Do atheists believe in magnetism?

[It Aint Necessarily So]

A common sentiment from atheists is that they won’t believe in things that can’t be shown. We cannot see it, we can’t touch it. In the case of electromagnetic devices it is not always there. Yet one can observe its effects being inline with a given theory. So is it believed in?

I would rewrite your first sentence as, "An invariant sentiment from skeptics and critical thinkers is that they wont believe any claim absent demonstration of sufficient supporting evidence."

Semantic quibble: I believe that electromagnetism exists, but I don't believe in it. I reserve the phrase believe in for faith-based beliefs, not sufficiently evidenced beliefs. This may illustrate the difference between believing and believing in, although he isn't using that language. I would have written that first sentence, "Truth doesn't need to be believed in":

"Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up must come down, down. down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it." -Dan Barker

When set conditions are met an electromagnet exerts an invisible power to impact life as we know it. This is widely accepted, but God communicating or helping man is not???

Electromagnetism is posited to be the force that pulls compass needles, allows balloons to stick to the wall, and makes the night sky light up with bolts of lightning. It took the genius of Maxwell to realize that electricity, magnetism, and light were all manifestations of a single force. Nothing else accounts for any of this unless we want to invoke spirits, and adding spirits to the math and science does nothing for the science's explanatory or predictive power. This is the fundamental difference between something like the electromagnetic force and gods. We need the former to account for observation, but not the latter. Think about it: a science of the force electromagnetism with no gods, a religion of electromagnetism that postulates unseen agents with no science or math, and both combined - a physical theory with a deity thrown in. It should be apparent what's different between scientific beliefs and faith-based beliefs

What I find odd is the often hostile attitude towards things people believe while accepting many things that we can’t see, hear etc.

What I find odd is couching that in the language of an emotion, hostility. What you are observing is people who have a different standard for belief than the theist, people who reject faith for themselves. Ask yourself why you chose that word, hostile. Nobody here has been hostile to you. They've been like me - unemotional.

What justifies calling rejection of an idea hostility for you? I have a tentative answer - an educated guess - but I'll wait to see yours.

Such a statement re atheists means that the existence of God, or gods, is defined.

I have a definition for gods - supernatural, sentient agents capable of building universes. If you ask me, an agnostic atheist, if I believe such a thing exists, my answer would be no, because I don't have a reason to believe that absent some finding much better explained by a supernatural intelligent designer than a naturalistic process. The critical thinker builds his world view the same way science does. His narrative evolves as new discoveries not adequately explained by the existing paradigm appear.

Falsify evolution, and I will be forced to believe that deceptive intelligent designers exist or existed to account for there being so much evidence for evolution, and yet the theory is incorrect, but not before. Even then, I would have no need to add supernaturalism into my new paradigm, which also can be explained naturalistically as the work of powerful race of aliens that arose through abiogenesis and biological evolution.

You therefore mean: you don't know what you don't believe in, but you don't believe in whatever-it-is

That description fits you. You don't know what you DO believe in. You can't describe it clearly. You don't know where it is or what it is. But you are correct: I don't believe whatever-it-is that YOU believe if it involves the supernatural.

 

[ChristineM]

So now I need educating now... Thank you for your thoughtful input into my educational status. I guess people care in different ways, but sadly, they can't always express that care in a positive manner.

You want me to provide "falsifiable evidence?" Didn't you mean, 'un-falsifiable evidence?' I'll presume meant un-falsifiable evidence. That little 'un-' makes all the difference. There's oodles of falsifiable stuff around, not least from the scientific community - Missing Links everywhere, but oops, it was falsifiable. I'll stop there, since there's lists and lists of falsified stuff from the scientific community, so called. And yet, perhaps you're offering money for un-falsifiable evidence. I can guess the price of such evidence, and my guess is that it would be huge. But who'd pay? Would you? I doubt it. And, if I provided you with said evidence, would you believe your eyes, or your heart, or your mind - if you even knew the nature of your mind, or your heart and eyes. You do not know, and the sciences do not know, but currently it's all guesswork; jab it, poke it, cut it.

And where to start with evidence, when even basic ghosts, as yet, are considered magic woo, or similar. And why should I anyway? Besides possible cash, are you offering me a trophy? I mean, do you know that deeply religious people like myself have little or no interest in possessions, so unlike yourself, perhaps - tempting me with anything you have to offer is pointless, even if I have oodles of evidence. Evidence that you seem to crave, or not. But, maybe I have it all wrong and you did mean you want 'falsifiable evidence.'

You read what i wrote, sorry you don't understand it.

Falsifiable, are you talking about the falsifiable evidence that was falsified by science and thus showed the cons and lies? And thus science advances.

No i am not offering money no point, you ain't got any anyway but you simply must argue because you have nothing else but waffle.

Yes, you have it all wrong.

 

[Qwin]

That description fits you. You don't know what you DO believe in. You can't describe it clearly. You don't know where it is or what it is. But you are correct: I don't believe whatever-it-is that YOU believe if it involves the supernatural.

Hey? But I know what I believe, well most of the time.

 

[Qwin]

You read what i wrote, sorry you don't understand it.

Falsifiable, are you talking about the falsifiable evidence that was falsified by science and thus showed the cons and lies? And thus science advances.

No i am not offering money no point, you ain't got any anyway but you simply must argue because you have nothing else but waffle.

Yes, you have it all wrong.

A fine debate, sooo scientific. You say: I "have it all wrong." Lol. I'd agree with you entirely, but then we'd both be wrong.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There are a lot of approaches suggested in various belief systems.

sometimes something simple like mediation, prayer or reading sacred texts and observing how you feel.

Good thing for you that I don't put much stock in that sort of thing. "How I feel" in those sorts of situations suggests that there are no gods.

 

[ChristineM]

A fine debate, sooo scientific. You say: I "have it all wrong." Lol. I'd agree with you entirely, but then we'd both be wrong.

Actually you said you have it all wrong, i am just agreeing with you.

 

[stvdv]

But it can be difficult and confusing to even attempt to talk about those matters with any clarity. All the more when no care is taken to specify what is meant by "god" and "god experience".

True. And IMO there is no need to talk about them, unless others ask maybe, because it's all about personal experiences.

And there is no prior certainty that @Policy 's point won't stand (I think that it does stand): whatever other people call god experiences may very well be fully known by atheists, and we just don't find justification to call them divine in any way, shape or form.

In my case I know that he did not have my experiences, as they are personal and unique (hence I replied the way I did)

When you talk about more general experiences that can apply to others also, then of course it might be true what he said, after all we all belong to the human race, with similar working heart, brain etc

 

[Subduction Zone]

So now I need educating now... Thank you for your thoughtful input into my educational status. I guess people care in different ways, but sadly, they can't always express that care in a positive manner.

You want me to provide "falsifiable evidence?" Didn't you mean, 'un-falsifiable evidence?' I'll presume meant un-falsifiable evidence. That little 'un-' makes all the difference. There's oodles of falsifiable stuff around, not least from the scientific community - Missing Links everywhere, but oops, it was falsifiable. I'll stop there, since there's lists and lists of falsified stuff from the scientific community, so called. And yet, perhaps you're offering money for un-falsifiable evidence. I can guess the price of such evidence, and my guess is that it would be huge. But who'd pay? Would you? I doubt it. And, if I provided you with said evidence, would you believe your eyes, or your heart, or your mind - if you even knew the nature of your mind, or your heart and eyes. You do not know, and the sciences do not know, but currently it's all guesswork; jab it, poke it, cut it.

And where to start with evidence, when even basic ghosts, as yet, are considered magic woo, or similar. And why should I anyway? Besides possible cash, are you offering me a trophy? I mean, do you know that deeply religious people like myself have little or no interest in possessions, so unlike yourself, perhaps - tempting me with anything you have to offer is pointless, even if I have oodles of evidence. Evidence that you seem to crave, or not. But, maybe I have it all wrong and you did mean you want 'falsifiable evidence.'

No, she meant "falsifiable evidence". If it is not falsifiable it is irrational.

And yes, one or two "missing links" (that alone is a rather ignorant phrase) have been shown to be wrong. The vast majority are still solidly there with no sign of going anywhere.. It appears that you may be a science denier too. You should relax, knowing that the Bible stories of Genesis are fables and allegory does not refute God. It only refutes a the stoop and fetch it God of creationists. Most Christians accept the fact the life arose thorough the process of evolution.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

whatever other people call god experiences may very well be fully known by atheists, and we just don't find justification to call them divine

That's my assumption. People claiming to experience God are misinterpreting their experience. I have first-hand experience. Here's a comment I posted on RF recently:

"Theists can know nothing about gods not knowable to skeptics. They use the same devices, the same senses and the same human brain. They have no unique mental faculties. So, I know the limits of their knowledge even if they don't. I had the same experiences, and eventually realized that they were not of a deity. How? My conversion to Christianity happened while I was in the Army. I wandered into the congregation of a very gifted and charismatic pastor who had all of us in a euphoric state with every service, which I experienced as the presence of the Holy Spirit. Upon discharge, I returned home and tried to find a new congregation. I visited about a half dozen of them in my first few years home, and they were all lifeless. I understood what that meant. I had misunderstood the initial experience. There was no Spirit behind that first church experience, just a skillful preacher."​

"falsifiable evidence"

For me, falsifiable refers to statements, not evidence. Falsifiable means that if the statement is wrong, there are imaginable discoveries that can show that to be the case. Evidence can falsify a statement, but itself can't be falsified because objects and processes are neither true nor false. They are just evident to the senses (hence the name evidence), and the problem is to determine what they signify, what other things are true because this evidence is evident.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

A magnet, as shown above, is modeled as having both a North and South Pole. Ironically, science has never seen or isolated a magnetic monopole. This means magnets are modeled using two imaginary monopoles. In essence, this is like saying, if two unicorns are combined they equal one horse; 2 imaginary things make one real thing.

Those warnings about being around magnetics if you have a pacemakers, those are put up here and there because magnetics are most definitely not imaginary.
And are you seriously saying it's imaginary after a post a picture of the existence of this?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So, if magnetism can be believed through its effect, can God also be believed though His effect?

You can't show god like you can magnetics. That image I posted demonstrates that magnetics are there. And this will work each and every time.
With god this doesn't happen and the believers must resort to nonsense such as no true Scot fallacies.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

He who doesn't love doesn't know God, for God is love.
1 John 4:8

Again hogwash I say. Plenty who don't love know god while many who don't have a god are more loving than those with.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So, if magnetism can be believed through its effect, can God also be believed though His effect?

According to the Bible, God is love, and that love comes visible in actions of those who are God's people.

He who doesn't love doesn't know God, for God is love.
1 John 4:8

Out of curiosity: do you sincerely think that this is a good argument that ought to convince an atheist?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What is more fundamental than the math, are the conceptual considerations, that you use that are then modeled with math. The math does not care which way you go; different theories, since it is faithful horse, willing to pull whatever is placed in the cart, even two imaginary magnetic monopoles equals a full magnet.

And yet math is how we prove things. This is something science does not even do.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That's my assumption. People claiming to experience God are misinterpreting their experience. I have first-hand experience. Here's a comment I posted on RF recently:

"Theists can know nothing about gods not knowable to skeptics. They use the same devices, the same senses and the same human brain. They have no unique mental faculties. So, I know the limits of their knowledge even if they don't. I had the same experiences, and eventually realized that they were not of a deity. How? My conversion to Christianity happened while I was in the Army. I wandered into the congregation of a very gifted and charismatic pastor who had all of us in a euphoric state with every service, which I experienced as the presence of the Holy Spirit. Upon discharge, I returned home and tried to find a new congregation. I visited about a half dozen of them in my first few years home, and they were all lifeless. I understood what that meant. I had misunderstood the initial experience. There was no Spirit behind that first church experience, just a skillful preacher."

Reminds me of this quote from Thomas Paine, and (partially) why I find finding fault in all of religion based on the flaws of Abrahamic faiths problematic.

Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself than this thing called Christianity. Too absurd for belief, too impossible to convince, and too inconsistent for practice, it renders the heart torpid or produces only atheists or fanatics.

 

[PearlSeeker]

That's my assumption. People claiming to experience God are misinterpreting their experience. I have first-hand experience. Here's a comment I posted on RF recently:

"Theists can know nothing about gods not knowable to skeptics. They use the same devices, the same senses and the same human brain. They have no unique mental faculties. So, I know the limits of their knowledge even if they don't. I had the same experiences, and eventually realized that they were not of a deity. How? My conversion to Christianity happened while I was in the Army. I wandered into the congregation of a very gifted and charismatic pastor who had all of us in a euphoric state with every service, which I experienced as the presence of the Holy Spirit. Upon discharge, I returned home and tried to find a new congregation. I visited about a half dozen of them in my first few years home, and they were all lifeless. I understood what that meant. I had misunderstood the initial experience. There was no Spirit behind that first church experience, just a skillful preacher."

Something like this?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

A common sentiment from atheists is that they won’t believe in things that can’t be shown.

We cannot see it, we can’t touch it. In the case of electromagnetic devices it is not always there. Yet one can observe its effects being inline with a given theory.

So is it believed in?

I'm not an atheist, but I have questions.

Do you think that electromagnetic phenomena are not demonstrable?

What do you think electromagnetic means?

What do you mean by believe?

What is not always there in electromagnetic devices?

Is a lightbulb an electromagnetic device?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

There are a lot of approaches suggested in various belief systems.

sometimes something simple like mediation, prayer or reading sacred texts and observing how you feel.

What is the mediation approach in a belief system?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It does when the conditions are the same. If you have many different sets of conditions you will get different results.

What does "it does when the conditions are the same" mean? Having different results is a demonstrable effect isn't it?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Nobody tries to get me to accept that magnetism is real by handing me a 2000+ year set of bronze age writings, then tells me to read about a bunch of guys shouting about how great magnetism is and how I must worship it or else.

If someone wants me to accept magnetism, they stick a magnet to my fridge. Or they hand me a 6V spring top battery, a length of wire, and a nail. Like my dad did when I was 4. Which is also when I started going to Sunday School. If there was 1/1000th and weighty evidence for any god as there is for electromagnets, I would still believe that some god exists.

I made these simple, but really cool little electric motors with my kids using some paper clips, a AA batteries and some neodymium magnets.