Serious The Atheism/Agnosticism thread

[Calm_Mind_Latias]

I suppose it depends on how you view the world and how a religious belief fits into that view.

For me, I don't really see how a religious person wouldn't be essentially an existential nihilist, if they really took seriously the notion that all the despair, pain and suffering in the world is part of God's plan. All these horrible things happen, often committed by religious zealots trying to spread their views, and I have no idea why a loving God would have all that be part of his plan. Whatever kind of plan this is, it seems to defy all logic and all basic moral intuition. So I have to consider these things, knowing that I have no idea of why God would plan this, thus also knowing that nothing I do is even reasonably likely to be in line with that plan. I suppose all this is supposed to prove the notion that we're powerless, pathetic, worthless people.

I don't know what your views on this matter are. I don't even know if your views are even practically distinguishable from atheism. However, for someone like me, who took the whole "there is a loving God out there with an unknowable plan" thing very seriously, letting go of that notion is liberating.

I will admit that am still more influenced intellectually by empiricist philosophy, my general understanding of science, Marxist-Leninist political philosophy, and utilitarian ethics than by Scripture readings, the Catechism, and homilies. I actually get more intellectual satisfaction rebutting apologetic arguments that attempt to advance a positive case for the existence of God (and rebutting is different than arguing that God doesn't exist) than affirming the existence of God.

Essentially, what you are stating is another variation of the classic problem of evil argument concerning the incongruity between natural and human affairs to God's plan. Your words should not be easily dismissed as it is reasonable for one to interpret the universe is rather indifferent to human concerns. One can infer from this indifference the absence of God overlooking his creation.

What precipitated my conversion was a strong impression of God's love and immanence given though one of his beloved instruments -- a experience so strong that it eclipsed any intellectual doubt and the apparent absurdity of reconciling the suffering of the world with the existence of a benevolent God.

I really do not try to convert anyone because I am cognizant of the impotence of most apologetic arguments and that I am aware that my particular experiences would unlikely to resonate to more skeptical minded people.

My Catholic peers often regard me as naturally cynical, pessimistic, aloof, and melancholic although occasionally feelings of hope, peace, and joy do shine though.

 

[mien]

What precipitated my conversion was a strong impression of God's love and immanence given though one of his beloved instruments -- a experience so strong that it eclipsed any intellectual doubt and the apparent absurdity of reconciling the suffering of the world with the existence of a benevolent God.

Would you consider to describe this strong experience in more detail?

 

[YHVH]

I've been born into a Jehovah's Witness family but have recently begun starting to question the validity of my religion. What are some essential atheism-related books I can read to expand my worldview, besides Dawkins?

 

[mien]

Rather then reading books from hardcore atheists like Hitchens and Dawkins you may want to consider reading "losing faith in faith" by Dan Barker. A biography of a preacher becomming atheist

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

This is powerful

 

[lamerthanlame]

I believe in a higher entity called God but I really don't believe in Religion. Religion limit peoples belief.

 

[capefeather]

I feel like making people feel old

 

[BenTheDemon]

<garbage>


Regardless of what religion you follow, most of them have one central thesis; there is something special about [most particularly human] life. From what I've gathered, this is a false premise. People in general want to believe that they are special and not just a byproduct of organic chemistry, so they may come up with the idea of what is commonly known as a "soul", which from what believers have told me is a magical force that encompasses our thoughts, feelings, etc. No scientist has ever been able to find a soul, but they have been able to prove that all those functions take place in our brain, which is made of the same elements and compounds as the rest of the world. We have been able to study the brain quite fully. There is even a branch of science dedicated to brain activity known as psychology. Within human psychology, we possess logic and feeling. Because of evolution, our brains are programmed to consider feeling before logic. If a bear is chasing us, we don't think; we fear. We get the hell out of there without a second thought. That is the good end of the deal. Here's the bad end of the deal, and I'll use myself as an example. I have a phobia of elevators. I always ponder the idea of getting stuck, although statistically and logically, I know that I'm much more likely to die in a car accident, yet I don't fear cars. This is an example of how the brain considers feeling before logic. To tie this to atheism, evolution is about survival. One of the key parts of survival is avoiding death, so we fear death. We also want to feel like more than just organic beings, as I stated earlier. This is where religion comes from. It's a byproduct of the fear of death. Because, as I've shown, the brain considers feeling before logic, a large amount of people accept the idea of God before questioning it.

However, logic still exists within the brain, and we all have different logic, so I will give you mine:
We are organic beings. All life is based primarily on the bonding or carbon atoms. There is very little separating us from other life forms. Consciousness is not a human exclusive, nor are morals, nor feelings. (If you would like an explanation for why morals are not a human exclusive, just ask.) So I ask, where does God come in? If he created us, what created him? If he doesn't need a creator, then why is the natural universe held to a different standard? If God just popped into existence, then why do many religions claim that there is only one God? Why aren't other gods popping out of nowhere? Why is there no sign of God anywhere? Why should we trust books from thousands of years ago claiming to be written by God? Why wouldn't you believe me if I told everyone that I'm God's messenger? And lastly, if God has given us free will, and is still all-knowing, then is it really free will?

As always, my philosophies are always open to criticism, and if you are able to present a point to me that surpasses these arguments, I'm always open to learn.
Until then, I will be an Atheist.

 

[billymills]

ok back on track maybe?

 

[Super Mario Bro]

I thought I would contribute to this thread by sharing one of the most elegant and decisive thrashings by Christopher Hitchens:

In other news, Edwin Kagin just passed away. RIP.

 

[Ununhexium]

I am technically Christian but I choose to believe what I want. I do help out at my church every few weeks and do enjoy readings but unlike some I choose to be generally acceptant. You're Sikh? Cool. You're Muslim? Cool. I just prefer to believe what I want to with a sort of general "guidelines"

Didn't follow, I am Christian but I believe that everybody is entitled to be different and have religious differences.

 

[KM]

my opinion towards religion is pretty strange, so I thought i'd share it.

I don't ascribe to any organized religion, but I do believe in god. Maybe. I'm not sure.

I pray every night, but the way I justify it to myself is that for me, it's as much of a therapeutic exercise as it is a religious one. I'm able to keep my head clear, keep my priorities straight, and be constantly mindful of people who are less fortunate than I am, and if the religious construct I'm using to discuss those ideas with is a false one, I can't say I really care.

This sort of extends to my belief on death and afterlife and all that shnazz too. Quite honestly, I have no fucking clue what happens after death. None of us do, not even the people who claim to have died and come back, or whatever. I have a number of theories on the subject; that consciousness has the power to distort time such that the last real moment of your life is extended into infinity (e.g. an expanded life-flashing-before-your-eyes type of deal), that if humans ever figure out a way to obtain consciousness from DNA and restore life/indefinitely prolong it, you would essentially be reincarnated as yourself the moment you die because your consciousness is re-introduced at that point in time, or just that heaven is a personal construct, like reality, and the brain has the power to create it. There's also a part of me that believes that there's absolutely nothing after death, but like most death-fearing humans I usually try and stray away from that thought, lol.

tl;dr I think religion has the power to be good on a personal level, but I would also classify myself as more of an agnostic than anything else. At the same time, I think it's important to not resign yourself to a doom-oriented concept of oblivion and spend your whole life wallowing in existential depression. Even if all of my crackpot theories about death are nothing more than vain grasping hopes to prolong consciousness, they do make my time as a mortal on earth a bit more bearable.

lol that last sentence sounded so angsty i can't even

 

[Jorgen]

I wouldn't say a lack of belief in an afterlife is necessarily doom, gloom, and depression. I frankly don't see why life beyond death needs to motivate my actions, there's plenty enough stimulation worth experiencing in this life for its own sake.

You know, when I was turning the religion issue over in my own head, one thing I found myself clinging to was the importance of a "spiritual" aspect to existence. This wasn't helped by the prevalence of dualist thinking. This kinda reflects itself in schools, where "working on your brain" in a passive state, sitting down and studying, is starkly contrasted with "working on your body" in after-school activities. This made the notion of a third dimension to a well-balanced life, spirituality, weirdly salient (rule of threes and all that). Those distinctions are mostly rubbish, though, as dualism is pretty handily shattered pretty much anywhere you look in neuroscience and physiology (dopamine and Parkinson's disease, Phinneas Gage, correlations between exercise and cognitive performance, etc. etc.). So there's no reason to suggest that a spiritual dimension, which, unlike human personality and internal states, doesn't even have a clear set of manifestations, would be a vital, distinct aspect of being human.

The reason I'm off on this tangent about dualism and shit is because I think I'm seeing a little bit of that kind of thinking in Kitten Milk (or maybe I'm just projecting). Doesn't agree with organized religion because it's too dogmatic, but seems to feel the need to believe in something because, well, it's important for its own sake. The problem is that when you feel compelled for some unsubstantiated reason to hold beliefs about the existence and nature of deities and an afterlife, it doesn't foster an appropriate skeptical approach to claims in general, which could lead you to ascribe to weird things like alternative medicine, conspiracy theories, or the supernatural.

TL;DR: Rejecting dogma because "who knows dude" but still feeling like you need to hold weird beliefs about the unobserved world turns you into this guy:

 

[KM]

I wouldn't say a lack of belief in an afterlife is necessarily doom, gloom, and depression. I frankly don't see why life beyond death needs to motivate my actions, there's plenty enough stimulation worth experiencing in this life for its own sake.

You know, when I was turning the religion issue over in my own head, one thing I found myself clinging to was the importance of a "spiritual" aspect to existence. This wasn't helped by the prevalence of dualist thinking. This kinda reflects itself in schools, where "working on your brain" in a passive state, sitting down and studying, is starkly contrasted with "working on your body" in after-school activities. This made the notion of a third dimension to a well-balanced life, spirituality, weirdly salient (rule of threes and all that). Those distinctions are mostly rubbish, though, as dualism is pretty handily shattered pretty much anywhere you look in neuroscience and physiology (dopamine and Parkinson's disease, Phinneas Gage, correlations between exercise and cognitive performance, etc. etc.). So there's no reason to suggest that a spiritual dimension, which, unlike human personality and internal states, doesn't even have a clear set of manifestations, would be a vital, distinct aspect of being human.

The reason I'm off on this tangent about dualism and shit is because I think I'm seeing a little bit of that kind of thinking in Kitten Milk (or maybe I'm just projecting). Doesn't agree with organized religion because it's too dogmatic, but seems to feel the need to believe in something because, well, it's important for its own sake. The problem is that when you feel compelled for some unsubstantiated reason to hold beliefs about the existence and nature of deities and an afterlife, it doesn't foster an appropriate skeptical approach to claims in general, which could lead you to ascribe to weird things like alternative medicine, conspiracy theories, or the supernatural.

TL;DR: Rejecting dogma because "who knows dude" but still feeling like you need to hold weird beliefs about the unobserved world turns you into this guy:

After I made this post, I actually thought about just this, so thanks for responding.

I guess the way I should word it isn't that I'm clinging on to unsubstantiated beliefs about an afterlife, but rather that I'm willing to entertain my natural tendency to explore these ideas. Imo as much as we like to call ourselves/strive to be creatures of reason, it's perfectly natural for humans to be somewhat irrational at times, and while I certainly would never base real-life decisions off my possible belief in an afterlife, I also don't feel as though it's healthy to close yourself off to any possible musings about what happens after death.

At the end of the day, I see accepting the non-existence of any form of consciousness after death as almost as easy of a way out as blindly accepting the existence of eternity; as little as we know about the existence of an afterlife, we also have the same lack of knowledge about the non-existence of the afterlife, given that it presumably springs from some form of "soul" or your consciousness transcending your mortal body, and that's something that we really can't understand. I'm not meaning to sit on a New-Agey high horse and preach about how humans can't comprehend the concept of eternity, and that we like to fit everything into nice neat little boxes with beginnings and ends, but I'm just trying to point out that the existence or lack thereof of an eternity are equally dubious to me, given that there's no proof for either. If there was ever conclusive scientific proof one way or the other, I'd obviously ascribe to that theory and hold it as the dominating one, but with a lack of evidence either way I'd prefer to keep my harmless musings.

tl;dr I don't see the afterlife as the same thing as evolution or whatever. There's a lack of conclusive proof on either side, and so it seems equally as silly to commit yourself to any side.

 

[000MobianAngel000]

I am not an atheist/agnostics (nor do I have anything against it). And I am not part of an organized religion either (more on my profile info). I can relate with the OP very well. I usually stay in the closet for my spiritual beliefs due to the fact that most people find it as crazy and many people are against what I believe, spiritually, including my mother. Even people who I met who had similar beliefs as mine still find me bizarre.

 

[Present Evidence]

I believe in a higher entity called God but I really don't believe in Religion. Religion limit peoples belief.

I think this is kind of a silly post. Not everyone follows the religion they follow to a T. i.e Catholics who eat meat on Fridays, Jews who do not bathe daily, Christians (some branches are okay with the following) who are okay with Gay Marriage and actively advocate it, etc. I would also say many people find power in their faith such as Mother Theresa, MLK, etc. Religion is only "bad" when it causes people to act unjustly, and harm each other for no good reason.

 

[KM]

I think this is kind of a silly post. Not everyone follows the religion they follow to a T. i.e Catholics who eat meat on Fridays, Jews who do not bathe daily, Christians (some branches are okay with the following) who are okay with Gay Marriage and actively advocate it, etc. I would also say many people find power in their faith such as Mother Theresa, MLK, etc. Religion is only "bad" when it causes people to act unjustly, and harm each other for no good reason.

Agreed. Ascribing to a certain religion doesn't mean that you have to follow all of its supposed tenets. In fact, I think you'd find the number of people who actually follow every single law written in their religion is incredibly small, if not simply zero. Religion is interpreted by each person who follows it, and often people use it as an excuse to do wrong, or as a justification to discriminate or spread hatred. There are many people who claim to be Christian, yet merely have a belief in a higher power of some sort and enjoy the construct of church as a social gathering - and there's nothing wrong with that. Being a member of any group doesn't mean you have to let your membership define you, and it's no different for religion.

 

[Shiv]

I grew up in a fairly religious family. My mother was probably the driving force behind it and while she was religious, it wasn't really overbearing or anything like that. Over time, she's become more spiritual than religious herself.

Over the last few years, I began to identify myself as first, agnostic and then as an atheist. I've never really had an issue with telling people that's who I am as well, I've always felt that religious people find enough moments to shove their specific religion in your face. The least I can do is honestly tell them that I don't buy it. Being a longtime fan of George Carlin, it's generally easy to raise a simple point or two which will atleast stop them from trying to force their religion down my throat. I do respect all religions though - just as long as they remain a personal belief and not something you need to force everyone else to subscribe to as well.

My personal philosophy is essentially "to do good for the sake of doing good - not because god said so". Anybody (from any religion) I've talked to has agreed that if I stick by that, I'd still make it to heaven (according to their faith). That conversation generally ends after that. When it comes to the afterlife, I feel like most people want to believe in something beyond death - because nothingness is a scary thought for them, just as death is. For me, I take death as the sole truth in our lives - it's the only thing we know will definitely happen. For that reason, I don't really care about death. When I say that, I don't mean to say I have a death wish but rather, is just an understanding and acceptance of death. If the afterlife exists, great, I'll probably do well there. If it doesn't, great, I'd have enjoyed my time while living.

That said, I am a spiritual person (in my own way). I find my spirituality to be in martial arts (rather than the usual medium of meditation and so on). It helps calm me, makes me "be in the present" and helps train your brain to always form rational though. In fact, I've had deep discussions on how Jiu-Jitsu provides the same functions that deep meditation does.

Recently, I came across a concept called Omnism. Essentially a belief in all religions. Basically, believing in a higher power without subscribing to any specific religion. I've recently begun finding it interesting. While I don't believe in God or an afterlife, I do think there could be a connection between all living beings - which one could refer to as a higher power. I don't think this higher power has any conscious thought or if it does, it definitely does not give a shit but rather, it's just... there. The simplest way I can put it is the realization that you are one very small cog in one extremely large and complex machine.

 

[Minwu]

Shiv -- Omnism seems to hold principles similar to Deism? Namely the main idea of spirituality while rejecting organized religion. There's a lot of established independent/skeptic principles on belief if you look around.


I find the ontological school of philosophy the most compelling on God's existence and kind of frame my agnosticism on that + empiricism I guess? "God is no imaginable or measurable goodness and I'd be arrogant to deny what I can't even begin to imagine."

 

[Shiv]

Shiv -- Omnism seems to hold principles similar to Deism? Namely the main idea of spirituality while rejecting organized religion. There's a lot of established independent/skeptic principles on belief if you look around.


I find the ontological school of philosophy the most compelling on God's existence and kind of frame my agnosticism on that + empiricism I guess? "God is no imaginable or measurable goodness and I'd be arrogant to deny what I can't even begin to imagine."

Yup, something along those lines. Spirituality can turn into belief in god though, dependent on a personal views. My personal view is a belief in a connection amongst people & other living things. This could be looked at as an abstract concept or as something more real and in front of us even today.

There's an interesting concept I heard about some time back and I like it. It basically says that technology around us is a part of human evolution. It refuses to define human beings as simply the bodies we inhabit but rather technological items that are present on us at all times as well. Think about it for a second. If I told you that you could just think and talk to anybody anywhere in the world within seconds or that you could say a magic word and have someone appear in front of you and talk to them - these sound like wild magical ideas present in a fantasy novel.

Now, when you consider our phones which allow us to talk to anyone or software like Skype or Hangouts or Facetime which allows us to see the person we're talking to, they do the same function. These devices are as much a part of us as any other part of our body. They are an extension of our being. When you look at it that way, the "connection amongst people & other living beings" can simply be looked upon at the wide network that connects us all.

Regardless, I find this pretty interesting. Some of the stuff Joe Rogan talks about fits in to these, brilliant stuff to watch if you're of this bent of mind.

 

[Jorgen]

There's a lot wrong with the vague spiritual claim that all living beings are connected. Doesn't specify which beings are included, doesn't specify what the nature of that connection is. You can say that it's all just a mystery but totally there, but then you're not really saying anything, it's all vaguely spiritual fluff.

As for the state induced by meditation and martial arts, I don't really see why those need to be attributed to the existence of something supernatural. They're different states of consciousness, you can induce one of those pretty easy by hitting the bottle.

Angry curmudgenliness about metaphysical fluff aside, this notion of "omnism" sounds a little like Bahá'í, a faith notable for acceptance of all (monotheistic) religions. I found it interesting not just for the peace and love aspect, but also because, within the context of its tenets, it actually tries to deal with the ridiculousness of a bunch of different faiths claiming to be the actual correct description of the supernatural world. It's like a meta-religion.

 

[Shiv]

It's vaguely spiritual stuff for some, but not for everyone. It's just the notion that you're all part of a far larger machine. There's no science to prove it obviously but there are interesting observations - like how the structure of an atom looks exactly like the planets rotating around the sun. It's amazing to see the exact same structure followed at such different scales.

On the subject of meditation and martial arts - I never associated them with the existence of anything supernatural. I said "I find my spirituality to be in..." For me, spirituality and the supernatural are not related at all. Spirituality is about understanding oneself and one's surroundings and attempting to improve the self in any way you desire (not necessarily the way society would want you to improve). It's just self-actualization. As I said, it helps calm me, "be in the moment" and other such functions. There are no supernatural all seeing, all powerful beings involved.

 

[Jorgen]

Fair enough, I just see the word "spiritual" and assume one is talking about the transcendent, and then ironically get caught in a fit of holy rage!

To be a smart-ass though, atoms don't look like that, and the Bohr atom is out of style. It's all about electron density distributions because of quantum mechanics and the resultant uncertainty principle, and the resultant orbitals look more like disjointed lobes than elliptical planetary orbitals.

 

[Shiv]

I know that Jorgen. It's still smaller entities (electrons ; moon ; planets) moving around a larger entity (nucleus ; planets ; sun).

A little bit can vary, it's just an interesting thought, that is all.

No sweat on the fit of holy rage, I'm the same way to a degree :)

 

[Blazade]

Shiv

They're not really similar at all though. In fact, you'd really call the electrons the 'larger' entity because their position amplitude function covers a larger area of space than the nucleus. They don't even 'move around' really, either. All they really have is what's called an angular momentum quantum number, which we really only call as such because it shares some vague similarities to rotation, but not in the way you'd classically think.