Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Atheism

Re: Atheism
December 29, 2008, 12:53:55 AM
Being an atheist simply means you don't believe deities exist.

I agree with most of your post, but consider this: there is such a thing as conceptual infinity. The number of conceivable mind-things is an infinite set; all you have to do is consider the infinite increments between the real numbers 1 and 2 to realize this. So, then, we could say we are:

adragonists
abigfootists
acircularsquareists

And you can get even more absurd than that if you want. 'God,' as a symbolic summation of a bunch of reality-notions, is only slightly more comprehensible than 'circular squares,' and seems to be indicative of a flaw pertaining to how most people use language. Sure, you can claim that the preponderance of religious people in the world might make it worth professing one's particular lack of belief in deities (whatever those even are in the first place) while never even referencing one's conceptually infinite set of lack of belief, but there are structural flaws in society which -- in being fundamental and all-encompassing -- should take precedence over arguing about the damage a sub-paradigm has caused.

Re: Atheism
December 29, 2008, 01:17:57 AM
Being an atheist simply means you don't believe deities exist.

I agree with most of your post, but consider this: there is such a thing as conceptual infinity. The number of conceivable mind-things is an infinite set; all you have to do is consider the infinite increments between the real numbers 1 and 2 to realize this. So, then, we could say we are:

adragonists
abigfootists
acircularsquareists

And you can get even more absurd than that if you want. 'God,' as a symbolic summation of a bunch of reality-notions, is only slightly more comprehensible than 'circular squares,' and seems to be indicative of a flaw pertaining to how most people use language. Sure, you can claim that the preponderance of religious people in the world might make it worth professing one's particular lack of belief in deities (whatever those even are in the first place) while never even referencing one's conceptually infinite set of lack of belief, but there are structural flaws in society which -- in being fundamental and all-encompassing -- should take precedence over arguing about the damage a sub-paradigm has caused.

Yeah, this is why I said the word atheist shouldn't even exist.

Also, I forgot to add:

Quote from: fractal
people truly don't believe in fairy tales in terms of senile daddy smiling on them from the cloudy cloud and speaking about heaven

This is the most intellectually dishonest statement I've ever seen.  Have you ever looked at the studies done on what religious people actually believe?  Do you think if I went to the Muslim world that most of them would tell me that they don't really believe Allah exists?

Cigno

Re: Atheism
December 29, 2008, 02:30:12 AM
Pheeew...

I better choose non-theist religiosity (Zen, Tao... Eckhart!).

And yes, I mostly disagree with atheism because we surrender to economics as the sole factor of social explanation.

Re: Atheism
December 29, 2008, 02:35:14 AM
Atheism is completely retarded. If religions were like a sports team, and a religious person said to an "atheist" what team do you support? The Atheist would basically say "I don't support any team". And then they treat their lack of a team like an actual team, and dress in shirts of that teams colours and stand at the side of a field every Sunday, cheering on their empty pitch. The idiots.

I like what this Fractal chap says, and Mr Nous too. Many people say that religion is an allegory of the real world, but that is just opinion. Fractal just pointed out that without the intermediary of religion, humans can't connect directly to the world. I think there is a lot of sense in saying something like that.

Also, it is clear that most of the world is atheistic as Nous pointed out. The Herd.

And you must believe what you know, otherwise you don't know it. Atheists' opinion that 'you can demonstrate certain specific things that are real regardless of whether the deluded individual believes them' is just garbage individualist blind faith. The hypocrites.
Most people in the world are certainly not atheistic, not in the slightest. The vast majority of people are religious and believe in a god. The herd needs crude, traditionalist beliefs because it makes them feel comfortable in what otherwise would be a very plain and natural world. They feel comfort in there being a grand leader who will reward them for life if they are part of his team; they feel comfort in being part of a group where others believe the exact same thing. They get an absolute "truth" about everything there is to be known, and this truth is unyielding to criticism. In other words, they are comfortable. That is what the herd seeks. Atheism gives absolutely none of that simple comfort.

Your simplistic metaphor comparing religions to sports teams is idiotic and I fail to see the connection, other than the fact that there are many "teams" of religions as there are teams in sports. Not a valid comparison at all.

And atheism has no dogma at all, nothing even close to what would qualify as a religion. All atheism is is a lack of belief in god, nothing more. A Buddhist can be an atheist if they do not believe in a god. There isn't one big pool of atheists with the same values, the same beliefs, etc. I would think this is something extremely obvious, yet so many misunderstand what atheism is. It is not even necessarily a belief in god, simply the absence of belief. Any rational person withholds belief until there is sufficient evidence. There is not sufficient evidence for a god, and thus I withhold my belief in god, making me an atheist.

Re: Atheism
December 29, 2008, 03:04:58 AM
Atheism is completely retarded. If religions were like a sports team, and a religious person said to an "atheist" what team do you support? The Atheist would basically say "I don't support any team". And then they treat their lack of a team like an actual team, and dress in shirts of that teams colours and stand at the side of a field every Sunday, cheering on their empty pitch. The idiots.

I like what this Fractal chap says, and Mr Nous too. Many people say that religion is an allegory of the real world, but that is just opinion. Fractal just pointed out that without the intermediary of religion, humans can't connect directly to the world. I think there is a lot of sense in saying something like that.

Also, it is clear that most of the world is atheistic as Nous pointed out. The Herd.

And you must believe what you know, otherwise you don't know it. Atheists' opinion that 'you can demonstrate certain specific things that are real regardless of whether the deluded individual believes them' is just garbage individualist blind faith. The hypocrites.
Most people in the world are certainly not atheistic, not in the slightest. The vast majority of people are religious and believe in a god. The herd needs crude, traditionalist beliefs because it makes them feel comfortable in what otherwise would be a very plain and natural world. They feel comfort in there being a grand leader who will reward them for life if they are part of his team; they feel comfort in being part of a group where others believe the exact same thing. They get an absolute "truth" about everything there is to be known, and this truth is unyielding to criticism. In other words, they are comfortable. That is what the herd seeks. Atheism gives absolutely none of that simple comfort.

Your simplistic metaphor comparing religions to sports teams is idiotic and I fail to see the connection, other than the fact that there are many "teams" of religions as there are teams in sports. Not a valid comparison at all.

And atheism has no dogma at all, nothing even close to what would qualify as a religion. All atheism is is a lack of belief in god, nothing more. A Buddhist can be an atheist if they do not believe in a god. There isn't one big pool of atheists with the same values, the same beliefs, etc. I would think this is something extremely obvious, yet so many misunderstand what atheism is. It is not even necessarily a belief in god, simply the absence of belief. Any rational person withholds belief until there is sufficient evidence. There is not sufficient evidence for a god, and thus I withhold my belief in god, making me an atheist.

Agreed on all counts.



Quote from: fractal
What does it matter if some of us are atheists and some not? We're here to discuss things abstract from individual struggle, not to blab about someone's tastes in pink socks.

It doesn't.  The thread starter stated he was a "well-devoted atheist" and I wanted to know what he meant by that.  Nothing more.

ken

Re: Atheism
December 29, 2008, 03:25:52 AM
^ the first intelligent post in this thread (AzureNight)

I am surprised that religion still exists, but I am probably too far out of 'the know' to know better.

There have been a few comments like

Atheism pushes people toward the 'rational' dogma like liberalism and science-ism, and both of these encourage our modern decadence, needless consumption, et cetera (i.e. "There's no god, I'm gonna do whatever the fuck I want! Bring on the motorized anal beads!!").

when an inexperienced person is exposed to the seeming variety of them[religions], he becomes confused and tries to run away to denial - and that's atheism.

hard-line atheism is akin to fatalism in that it provides no reason to do anything noble. it also gives full leniency to extreme individualism, since it can only support that view of life which sees all humans as inherently the same, at least when compared to other species. additionally, it seems to be an attempt to not only approach, but fully know, an objective truth in human minds, which can ultimately only see the world in subjective terms. what nous said probably indicates its biggest fault, though; it's merely another easy way out.

Personally I see agnosticism as slightly cowardly. Scientifically, we cant prove that God doesnt exist, and scientifically we cant prove that God does exist. It might be, therefore, more 'logical' to be a Christian so that if God does exist then you wont go to Hell, but logic and science denies the existance of any god and taking the middle ground is a weak decision.

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=402381


 http://bhascience.blogspot.com/2008/10/atheists-are-more-intelligent-but-does.html

Cigno

Re: Atheism
December 29, 2008, 03:52:23 AM
Ken: beware of that false dilemma.

If a remember well, atheism has been also used as a flag to move herds to achieve an utopic state. Please stop using atheism as a sign of freedom against religion.

Re: Atheism
December 29, 2008, 04:04:16 AM
man hold up, that's what I'm talking about. XD
so I see what you guys are saying to me. What if I combine my atheism and a mix of religions together in a trancendental way?
It reminds me of personal based gnosticism of some sorts... tell me what you think.

It's like God is the universe, the story of creation is actually how humans evolved both literally, physically, metaphorically, and symbollically,
and the rest....personal based.

Re: Atheism
December 29, 2008, 04:21:48 AM
As said ABSO in another thread (I think) :

Science as a method,
Religion as a methaphor.

My point of view is that if you can understand the underlying principle of the message without taking time to study and follow the metaphor, fine by me. But we shouldn't hold that most people can transcend the metaphor (i.e. being atheist).

I prefer herd hold together by tradition and religion than driven in all direction. Spirituality is important, no mather what god or no-god you pray.

Re: Atheism
December 29, 2008, 05:54:08 AM
man hold up, that's what I'm talking about. XD
so I see what you guys are saying to me. What if I combine my atheism and a mix of religions together in a trancendental way?
It reminds me of personal based gnosticism of some sorts... tell me what you think.

It's like God is the universe, the story of creation is actually how humans evolved both literally, physically, metaphorically, and symbollically,
and the rest....personal based.
Why does the universe have to be god? Do you think that is the wrong choice of words to describe the universe? Is the universe conscious of itself?

You are obviously not an atheist if there is any belief in god. Why not just save a step and remove god from the equation? The universe is the universe; it is simply all matter that exists. While matter can become conscious, I do not think the universe is conscious of itself as a whole. You need to think deeper into your beliefs as it appears you are confused about the definitions of the terms you are throwing around.

Re: Atheism
December 29, 2008, 06:24:06 AM
"Religion may be an excellent means of taming and training the perverse, obtuse and wicked biped race: but in the eyes of the friend of truth every fraud, however pious, is still a fraud." 

"Philalethes"  - in "On Religion: A Dialogue" by Schopenhauer.

Some here may enjoy this essay if you've never read it.   

Re: Atheism
December 31, 2008, 03:57:47 AM
I'm very confused why the staff at ANUS and CORRUPT bicker so much about this so called "problem" of atheism.....

Do they?

I think we all have a little anarchist in us, but anarchy doesn't work. Same with atheism.
ASBO

“Kurt Cobain was, ladies and gentlemen, a worthless shred of human debris.” - Rush Limbaugh

Re: Atheism
December 31, 2008, 05:14:25 AM
I'm very confused why the staff at ANUS and CORRUPT bicker so much about this so called "problem" of atheism.....

Do they?

I think we all have a little anarchist in us, but anarchy doesn't work. Same with atheism.
Atheism certainly does work, considering that it is logical to withhold belief until there is sufficient evidence. The extraordinary claim of a god existing does not have extraordinary evidence.

ken

Re: Atheism
December 31, 2008, 08:30:01 AM
I'm very confused why the staff at ANUS and CORRUPT bicker so much about this so called "problem" of atheism.....

Do they?

I think we all have a little anarchist in us, but anarchy doesn't work. Same with atheism.

Why? Explain in more detail.

Re: Atheism
December 31, 2008, 09:03:39 AM
Quote
Why does the universe have to be god? Do you think that is the wrong choice of words to describe the universe? Is the universe conscious of itself?

We are the universe and part of it, therefore in a metaphysical sense, one with the universe and co-creators. You sound like you are still associating the "God" of the bible with it.

Quote
You are obviously not an atheist if there is any belief in god. Why not just save a step and remove god from the equation? The universe is the universe; it is simply all matter that exists. While matter can become conscious, I do not think the universe is conscious of itself as a whole. You need to think deeper into your beliefs as it appears you are confused about the definitions of the terms you are throwing around.

I remember viewing a video posted here, it was an Averse Sefira interview. One of the members mentioned the universe as an ambivalent, ever moving force. It is chaotic, destructive and creative all at once.. it has no need to be conscious while it is moving and churning you are taking part in the creation, destruction and chaos on Earth itself. Henceforth in metaphysics and scientifically you could frame the Universe as some kind of "Godly" matter( C, N, H, O). We are of it.

The belief in -ism's I believe is what holds people back from seeing the big picture, there isn't a single religion to establish truth but many pick apart little satori's from.