Are you an Atheist/Believer?

[tartempion]

Only humans need a God....

[pxlgirl]

if you are an atheist, you are a believer too.

That is the typical misconception of atheism, many religious have. They project their mindset on others and think that "not believing" means simply rejecting of something that is actually existent (to them). Someone came up with an expression called "god glasses", which really hits the nail here. This is also why many refer atheists to "satanism", implying that as a symbol of rejection of their deity. They don't understand that the satan character is related to their deity and this indeed does require a belief. However, being an atheist simply means that gods (or devils) aren't existent in any shape or form as a part of the natural world. Yet some kind of a fantasy world can exist in people's minds and even have a psychological benefit, as long as they are recognized as a part of human imagination. To me, it is very useful to boost my creativity as a designer/artist. I like certain types of mythology combined with my own creations and they surely influence my art I do in my spare time, but I do know that the characters do not exist outside of my head or drawing paper.

[Naam]

Only humans need a God....

my dogs think i am God...

[canuckamuck]

I have trouble believing: I have trouble believing that the immensity of the universe came into being independently in nothingness. I have trouble believing there is nothing outside of time. I have trouble believing that order came out chaos, and when I say order I mean not only the galaxies, with complex orbital systems and planets, but matter itself organized into mutually beneficial particles which are mostly indescribable, but which cooperate together in predictable ways giving each other powers such as mass, gravity and charges. Which together can be combined to create entirely different elements which themselves can be combined over and over again, but the results can be predicted and are mathematical, and conform to laws.

And from these amazing accidental particles, we have gotten the Earth and the Earth particles cooperated to create all the necessary building blocks of life, instead of the much easier task of creating no life.

At some point the particles fantastically combined into amino acids. Which, although amazing, was nothing compared to the next act, which was to get multiple types of these amino acids (yes multiple types were necessary at the same time) to link up into long chains in the precise order to create proteins. Not only was this act as statistically impossible as matter coming from nothing. It was only a warm up to the next fantastic bit of cooperation.

The proteins somehow began organize themselves (fortunately the right proteins were all there that day) to become an organism. And if this is not enough to blow your mind up; you will never believe what came next. The organism was so impressed with being an organism that it decided to do it all over again and figured out, all on its own, how to make another one just like itself. It must have suddenly invented consciousness.

Fortunately the organism had the presence of mind that, when it created itself, it also made sure to write all of it down in a fantastically complicated code now called DNA. This ensured that the next organism didn't have to think so much and in fact left the future organisms the time to tinker with that code so they could have little mutations.

And even though as we observe on Earth today that genetic mutations are almost always detrimental to the organism. It seems that original organisms had fantastic luck or were much better at mutating. Because they mutated their way into becoming possibly 10’s of millions of new fantastically complex organisms (we will never know how many because we have lost quite a few). And all of these organisms, with perhaps the exception of man, seem to have a perfect and ordered place in this ecosystem - that includes plants; which I left out for sake of brevity, but that tale includes an equally fascinating story which somehow amazingly includes DNA too. I suppose there was some cooperation (perhaps a summit) between the plants and animals to ensure their DNA was compliant, because these days, plant and animal DNA can be combined – wow.

I find this whole chain of events very difficult to believe. But I think it is because I do not have the strong faith that most of you do.

Edited January 6, 2014 by canuckamuck

[pxlgirl]

canuckmuck (and others too, of course), you might want to read a book that is addressing what you just mentioned:

http://www.amazon.com/Universe-Nothing-There-Something-Rather/dp/1451624468

Lawrence Krauss is a theoretical physicist who gives a glimpse in the newest findings about our universe. The book is nicely written and you'll be able to understand it w/o juggling with equations and formulas

[manarak]

Being an atheist is not "not believing in God". It goes a step further than that in affirming the non-existence of God.

However, being an atheist simply means that gods (or devils) aren't existent in any shape or form as a part of the natural world.

This is exactly the point. Since we know only a very tiny part of the natural world, we cannot say for sure that some consciousness with god-like powers doesn't exist somewhere.

That's why being an atheist is also being a believer, because atheists believe in something that is unproven.

I don't define myself as an atheist.

I have never felt, seen, tasted or read anything proving the existence of a god (or of ghosts or whatever).

The same is true in the opposite: I have never come upon any proof that a god or god-like creatures don't exist.

Proving that anything doesn't exist in the universe is actually very very difficult.

Therefore I place the concept of "god" in a box labeled "unknown, unrelated & irrelevant", any questions about the existence of god are futile and a waste of time.

Except for acknowledging and analyzing the social phenomenon, god is simply something that doesn't matter to me, and I don't waste any thought about it.

YET atheists feel somehow the urge to deny the existence of god, which is proof that god matters to them as something that needs to be denied, rejected.

[canuckamuck]

canuckmuck (and others too, of course), you might want to read a book that is addressing what you just mentioned:

http://www.amazon.com/Universe-Nothing-There-Something-Rather/dp/1451624468

Lawrence Krauss is a theoretical physicist who gives a glimpse in the newest findings about our universe. The book is nicely written and you'll be able to understand it w/o juggling with equations and formulas

Considering that the time it will take for me to order that receive it and read it; I think this thread will be long dead. So would you do us a favor and tell us in your own words, how the author has solved some of these fantastic coincidences in the accidental creation of life?

[sirineou]

Only humans need a God....

my dogs think i am God...

How do you know what your dog thinks?

[tartempion]

Only humans need a God....

my dogs think i am God...

You gave him Descartes to read?

[sirineou]

Being an atheist is not "not believing in God". It goes a step further than that in affirming the non-existence of God.

However, being an atheist simply means that gods (or devils) aren't existent in any shape or form as a part of the natural world.

This is exactly the point. Since we know only a very tiny part of the natural world, we cannot say for sure that some consciousness with god-like powers doesn't exist somewhere.

That's why being an atheist is also being a believer, because atheists believe in something that is unproven.

I don't define myself as an atheist.

I have never felt, seen, tasted or read anything proving the existence of a god (or of ghosts or whatever).

The same is true in the opposite: I have never come upon any proof that a god or god-like creatures don't exist.

Proving that anything doesn't exist in the universe is actually very very difficult.

Therefore I place the concept of "god" in a box labeled "unknown, unrelated & irrelevant", any questions about the existence of god are futile and a waste of time.

Except for acknowledging and analyzing the social phenomenon, god is simply something that doesn't matter to me, and I don't waste any thought about it.

YET atheists feel somehow the urge to deny the existence of god, which is proof that god matters to them as something that needs to be denied, rejected.

"Being an atheist is not "not believing in God". It goes a step further than that in affirming the non-existence of God."

you can not affirm the now existence of anything, certainly not God, simply put

You cant prove a Negative,

The only way you can prove a negative is with in a limited domain, such as, there is no water in this glass.

The glass is a limited domain, and upon careful examination of the glass you can affirm with certainty that the glass is empty. But an infinite domain escapes your capacity for complete examination.

"That's why being an atheist is also being a believer, because atheists believe in something that is unproven."

Atheism is as much a belief, as abstinence is a sexual position

Edited January 6, 2014 by sirineou

[pxlgirl]

Considering that the time it will take for me to order that receive it and read it; I think this thread will be long dead. So would you do us a favor and tell us in your own words, how the author has solved some of these fantastic coincidences in the accidental creation of life?

fast forward to 12:42

[GuestHouse]

The argument against religion of 'we can give a scientific explanation (actually theory) which explains creation' misses the central message of religion, which is not how did we come to be or even why we came to be but rather - how can we live a better life?

Its this question 'How can we live a better life?' which challenges us all, we don't have to be religious to ask the question, nor do we have to be religious to look or find an answer.

But it is this question which is circumvented when getting distracted by one theory of creation versus other theories of creation.

[barrybankruad]

As I get older (and hopefully wiser) most of what was learnt in my informative student days has been assigned to a cloudy pot of memories. However one thing said to me by an alcohol-fuelled theology professor at a Christmas party has stuck in my mind and remains clear in detail to this day. In fact it changed my whole view of religion. Coming from a committed Christian family upbringing and being a very naïve first year student it affected me enough to seek him out on my return after the holiday break.

He had said during an open conversation to several students “I believe that all religions are a form of controlling people en-masse and the size of financial and material assets dictates how widespread that religion is.”

When I later confronted him on this and asked him if he was aware of what he had said and did he say it because it was some kind of weird Christmas rant, he replied “Listen I have a comfortable job here which provides for me and my family. I am expected to say nothing that rocks the boat and I am here to help students attain degrees by which I am judged. I hate my job as I no longer believe in what I am teaching but have no alternative than to continue. Sometimes I get so pissed off; I talk when I should not. A couple of years ago I was in an informal discussion with some senior government officials and they said to me that the bigger a religion was the more easily it is to control huge swathes of populations. By coercing the heads of religions to conform to the particular wishes of a government by usually massive financial contributions it was possible to implement policies that were not necessarily those of that country’s’ government and it worked to good effect when dealing with impoverished nations or financially challenged sectors of a country’s population. That degree of control supplemented by food and arms shipments usually achieved the desired result.”

I never forgot that conversation and through later experience I began to see this in a much clearer light. I tried to believe that there was a God who was all-seeing and looked after me, but events in my life brought total disbelief. It is now something that is impossible for me to take seriously as I can find absolutely no proven facts to any of it, excepting that many religions started at the same time that written languages became a common form of communication; that they were based upon the insecurities of how the human race came into being and provided an acceptable answer to a better life after death. Rule books (bibles) were created by man after so-called events and with words that most wished to hear coupled to threats of a living hell in death for non-conformists in order to attain control and inevitable rule by the majority.

Imagine with today’s’ technological advances how impossible it would be to create a new ‘God’ religion that could control if prior to it there had been no religion whatsoever and our history books stated that we had been created by test-tube.

The above is my experience only and I am not on a pedestal trying to convert. I believe in freedom of choice and respect the choice of others as long as it does not affect me. It takes all kinds to make a world and I am lucky to have found my inner peace without a religion. But if it needs one for you to attain yours, that is fine by me and none of my business. We can still be good friends.

My answer to the OP is that I am a 7.

That is so true - the part about religion being used to control people. The amazing part is that by influencing policies the various religions are able to wield control even over people who don't subscribe to any of those religions. For instance, abortion is illegal in most Buddhist, Catholic or Islamic countries. Drinking is prohibited in many Islamic countries.

I am all for freedom of choice, but it should be based on reciprocity. The sad part is that, being an atheist, I don't get that freedom. In many countries, we are not even given an opportunity to acknowledge the fact that we don't follow any religion - the official forms don't give us an option of saying no religion (Malaysia for instance; I am not sure about Thailand yet).

I am not a preacher - all I ask is for the same courtesy be accorded to me.

When I applied for my tabian ban (yellow book) some years ago, one of the questions asked me was 'what is your religion?' I replied that I didn't have one. This caused some confusion. the officials just couldn't believe that anyone didn't have a belief in a superior being or follow a particular philosophy. They even had a paper listing the various countries and the particular religions found in that country. In the end to save any more trouble I said out down Christian.

I am a 7 by the way.

[OmegaRacer]

Without going into too much details and philosophical nitpicking, I have a question for those posters who are convinced there is nothing outside of what they can perceive with their 5 senses.

If I gave you the tools to prove (to yourself) that there actually is something else, that we are all connected, that consciousness can survive the death of the body, that we are much more than what we think we are...... wouldn't you want to find out?

Like in the movie 'The Matrix'.....would you take the blue or the red pill?

If you say no: why not? Are you afraid you might lose something? Afraid to let go of

If you say yes: ...well...let's talk about it

[drx13]

Without going into too much details and philosophical nitpicking, I have a question for those posters who are convinced there is nothing outside of what they can perceive with their 5 senses.

If I gave you the tools to prove (to yourself) that there actually is something else, that we are all connected, that consciousness can survive the death of the body, that we are much more than what we think we are...... wouldn't you want to find out?

Like in the movie 'The Matrix'.....would you take the blue or the red pill?

If you say no: why not? Are you afraid you might lose something? Afraid to let go of

If you say yes: ...well...let's talk about it

Well I use REASON and like Russel's Flying Teapot would not waste my time pursuing such nonsense..so NO.

[drx13]

canuckmuck (and others too, of course), you might want to read a book that is addressing what you just mentioned:

http://www.amazon.com/Universe-Nothing-There-Something-Rather/dp/1451624468

Lawrence Krauss is a theoretical physicist who gives a glimpse in the newest findings about our universe. The book is nicely written and you'll be able to understand it w/o juggling with equations and formulas

I doubt if one percent of TV members read ANY books, let alone Philosophy..Yes I am an intellectual snob, to save you telling me.

[canman]

canuckmuck (and others too, of course), you might want to read a book that is addressing what you just mentioned:

http://www.amazon.com/Universe-Nothing-There-Something-Rather/dp/1451624468

Lawrence Krauss is a theoretical physicist who gives a glimpse in the newest findings about our universe. The book is nicely written and you'll be able to understand it w/o juggling with equations and formulas

Considering that the time it will take for me to order that receive it and read it; I think this thread will be long dead. So would you do us a favor and tell us in your own words, how the author has solved some of these fantastic coincidences in the accidental creation of life?

I've read a few books on the subject and the reasoning is usually along the lines of: There are so many forces, constants, partical interactions which had to be just so for our universe to come into existance that if they were not just so we would not be here to question it, so basicly you just need to accept it.

That sort of reasoning does not sit well with me.

[Dimpys Dad]

canuckmuck (and others too, of course), you might want to read a book that is addressing what you just mentioned:

http://www.amazon.com/Universe-Nothing-There-Something-Rather/dp/1451624468

Lawrence Krauss is a theoretical physicist who gives a glimpse in the newest findings about our universe. The book is nicely written and you'll be able to understand it w/o juggling with equations and formulas

I doubt if one percent of TV members read ANY books, let alone Philosophy..Yes I am an intellectual snob, to save you telling me.

You left out condescending. Many who post here can't have developed the views they express without reading and discussing. I may disagree with many here but acknowledge that their considered opinions are based on something other than their own personal thoughts.

This is one of the best threads in a while. All the posts (even those with only pithy comments) are informative, if only to give a glimpse of the personality.

Thanks to all.

[OmegaRacer]

Without going into too much details and philosophical nitpicking, I have a question for those posters who are convinced there is nothing outside of what they can perceive with their 5 senses.

If I gave you the tools to prove (to yourself) that there actually is something else, that we are all connected, that consciousness can survive the death of the body, that we are much more than what we think we are...... wouldn't you want to find out?

Like in the movie 'The Matrix'.....would you take the blue or the red pill?

If you say no: why not? Are you afraid you might lose something? Afraid to let go of

If you say yes: ...well...let's talk about it

Well I use REASON and like Russel's Flying Teapot would not waste my time pursuing such nonsense..so NO.

Sorry, but 'reason' doesn't really come into play here.

Reason would tell me to explore every option when it comes to something so fundamental and important like my own consciousness. Reason would tell me to find out by myself before calling something nonsense. Reason would tell me to not dismiss thousands of years of experience and millions of people as hogwash and deluded sheep.

It's like saying: brainwaves are an invention of some crazy scientists and even if they try to show me evidence and a way to find out by myself that they actually exist, I just won't listen and refute everything.

Close-mindedness and maybe a pinch of arrogance would tell me to look no further and ridicule those who do, and by doing so lose all credibility for the claim that there's no higher power.

[uptheos]

Only humans need a God....

my dogs think i am God...

You gave him Descartes to read?

Wasn't Rene Descartes the drunken fart "I drink therefore I am?

[seajae]

I am in the middle, I believe in him some times but do not believe in religion, it is all bullshit created to make people wealthy/powerful and is the cause of nearly all the wars in the world. Muislims hate christains and other muslim sects, catholics hate protestants and every other religion and then you have the nut job religions. Religions should be outlawed with people either allowed to believe in god or not, with no religious crap we would have a better world. Even so called buddhists are now full of it, promoting violence, sex, alcohol and wealth, they are all as bad as each other, god, yes or no should be all that is allowed.

[Neeranam]

I am continually amazed at the state some atheists get themselves worked up into over something that they think doesn't exist.

Some people talk of God with great conviction yet have probably never even glimpsed the reality of what they are talking about. I have glimpsed such a reality when I was pretty young - as a 15 year old kid taking magic mushrooms and LSD. When travelling in India for 6 months in my early 20s I had some experiences that proved to me the existence of a God.

[canuckamuck]

Considering that the time it will take for me to order that receive it and read it; I think this thread will be long dead. So would you do us a favor and tell us in your own words, how the author has solved some of these fantastic coincidences in the accidental creation of life?

fast forward to 12:42

Thanks for that, I did watch it, so I can comment at least on this lecture.

I can say that he does not address many of the things I mentioned in post 305 as pertaining to the beginning of life. He talks primarily on why there is something instead of nothing. And also quite a lot on the beautiful balance of the universe, which is slowly being discovered. I agree with him that we live in a special time.

His beliefs are predictable but well presented.

He believes that physical laws are coincidental to whatever universe you find yourself in. He believes that there was a vast energy in the nothingness before the big bang, so not really nothing.

He believes that universe is heading to nothingness, but only a nothingness in the fact that it will no longer be observable. so once again not really nothing.

He has a real problem with nothing actually being nothing, I assume because it doesn't fit any of his theories.

I also might add that he is clearly angry with religious belief and in one his answers in the Q&A session he said he found multi-faith services after a tragedy to be offensive. So most likely his theories are agenda driven and not purely scientific.

Edited January 6, 2014 by canuckamuck

[Guest]

Thanks for that, I did watch it, so I can comment at least on this lecture.

I can say that he does not address many of the things I mentioned in post 305 as pertaining to the beginning of life. He talks primarily on why there is something instead of nothing. And also quite a lot on the beautiful balance of the universe, which is slowly being discovered. I agree with him that we live in a special time.

His beliefs are predictable but well presented.

He believes that physical laws are coincidental to whatever universe you find yourself in. He believes that there was a vast energy in the nothingness before the big bang, so not really nothing.

He believes that universe is heading to nothingness, but only a nothingness in the fact that it will no longer be observable. so once again not really nothing.

He has a real problem with nothing actually being nothing, I assume because it doesn't fit any of his theories.

I also might add that he is clearly angry with religious belief and in one his answers in the Q&A session he said he found multi-faith services after a tragedy to be offensive. So most likely his theories are agenda driven and not purely scientific.

I have not watched the youtube clip yet, will do at some point.

I think that at the moment we are living in a special time. Then again, people before us, and after us will think the same.

Currently there is no answers beyond the Big Band, so it can be a culmination point where physics, philosophy and religion are at the moment together.

In the future, when we get more information, the future people will look at the ways we think now, the same way we look at the people who believed that the Earth revolves around the Sun. It was a good theory at the time, but the collective information over the generations has proven it to be wrong. This does not mean that it was all wrong. Moon is still revolving around the Earth, even if our rock is revolving around the Sun.

When you do a reverse engineering to the beginning of our known time, you are actually looking at one strain of events and compare that what we are able to see know. These events could have been very different. At some strain, there would not be life at all and on another we would have developed much earlier and our IQ would be million times larger, compared to us know. If we would be in that position, we would be able to see and know much more, compared to what we are able to see on our bubble at the moment. We would maybe be able to see far beyond the big bang.

Our history is naturally very Earth centric and our science projects this as well. We like to think that the life begun here. Why do we need to restrict our thought in that? Just a moment ago, we have got a proof that many of the stars have planets. This partly will affect the ways we think. We are no longer a very special place, but just one of the many special places.

I don't have the capacity of understanding what is beyond the t=0, but I hope future generations will have. After that they will have new unanswered questions, which will bugger their minds

[pxlgirl]

you see, the thing how life began can be tracked down throughout many disciplines, let it be physics, biology or chemistry or even maths. The use of the scientific method has been around for like what... 200 years? So there's still more to discover and solve. The point is though, scientists (and most atheists) are totally ok with not knowing everything. That is what thrives their curiosity to find out. Once you think you reached the point where you think you know it all, you stop learning. Nature and the whole universe are mind burgling enough. Think about what they have discovered over just a few decades. How would anyone imagine about the existence of parallel universes, just to give one example...

[thailiketoo]

I was reading this thread and thought boy, there a lot of dumb people posting here. So I thought up 4 questions that are common knowledge in Poughkeepsie, New York and I thought I'd ask them of you all.

What flag is flying over Parliament on the Canadian two dollar bill?

How long is a goldfish's memory span?

What is the longest English word typed with the left hand?

Does an Australian crocodile lick it's lips after eating an American?

Edited January 6, 2014 by thailiketoo

[canuckamuck]

1. The flag on the old two dollar bill was the old Canadian flag with a union jack in one corner

2. There is an urban myth about a goldfishes memory being only seconds long, but this is not true, they can be trained to remember things like where does the food appear and what route to get there. Mythbusters have a show on it.

3. Don't know, is it weathered?

4.Do crocodiles have lips?

[willyumiii]

Some have stated that they can not believe that atheist get so worked up about something they do not believe exists.

What reasonable people get so worked up about is that something that does not exist has cause so much pain, suffering, suppression and death over the past 2000 years!

Remember the Inquisition?

Remember the Crusades?

A Pope who sent Missionaries to the "New World" with instructions to " kill whoever you can not convert"

and the list goes on and on.

Reasonable people ( atheist if you like) get worked up by the tragic things caused by superstitious people who believe in what does not exist.

[canuckamuck]

you see, the thing how life began can be tracked down throughout many disciplines, let it be physics, biology or chemistry or even maths. The use of the scientific method has been around for like what... 200 years? So there's still more to discover and solve. The point is though, scientists (and most atheists) are totally ok with not knowing everything. That is what thrives their curiosity to find out. Once you think you reached the point where you think you know it all, you stop learning. Nature and the whole universe are mind burgling enough. Think about what they have discovered over just a few decades. How would anyone imagine about the existence of parallel universes, just to give one example...

I see what you are saying, but it all depends on the angle you approach it from. To me the fact that all disciplines of scientific study find common ground and are intersupporting is evidence of truth and majesty. Perhaps to you it is evidence that man is magnificent for discovering the order of things. So might a squirrel be admired by other squirrels for discovering how to break into a bird feeder. Who knows how small our knowledge really is on the overall scale of things?

[willyumiii]

I was reading this thread and thought boy, there a lot of dumb people posting here. So I thought up 4 questions that are common knowledge in Poughkeepsie, New York and I thought I'd ask them of you all.

What flag is flying over Parliament on the Canadian two dollar bill?

How long is a goldfish's memory span?

What is the longest English word typed with the left hand?

Does an Australian crocodile lick it's lips after eating an American?

<deleted>?

At least the "dumb posters" here can stay on topic.

The above are things you think intelligent people know or care about?

Well, maybe in New York it's considered intelligent.

Should a drunk New Yorker post on TV?

Another no brainer question for your list.