I need something eternal, something bigger than me, my problems - even the universe - to give me a purpose. Otherwise, why NOT be a self-centered prick, chasing only your own best interest? Why help people? Why do anything?
Ahhh, but as someone who has never believed, I have no problem helping people, being nice, and not caring that there's likely no point to anything.
I have faith because without it I have nothing else.
But knowing that is your sole reason for having it belies its actual truth. You're basically saying "I choose to believe something I know is not true because it makes me better in some way."
I need something eternal, something bigger than me, my problems - even the universe - to give me a purpose. Otherwise, why NOT be a self-centered prick, chasing only your own best interest? Why help people? Why do anything?
Here's a more important question you should ask yourself.
You are basically saying that if indeed there were no higher purpose that you would be a self-centered prick who did whatever you wanted, no matter how heinous.
Yet, here we are. We are all completely atheists who do not acknowledge any higher purpose. The universe is cold, dark, and vast. Yet, even without this higher purpose, here we are. We're not jerks. Well, we're not HUGE jerks, just a little jerky. But we certainty aren't killing and raping or whatever. We don't need any false beliefs to keep us in check. In fact, there is nothing to keep in check. We don't have any desire or reason to do any of those things. If anything, we want to prevent them, even with no higher purpose.
Why do you need to believe a lie to keep yourself from becoming teh evil? What kind of person are you really? If your belief in god disappears are you really going to rape and kill and whatnot? If so, you are one scary motherfucker I do not want to be around.
This is the whole argument about free will I remember having. We were talking about causality and not having freewill, about a deterministic universe. I remember saying that lots of people would give up doing anything if it was proven they don't have the ability to mathematically change the path of events within the universe. However, once I thought about the idea and it occurred to me that the experience of existing as we humans see it would be just the same. Why would we suddenly shut down? We perceive that what we do makes changes, so we should keep doing so. We perceive that the avoidance of "badness" makes existence better. God or no God, Free will or no Free will, the sensation I experience of being alive in all its glory does not change. What if there is no meaning? Why can't we just be?
Alright, so Rym first. As I said in my post, if you can be cool with there being no point to anything then you're a better man than I and I'm quite serious about that. That's a big scary thing to me. It just is. I can forget about it sometimes, but at least at this point in my life I wouldn't be able to just accept it. It would be terminally depressing. Second, I disagree with your wording. The proper statement is "I choose to believe something I can not know to be true because it makes me better in some way" because that's more accurate. I can not know factually whether God exists while I live. I can believe but I can neither prove nor disprove it scientifically. Besides, who has the burden of proof on God? Does God exist until proven non-existent or does God not exist until proven existent? As to my objectivity, think about love for a second because I've heard you talk about this subject exactly. Love is an incredibly hormonally/biologically based phenomena. You can induce it with the proper chemical stimuli. Yet would you claim that because of that you no are no longer in love with your significant other? The same applies here. I can be aware of my psychological reasons for faith and understand how the brain is wired for it (or not) yet still accept it.
Scott - First off, I'm referring to me. You're a standup guy and by no means did I intend to insist that atheists are bad. The full spectrum of humanity exists within all beliefs or lack thereof. See the earlier note on "Christians do not have the corner on Good." This is one of the first things that resonated with my debt of cognitive dissonance. As to who I would be without faith? I have in fact thought about that and having never tried, I suppose I can not speak with certainty. I would be different, probably less happy. My comments on such have more to do with the aforementioned lack of purpose, not moral or ethical constraints, a sufficient number of which are provided by secular civilization. Perhaps I should have been clearer on that point but hopefully this addition does so.
With faith, I am WindUpBird, and my purpose is to serve God by doing good to all and being a humanist. Without faith, I am WindUpBird, and my purpose is to do good to all and be a humanist always, because seeing others enriched by my actions brings me deep fulfillment.
My belief in, or lack thereof, of a deity does not change my purpose, which should always be to work towards the betterment of humanity in whatever I do.
With faith, I am WindUpBird, and my purpose is to serve God by doing good to all and being a humanist. Without faith, I am WindUpBird, and my purpose is to do good to all and be a humanist always, because seeing others enriched by my actions brings me deep fulfillment.
My belief in, or lack thereof, of a deity does not change my purpose, which should always be to work towards the betterment of humanity in whatever I do.
I don't think I could word my own feelings any better than this. Though I would add that I'm going to try to build as good a life as possible for myself while doing so.
Given the last three posts then, I believe the point is made. Many people can go on with their lives just fine without faith. More power to you. For some of us, that doesn't work so well. As much as I like to debate, there's really nothing else to contend about it. I am merely here to present myself as an example of someone for whom a knowledge of science and history does not preclude faith (and why) as a contribution to the discussion, nothing more.
Besides, who has the burden of proof on Godthe Flying Spaghetti Monster? Does Godthe Flying Spaghetti Monster exist until proven non-existent or does Godthe Flying Spaghetti Monster not exist until proven existent?
Given the last three posts then, I believe the point is made. Many people can go on with their lives just fine without faith. More power to you. For some of us, that doesn't work so well. As much as I like to debate, there's really nothing else to contend about it. I am merely here to present myself as an example of someone for whom a knowledge of science and history does not preclude faith (and why) as a contribution to the discussion, nothing more.
Sure, some people think they need faith to live their lives just fine, but that doesn't mean they're right about it.
@lackofcheese LOL I'm not sure whether that was simply humor or if you're challenging me but I will not change my stance. Maybe there is a Flying Spaghetti Monster out there and we just haven't run into it yet. The universe is a big fricking place.
@lackofcheese LOL I'm not sure whether that was simply humor or if you're challenging me but I will not change my stance. Maybe there is a Flying Spaghetti Monster out there and we just haven't run into it yet. The universe is a big fricking place.
There's a chance of grass actually being magenta and not green. Doesn't mean I'm not a moron if I believe grass is magenta.
@lackofcheese LOL I'm not sure whether that was simply humor or if you're challenging me but I will not change my stance. Maybe there is a Flying Spaghetti Monster out there and we just haven't run into it yet. The universe is a big fricking place.
The point is that the burden of proof for God should be the same as the burden of proof for the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
As for this whole "purposelessness" question, I am the one who determines the meaning of my life. I don't see a problem with that.
Hey Ryven, I understand where you are coming from. I think you are okay, even though we are different. You are an intelligent deist, and I know other people like that. I understand that it is a hopeful feeling, even if it is not 100% rational.
I agree entirely with this dude.
You couch your faith in way more negative terms, and you believe in non-believers going to hell, original sin, and stuff. I can't get behind that. It is too mean. You go "we suck and are bad" and he goes "I am hopeful and have purpose because of the possibility of a great being!"
Again, Heisenberg was a Lutheran. He was not a moron.
Until very recently, being an atheist in public was dangerous and ill-advised. There was also less general access to information, especially about religion, unless you dedicated yourself to directly researching it.
Now, I can not help but run across, say, the Documentary Hypothesis on the clearly secular origin of the christian bible, or the a-historicity of the events described in it over time. The social stigma and danger of being an atheist is also greatly reduced.
There's also the difference between religion with a positive belief, and deistic "religion" that is essentially atheism coupled with wishful thinking. Deists are effectively atheists, and deist-like beliefs are useless in any practical sense.
Scott, indirectly calling the religious idiots doesn't exactly do your side a big favor. Again, Heisenberg was a Lutheran. He was not a moron.
Neil Adams. Is his Batman art awesome? Yes. Does he believe the earth is hollow? Yes. Someone can be a moron and still be really smart or talented simultaneously.
Scott, you're twisting a definition of "moron" to suit your purposes. I think "fool" would work, though.
Eh, fool is still too broad in some cases. To be effective, you need to tell someone what it is that you find irrational and then illustrate why that is. That's the proper way to convince people. Calling people loons, idiots, fools, or morons based on beliefs they hold just makes you look patronizing and irritating, and that just drives people to be more obstinate in their resistance to your logic.
I think people who believe in intelligent design and backwards idiots, but telling them that is not the first step in reeducating them.
In Scott's defense, while I wouldn't use the term "moron" in these cases, the fact remains that there is just as much evidence for the existence of any specific christian deity as there is of Neil Adams' hollow Earth theory.
There's also the difference between religion with a positive belief, and deistic "religion" that is essentially atheism coupled with wishful thinking. Deists are effectively atheists, and deist-like beliefs are useless in any practical sense.
That's my dad, Ryven (maybe?), and, a teeny bit me. I can totally get how thinking of a great goodness, a consciousness filling the universe is comforting, just like believing that somewhere out there is magic. Same with the spirit going on after death. However, that is not really religion, it has not laws, and it doesn't the affect the way deist people behave very much.
In Scott's defense, while I wouldn't use the term "moron" in these cases, the fact remains that there is just as much evidence for the existence of any specific christian deity as there is of Neil Adams' hollow Earth theory.
True. See my edit.
There's also the difference between religion with a positive belief, and deistic "religion" that is essentially atheism coupled with wishful thinking. Deists are effectively atheists, and deist-like beliefs are useless in any practical sense.
That's my dad, Ryven (maybe?), and, a teeny bit me. I can totally get how thinking of a great goodness, a consciousness filling the universe is comforting, just like believing that somewhere out there is magic. Same with the spirit going on after death. However, that is not really religion, it has not laws, and it doesn't the affect the way deist people behave very much.
Same here. I'm on the fence right now. Can one be a deistic apatheist? That's probably how I'd categorize myself.
Can one be a deistic apatheist? That's probably how I'd categorize myself.
That makes you an atheist who speculates on the unknowable and is optimistic about the spirit without having any actual specific beliefs or making decisions based upon said speculation. Nothing wrong with that.
In fact, we have another word for that, that you might want to use to describe yourself. Philosopher.
Well, if you were to actually believe that the spirit goes on after death, that ought to have a very large impact on your actions.
You can hope that it will, but you don't count on it. I am fine with this being all there is.
That makes you an atheist who speculates on the unknowable and is optimistic about the spirit without having any actual specific beliefs or making decisions based upon said speculation. Nothing wrong with that.
Can one be a deistic apatheist? That's probably how I'd categorize myself.
That makes you an atheist who speculates on the unknowable and is optimistic about the spirit without having any actual specific beliefs or making decisions based upon said speculation. Nothing wrong with that.
In fact, we have another word for that, that you might want to use to describe yourself.Philosopher.
I chuckled. But fine, I'm cool with that.
The idea of explaining this to my extended family is still laughable, though.
You couch your faith in way more negative terms, and you believe in non-believers going to hell, original sin, and stuff. I can't get behind that. It is too mean.
Umm...I hate the terminology "non-believers going to hell." Here's how I look at it, and it is this simple. If you believe that there is an afterlife, and you believe some singular deity controls who goes in and doesn't, and if you believe this deity can "forgive you" for your wrongdoings, and if you ask and want this, then you get it. It doesn't have to specifically be you calling this deity Jesus, or whatnot. It's a matter of forgiveness. Also, you don't have to get behind what I say. I may present it in different terms, but a lot of my arguments are very similar, just less happy "Oh, I try to be nice for this reason, and you try to be nice for this reason," and more "I don't like the non-theist explanations as to why people are nice, so I choose to believe in some form of theology." You don't have to "get behind me," you just have to say "Well, he's not hurting anyone, or trying to stop anyone from gaining their rights, so I can ignore what I disagree with."
If you believe that there is an afterlife, and you believe some singular deity controls who goes in and doesn't, and if you believe this deity can "forgive you" for your wrongdoings, and if you ask and want this, then you get it. It doesn't have to specifically be you calling this deity Jesus, or whatnot. It's a matter of forgiveness.
If, upon dying, I somehow found myself before some deity demanding I be sorry for the way I lived my life, I would not ask for "forgiveness." Why? What's the point?
If any of the the christian gods existed as they are described, I would be their enemy.
Comments
You are basically saying that if indeed there were no higher purpose that you would be a self-centered prick who did whatever you wanted, no matter how heinous.
Yet, here we are. We are all completely atheists who do not acknowledge any higher purpose. The universe is cold, dark, and vast. Yet, even without this higher purpose, here we are. We're not jerks. Well, we're not HUGE jerks, just a little jerky. But we certainty aren't killing and raping or whatever. We don't need any false beliefs to keep us in check. In fact, there is nothing to keep in check. We don't have any desire or reason to do any of those things. If anything, we want to prevent them, even with no higher purpose.
Why do you need to believe a lie to keep yourself from becoming teh evil? What kind of person are you really? If your belief in god disappears are you really going to rape and kill and whatnot? If so, you are one scary motherfucker I do not want to be around.
We were talking about causality and not having freewill, about a deterministic universe. I remember saying that lots of people would give up doing anything if it was proven they don't have the ability to mathematically change the path of events within the universe. However, once I thought about the idea and it occurred to me that the experience of existing as we humans see it would be just the same. Why would we suddenly shut down? We perceive that what we do makes changes, so we should keep doing so. We perceive that the avoidance of "badness" makes existence better.
God or no God, Free will or no Free will, the sensation I experience of being alive in all its glory does not change. What if there is no meaning? Why can't we just be?
Alright, so Rym first. As I said in my post, if you can be cool with there being no point to anything then you're a better man than I and I'm quite serious about that. That's a big scary thing to me. It just is. I can forget about it sometimes, but at least at this point in my life I wouldn't be able to just accept it. It would be terminally depressing. Second, I disagree with your wording. The proper statement is "I choose to believe something I can not know to be true because it makes me better in some way" because that's more accurate. I can not know factually whether God exists while I live. I can believe but I can neither prove nor disprove it scientifically. Besides, who has the burden of proof on God? Does God exist until proven non-existent or does God not exist until proven existent? As to my objectivity, think about love for a second because I've heard you talk about this subject exactly. Love is an incredibly hormonally/biologically based phenomena. You can induce it with the proper chemical stimuli. Yet would you claim that because of that you no are no longer in love with your significant other? The same applies here. I can be aware of my psychological reasons for faith and understand how the brain is wired for it (or not) yet still accept it.
Scott - First off, I'm referring to me. You're a standup guy and by no means did I intend to insist that atheists are bad. The full spectrum of humanity exists within all beliefs or lack thereof. See the earlier note on "Christians do not have the corner on Good." This is one of the first things that resonated with my debt of cognitive dissonance. As to who I would be without faith? I have in fact thought about that and having never tried, I suppose I can not speak with certainty. I would be different, probably less happy. My comments on such have more to do with the aforementioned lack of purpose, not moral or ethical constraints, a sufficient number of which are provided by secular civilization. Perhaps I should have been clearer on that point but hopefully this addition does so.
Without faith, I am WindUpBird, and my purpose is to do good to all and be a humanist always, because seeing others enriched by my actions brings me deep fulfillment.
My belief in, or lack thereof, of a deity does not change my purpose, which should always be to work towards the betterment of humanity in whatever I do.
As for this whole "purposelessness" question, I am the one who determines the meaning of my life. I don't see a problem with that.
You go "we suck and are bad" and he goes "I am hopeful and have purpose because of the possibility of a great being!"
Now, I can not help but run across, say, the Documentary Hypothesis on the clearly secular origin of the christian bible, or the a-historicity of the events described in it over time. The social stigma and danger of being an atheist is also greatly reduced.
There's also the difference between religion with a positive belief, and deistic "religion" that is essentially atheism coupled with wishful thinking. Deists are effectively atheists, and deist-like beliefs are useless in any practical sense.
I think people who believe in intelligent design and backwards idiots, but telling them that is not the first step in reeducating them.
In fact, we have another word for that, that you might want to use to describe yourself. Philosopher.
The idea of explaining this to my extended family is still laughable, though.
Also, you don't have to get behind what I say. I may present it in different terms, but a lot of my arguments are very similar, just less happy "Oh, I try to be nice for this reason, and you try to be nice for this reason," and more "I don't like the non-theist explanations as to why people are nice, so I choose to believe in some form of theology." You don't have to "get behind me," you just have to say "Well, he's not hurting anyone, or trying to stop anyone from gaining their rights, so I can ignore what I disagree with."
If any of the the christian gods existed as they are described, I would be their enemy.
I reject the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, and his forgiveness for my sins. According to your beliefs, will I go to hell when I die? Do I deserve that?