Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Well, I thought I would present the fact that I am an atheist, and wonder how many here are fellow non-believers like myself. :3

You all may be wondering why I am an atheist. I can explain very simply that I am an atheist because Nature shows no sign of design, no need for design, and that humans currently are better off dealing with themselves than to attempt to deal with that which they cannot clearly define.

Moreover, even though I am an atheist, I don't make it my business to bash other's religions, faiths, or ideas. I think people beat themselves up enough already, and I don't think it's necessary for me to be the grand pooh-pooh'r of what others do with their lives.

-- Brede

I don't necessarily consider myself an atheist.  I believe that God, as it were, is a symbol of mankind's potential.  Anything that is based in compassion and social progress is "the work of God", or "the work of Humanity".  My beliefs allow me to preach within the guidelines of just about any religion that serves a human purpose at its fundamental.  I often like to tell people that the moment they think God is as petty as they are, they're wrong. 

I've always had my own sensible theories rooted in science and spirituality about how things work.  My brain is constantly trying to strike a balance between the physical and metaphysical, and I'm fairly confident I figured out the meaning of life, the universe, and everything, all on my own.

When I was fourteen, I had my first revelation about the meaning of life on the schoolbus.  It simply occured to me that the meaning of life was "pursuing happiness and fulfillment."

Eight years later and I don't feel the need to revise the assesment. 

So...  yes, I suppose I'm an atheist.  However, I do believe God exists in all of us.  (S)he can appear as whatever form or symbol brings us most comfort and inspiration.  God is progress, God is motivation, God is enlightenment.  God can take on any form, because God takes refuge in the deepest part of the human imagination.

~ Blair

im a devout atheist!  ;)

a former post:

Quote from: Katia on January 28, 2007, 01:14:55 AM


hate and intolerance? just because i'm an atheist doesn't mean i'm [hateful or intolerant]. for me it wasn't really a matter of choice. i was overwhelmed by the evidence that my religious beliefs were based in outright [falsehood] at worst and [baseless assertion] at best.
but i can tell you what has changed in my life as a result. the many hours a week i was [serving the church] now go into making a difference in my community. and the money i once gave to [build churches] and pay staff now pays for treatment of children with cancer, and after school programs, and safe homes for battered women and kids and a college education for an orphan. the hours i spent [studying myths] and fantasy and debating over minutiae of religious dogma and notions of apocalypse and the god's will now go into relationships and making a difference and [not] screening my friends based on religion has sure enriched my life.
my growth, joy and maturity [were stunted] by christianity. in other words, all the time, treasure and thought i put into a [lie] and a [fraud] is now put into enjoying life and enjoying people and trying to make something of this life and this world because there won't be another. i [no longer have to struggle] with the concept of a god of torture who demands flattery and who gives eternal agony for temporal errors. i no longer have to struggle with a god whose ego is more fragile than my own, who is jealous, vengeful, petty and whose best offer to his children's an eternity of kissing his butt and telling him [how pretty] he is.
but at its [essence], i left the church because the claims were either probably false or improbable, and the notion of a god that gives us a brain and tells us not to use it, a god who [embodies] some of our [own worst traits], just made [no sense]. any one can change their life with any religion. moslems and jews and buddhists would all say their religion changed their lives. but for me, religion had to be more than a lifestyle that changed how i felt and what i did. it also had to be objectively true and it simply is not.  sorry if this post offends you but it's just how it is and how i feel.  and no, i haven't found hatred or intolerance here and you won't either if you decide to stay.

I don't give deity credit for things that I don't understand.  I simply accept that there are things that I don't understand. I am deeply spiritual. I do believe in the power of faith and I admit that is a belief.

I don't deny that God may exist. But I see no "evidence" of God either.  I thought that I was an atheist once, but I don't consider myself to be one now.  My hubby says he's a bochalist.  I tell people I'm a druid.  Neither have any basis in reality ;)

Cindi

I became an atheist at age 12, at 20 evolved to agnostic. I am Jewish, and that's an important part of my life, however I'm also still agnostic.

zythyra

I just find it amusing how Americans distrust atheists more than muslims, gays, and etc. :3

It's like my strange worship of matter must be evil. Yet, we're all made of matter. We all use matter to make things. We all need matter to exist. We are simply matter. Some will claim I have a subjective, morality, yet my morals depend on one universal constant: human reasoning. So long as things are objective in their properties, to be isolated and integrated as knowledge, there will always be a code of behavior for which I will obey to ensure my life, liberty, and property here on Earth. And that probably makes me a moral [not the only moral though, I think old Penn Jillette is... :3] compare to most people that tend toward doing what they feel like without regard to consequences. Yet, still I am called immoral, amoral, and evil. Go figure.

-- Bridget

Im an atheist because:

1. Why would a superior being want us to constantly feed glory to him?
2. Why would a superior being create a world just to let it get on with things without his intervention?
3. Why must we pray to a superior being? Does that imply that by doing so, we are able to change his mind or influence him?
4. I believe religion tends to explain things that science cant. Now, science is able to rationalise, so religion is becoming increasingly illogical.

I am not an atheist.
To me, the Universe is my Divine Being. Not a thinking person, not an entity, but a divinity. It doesn't think in itself, but everything is part of it, and thinking creatures are some of the many, countless things that are a part of the Divine.
It is an 'it;' it doesn't have a gender, it doesn't have a will, and it doesn't think. It doesn't speak. But it opens up to people; it has opened up to me. That sounds.. Prophetic, and sadly insane, and I don't mean anything... 'Divine' with it, or miraculous. It's just the feeling of.. One-ness; being loved simply for being a part of something. Being precious because you are a part of everything...

Okay; this does look like I'm losing my mind... *grumbles*
No; I don't worship a god. I wouldn't worship a god if I were to be religious. And I don't think there's a higher being or a higher force or a whatnot. To me, it's just everything, and everything is all there is. And there's something nice to think of.. Everyday stuff is holy. Because it's part of everything. Everywhere is something shiny and beautiful to see, if only you'd look.

Quote from: Fer on March 31, 2007, 11:34:38 PM
Im an atheist because:

1. Why would a superior being want us to constantly feed glory to him?
2. Why would a superior being create a world just to let it get on with things without his intervention?
3. Why must we pray to a superior being? Does that imply that by doing so, we are able to change his mind or influence him?
4. I believe religion tends to explain things that science cant. Now, science is able to rationalise, so religion is becoming increasingly illogical.

Fer,

I'm reading from the same book! God would not require servitude. Why would God need our support and adoration? 

We have invented many things in the name of religion to define things we can not explain.

Cindi

I was brought up atheist. Have remained so. Just missing the god gene I guess. I don't care if others believe. It's just not my thing.

Dennis

Quote from: Tink on April 01, 2007, 02:20:34 AM
I will probably be questioned for saying this since I have never posted anything of this nature on these forums.  In the last year, I have been examining things, questioning events, observing how the world is going, wondering about stuff, and right now, I feel that you may all be right; there might not be a God after all.  Am I becoming atheist?  is this possible?  I don\\\'t  know.  I am still extremely confused about this and don\\\'t be surprised if I decide to edit this post later on.

tink :icon_chick:

It seems that youre realizing the truth, that theres nothing up there. I was  brought in a strict catholic family and served as an alter boy several times a week. But lost faith in the Catholic church around 9 - 10 years old.  I saw that very few people seemed to think about the strong statements they were making in mass. I saw my mother compelled to put money in the plate twice every Sunday, even though she was raising five kids on a widows pension.  I saw them changing the churchs definition of truth to suit the times. 
Every week, during the readings from the bible and in school I would be puzzled by the bibles contradictions and how totally wacky the old testament was. By the time I was 13 - 14, I had realised if Jesus existed, that he was just a man. I searched through all sorts of philosophies and religions trying to find somthing that seemed to make sense.  One day when I was about 18, it hit me. There is no supreme being or higher intelligence, and when you die youre dead.  Once it hit me, it seemed so obvious. It is the only thing that makes sense and can be backed up by physical evidence.  It has given me a great sense of freedom and a realisation of just how important it is to make the most of life.  youll do fine tink. :)

Growing up in church, I was always struck with the sense something was very wrong with the people there. Even as a child, I could sense that their need to believe in a God shorted out their rationality.

Today, I basically feel the same way, only more strongly. It's not so much that I'm convinced that God doesn't exist, because I don't think there's data either way. What I am convinced of is most Christians are fools, liars and generally evil. Maybe it's the same in other religions, but I wasn't raised in them.

So - my belief is not so much that God doesn't exist, because I don't know. My belief is that Christians are  insincere, delusional, and dangerousl. That's what I am certian about.

(Please read this

Bri

I guess in a sence Im atheist....

I dont believe in god persay... I dont necicarily believe in a greater power... so technicly Im not agnostic.
What I do believe in is the power of the human spirit, hence my saying that man is god... which really bothers some people for some reason...  But the universe existed before us and will exist after us... unless ofcorse it only exists in our imagination in which everything came and goes with us LoL.

Im a very spiritual yet scientific person, seemingly totaly unique in my opinions of faith. Its wierd but I like it.

Dear Friends,

I am not an atheist.  However I am not a believer in fire and brimstone either.

I have found that insensitive humans create harm to fellow human beings not God.

I have been made to feel ashamed for being different by fellow human beings.  God loves me regardless of my gender.  I hide from people not from God.

People tell me Jesus Christ was a peaceful conservative human.  Jesus Christ was the most radical human being that ever lived.  His friends came from all walks of life including tax collectors, thieves, prostitutes, murderers, and any one else that asked to be his friend.  At one moment of his life he turned over the money tables at another moment he reattached an ear to one of his captures before he was crucified. 

An agnostic is a person that does not know if God exists.  An atheist is absolutely sure that God does not exist.

The bible is as relevant today as it was thousands of years ago.  When all is hopeless for me then God sends me few atheists to save me from myself.  This is rather ironic.

God does not place you here to suffer.  People make other people suffer.

I see miracles every day.  I do not see a heaven and hell as is tradtionally preached.  I see heaven and hell as a place for spiritual beings to exist.   If you have faith to believe in goodness and kindness then  your spiritual being will live in goodness and kindness and vice versa.

God sent a nonbeliever fellow atheists so that the nonbeliever would believe.

And yes I love you regardless of your beliefs because you are my friends.   

Wendy

QuoteI will probably be questioned for saying this since I have never posted anything of this nature on these forums.  In the last year, I have been examining things, questioning events, observing how the world is going, wondering about stuff, and right now, I feel that you may all be right; there might not be a God after all.  Am I becoming atheist?  is this possible?  I don't know.

Tink,

I think it's truly wonderful that you're asking these questions. I am a deeply spiritual person, and being Jewish is a very important part of me, however I also am agnostic, and have been for 30+ years, lol. I really don't know if g-d exists at all, or whether humans simply created g-d because we need the idea of g-d to exist, as some great philosophers have suggested. Perhaps it's some of both. I suppose that I'll find out the answer someday, when I take leave of this earthly reality. Until then, I'll enjoy asking questions and discovering my purpose in llfe, and learning how to use  this gift of my transgender nature.

zythyra

I went through an atheist phase when I was in high school, after I went thru the agnostic phase, which came after recovery from Catholicism. Yep, I too was raised a Catholic.
Later I became taoist, and then a spin in the MCC, after which I became a pagan/Goddess worshipper.

Tonight I do my Full Moon Ritual, so I'll pray for you all [kidding, just kidding....]

I try my best to be respectful of everyone's spiritual beliefs, or non-belief as it were.

So, is atheism a secular religion?   >:D

Thundra <== button pusher

Quote from: Thundra on April 03, 2007, 12:30:49 AM

So, is atheism a secular religion?   >:D

Thundra <== button pusher

I think for some people it is. They're as fervently atheist as others are fervently religious. For others, it's just a question of not having that in your life. For me, I don't define myself by it, it's just not there. I don't play golf either and the absence of golf in my life is no more notable to me than the absence of a god or goddess.

Dennis

Nah, my religion is Life. As long as I'm alive I'm worshiping every day! :3

-- Brede

Quote from: Fer on April 02, 2007, 07:56:11 PM
It seems that youre realizing the truth, that theres nothing up there.

^{*raises eyebrow*}

The 'truth' for you is not the 'truth' for everyone dear.

What makes you think that what Religion says is what really is? Are you sure they are not just like you, doing the best that they can with the information that they have?

Could it possibly be that there is more than you realize, in a context that you have no basis to understand?

What happens if all 'God' wants is to be loved? Nothing else, just loved.



Believe what you wish of course, but I, among others, do care.


Fyi, I started out basically atheist. ^*smile* I find that rather amusing really.

Truth: That which conforms to Nature.
So there is one truth, it's just a matter if you accept the definition, because I'm a Naturalist, thus my definition is as defined. :3

-- Brede

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.

Quote from: Dryad on April 03, 2007, 08:06:11 PM
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

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

QuoteThat 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.

Quote from: Dryad on April 05, 2007, 09:17:56 AM
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]

QuoteMany 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

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

Quote from: Attis on April 03, 2007, 03:28:37 PM
Truth: That which conforms to Nature.

I respectfully disagree.

Truth is that which is.

Nature is a construct ;)

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.

Quote from: Yvonne on April 05, 2007, 03:09:10 PMFor me, It's about being true to myself.

(=
Ayup, that is what it is about (=

Quote from: Kimberly on April 05, 2007, 01:29:04 PM

Quote from: Attis on April 03, 2007, 03:28:37 PM
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

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."

Quote from: Dryad on April 05, 2007, 06:11:17 PMWhat 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.

QuoteAnd 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

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

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.)

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.

Put me down in the atheist camp.

Alice

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.

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


LLL&R

Maebh

QuoteWhoa 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.

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.

Quote from: Dryad on April 10, 2007, 09:15:34 PM
Some people see leprechauns, trolls, faeries, gnomes.. You name em. They SEE them; they FEEL them, they HEAR them.

What you see is not what is. You see something because you're either inducing an state in the brain that allows you to generate them, or you're brain is doped up on something. Remember, your perceptual events are far from reach of your volition, so in this case, we cannot conclude there are really these things which you see. In this case, we can measure the change in brain states that look very much like a hallucination since such hallucinations also stimulate the areas of memory in the brain.

QuoteTherefor, they control our perception.

Nope, you're simply turning on your memories in such a way that the visual cortex is getting the signal to show them. We call these flashbacks and hallucinations.

QuoteUltimately, 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?

A neurologist. :3

QuoteBy 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.

Feelings not coupled to reason ought to be disregarded by virtue that they themselves are not valid proofs.

-- Brede

Um, just a moment. Wouldn't that be saying that something like love should be disregarded? Or do you cite electrochemical nuances in the brain (I think? Tis been a while since I heard a scientific explanation for the concept) or something like that as explaining that state/feeling?

What of knowing someone you have never seen?

What of 'wanting long hair again' when you have never had long hair? For this matter what of knowing that you are in the wrong body when you have no basis to know this?


For me there seems to be a lot of reason to think that a purely scientific view of existence is missing out on a lot of things. I think a purely scientific view point would find me quite deranged, and yet, am I really? ... See that is the basic problem, the neurologist can only understand what they know. That is the limitation of science really, if it can not be repeated it does not exist as presented. Which really is a sane way of viewing things but one ends up turning a blind eye to many things with that view point, I think.


Regardless, it is quite fascinating how our viewpoints differ, tis a shame we have this tendency to think we are right ;)

Blessed Be, or if you prefer, live free and prosper.

Quote from: Kimberly on April 11, 2007, 04:18:21 PM

For me there seems to be a lot of reason to think that a purely scientific view of existence is missing out on a lot of things.

Exactly, as human we are more than a body,or a brain, or chemical reaction or electricmagnetic currents. So Neurologists can measure and try explain the physical part of the mental and may be some of the emotional. But what do they do about the spiritual? Ignore it? Dismiss it? Because they cannot measure it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Their attitude reminds me of the people in Plato's cave: because they are chained with their back to the fire they can only see the shadows on the wall, thus their perception is limited to a 2 dimensional world. Do our cells have memories? Do the atoms in our body know where they come from? If the scientist admit that we are all made of stars dust, why won't they open to the possibility of feeling and experiencing that connection in  themselves and through it to the universe as a whole?

LL&R

Maebh

QuoteWhat you see is not what is.

Thank you. That's exáctly my point. What we see is not nescessarily what is.

You all may be wondering why I am an atheist. I can explain very simply that I am an atheist because Nature shows no sign of design, no need for design, and that humans currently are better off dealing with themselves than to attempt to deal with that which they cannot clearly define.

Moreover, even though I am an atheist, I don't make it my business to bash other's religions, faiths, or ideas. I think people beat themselves up enough already, and I don't think it's necessary for me to be the grand pooh-pooh'r of what others do with their lives.

-- Brede
[/quote]

Well even though, I see myself as a spiritual persons, that simply means that I see and practice faith issue of my religion as to the personal relationship with the God I pray to.... There is no religion per say that transcends the individual and can become a societal construct upon which to develop a government or society. Once you do that transition from private to public, you have made a grave error as I see it.

But than my observations are at best myopic and like my faith beliefs of little value beyond my own use.

QuoteWhat you see is not what is. You see something because you're either inducing an state in the brain that allows you to generate them, or you're brain is doped up on something. Remember, your perceptual events are far from reach of your volition, so in this case, we cannot conclude there are really these things which you see. In this case, we can measure the change in brain states that look very much like a hallucination since such hallucinations also stimulate the areas of memory in the brain.

It's interesting that you assume your viewpoint is the only right answer.  People that think that there isn't any 'divine' being confuse me..  But I do respect the fact that you're entitled to that opinion, and I don't think less of you for it.  It's greatly insulting that you're comparing someones love for a God or a Goddess to a hallucination or "doped up".   You said earlier:

QuoteI don't make it my business to bash other's religions, faiths, or ideas.

But you did just that, several times in this thread.

My christian perspective (which is my birth religion my family lineage celebrated: of the Mormon variety) that I grew up with really went down hill more the last few years. I pick this one out since I have some negative feelings having had come from there. Also living in a highly large populated Baptist area.

I am sure not all christians do the things that I have heard, but this is what I heard from my mother and people I interact with at work (many times customers), spending their newly acquired money from the relief or insurance). I live in Mississippi where Hurricane Katrina plowed through a few years ago. The church belltower that "miraculously" had survived hurricane Camile, which became a religious symbol that god was watching over the church (despite the rest of the church being demolished) was annihilated.

After Hurricane Camile (https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.deadlystorms.com%2Fstorms%2F1969%2FCamille%2Fimages%2Fbelltower.jpg&hash=8be7f9a0db8d472342c5ff90c85ad6bf90b28165)
After Hurricane Katrina (https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgbgm-umc.org%2Fimages%2Fphotobank%2Fd0137.jpg&hash=364d276321924594c9ea271705e551ef26d1dc15)

Despite $81.2 billion (2005 U.S. dollars) in damage, 1,836 people lost their lives in Hurricane Katrina and in the subsequent floods, what gets me the most upset of everything is whenever I hear someone mention that it was a "blessing" because they received a new home, roof, car, tv, computer, or whatever financial recovery money provided from insurance or federal aid. It quite sickens me.

The Bible I have read explains this was caused by the 'wickedness' of the people living there (aka story of Noah)(Sodom and Gomorrah). My mother thinks this is why New Orleans was flooded.

Or the relatives of someone that died think that god was "calling" there relative home, or it was time to go to a "better" place.

I drive down the road; 3 NEW 20 million dollar (each) huge churches going up just within 2 miles of my house.

No thanks, I will pass.

My explaination : nature somewhat randomly creates weather patterns, and sometimes distructive hurricanes when the elements are just right.

Not some blessing, because of wickedness, or even prediction from Nostradamus.

I can take being bashed. Its one way I can learn and find the errors in my way. I am sure I said something wrong. I just shake my head when I hear something like that (which I have heard maybe 20 times from different people).

Ken/Kendra;
  Thank you for posting the pictures and the foolishness as well. I am not one of those who go about getting foolish with the events of this world.
  The word of God says that men's hearts would fail them for fear and for "looking upon those things that happen on earth."
  Those who try to use these events to justify their views and condemn others are just about void of common sense.
  These things were indeed prophesied but not in the light as spoken by those who attend the supercenters of heresy known as the modern day Christian church.
Tiff

KK, thanks for the dish of reality.  Bingo.

Cindi

Is Atheism not absolutely a form of belief?

Njc

Quote from: Attis on March 31, 2007, 01:14:11 PM
... because Nature shows no sign of design, no need for design, and that humans currently are better off dealing with themselves than to attempt to deal with that which they cannot clearly define.

-- Brede

While I certainly concur with the latter part of your statement, I must ask you to consider the first part more carefully. It is a bold assertion.

The universe exists. It works. Whether or not anyone understands how or why, it works, and has for what is generally considered by smarter people than are currently posting right now/here, to have done so for 13, 15 billion years, like that, and shows no definite signs of collapsing or expanding into a crunch or bang singularity any time sooner than than that.
Now you can take a cursory look at physics, and you will find that the conditions for even having an inhabitable universe are very close to what is known as a vanishing probability. Too close to 'impossible' for comfort, you might say.

Does that not indicate design in some sense?

(NB: I do not consider the word 'design' to be in any way dichotomous with 'evolution' or the science involved with any study of this stuff, at any level. IE: "Intelligent design" tends to be a cover term for teaching a form of faith as if it were something more.)

Njc

Quote from: nancyj on May 08, 2007, 04:13:09 PM
Now you can take a cursory look at physics, and you will find that the conditions for even having an inhabitable universe are very close to what is known as a vanishing probability. Too close to 'impossible' for comfort, you might say.

Oh, really?

What conditions do you have in mind, and what are the probability distributions on them that lead you to this conclusion?

To attribute to god that which we do not understand, simply because it is complex, is irrational. I believe that faith based on the mystical qualities of god is dangerous. It bites us in the kiester all the time.

"Have a little faith baby."  Perhaps someday we'll be able to figure it out. ;)

Cindi

Quote from: WikipediaIn its broadest sense, atheism is the absence of belief in the existence of gods, sometimes called nontheism. As a philosophical position, atheism has also been defined as the belief in the nonexistence of gods, and as the rejection of theism. Although atheists are commonly assumed to be irreligious, some religions, such as Buddhism, have been characterized as atheistic

Yep that would be me... :)

My belief is that "Life is a choice" and we live our lives based on choices that we make in accordance with an expected outcome.

Steph

Quote from: nancyj on May 08, 2007, 04:13:09 PM
Now you can take a cursory look at physics, and you will find that the conditions for even having an inhabitable universe are very close to what is known as a vanishing probability. Too close to 'impossible' for comfort, you might say.

Well, yes. On the other hand, you might also take a cursory look at probability theory and consider the concept of conditional probability. In those terms, P(inhabitable universe) << P(inhabitable universe | we are here to debate the issue).

In plain English, it does not matter how improbable it is to get an inhabitable universe: if it didn't happen this way, we would not be here. Since we are, we know things happened this way, but that does not tell us why it happened that way. The reason may be pure chance -- who knows, maybe there are a gazillion of uninhabitable universes lying around. Or, of course, the reason may be because God wanted it this way. Choosing between the two (or something else) is a matter of faith, not science.

  Nfr

Re; inhabitable universe....

That's all opinion my dear.  Nucleic acids, you know the things that make up life forms, exist everywhere in the universe.  They are created in novae.  A star's death creates the fundamental building blocks for life... everywhere. It is simple physics and not all that hard to explain.

To say that something has a nil possibility to exist, in the face of the actual existance of said thing, and then attribute that to god, is in my opinion, not a reasonable assumption. 

I find it amazing that some will use the science we have collected over the centuries to make assumptions "proving" the existence of god, yet refute new science that we are collecting!  I'm not talking about anyone who has contributed to this thread... I'm talking about the religious zealots we tend to run into.  You know... the types that want to prohibit research or deny postulations and sound theories because it flies in the face of what they believe.

Is it so fundamentally wrong to change your perspective when new facts are produced?  Sometimes I think that I was born on the wrong planet!

Cindi

Yes Cind, it's "opinion"; remember our back 'n forth on Hawking's riff: 'Time does not exist...', where you made the assertion that 'cause we can measure it, yeah it DOES', well that one (as well as your asserting: "And in time will come the demise of all matter.")
are harder opinions to swallow, I think, than my answer to your deal:

'well you inhabit a universe, THEORETICALLY, so it's inhabitable...' LOL

moving right along:

NB: One of the basic laws of physics is expressed by the Latin phrase ex nihilo, nihil fit, "from nothing, nothing comes". It's a tremendous leap of faith to believe that the inhabitable world(s) emerged from nothing. "The universe" came accidentally into existence (this time) as a quantum singularity. Against ALL ODDS, look it up...

"To say that something has a nil possibility to exist"

I said it was CLOSE to that. I will return with some math on it if you like.

"in the face of the actual existance of said thing, and then attribute that to god, is in my opinion, not a reasonable assumption. "

I am accused here of attributing what to "God", now?! Quote me on it. It isn't there in what I have typed. I am merely constructing arguments.

Remember this riff?:




Geez. Egg me on, whydoncha.

(She's crafty, y'all  ;) )

Quote from: Cindi Jones on May 09, 2007, 12:35:22 PM
It is simple physics and not all that hard to explain.

No, it's insanely complex physics and is next to impossible to explain. Smarter people that you or I, by a long, long ways struggle with this stuff their whole lives and actually do the fricken math.

Quote from: Zombies on May 08, 2007, 06:18:41 PM
I think I've ultimately decided that I'm not quite dogmatic enough to be an atheist.

Yep. Or, it's hard to have that much faith, isn't it.

"It's a tremendous leap of faith to believe that the inhabitable world(s) emerged from nothing."

And an "Atheist" (or at any rate all the ones I've spoken with have said something to that effect) is presupposed to not have such a level of faith as that; or, define Atheist, there might be a lot of variants of that religion, and we'll start over.

Quote from: Fer on March 31, 2007, 11:34:38 PM
2. Why would a superior being create a world just to let it get on with things without his intervention?

For the simple fun of an act of creation. Why Not? You create a work of Art, put it out there, see if it works. I am not seeing a problem there.

You have imagined "God" as some sort of 'dada' or 'mama'. You have limited "God" according to your experience.

I was looking at a book, Programming the Universe, which looks at such a question in terms of information systems.

From very few bits* out to what we got nowadays, Hoo Boy! Funny how that worked out.

(*: just a Big Ol' On/Off Switch, even?)

I believe I am somewhere in between agnostic and atheist, because I don't believe there is a way to actually prove god exists or doesn't exist, so I usually just stay the heck out of it...religion has never been a good thing for me...plus its back-stabbed me enough times too...

I represent myself as an agnostic. I have read the Bible (both Old and New Testament), parts of the Koran (translated), and readings from the Buddhist and Hindu faiths. Basically the conclusion I've come to is that no one has it all right, and who am I to make a decision what is correct?

Do I believe there is something greater than I am? Maybe. Am I willing to say that there isn't? No way. That would be assuming a superior intelligence that I am not capable of.

Quote from: Butterfly on May 22, 2007, 10:26:44 AM
Basically the conclusion I've come to is that no one has it all right, and who am I to make a decision what is correct?

You are the only one who can make that decision for you. Of course, if you choose to keep your options open, that's fine too.

As for myself, I choose to believe in the Christian God. It is my choice, though, and I also believe -- even more deeply -- that it does not matter whether the God I believe in exists or not.

  Nfr

Quote from: Seshatneferw on May 22, 2007, 12:58:20 PM


As for myself, I choose to believe in the Christian God. It is my choice, though, and I also believe -- even more deeply -- that it does not matter whether the God I believe in exists or not.

  Nfr

??? it seems to me that you are unsure of his existence.  Are you saying that it wouldnt matter if you had wasted your time praying to nothing?  interesting!

Not quite wasting my time. I'd try to behave the way I try to even if there wasn't a God who told me to, because that's the decent thing to do (and that, in turn, can be argued from a sociological point of view as well as a theological one).

In case there is no God, there's not really any harm done -- I just got some of my spiritual solace from self-adopted delusions. Still, it worked.

In case there is a God, things should also work all right. Of course, if the real God does not like my semi-flippant attitude towards faith, I'm in trouble -- but would that kind of God be someone with whom I'd want to spend the rest of eternity anyway?

The fact that I chose the Lutheran outward forms is a matter of upbringing. Ultimately, they work for me; but this is not too different from the way I've adopted certain theoretical frameworks for my day job. They, too, work for me, but at the same time I recognise that some competing theories work for others.

  Nfr

I\'d say that you have an Agnostic mentality.  I thought that the idea of believing in God was to actually have faith that He DOES exist, but thats just my opinion.

Quote from: Fer on May 22, 2007, 01:36:18 PM
I\'d say that you have an Agnostic mentality.  I thought that the idea of believing in God was to actually have faith that He DOES exist, but thats just my opinion.

Hmmm I'm a Christian, and I believe in God, but I have the view that I can not be certain whether he exists or not.
How could I as a human, be sure?
I just find it far more romantic to believe in a god that created and designed all that exists, rather than to believe my ancestors were apes. But, that's just me.

Yes, that's part of it for me, too, except for the part about my ancestors having been apes (they were, I am, the exact species has been evolving for a while, and so on). This belief-despite-doubt is the main reason why I don't really consider myself agnostic.

  Nfr

Sometimes I waver a bit between Agnosticism and Atheism, but for the most part I'm an atheist.

I guess there's a lot of ways to view it, but I think there is some awe in the notion that we are the refined product of billions of years of life, the cream of countless trillions of generations of natural selection, and that from the seeds of life born when the Earth was young, so we and all life are here today.

For me, that's at least as inspiring as the idea that some highly powerful being decided to 'play God' as it were, and we are the result.

QuoteI just find it far more romantic to believe in a god that created and designed all that exists, rather than to believe my ancestors were apes. But, that's just me.

No, I'm not picking on you Nero... I just wanted to make a point about the study of evolution.  Evolution does not necessarily say that we are decendents of apes.  It does provide for the possibility that we and apes have a common ancestor.  If this is true, then that common ancestor would likely be even more primitive than apes! 

And who knows..  wouldn't it be interesting if apes were decendents of man?  ;)  I can hear the conversation now: "Do you know what they are teaching in our forest?  That apes are decendents of man! How long can we allow this to happen?"

Cindi