13 of 22
13
Let’s Have a Dialog—ie., a Conversation, not a debate—About the god-hypothesis
Posted: 27 June 2012 11:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 181 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  193
Joined  2011-12-30
psikeyhackr - 26 June 2012 11:50 AM

I wouldn’t assume that all people who call themselves “atheists” think alike.

I am definitely suspicious of any “atheist” who presumes to speak for all others.

psik

Psik: I assume, from what you say here, that you are an atheist, but that you are at least willing to chat, openly, about your ideas and be open to those of others, right? Earlier you wrote

I figure if there is a God then He is a sneaky bastard that doesn’t give a damn about worship anyway and knows far better than I do what crap organised religion is.

If this is what you think “God” is like, no wonder you are an atheist. I repeat:This is why, decades ago, I stopped having an anthropomorphic—that is, giving human-like qualities to gods, animals or things—view, or idea, of “God” or of gods.

This new and modern kind of thinking is what inspired the philosopher, Nietzsche to write, “God is dead!”  Nietzsche was the son of a Lutheran minister—a traditional religionist. Though very much an intellect, he lived a very unusual and often sad kind of life. About his family and relations:

http://www.readeasily.com/friedrich-nietzsche/index.php

AN OVERVIEW
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche

[ Edited: 27 June 2012 02:52 PM by RevLGKing ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2012 11:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 182 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4142
Joined  2008-08-14

psikeyhackr-

But the unknown is still REAL.  I just don’t know about it, YET.  The unknown can get you killed and it will not give a damn. So if the system works on reincarnation and there is some God behind it all it is still REAL it is simply an aspect of reality that I do not know about at this time but I am not going to go on any religious trip on what I don’t know.  I figure if there is a God then He is a sneaky bastard that doesn’t give a damn about worship anyway and knows far better than I do what crap organised religion is.  LOL

Did you experience god before you were born?  Before you were conceived I mean.  Did god know you before your father fertilized your mothers egg?
Because that’s where you are going back to. Your going back to the “state” you were in before your father fertilized your mother’s egg.  Which is nothingness.  It’s less than nothingness.
Were you in some ether before your conception. Did god “touch” you in this ether? 
You figure lots of things psikey.  You figure aliens made crop circles and 9/11 was an inside job.
Now, typically you presume to understand the characteristics of an imaginary super-creator being.  And you ascribe human attributes to him.  Your point of view, your angle of understanding is so hackneyed and predictable. It’s like a broken record of the Unknown.
You are a believer, and you will be looking to the beyond when you know your time is near. Unless your death comes quickly and unexpectedly.
You are the guy who falls for pseudo-science shows narrated by the likes of Leonard Nimoy.  I’m sick of your aspersions being cast at atheists.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2012 02:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 183 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2291
Joined  2007-07-05
VYAZMA - 27 June 2012 11:49 AM

psikeyhackr-

But the unknown is still REAL.  I just don’t know about it, YET.  The unknown can get you killed and it will not give a damn. So if the system works on reincarnation and there is some God behind it all it is still REAL it is simply an aspect of reality that I do not know about at this time but I am not going to go on any religious trip on what I don’t know.  I figure if there is a God then He is a sneaky bastard that doesn’t give a damn about worship anyway and knows far better than I do what crap organised religion is.  LOL

Did you experience god before you were born?  Before you were conceived I mean.  Did god know you before your father fertilized your mothers egg?

I have no comprehension of the grounds for those silly questions.

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2012 02:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 184 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2291
Joined  2007-07-05
RevLGKing - 27 June 2012 11:14 AM
psikeyhackr - 26 June 2012 11:50 AM

I wouldn’t assume that all people who call themselves “atheists” think alike.

I am definitely suspicious of any “atheist” who presumes to speak for all others.

psik

Psik: I assume, from what you say here, that you are an atheist, but that you are at least willing to chat, openly, about your ideas and those of others, right?

I am not an atheist, never was an atheist and never told anyone that I was an atheist.

I decided I was an agnostic when I was 12.  By that I am simply making an admission of my Own ignorance.

Back then by atheist I meant someone who believed there was no God.

But today atheists say anyone who does not believe in God is an atheist so by their definition they have drafted agnostics into atheism.  I do not accept that definition.  I just do not have a problem with entertaining the possibility that things exist which I do not know about.  The paradigms of God promoted by most religions seem rather silly to me but that may simply mean that religious leaders have been promoting concepts of God which serve their interests and have nothing to do with the deity.

Consider that JC was not killed by Jews but by Jewish religions leaders.  What if that is one of the lessons of the gospels?  Religious leaders are full of crap.  Atheists may be religious reactionaries who throw the baby out with the bath water.

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2012 02:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 185 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  90
Joined  2012-04-24

I’m sorry if you don’t like the definition, psikeyhackr, but the word atheist literally means “one who is without a god.”
It comes from the Greek a- (without) + theos (a god) + -istes (agent noun suffix).

 Signature 

Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2012 03:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 186 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2291
Joined  2007-07-05
Austin Harper - 27 June 2012 02:58 PM

I’m sorry if you don’t like the definition, psikeyhackr, but the word atheist literally means “one who is without a god.”
It comes from the Greek a- (without) + theos (a god) + -istes (agent noun suffix).

I’m so impressed by semantic drivel.

Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist. Atheism is contrasted with theism, which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.

The term atheism originated from the Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning “without god(s)”, used as a pejorative term applied to those thought to reject the gods worshipped by the larger society. With the spread of freethought, skeptical inquiry, and subsequent increase in criticism of religion, application of the term narrowed in scope. The first individuals to identify themselves using the word “atheist” lived in the 18th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2012 03:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 187 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  25
Joined  2012-06-04

Well, that’s a wiki entry that needs some work.  smirk

Regardless, if you self-identify as an “agnostic”, chances are you believe the same thing as most atheists. Agnosticism doesn’t lie between theism and atheism.  Gnosticism/agnosticism refers to the presence or absence of certain knowledge (about something).  Theism/atheism refers to presence or absence of belief in a theistic deity.  It’s a question of logical drivel rather than semantic drivel.

 Signature 

Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum (Ambrose Bierce)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2012 03:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 188 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2291
Joined  2007-07-05
Apxeo - 27 June 2012 03:37 PM

Well, that’s a wiki entry that needs some work.  smirk

Regardless, if you self-identify as an “agnostic”, chances are you believe the same thing as most atheists. Agnosticism doesn’t lie between theism and atheism.  Gnosticism/agnosticism refers to the presence or absence of certain knowledge (about something).  Theism/atheism refers to presence or absence of belief in a theistic deity.  It’s a question of logical drivel rather than semantic drivel.

I came up with my own definition of BELIEVE since so many dictionaries are irrational on the subject.

To BELIEVE means to accept something as true, or false, without sufficient evidence.  Therefore belief is stupid by definition.  If I don’t know something I just accept the fact that I don’t know.

I don’t let people calling themselves “atheists” tell me what to think just because said “atheists” regard themselves as intelligent and logical.

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2012 04:00 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 189 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  193
Joined  2011-12-30
Austin Harper - 27 June 2012 02:58 PM

I’m sorry if you don’t like the definition, psikeyhackr, but the word atheist literally means “one who is without a god.” It comes from the Greek a- (without) + theos (a god) + -istes (agent noun suffix).

AH, I assume that your signature, in Latin, means: While reason will lead us, and be able to accomplish many things well. [I find Google Translate, is very helpful, eh?]

AH, by your comment, you imply, I assume, that you are one who is without a god—one with dimensions, agreed?

BTW, I am happy to add, so am I. However, I work, daily, on being a rational human (thinking) and humane being—that is, one who chooses not to be without that which is Good, Opportune, & Desirable—that is, one who lovingly agree to live in keeping with the principle of the Golden Rule.

When I am asked: Are you a Christian? I usually respond: Do not ask me; ask my neighbours, and especially those with whom I come in contact, day by day.

ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVIL AND SIN—In my opinion, OK?
Generally speaking, here is what I understand is the definition of what it means to be a Christian—the kind in which I was raised, and with which I now agree: A Christian (literally meaning, one anointed to be, and do, good) is one who recognises that we are always open to the temptation to being a hypocrite, a sinner—that is, one who knows what is wrong and chooses, consciously, to do it.

There is a saying: All sin is evil, but all evil (like a pure accident) is not, necessarily, a SIN—the deliberate, and conscious, doing of that which one knows is evil.

However, here is my intention: I intend to do all the good I can. Will you agree to help me live this kind of life?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2012 04:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 190 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  25
Joined  2012-06-04
psikeyhackr - 27 June 2012 03:50 PM

I came up with my own definition of BELIEVE since so many dictionaries are irrational on the subject.

To BELIEVE means to accept something as true, or false, without sufficient evidence.  Therefore belief is stupid by definition.  If I don’t know something I just accept the fact that I don’t know.

I don’t let people calling themselves “atheists” tell me what to think just because said “atheists” regard themselves as intelligent and logical.

psik

Right.  Belief and Knowledge are different categories—they do not lie on the same continuum.  When it comes to belief about God’s existence, I am an atheist.  I have an absence of belief.  When it comes to certain knowledge of God’s existence, I am, like most atheists, agnostic—logically I can’t be 100% certain God doesn’t exist (although I regard it as unlikely and live my life as if God doesn’t exist).  Not believing that God exists is not the same thing as believing God doesn’t exist. 

Like I said, if you have an absence of belief in God, then you believe the same thing as an atheist.  But how you self-identify is up to you.  Logic aside, there are certainly good social reasons to identify as an “agnostic” rather than an “atheist”, simply because of the media image of atheists.

 Signature 

Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum (Ambrose Bierce)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2012 04:26 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 191 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5976
Joined  2009-02-26

psikeyhackr,
To BELIEVE means to accept something as true, or false, without sufficient evidence.  Therefore belief is stupid by definition.  If I don’t know something I just accept the fact that I don’t know.

Which makes you an agnostic, no?

I don’t let people calling themselves “atheists” tell me what to think just because said “atheists” regard themselves as intelligent and logical

Do you mean to imply that atheists are telling you NOT to believe in a god or deity? Seems to me you are making the semantic mistake of confusion, a) “non-belief in a god/deity” with, b) “belief that there is no god/deity.
a) is a statement of rejection of the existence as a truth, pending proof, i.e “I don’t believe there is a god/deity”
b) is a statement of rejection of the existence as a truth, without sufficient evidence, i.e. “There is no god/deity”.

To me therein lies a large philosophical difference. Personally, I shall never use b) to try and convince anyone. That way I shall never be in a position of carrying “burden of proof”.

[ Edited: 27 June 2012 04:49 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 June 2012 09:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 192 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2291
Joined  2007-07-05
Write4U - 27 June 2012 04:26 PM

psikeyhackr,
To BELIEVE means to accept something as true, or false, without sufficient evidence.  Therefore belief is stupid by definition.  If I don’t know something I just accept the fact that I don’t know.

Which makes you an agnostic, no?

That is what I said.

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 June 2012 04:51 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 193 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1191
Joined  2011-08-01
Apxeo - 27 June 2012 04:12 PM

When it comes to certain knowledge of God’s existence, I am, like most atheists, agnostic—logically I can’t be 100% certain God doesn’t exist (although I regard it as unlikely and live my life as if God doesn’t exist).

I have come to believe that that phrase “...live my life as if God doesn’t exist” is the best criterion of all to determine one’s true belief or non-belief. That really is the key, isn’t it? And it can be broadened beyond just belief in deities. By this measure, there are people who claim to be skeptics but who go around avoiding black cats and reading their horoscopes—they are not skeptics but believers. And there are people who claim to be religious believers but who live their lives pretty much as they please. To me, these people are in reality at least agnostic toward god. Thomas Paine called such people infidels:

Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe.—Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

So I say, if you want to know what someone really believes, ignore what they say and watch what they do. All this hand-wringing in the secular community about whether one is a classical atheist, new atheist, agnostic, non-deist, spiritual but not religious, etc. is just not helpful. The important question is how do you live?

 Signature 

Free in Kentucky
—Humanist
“I am patient with stupidity but not with those who are proud of it.”—Edith Sitwell

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2012 11:13 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 194 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4142
Joined  2008-08-14
Apxeo - 27 June 2012 03:37 PM

Well, that’s a wiki entry that needs some work.  smirk

Regardless, if you self-identify as an “agnostic”, chances are you believe the same thing as most atheists. Agnosticism doesn’t lie between theism and atheism.  Gnosticism/agnosticism refers to the presence or absence of certain knowledge (about something).  Theism/atheism refers to presence or absence of belief in a theistic deity.  It’s a question of logical drivel rather than semantic drivel.

I must disagree here. Agnosticism lies firmly within theistic or deistic boundaries.
Taken within the context of the implications of what a god could be, or what it means,  agnosticism is not ruling these possibilities out.  In other words, an agnostic is not ruling out what an atheist can easily reason to be a contrived, human creation that has evolved socially and psychologically with humankind.
Compared with avowed theists/deists this is almost the same exact thing.  After all, every catholic, hindu, or moslem(etc…) has the same exact ‘doubts”.  A theist questions the existence of god.  Compared with an agnostic, this is analogous to the glass being half-empty or half-full.
On the other hand, nobody is agnostic about Santa Clause.  Why would anyone be agnostic about god?
-Because they were imprinted with the idea.  It is universally accepted.  And it helps explain/or soothe unknowns/fears.
This brief summary rebuts your paragraph succesfully in my opinion.  It isn’t a light matter to be foisted into the compartment of semantics.  It is logic and reason as you have said, but your logic is backwards.  I believe I have briefly shown this herein.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2012 03:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 195 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5976
Joined  2009-02-26
Thevillageatheist - 16 February 2012 08:10 AM

It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropomorphic concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near to those of Spinoza: admiration for the beauty of and belief in the logical simplicity of the order and harmony which we can grasp humbly and only imperfectly. I believe that we have to content ourselves with our imperfect knowledge and understanding and treat values and moral obligations as a purely human problem — the most important of all human problems.

Linds, I enjoy reading your posts and it sounds as if you will be an interesting contributor here. Welcome! Piggybacking on Doug’s posted site, I found the quote by Enistein that I ran into a few years back. After careful study from the historical perspective (just learning about philosophy from the moderators and fellow posters) I came to share this view of religion. I guess I could call myself a fellow Spinozan. Looking forward to your insights.

Cap’t Jack

I agree and one must admit that at a certain level the distinction between physical and non-physical becomes blurred. At that point we begin to deal with “information” and then the only question remains if this is a form of consciousness or just a mathematical interaction.
Then still, there is the question if the exercise of “free will” allows us to influence this natural interaction.
Personally, I have adopted the position of an implacable mathematical function without sentience (as we commonly accept the term), but also that man (and certain other animals) with a unique combination of intelligence and/or manual dexterity is able to purposefully influence events.
However I certainly reject the notion of a supernatural being which is seperate from the cosmological wholeness, but which still can be accessed through ritual and prayer.

[ Edited: 29 June 2012 08:35 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
   
13 of 22
13