. OldLeftieLawyer....

Your quote-"How any sentient human being can believe in some guy in the sky - usually, at the same time denying the possibility of extraterrestrial company or visitors out there"

That's pretty much how I feel!

[gordontron]

4. what about

there is little proof so no decision can wisely be made?

[OldLeftieLawyer]

6. Proof?

You see "little proof," and I have seen none.

That's how my decision was carefully, thoughtfully, knowingly, and wisely made.

[Proud_Democratt]

7. You mean UFOs or ETs???

[gordontron]

8. no it was an agnostic statment nt

[Proud_Democratt]

9. There is no solid proof of the existance or

non-existance, is there?

[chaumont58]

10. Three generations

My dad was an atheist, according to what my mother said. He died to soon for me to know him much or to be affected by his beliefs. I am an atheist, without any religious training as a child. I became an atheist at around 15. My son is an atheist, but without any coaching from me. But I have three siblings, all believers, one is a hardcore fundie. Go figure.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

11. Now, THAT is an interesting family dynamic

Was your mother religious? Or her family? Your father's family?

Where did these fundie beliefs come from, do you think?

[chaumont58]

18. More of my own history

My mother was not religous. Her family(mother, sisters) was very religous, pentacostal, no less. I don't know much about my father's family. We moved away from them early in my childhood and I never reestablished contact.
Regarding my fundie brother, my sister(a believer, but not a fundie) says he was always inclined toward religion. His wife is very religous, a fundie and her mother was a fanatical fundie. Too much exposure, I guess.

[Proud_Democratt]

16. Almost the same with me

Myself and my son are nonbelievers. My sister is a hardcore evangelical and gospel singer.

[manic expression]

20. So the Jesuit represents all religion for you?

good to know. However, I find it interesting that you ignore many different traditions with many different outlooks and conclusions.

"How any sentient human being can believe in some guy in the sky - usually, at the same time denying the possibility of extraterrestrial company or visitors out there - has always been beyond me..."

Again, the fact that not everyone who is a deist is a Jesuit is important. I personally think that the notion of a "guy in the sky" is quite ridiculous.

On divinity, there is a lack of empirical evidence either way. However, if you see smoke, you know there is a fire, so we can make many accurate conclusions with inferences from simple observation. That is one way a person can rationally conclude that divinity exists.

"It's a scam, nothing but another way to control the masses, and if people choose to surrender their personal responsibility to the idea of a god and a rewarding afterlife, provided they chant the right words on the right days, attend the correct services in the right places at the right time, and make sure they do as they're told, well, that's a matter of faith."

Congratulations. You just described Christianity. Care to comment on any of the other 30+?

[OldLeftieLawyer]

48. Ha.............

I'm not sure anyone has ever demonstrated a more remarkable misreading of my post. You've already drawn your own misguided conclusions over a simple statement, and your failure to understand it precludes any further discussion.

[manic expression]

51. If I was mistaken

would you be so kind as to illustrate how?

I responded to a direct quote from your post in a straightforward manner. I fail to see this as a "remarkable misreading".

Also, it was not a conclusion, but I posed a simple question. Do you think of all religions in that way? Call me thick, but I don't see where I misread your post.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

53. No, I just told you

that you got it wrong, misread it, and, frankly, I've better things to do than to instruct someone whose challenges fail to rise to the leel that I find intellectually valid. If you couldn't understand what I wrote, you and I are travelling very different paths, and I wish you well on your journey, friend.

Maybe, if you're lucky, you'll encounter some Jesuits. They'll tell you about every god there is.

[manic expression]

55. Well

Let me see.

"How any sentient human being can believe in some guy in the sky - usually, at the same time denying the possibility of extraterrestrial company or visitors out there - has always been beyond me, and I had a solid religious upbringing. In fact, I got a Jesuit education - which did even more to clear my head of the claptrap that had been fed into it while I was a small, impressionable, trusting child."

You are saying that, due to what you have seen from a Jesuit education, all religion is incompatible with a thinking person. I objected to that much.

"It's a scam, nothing but another way to control the masses, and if people choose to surrender their personal responsibility to the idea of a god and a rewarding afterlife, provided they chant the right words on the right days, attend the correct services in the right places at the right time, and make sure they do as they're told, well, that's a matter of faith."

Your use of "It" is, IMO, alluding to religion as a whole, especially since you make no attempt at specifying. I again object to your generalization and lack of understanding of many beliefs. I also disagree on your paragraph as a whole.

"A smart Jesuit lawyer/teacher of mine once told me, as we were speaking about this exact idea, that faith could be characterized thusly:

To those who have it, no proof is necessary.

To those without it, no proof is possible.

I chose to sign up for the latter."

Now, you use a Jesuit's words to characterize ALL faith. I objected to that.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

56. Feel better?

You're holding on to something that's not there. I saw your response, but didn't read it, but, really, now I just feel sorry for you.

Best of luck to you. And welcome to my lovely IgnoreLand.

[manic expression]

59. Cute

ignore people you don't want to engage in a discussion. Please, I implore you, don't feel sorry for me, as you're the one in dire need of sympathy.

I hope that your head feels good buried in sand.

[LiberalVoice]

52. "we can make many accurate conclusions...from simple observation"

You wanna clue me in on what accurate conclusions you've come up with? Oh and help me out with the simple observation part too if you dont mind.

[manic expression]

58. Surely

By the way, this is all in my own opinion.

The way I see it, if you can see smoke, you know there is a fire. Therefore, you don't have to necessarily directly observe something to acknowledge its existence, but only connections to it.

Because of this, we can apply many truths that are very observable in a deeper sense. For instance, it is a fact that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction (Newton's Third Law). This would strongly suggest that the same is true for the existence of all things in every way. This is supported by history as well.

In regards to "deeper existence" itself, I think there is evidence that suggests this as well. You can see order and commonality everywhere. Matter forms itself around certain influences in ways that are observable in every part of the world. What influences are these? IMO, matter could not randomly form life. This suggests that this influence would be exactly what the matter forms around, the individual entity.

If you look at how everything begins, exists and ends, and how nothing REALLY perishes, but continues in a different form, it is very interesting (and, IMO, revealing). One thing can exist in many forms, but that one thing will not change at all. For instance, water can be solid, liquid and gas without a real change whatsoever. Couple this with the fact that the cycle of existence (observable everywhere) is made up of perpetual creation, life and destruction. Then we know that the truest aspect of the individual does not end upon physical death. It is therefore eternal.

Those are all IMO only. I really don't mind at all if you disagree.

[trotsky]

45. OLL, when you talk like that...

you make my heart go a-flutter. ;-)

[OldLeftieLawyer]

49. Silly..........

That's the only reason I do it, trots, my love ............

[OneBlueSky]

12. personally, I find atheism rather egocentric . . .

in denying God -- or at least some kind of higher power -- aren't we setting ourselves as the highest level of being in all of Creation? . . .

and isn't that more than a little self-aggrandizing? . . .

I have nothing against atheists . . . I just don't get them . . .

[charlie]

13. Are we?

There are believers who have conniptions over the common atheist notion that we're just another animal. In that regard, it's them who accord humans some sort of exalted station over the rest of creation.

[manic expression]

21. We are animals

most Judeo-Christians regard humans as "superior", and I find that a revolting belief. However, there are religions which pray to animals as deities, and others which view all things as ultimately one (animals and rocks included).

Personally, I do think that atheists have a tendency to think themselves superior to theists, but that's a complaint that can be applied to many other groups as well.

[heidler1]

60. Agreed we're all animals. It is hard work believing that another animal

does not know that he/she is a animal, when it's so obvious. Isn't this some how unbalanced? Proving there isn't a God is also a strange request. It seems fair that when someone says there are ghosts, devils, souls, Gods, fairies, angels, unicorns, extra terrestrials and etc the "show me one rule" would be reasonable. However, believers try to spin it so it's just as much the non believers task to disprove their fantasy. This is unreal. This is BS.

[manic expression]

61. Definitely

I'm also not sure how people can mistakenly think that they are NOT animals.

Anyway, the whole "show me proof" question is not the whole argument. First of all, if you asked the right people, they would give you "examples" of ghosts, along with testamonies and other "evidence", so showing someone something doesn't qualify as proof in itself. Furthermore, the concept of divinity is different from unicorns or fairies. Specifically, I do think that there are arguments for divinity that do not fly for the other things you mentioned.

At any rate, I think we can agree on the fact that humans are animals. :toast:

[heidler1]

64. I'm still of the opinion, like the Great Randi, who claims all proof

of anything supernatural is cooked so as to fool the observers. Even water witching is a hoax that depends on the suggestible nature of humans much like placebos, even the practitioners. Hypnosis is real, but it too is dependent on the mental characteristics of the person being hypnotized.
http://www.randi.org/

[manic expression]

68. OK

but "proof" in the mold of people at a revival meeting getting their blindness miraculously "cured" is ridiculous to anyone. Those crying Christian icons (small paintings common in Greece) are easy to fake. We can agree on this, but I think it is important to note that many theists will shake their head at these pathetic shows as much as atheists will.

Asking someone for physical proof of divinity is, IMO, like asking someone for empirical evidence of love. It is possible to use observations and inferences to logically conclude that divinity exists (IMO...on another post in this thread I outline a few ways).

[unschooler]

14. For me, it's not about whether it's egocentric but about whether it's

my best shot at the truth.

It's also true that one could be an atheist and yet believe in the likelihood of beings superior to humans living somewhere in the universe.

[Proud_Democratt]

15. Egocentric? Yep, for me it is. Speaking for myself,

being an Atheist, I feel I've achieved more logic and common sense.
I do not rely on any god, alcohol, drugs, or other crutch to make it through the day or dilemna.

[manic expression]

22. Please

you don't find that arrogant? You don't find that incorrect? It is.

What you've achieved is a conclusion on a certain subject. That much has been accomplished by many others, many of them valid conclusions. To think that your conclusion is better than another conclusion is simply pathetic and petty. This just in: many theists don't use beliefs as a "crutch" as much as you do. The difference is that many of us do not use our conclusions as a way of self-gratification; we only hold them because of understanding and not because of a lack of it.

[Proud_Democratt]

24. It is arrogance.....logic is an achievement....belief

is easy.

[manic expression]

38. and who are you

to say that you have achieved the ONLY brand of logic? Hint: You haven't.

Ignorance is also easy, and I must say that you have achieved that much.

[Proud_Democratt]

25. At least I don't bow or kneel before some invisible

nothingness.

[beam me up scottie]

28. Ah, I see you've met one of the usual suspects.

They love to set up atheist straw men so they can feel superior when they knock them down.

You can always count on at least one of them showing up in these threads.
That, and the fact that they will ignore and/or dismiss anything atheists post.

I refuse to bang my head against that particular brick wall anymore.

Perhaps you'll have better luck.

[Proud_Democratt]

29. AAAHHHHHH!!!!!!

but there are more opinions of mine that meet the eye!!

[manic expression]

39. Take 2?

It may not be observable to the eyes or the other physical senses (when did I say that it was?), but it is certainly an existence that can be verified by inference and rational thought. I have explained that much prior to this response.

You bow before nothing but your own ignorance.

[Proud_Democratt]

69. I bow to no one.!!! If you bow or kneel out of inferior humility

that's your business!

[chaumont58]

19. What could be more logical than atheism

Its probably the least egocentrically belief system on the planet.

Ever heard a Christian say: "I survived. I guess God had further plans for me!"

[manic expression]

23. 'More' doesn't work in this regard

you can use logic and come to the conclusion that divinity exists. I know atheism is "logical", but so is many forms of theism.

Yes, I have heard Christians say that, but I also know that there are quite a few religions not named "Christianity".

[chaumont58]

31. Logic that divinity exist

That would be an interesting manipulation of words.

[manic expression]

37. I don't particularly care how 'interesting' you would find it n/t

[chaumont58]

40. Well, your mother wears combat boots! so there

*

[beam me up scottie]

41. Now you've gone too far!

[manic expression]

42. To clarify

Your solitary point was that YOU would find such a concept "interesting". That does not constitute an actual point, as your opinion on how interesting something would be has no bearing on its validity whatsoever. Therefore, I said that your opinion on how interesting it would be for you was inconsequential and meaningless, which it is.

edited title

[chaumont58]

47. Just a couple of points, then I quit the fight

I'm an atheist, because its what works for me. I didn't go to atheist school and learn to be an atheist. My atheism evolved.
To break religion into two parts of god belief, one involving a loving caring god, and the other a force necessary to start the big bang. A loving caring god, in light of the history of just the 20th century, would, it seems to me, sure as shit isn't doing his job. It is a lot easier to believe, if he exists, he just doesn't care on iota about human experience. World War II caused the untimely death of perhaps 100 million people. In this century, the Indian Ocean tsunami killed 300,000 people. If an undersea earthquake has a cause, its god's work. I asked a fundie about the tsunami, the death of all those people and his reply was, "but those were muslims." One has to love such logic. Pat Robertson was asked by little Staphlocaucus about the tsunami, and his reply was even better than my fundie. He said god doesn't do tectonic plates.
I really don't care who believes what, unless they start trying to fuck up my life. The current crop of fundies have reached that point. They have now branched into science. Evolution didn't happen, according to them, the earth is 6,000 years old, but no more. I don't know if there is a secular reason to oppose abortion, but there certainly is a religious one.
My own feeble little mind got me where I am. I didn't ask some minister, or priest, to tell how to believe. What I know about the physical world, and history, lead me to become an atheist. Anything else would be living a lie. Repukes do that enough, I don't need to crowd into their game.

[manic expression]

50. No problem

I think everyone should do what works for them, period.

However, the viewpoint that you specify, the Judeo-Christian mindset which so sadly permeates the discourse and collective opinion of the West (and Islamic world) is not shared by all religions. I would completely agree in condemning THAT mindset's ridiculous and insipid nature. Actually, you'd be hard pressed to find someone who gets as annoyed by insane theists as I do.

Anyway, my views are completely different than the "big man in the sky who's all-powerful..." concept. Most of my time spent on this forum is trying to make that fact known (which makes the annoyance of ignorant theists even greater). For instance, myself and many others (to the tune of about 1.02 billion and then some) believe that divinity is within all things. Not only that, but that everything IS divinity. I could expand on it, but you probably get my drift.

So, when I think about WWII, I do not think of it as some governor of the universe forgetting to set things right, I see it as people who are divine acting in ignorance of that very truth. Therefore, if there is something as terrible as WWII, it is a case of beings committing wrong (after all, there is free will). I (we) also have a different outlook on something like the recent tsunami. Since it is obvious that everything begins, lives and ends, a tsunami is simply a part of the cycle. You CANNOT have creation without destruction (this also helps to suggest the eternal nature of that which is not destroyed...the soul).

That's just an example of a different viewpoint. I think it is perfectly reasonable for people to respect one another, even if they disagree. The thing is that you and I are both being "fucked with" by the lunatic RW fundamentalists. Evolution is just one example of something this idiots cannot bring themselves to accept, as they ignorantly cling to their hateful and pathetic book that has no basis in either history or reality. (rant alert) Ask an average pious Christian WHY he or she believes what s/he does, and they will invariably have no REAL answer. They will simply say "I just feel it" or "I just know it", or they will just resort to...that's right...the Bible. If they start encroaching on any of the rights we hold, we need to stand up together and fight them tooth and nail, and I have no problem doing that.

I can honestly say that I've thought about my beliefs very critically, sometimes for weeks at a time. So I'm not spewing out something anyone really told me, I believe the conclusions I've come to. This includes observation and inferences from the world, nature, history and science. As long as we are able to respect each other, even with disagreement, and stand up for truth in our society, I believe THAT is a real agreement worth having.

[beam me up scottie]

26. No kidding. Apparently, you don't get a LOT of things.

Like how atheism doesn't deny your god(s) or anyone else's.

I love the smell of fallacies, misconceptions and untruths in the morning.
:eyes:

[Proud_Democratt]

27. Kinda smells like fecal matter to me

[lyonn]

35. How can being an atheist be considered egocentric?

If anything it would seem to be the opposite. Atheist don't feel superior to anyone, more of an equal opportunity way of thinking. Religious people give me the definite impression that they feel sorry for me, superior, that I am going to hell, pray for me, etc. It is a matter of choice due to conclusions.

[trotsky]

46. But atheism isn't about denying god.

Nor is it setting ourselves up as the "highest level of being".

On the contrary, part of atheism is realizing we are but miniscule specks on a tiny speck of dust in the immense vastness of the universe.

How you can get egocentrism out of that, I really don't know.

[LiberalVoice]

54. ummmm

You know what I think is egocentric? The idea that someone is watching our every move with the greatest interest and is overjoyed when we pray in their name.

My denial of the belief in a god/s is based on one thing...evidence. To suggest you know anything about anything without a shred of evidence is the epitome of stupidty and egocentricity.

And lets not forgot that religion has had a strangle hold around the throat of this planet for thousands of years and hasn't done a god damn thing toward lasting peace or anything positive for that matter.

On edit: Do I think I have a better grasp of this world because I dont believe in the ridiculousness that is religion? Nope. Do I think I have more of a grasp on reality then someone that talks to an invisible friend? Yes.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

66. Usually, yes, we are. *manic gleam*

That's the point. We're rabid! We're drooling!

:silly:

[Orrex]

67. You've got it completely backwards, I'm afraid

Far from declaring man to be the pinnacle of creation, the atheist observes that man is an infinitessimal speck in the vast expanse of the universe. Consider the Old Testament view, wherein all the world and creatures in it are subordinate to man. Consider the New Testament view, wherein each person fills a special role created specifically for him or her.

Heck, the very idea that we finite, fallible beings can even reach any conclusions about the true nature of an infinite, eternal, and omnipotent entity is the height of egotism.

In short, atheism is the opposite of self-aggrandizement.

[Proud_Democratt]

17. Mark Twain

Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain"

"Faith is believing something you know ain’t true."

[shrike]

30. Don't know about Lincoln

Or about Adams or Jefferson, quite frankly. Remember reading a letter written by Jefferson to Adams, comforting John on the death of his wife; Jefferson wishing God's blessings on him, etc.

People tend to have complex issues on the subject of religion and spirituality; they grow, change, evolve. Can be very hard to pin them down. I've read quotes from Jefferson which extol Christianity and others like the ones the author listed. He WAS a complex, brilliant man. Even Einstein has had some rather out of character quotes attributed to him, although who knows if actually said these things.

We all see each other from our own lense, and seek out ways the things we recognize.

Hemingway's attitudes do not surprise me, since some of his books show almost an agony of religion. (Didn't Hemingway convert to Catholicism at one point, for the sake of one of his wives?)

[Proud_Democratt]

32. I guess they are basing this on quotes, however,

many intelligent people make a variety of quotes, that weren't necessarily meant to be printed.

[shrike]

33. Yeah, I know

Sometimes I say things that I believe at the time, then I feel totally different a year later.
AND, it is possible to quotes to be taken out of context (I've seen Einstein's quotes have been taken out of context to make it seem as though he were devout!)

[Goblinmonger]

44. Though Old Man and the Sea

is almost too in your face with the Christ symbolism. Hemingway sets up Santiago as the ultimate Hemingway hero and Santiago is CLEARLY a Christ figure.

That being said, there is no way Hemingway was a Christian.

[LiberalVoice]

57. Lincoln was an atheist for much of his life.

Not until later in his life did he come to believe in a higher power. Although he detested christianity and organised religion.

[shrike]

63. Interesting

I am not a student of Lincoln, but have read, on a number of occasions, quotes by him which evoked a higher power.

Lincoln led such a tragic life I can imagine that he detested the presence of men of the cloth who surely tried to "comfort" him in his darkest hours.

[nemo137]

36. Jonathan Swift?

Dean of St. Patrick's cathederal, writer of many interesting, if wordy, sermons and prayers? Definately a pessimist, but that's an entirely separate beast from an atheist or agnostic.

[Jim__]

43. The Hemingway quote: "All thinking men are atheists."

As far as I can tell, this quote is actually from a character in "A Farewell to Arms." Do you know if Hemingway made this assertion anywhere else? If not, it's not usually valid to attribute the opinions of fictional characters to the work's author.

[Proud_Democratt]

65. There are people that consider Atheists to be evil-minded,

just because they will not bow in reverence during a prayer or other religious ceremonies.