[Andy8]

The 50 Most Brilliant Atheists of All Time

#42: Steve Wozniak

[design219]

If Woz is going to hell, I'll have to work on going the other way.

[Gavin]

More like 36 brilliant ones and a few singers and authors to pad it out.

The guy who produces a dr. who spin off... are you kidding?

[Tiresias]

And an atheist who is not even an atheist.

36. Stephen Hawking

Stephen William Hawking [b. 1942] is the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge, a position once held by Sir Isaac Newton. He is recognized as one of the most creatively intelligent people of the modern scientific age, best known his contributions to the fields of cosmology, quantum gravity and general relativity, as well as for his best-selling popular science books. He developed ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease) in graduate school in Cambridge and has survived with the condition longer than was thought possible. he has almost no neuromuscular control and must communicate via a speech synthesizer.

Hawking sometimes comes across quite like a deist in his popular writings, particularly in the book, A Brief History of Time, in which most of the questions posed of the universe also echo questions traditionally asked of God. In that book Hawking expounded upon his "no boundary" model by stating, "If the no boundary proposal is correct, He [God] had no freedom at all to choose initial conditions.". While he does not publicly profess atheism, Hawking does profess agnosticism.

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by Gavin 

More like 36 brilliant ones and a few singers and authors to pad it out.

The guy who produces a dr. who spin off... are you kidding?

To be fair, he produced the new Doctor Who and the spinoff, but point taken.

[Doofy]

Dawkins? Chomsky?

I thought this was about "brilliant"?

[CharlesS]

Why'd they have to pick Richard Strauss for the composer? I would have gone with Brahms, Ravel, or Bartók. Not only do I like their music more, but none of those three were nazi collaborators.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Dawkins? Chomsky?

I thought this was about "brilliant"?

No.

This is about page hits.

Gotta have controversial or idiotic decisions for page hits.

[Tiresias]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Dawkins? Chomsky?

I thought this was about "brilliant"?

Nice try.

[shifuimam]

Sagan called himself an agnostic instead, explaining that "an atheist has to know a lot more than I know" in order to make a positive assertion that no deity exists.

This list is kind of lame. Katharine Hepburn? Really? I wouldn't classify her as "brilliant". She was just an actress.

I'm not a fan of most atheists. The ones I've known generally openly mock and look down on anyone who follows any religion at all. It's one thing to say "I don't agree with your belief in the existence of God". It's quite another to say "you're weak, spineless, stupid, and brainwashed because you believe in God, and I'm inherently better than you because I don't".

That seems to be the attitude of every atheist I've met. It's obnoxious.

[rickey939]

Rickey Henderson......oh wait, I thought it was the 50 Most Brilliant Athletes....my bad.

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

This list is kind of lame. Katharine Hepburn? Really? I wouldn't classify her as "brilliant". She was just an actress.

I'm not a fan of most atheists. The ones I've known generally openly mock and look down on anyone who follows any religion at all. It's one thing to say "I don't agree with your belief in the existence of God". It's quite another to say "you're weak, spineless, stupid, and brainwashed because you believe in God, and I'm inherently better than you because I don't".

That seems to be the attitude of every atheist I've met. It's obnoxious.

As opposed to an attitude that says you are going to burn in hell for eternity if you don't believe what I believe?

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

The ones I've known generally openly mock and look down on anyone who follows any religion at all.

Fortunately, you're far above mocking and looking down on those you disagree with.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

I'm not a fan of most atheists. The ones I've known generally openly mock and look down on anyone who follows any religion at all.

Stop right there, back up, and reflect:

I'm willing to bet:
The vast majority of atheists you've ever met never bothered to tell you, because facts of their life aren't any of your business.

You don't tell everybody about how comfy the underwear you're wearing is, because it doesn't affect anybody else, and it's none of their business anyway.

The ones you know about are the ones that bother to tell you, either because there's an issue that offended them, or because their obnoxious insecure pricks, or because you're actually friends and talk about these things.


Vis:
I'm not a fan of most Christians. They keep trying to talk to me about Jesus, and how I must accept him as a saviour or burn in eternal damnation, because about how stuff that's none of their business means I've "sinned".

No. Actually, they don't. Most Christians leave me the **** alone, just like most atheists.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

You don't tell everybody about how comfy the underwear you're wearing is, because it doesn't affect anybody else, and it's none of their business anyway.

Dude, you're missing a trick there. Doing that kind of thing is fun!

I agree with everything else.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Fortunately, you're far above mocking and looking down on those you disagree with.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Stop right there, back up, and reflect:

I'm willing to bet:
The vast majority of atheists you've ever met never bothered to tell you, because facts of their life aren't any of your business.

You don't tell everybody about how comfy the underwear you're wearing is, because it doesn't affect anybody else, and it's none of their business anyway.

The ones you know about are the ones that bother to tell you, either because there's an issue that offended them, or because their obnoxious insecure pricks, or because you're actually friends and talk about these things.


Vis:
I'm not a fan of most Christians. They keep trying to talk to me about Jesus, and how I must accept him as a saviour or burn in eternal damnation, because about how stuff that's none of their business means I've "sinned".

No. Actually, they don't. Most Christians leave me the **** alone, just like most atheists.

[Gavin]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

It's quite another to say "you're weak, spineless, stupid, and brainwashed because you believe in God, and I'm inherently better than you because I don't".

But what if that's the truth? Wouldn't it be immoral not to point it out?

[lexapro]

I have super comfy underwear.

And, a lot of the people on that list are not atheists. At all.

[Hawkeye_a]

Atheism .... a new religion, which i think has a lot in common with old religions (fanatics and moderates, etc).

[smacintush]

Heeere we go. Atheism is a religion.

Lemme guess…it takes MORE faith to be an atheist because one has to have a heck of a lot of faith to look at ALL THIS CREATION and come to the conclusion that it is all an "accident".

And…how is it new?

I guess it's off to the PWL…

[Hawkeye_a]

Oh, my comment was not related to the theories of creation(from any group), nor was it about belief in a supernatural.

It was just an observation of similar sub cultures/groups and belief systems with regard to zealotry and 'way of life'(aka 'religion').

Cheers

[Jawbone54]

Hoooooold on, hold on...

Jodie Foster? Among the 50 most brilliant atheists of all-time?

Did they really run out of brilliant atheists as quickly as #46?

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Jodie Foster? Among the 50 most brilliant atheists of all-time?

Yes. Jodie Foster is very intelligent. She knows a dozen languages and does foreign films quite regularly. She's especially big in France and Italy where a lot of French and Italian viewers don't even know she's American because she carries a perfect accent.

Very smart person. She actually qualifies for Mensa, though she says she's not a member.

[scaught]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

This list is kind of lame. Katharine Hepburn? Really? I wouldn't classify her as "brilliant". She was just an actress.

I'm not a fan of most atheists. The ones I've known generally openly mock and look down on anyone who follows any religion at all. It's one thing to say "I don't agree with your belief in the existence of God". It's quite another to say "you're weak, spineless, stupid, and brainwashed because you believe in God, and I'm inherently better than you because I don't".

That seems to be the attitude of every atheist I've met. It's obnoxious.

strawman

[Andy8]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Very smart person. She actually qualifies for Mensa, though she says she's not a member.

You are assuming she has taken an IQ test.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Andy8 

You are assuming she has taken an IQ test.

That's the rumor.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Yes. Jodie Foster is very intelligent. She knows a dozen languages and does foreign films quite regularly. She's especially big in France and Italy where a lot of French and Italian viewers don't even know she's American because she carries a perfect accent.

Very smart person. She actually qualifies for Mensa, though she says she's not a member.

She also isn't an atheist.

Seems that the most intelligent men and women on that list are agnostic. Funny that the people who compiled it have difficulty grasping such a simple concept.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

She also isn't an atheist.

She says she is.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

She also isn't an atheist.

Seems that the most intelligent men and women on that list are agnostic. Funny that the people who compiled it have difficulty grasping such a simple concept.

Semantics. De-facto atheism is technically agnosticism.

Seeing how the attitude towards atheists are around here and in America, I don't blame them for publicly professing "agnosticism" instead.

[lpkmckenna]

"Brilliant" isn't a very useful word.

No Gotama Buddha? Fail. Including Sigmund Fraud? More Fail.

I didn't know David Gilmour was an atheist, but I always assumed Roger Waters was.

The pointless atheist vs agnostic debate continues. "Nonbeliever" avoids that irrelevant philosophical distinction.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

She says she is.

Seventy-six percent of Americans say they're Christians.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

No Gotama Buddha? Fail. Including Sigmund Fraud? More Fail.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Atheism .... a new religion, which i think has a lot in common with old religions (fanatics and moderates, etc).

Atheism is neither new nor a religion. Yes, there are fanatical atheists, but there are fanatics for everything. Are Beatlemania, free speech, Soccer/Football, black & white photography, and Everquest also religions, since people can be fanatical about them?

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

Semantics. De-facto atheism is technically agnosticism.

Seeing how the attitude towards atheists are around here and in America, I don't blame them for publicly professing "agnosticism" instead.

I know that you, and many others, would love to just grab the agnostic label and claim it for yourselves, but it just doesn't fit. Change the definitions to suit you, but don't expect everyone to accept it.

[Spheric Harlot]

(Sound: Church bells, lots of them, ringing.)
Man: I wish those bloody bells would stop.

Wife: Oh, it's quite nice dear, it's Sunday, it's the church.

M: What about us atheists? Why should we 'ave to listen to that sectarian turmoil?

W: You're a lapsed atheist, dear.

M: The principle's the same. The Mohamedans don't come 'round here wavin' bells at us! We don't get Buddhists playing bagpipes in our bathroom! Or Hindus harmonizing in the hall! The Shintos don't come here shattering sheet glass in the shithouse, shouting slogans-

W: All right, don't practice your alliteration on me.

M: Anyway, when I get my membership card and blazer badge back from the League of Agnostics, I shall urge the executive to lodge a protest against that religious racket! Pass the butter knife!

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I know that you, and many others, would love to just grab the agnostic label and claim it for yourselves, but it just doesn't fit. Change the definitions to suit you, but don't expect everyone to accept it.

How is the definition changed exactly?

I was the one arguing against the semantics argument. Try again.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I know that you, and many others, would love to just grab the agnostic label and claim it for yourselves, but it just doesn't fit. Change the definitions to suit you, but don't expect everyone to accept it.

Arkansas keeps trying to do that with "scientific theory."

[Railroader]

The League of Gentlemen has nothing on some of you in here

[Shaddim]

Ooo, lots of nice replies, struck a nerve.

Oh, it's my mistake, "no gods exist" is the same as "I don't know" in cuckoo Dawkins world.

[- - e r i k - -]

No wonder you got into bar fights with such a charming personality.

Do you really believe that arguing semantics does anything to further your argument or are you simply trolling (as the "struck a nerve" line implies)?

[Tiresias]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Oh, it's my mistake, "no gods exist" is the same as "I don't know" in cuckoo Dawkins world.

I agree with that. Dawkins is too much of a scientist to come out and say "there is no God," but persists in billing himself as an atheist just the same.

There is almost certainly no God ≠ There is no God.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

Do you really believe that arguing semantics does anything to further your argument or are you simply trolling (as the "struck a nerve" line implies)?

Oh boo-hoo. Agnosticism isn't atheism, they're two different philosophies. You, and the Dawkins drones, just need to buy a good dictionary, or perhaps just bookmark Webster's.com.

No wonder you got into bar fights with such a charming personality.

Now that's trolling.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

She says she is.

She says a lot of things.

I don’t follow any kind of traditional religion, but I have great respect for all religions. I spend a lot of time studying divine texts, whether it’s Eastern religion or Western religion. I only have questions so far and no answers.

[smacintush]

There is nothing wrong with the way Dawkins states his opinion on this. One cannot say with with any certainty that there is absolutely no god period without blind faith. Yet, it is his opinion that any existence of an omnipotent supreme being is about as likely as the existence of the tooth fairy, an invisible pink unicorn or Russell's Teapot. (since there is exactly as much evidence for these as there is for god)

Therefore he makes the statement there is no god.

In this situation, it makes perfect sense to use the term "atheist".

Did you bother to read the definition you linked?

1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable ;

Requires at least a basic belief that a god exists, therefore does not apply to Dawkins.

broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

He has said that there is no evidence for god, therefore he does not accept that a god exists, therefore does not apply to Dawkins.

2: a person unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics

Not applicable.

Whereas, the same site has this definition for atheist:

one who believes that there is no deity

Which Dawkins has said he does not. Tempering his opinion with "but after all we cannot really know for sure" does not somehow diminish his statement on the matter.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

You, and the Dawkins drones…

WTF is a Dawkins drone?

[Tiresias]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

There is nothing wrong with the way Dawkins states his opinion on this. One cannot say with with any certainty that there is absolutely no god period without blind faith. Yet, it is his opinion that any existence of an omnipotent supreme being is about as likely as the existence of the tooth fairy, an invisible pink unicorn or Russell's Teapot. (since there is exactly as much evidence for these as there is for god)

Therefore he makes the statement there is no god.

In this situation, it makes perfect sense to use the term "atheist".

Did you bother to read the definition you linked?



Requires at least a basic belief that a god exists, therefore does not apply to Dawkins.



He has said that there is no evidence for god, therefore he does not accept that a god exists, therefore does not apply to Dawkins.



Not applicable.

Whereas, the same site has this definition for atheist:


Which Dawkins has said he does not. Tempering his opinion with "but after all we cannot really know for sure" does not somehow diminish his statement on the matter.

It's not really worth arguing the point, but to my mind an agnostic is simply one who does not know. That is the proper definition of agnosticism, from a- "not", and "gnosis", "knowledge." Dawkins does not know, therefore he is an agnostic. Call him a hard agnostic, if you must, but until he is prepared to come out and say "There is no God" (a- "not", theos, "God") then he is not, technically, an atheist. Yes, and that applies to tooth fairies and unicorns too because while there are many degrees of uncertainty, there are no degrees of certainty. To say that you are almost certain is to say that you are slightly uncertain. And however miniscule that uncertainty, it's uncertainty, and that makes you agnostic.

Dawkins just wants to have his cake and eat it too.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by toothpick_charlie 

Dawkins just wants to have his cake and eat it too.

To what end?

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by toothpick_charlie 

There is almost certainly no God ≠ There is no God.

…which is exactly the point Dawkins and myself are trying to make.

[Shaddim]

I thank you, you've done a very good job of making my point. Which is, the vast majority of "atheists" are clueless. They make claims, but are oblivious to how much faith they're exercising in maintaining them.

Dawkins himself stated that he isn't "100% sure that a deity doesn't exist", but like so many others, he proudly proclaims his "atheism". I imagine it can only be wholesale ignorance. Or, as I've stated before on this forum, these people simply enjoy the shock value:

"I'm an atheist!"
"So, you're saying that it isn't possible for a deity to exist?"
"No."
"Then you're an agnostic."
"I'm an atheist!"
"You just like stirring **** up, don't you?"
"Maybe a little..."
"Thought so."

The fact is, most are simply attention whores who have some (often justified) gripe against organized religion. Personally, if that's what they need to feel special, then more power to them. Just as long as they realize that their belief is an emotional response, the same as any Christian, Jew, Muslim, etc..