Any other atheists about? :3

[Dryad]

Yes.. That which conforms to nature. The question is: What does conform to nature, and what doesn't?
That all things are connected conforms nature. By physical laws, it is so. We all agree on that one, I think.
But: Does God conform to nature, or doesn't it? Now there is a thing opinions differ. And they differ, because we, as people, are individuals, and basically, our opinions will differ, be it ever so slightly, on just about everything, as will our perception of things. Yes, even physical perception. One of us saw a bird fly over. The other one, try as they might, did not.
There's allways differences in opinion as to the nature of the truth. The meaning of the truth. And even if the truth even conforms to reality.

So I think God as a person, a thinking, feeling, entity with a personality, could not exist. Other people disagree with me. And that's fine; that's the beauty of it. Because everyone perceives a bit differently, so if we learn to eachother, then maybe, one day, we can put all the pieces together, then shift the picture, and actually come out with something everyone can agree with. Or perhaps not. And that has it's beauties aswell, because from the way people perceive the truth, we can learn something about that person.

[Attis]

The question is: What does conform to nature, and what doesn't?

That which one perceives in Nature. Ideas that do not come from observation or a proper abstraction of ideas related to Nature are not conforming to Nature, therefore are not truth. Basically, I adhere to the Correspondence Theory of Truth.

-- Brede

[Elizabeth]

Let me see if I get this right. God creates people so they can eventually end up in Heaven worshiping him/her for eternity. However, he also deliberately creates some who will not worship him and singles them out to spend eternity in buring hell. In the meantime we need to live this superficial human form life either worshipping god or not worshipping God, that will determine who will go where. However, God would have had to create those who not worship him. Why not just start with whatever that endnumber is going to be(those in heaven to worship God forever)? Why go to all this hassle? Why not just create the number of worshippers in the first place? We can only assume he also wants people to burn in hell, which he also must have created. And the goal is to end up in Heaven, worshipping God, for eternity. What am I worshipping him for again? Oh yeah, my existence. Thank God he made me, just so I could spend eternity worshipping him for making me to worship him.

That is just way to cynical for me. I don't remember being real upset about not being here, before I got here and I suspect it will be the same after I leave. Wasting my life worrying about whether or not God made me so I could entertain him in heaven or hell, seems rather pointless to me. It was never my decision, even if it's true.

I don't beleive we are here for a greater purpose, or even a purpose for that matter. I believe all of my urges were created by forces I was not in control of. whatever it is that causes humans to be the way they are, is the reason I am the way I am. I presume I am not the first or only one with the same urges and age as proved that out. Nowhere, more obviously than here. I used to think I was so unique. Turns out I am actually a stereotype. There are enough people like me, we actually have a demographic. If only I could have known that as a child.

No, if God made all the ugly things that I have seen in my life time, when he could have made all of the most beautiful things I have seen in my life, that is not the loving God I want to beleive in. I can't beleive in a God where I have more compassion than the God I am supposed to be worshipping.

I am ok not knowing why we are here. I am ok dying. The thought of living for ever kind of creeps me out. I bow to no man.

Love always,
Elizabeth

[Dryad]

That which one perceives in Nature. Ideas that do not come from observation or a proper abstraction of ideas related to Nature are not conforming to Nature, therefore are not truth.

Though I agree with the latter statement in the post I quoted from, I also see something in this:
Every person perceives, and observes, differently. Many people feel the existence of a God Persona. They can observe it. They perceive it. Of course; these people generally perceive it as above nature, but if Nature essentially ís the multiverse, it would contain this God Persona to this people. Thus, the God Persona would correspond to Nature Perceived.

[Attis]

Every person perceives, and observes, differently.

I would argue that no one perceives or observes differently rather that we think differently on the same situations. My support for this is the fact that many concepts can be broken down from their particular situation to an unparticular kind such that anyone, even a Helen Keller kind of person can grasp them despite the lack of visual and auditory abilities. Thus, all knowledge, and all things that which knowledge is derived, are invariant in themselves [aka metaphysically individual]

Many people feel the existence of a God Persona. They can observe it. They perceive it.

No, they don't and for one good reason. A feeling is not the same as actually seeing or sensing something in your actual ordered senses. The feelings you're referring to are events related to the temporal lobe of the neocortex. Essentially, it's that part of your brain that creates the sense-o-rama that your mind works on. Think of it as the 'Construct' like from the Matrix. You load whatever you want into it and have a go at it. Some people are so good at this that they can consciously use the temporal lobe to run experiments [example: Nicola Tesla did this on his AC generator. He tested it in his mind and then machined the final product which worked within its specifications.] or to have day dreams. Most folks, though, just have strong emotional states or hallucinations that take over the temporal lobe, thus making the person feel as if the source of this state change is external rather than internal. Therefore, God is not what is perceived, but rather what is conceived by the person and generated by the temporal lobe in response to the person. It's basically me looking at myself, looking at myself looking at me, and on to infinite recursion.

-- Brede

[Sheila]

When I was growing up, I guess there was religion in my family as we(my sister and I) would go to church every easter. That was our extent of religion. When I became a teen I got more involved in the Church, because I had one friend who was very churchy. I learned what it was all about, even took a few classes at the community college on Theology. I became a athiest in my 20's for about 10 years. I learned a few things since then. The miracles of life and a lot of other unexplainable occurances. That was when I believed in God or whatever name you want to put on this diety. I don't believe in the bible, not for one second. As far as the Bible goes, I would put it next to Grimm's fairy tales. So, now I'm an agnostic. I believe in something supernatural, but not religion. I believe that church is a social place where people can talk and let someone make you feel bad about yourself. Sometimes they have good food.
Sheila

[Kimberly]

Truth: That which conforms to Nature.

I respectfully disagree.

Truth is that which is.

Nature is a construct

[Yvonne]

I'm an Agnostic, and I don't think we can know the truth about if there is a god. I would rather follow my own beliefs than halfheartedly follow something I don't believe in. For me, It's about being true to myself.

[Kimberly]

For me, It's about being true to myself.

Ayup, that is what it is about

[Attis]

Truth: That which conforms to Nature.

I respectfully disagree.

Truth is that which is.

Nature is a construct

Construct of what? Btw, Nature IS, truth is the condition of  subset(s) of Nature, so it really doesn't logically follow to reverse the hierarchy.

-- Brede

[Dryad]

Attis: What I tried to point out is that, in the end, we cannot even prove our own existence. Because in the end, to prove, one must perceive. And to perceive, one must conceive. One must deduct from senses that which is. And as each person is different, feels different and thinks different, the result will be different, be it ever so slightly.
Please note that this is me being the devil's advocate. I really do agree with you; I'm just holding up a mirror here; trying to make you see the same thing from a different angle.
Such is the nature of philosophy, as opposed to biology and physics.

It's not: "I think, so I am," but rather: "I think thát I am."

[Attis]

What I tried to point out is that, in the end, we cannot even prove our own existence. Because in the end, to prove, one must perceive.

Actually you prove your existence everyday by use of axioms. In this case, these axioms include identity, causality, and non-contradiction. These axioms are also implied to be true by virtue that there has yet been a case in science or historical accounts of their violation.

And to perceive, one must conceive.

Whoa there a minute, Dryad. That's a big error if I've ever seen one. Perception is the organized part of your senses. It's what makes all those feelings of sight, sound, taste, touch, and etc useful. You don't have any way to control them. Not by meditation or whatever. It's always operating outside your conscious control. Could you imagine having conscious control over your perception? That wouldn't be very easy to do while driving, trying to remember your directions, and coordinate your limbs to make that driving possible. In essence, perception, like our motor functions, is automated with no veto in how they work. The only veto is in the thoughts that originate the concert of action itself. Thusly, our perception is meant to allow us to 'see' with our mind's eye the world. Conception is the means by which we understand what we 'see'. They're both disjointed [e.g. exclusive] properties of the mind. Therefore, perception != conception and conception cannot control perception.


-- Brede

[Ricki]

Yawn.... (sorry)
What makes brown rice different from white different from purple different from wild................
Rice is rice right??
Yawning again!
Ricki

[AndyTheDandy]

I have never really had a religion. I agree that it is a construct, fabricated by humans, but it seems to me that they are, all of them, founded on the most "sacred" (so to speak) of things in our universe: faith and hope. Therefore, while I do not practice any religion, I generally have no problems with people of a religious sort... so long as they do NOT try to enforce their beliefs on me. I used to be disturbed that many of my Christian friends held the belief that I would be punished because I didn't share their belief system, but I have gotten past that.
I believe there are forces beyond our control and comprehension, and that it is rather fruitless to spend our time trying to do so. I behave in the way I do (avoiding harming others, and in fact trying to help whenever possible) on the merits that it is inherently good. I have found that other people tend to return good for good. That is the only reward I hope for, and it is by no means expected. (I have experienced too much to be that naive.)

[Casey]

I'm an atheist, largely because of Occam's Razor. I haven't seen anything for which the explanation must be, or is most likely, that there is a supreme being or cosmic consciousness.

It may be just me, but when god ceased to exist for me, fate, karma, destiny, and life's purpose followed shortly afterward.

[TheBattler]

Put me down in the atheist camp.

Alice

[error]

Technically I classify as an "agnostic atheist".

Most people tell me the combination isn't possible, but it's one of the most fitting combination of terms that works for me. So I go with it.

[Maebh]

When I see all the horrors commited in the name of religion, I can only thank God for being an Atheist!


LLL&R

Maebh

[Dryad]

Whoa there a minute, Dryad. That's a big error if I've ever seen one. Perception is the organized part of your senses. It's what makes all those feelings of sight, sound, taste, touch, and etc useful. You don't have any way to control them. Not by meditation or whatever. It's always operating outside your conscious control. Could you imagine having conscious control over your perception? That wouldn't be very easy to do while driving, trying to remember your directions, and coordinate your limbs to make that driving possible. In essence, perception, like our motor functions, is automated with no veto in how they work. The only veto is in the thoughts that originate the concert of action itself. Thusly, our perception is meant to allow us to 'see' with our mind's eye the world. Conception is the means by which we understand what we 'see'. They're both disjointed [e.g. exclusive] properties of the mind. Therefore, perception != conception and conception cannot control perception.

Some people see leprechauns, trolls, faeries, gnomes.. You name em. They SEE them; they FEEL them, they HEAR them.
Yet, to me, these creatures aren't real. While conception may not control the senses themselves, they dó control what we make of them. Therefor, they control our perception. While they do not control the chemical make-up of the air, or the light-absorbing properties of materials, they do control the image that reaches our thoughts.
Ultimately, our senses simply give us signals. Then our fantasy, our conception, shapes these signals to images we can understand. And who's to say who's right and wrong?
By the way, to me, this feeling of 'the divine' is a sense. 'Something's gonna happen; I can feel it.' To me, that is a sense. Of course; the latter is merely a mathematical deduction of current events, but still. A warning signal goes off, and that, to me, is a sense.

[Kendall]

Religiously I am Skeptic, as in follow Skepticism

That is I have personal propositions concerning
1.) the limitations of knowledge,
2.) a method of obtaining knowledge through systematic doubt and continual testing,
3.) the arbitrariness, relativity, or subjectivity of moral values,
4.) a method of intellectual caution and suspended judgment concerning a Supreme Being which is unknowable, unseeable, impersonable, and elusive if one exists at all.,

I do seek out to learn different deities, histories, beliefs, and differences.