are babies better described as atheist or agnostic?

[dairygirl4u2c]

to be sure, there are many views. i just wanted to see what the views were here.

[Socrates]

Very interesting question.  I've personally never heard any infants express their beliefs regarding the existence or non-existence of God.  Perhaps we need to conduct a national poll of babies to settle this very important question.  Interestingly, while I don't know their view on this matter, the overwhelming majority of babies I've polled did describe their viewpoint as "pro-life."

All I know is that once my own kids were old enough to talk, they never expressed any denial or questioning of God's existence.

 

But since babies talk in incomprehensible babble, don't do productive work, but insist that others provide for them and do everything for them, scream and cry and throw fits whenever they don't get their way, and puke and poo all over those who look over them, I'd say maybe they're best described as simply "liberal."

[Benedictus]

5 hours ago, dairygirl4u2c said:

to be sure, there are many views. i just wanted to see what the views were here.

Babies are just babies

Strictly speaking all babies are atheist, in the weak sense or definition of the word. They don't express a belief and therefore atheism is the default label. But in this sense it doesn't really mean anything, aside from making sense in terms of applying logic. Babies have an absence of belief until they get older and or can express a view [whether you argue knowledge of God is intrinsic to all is maybe a separate argument].

Agnosticism and atheism aren't mutually exclusive, neither are theism and agnosticism. They deal with different things. In daily discourse some people avoid some labels and apply others (the refuge of the hesitant) but that does not distract from what the terms are understood to really mean or deal with.

 

 

 

[ardillacid]

...and that's enough internet for today

[Luigi]

1. Babies are best described as asleep or awake, calm or fussy, wet or dry, hungry or fed. In that order. 

2. Belief in God requires more cognition than babies can muster. I think you know that.

3. Babies do not require proof that God exists; they ARE proof that God exists. 

 

 

Really, do you have nothing more productive to do with your time than dream up pointless questions? 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Luigi said:

3. Babies do not require proof that God exists; they ARE proof that God exists. 

[dairygirl4u2c]

benedictus should have voted atheist to give poll more variation. i read 'implicit' atheism might work for babies. the lines get blurry around the edges to be sure.

there are atheists who say their own label is "clearly" what babies are. of course it all depends on the definition, but i contend if you have to pick a label, agnostic describes it better, cause to the every day man, atheists reject god and agnostisc are neutral.  where i got to in a recent debate is that they said only oxford dictionary works, which says you can merely lack belief in God, and agnostics have some sort of proactive belief. of course, something like websters says different, and even an encylcopedia reinforced by idea of what it means to the comon joe in every day usage, but they insisted only oxford can be used. of course there are no official dictionaryies, words are too fluid for that. but i insist my idea of common usage is probably correct, though i can't say for sure. there are surely plenty who say babies are atheist on a simple google search. i dont think it does productive to define atheist as so vague on one hnd and so strict on the other, it goes against common understanding and it confuses the simple ideas involved.

maybe i should have forced people to pick one "if you had to choose..."

" But since babies talk in incomprehensible babble, don't do productive work, but insist that others provide for them and do everything for them, scream and cry and throw fits whenever they don't get their way, and puke and poo all over those who look over them, I'd say maybe they're best described as simply "liberal." "

hilarious

[dairygirl4u2c]

perhaps i also should have just asked if atheism or agnosticism is the default position, and left those puking and pooing babies out of it.

[Papist]

They are better described as babies. 

[Luigi]

On ‎1‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 11:18 AM, dairygirl4u2c said:

perhaps i also should have just asked if atheism or agnosticism is the default position, and left those puking and pooing babies out of it.

As I understand it, the Church maintains that all people have a natural but perhaps misdirected impulse toward belief in God, as expressed by the general human tendency toward practice of religion in nearly every culture on Earth over nearly the entire expanse of human existence.