Question for Theists

[Danmac]

Our bodies and therefore also our brains did not evolve for the kind of life we are living now. For instance, a craving for sweet, salty and fatty foods would have been an excellent survival strategy in a hunter/gatherer society.

We are talking about now, and you said pleasure supports your survival. When in fact many pleasures are harmful to us. Your statement is no true.

I think you're going to explain that some more before I can properly respond then because right now I don't see the point you are trying to make.

Ultimate preference goes beyond subordinate choice and tells us the reasons behind our very motives. Indulging in pleasure is not just an attempt to feel good. It goes beyond that.

I'm an empiricist first and foremost. The fact that that also makes me an atheist is more of a consequence. I am also a-unicorns, a-astrology, a-crystal healing and a-homoeopathy if that matters. The question may not have been addressed to me specifically, but the claim is being made by theists that there is a god.

You are using the beliefs of others to justify your own. The fact is you came about your conclusion thru speculation, and not science. You are guilty of the thing you are accusing theists of. That is faith in what you cannot prove. On my part you are making the claim, "atheism", and I am making a counter claim.

I don't make the counter-claim that there is no god

Sure you do, you said you are an atheist. That is a counterclaim. No one asked you what you believed, you labeled yourself an atheist before anyone on REF asked you to choose a side.

, but rather that there is no reason to believe the theist claim.

There may be no reason to believe the theist claim, just like there is no reason to believe in a cure for cancer. But science is looking for a cure for cancer even though one doesn't presently exist. They certainly aren't a-cancercurists. You on the other hand have made a declaration without scientific data to back up your claims. You should not rule on it until all of the evidence is in. You have made premature assertions, without proof. Science is not on your side.

As for science... Well, in science you're not allowed to make claims without proper backing by evidence

So why do you make claims without proper backing of evidence?

I don't know. Perhaps you should do a study on it and see if you can get it published. I'm not sure trying it again will help though, since if you suspect your senses/perception/experience lied to you why wouldn't it do so a second time. Try gathering some objective evidence and conduct some repeatable experiments and maybe we'll get somewhere...

Experience seems to be the best teacher from my experience.

Faith (in the religious sense) has nothing to do with my position.

It has everything to do with your position, unless you have some evidence to support your claim. Well do you?

 

[jarofthoughts]

We are talking about now, and you said pleasure supports your survival. When in fact many pleasures are harmful to us. Your statement is no true.

Um... Yeah it is. We are of course affected by our evolutionary past.

Ultimate preference goes beyond subordinate choice and tells us the reasons behind our very motives. Indulging in pleasure is not just an attempt to feel good. It goes beyond that.

Indulging in pleasure is just an attempt to feel good. It does not go beyond that.

You are using the beliefs of others to justify your own.

Nope. I have no religious beliefs. That is rather the point of being an atheist.

The fact is you came about your conclusion thru speculation, and not science.

What conclusion?

You are guilty of the thing you are accusing theists of. That is faith in what you cannot prove. On my part you are making the claim, "atheism", and I am making a counter claim.

Atheism makes no claim. It is a rejection of the theist claim.

Sure you do, you said you are an atheist. That is a counterclaim.

Nope.

No one asked you what you believed, you labeled yourself an atheist before anyone on REF asked you to choose a side.

The forum site asked me. See, it has this spot on your profile where it asks you about your religion. And since my religious position is atheism, it seemed proper to put it there.

There may be no reason to believe the theist claim, just like there is no reason to believe in a cure for cancer.

Not until we have evidence that someone has found that cure, obviously. Of course, there are many types of cancer and while some can often be cured through various means, others can, as of yet, not be cured.
What's your point?

But science is looking for a cure for cancer even though one doesn't presently exist.

We know cancer exists. We know we can cure certain types of cancer. Of course we are looking for cures for the rest of them.
Your analogy is terrible... :areyoucra

You on the other hand have made a declaration without scientific data to back up your claims.

What declaration?

You should not rule on it until all of the evidence is in.

What ruling?

You have made premature assertions, without proof.

What assertion?

So why do you make claims without proper backing of evidence?

What claim?

Experience seems to be the best teacher from my experience.

Sure it is. But it is not infallible, and when it presents you with things that contradict objective scientific reality it might be a good idea to be a bit sceptical.

It has everything to do with your position, unless you have some evidence to support your claim. Well do you?

Again, what claim?

 

[Danmac]

Nope. I have no religious beliefs. That is rather the point of being an atheist.

Really

The forum site asked me. See, it has this spot on your profile where it asks you about your religion. And since my religious position is atheism, it seemed proper to put it there.

Really. So atheism is a religion then? I thought you had no religious beliefs.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Really

Really.

Really. So atheism is a religion then?

Nope.

I thought you had no religious beliefs.

That's right.


Now, what conclusion, declaration, ruling, assertion or claim have I made that is unscientific?

Do tell.

 

[Danmac]

Now, what conclusion, declaration, ruling, assertion or claim have I made that is unscientific?

Do tell.

That a god cannot possibly exist. There is no way you can know that because science only knows a fraction of what can be known, and God may well be within the area of the unknown.

 

[jarofthoughts]

That a god cannot possibly exist. There is no way you can know that because science only knows a fraction of what can be known, and God may well be within the area of the unknown.

And when exactly have I made that claim?

 

[Danmac]

And when exactly have I made that claim?

Atheism is a belief that a god does not exist. Agnosticism holds the position of, "I do not know if a god exists". By saying you are an atheist you are declaring that a god cannot possibly exist or else you would be an agnostic, and leave your options on the table.

 

[Tristesse]

Atheism is a belief that a god does not exist. Agnosticism holds the position of, "I do not know if a god exists". By saying you are an atheist you are declaring that a god cannot possibly exist or else you would be an agnostic, and leave your options on the table.

Thats not what atheism is. Atheism is simply the lack or disbelief in a god. An agnostic, no matter how much they may disagree, is, by definition an atheist. Because theism is defined as having a belief in a god, anything short of theism, is atheism. If you do not know whether a god exists or not, you do not hold a belief in a god, therefore you're an atheist.

 

[Danmac]

Thats not what atheism is. Atheism is simply the lack or disbelief in a god. An agnostic, no matter how much they may disagree, is, by definition an atheist. Because theism is defined as having a belief in a god, anything short of theism, is atheism. If you do not know whether a god exists or not, you do not hold a belief in a god, therefore you're an atheist.

Can a God possibly exist?

 

[Tristesse]

Can a God possibly exist?

I think it's a possibility. but in that case, I think fairies are possible, and leprechauns. The question should be, do I think it's probable? And the answer is NO!

 

[jarofthoughts]

Atheism is a belief that a god does not exist. Agnosticism holds the position of, "I do not know if a god exists". By saying you are an atheist you are declaring that a god cannot possibly exist or else you would be an agnostic, and leave your options on the table.

That is not what being an atheist means at all. An atheist is simply someone who does not believe in any god or gods. It does not mean someone who claims that there are no gods nor that they cannot exist, merely that the person in question does not believe in any.

Here is the explanation you're looking for: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/resources/102356-agnostic-vs-atheist.html

Also, there is the definition in the Online Oxford Dictionary: definition of atheist from Oxford Dictionaries Online

So I have, in fact, never made the claim that you accuse me of making.

 

[Danmac]

That is not what being an atheist means at all. An atheist is simply someone who does not believe in any god or gods. It does not mean someone who claims that there are no gods nor that they cannot exist, merely that the person in question does not believe in any.

Here is the explanation you're looking for: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/resources/102356-agnostic-vs-atheist.html

Also, there is the definition in the Online Oxford Dictionary: definition of atheist from Oxford Dictionaries Online

So I have, in fact, never made the claim that you accuse me of making.

Is it possible that a god may exist?

 

[Breathe]

If no God existed, would you still want to believe in one?

How do I put this properly?

I think it would be a shame.

But would I want to believe in God, if there was no God?
No.

Because there was not one.
Why want what cannot be? It wouldn't help me to do so.

 

[jarofthoughts]

How do I put this properly?

I think it would be a shame.

But would I want to believe in God, if there was no God?
No.

Because there was not one.
Why want what cannot be? It wouldn't help me to do so.

Seems a fair an honest answer.
So, what makes you think that there is a god, presuming of course that that is what you think?

 

[jarofthoughts]

Is it possible that a god may exist?

That depends a lot on the definition of the god in question. Some definitions of god makes them illogical and thus it would seem that such gods cannot exist, just as certain concepts cannot coexist.
But if you are willing to define exactly what you mean by the term "god" then I will be happy to argue whether such a god could logically exist or not.

 

[Breathe]

Seems a fair an honest answer.

Thanks.

So, what makes you think that there is a god, presuming of course that that is what you think?

Yeah, that is what I think - although my interpretation of God is not the same as those of the Abrahamic religions would hold. I'm doubtful of such an entity existing.


Why do I think there is a God?
Good question.

Hmm...

I know you're not insinuating any of these, but I wrote them out as I was thinking, so I thought I would share:

I was not really brought up with religion in my household so it is not from family. My parents, although religious, are mixed religions (Buddhist and Unitarian) and are very liberal and "nominal believers", the majority of my family are weakly religious, with very little mention of God and so on, and I can't tell who believe in God and who do not for the most part. My father was very adamant about how his children would decide their religion for themselves - so it's not that I was brought up with it and am brainwashed into it.

Likewise, I'm not ignorant of science or subscribe to creation (in fact, I follow atheistic, blind evolution, without Divine intervention or anything, we're just a form that became lucky, and I don't believe that God was necessary for the Big Bang) or eschatology myths so it's not some innate notion of "Well, the universe is sooo magical it needs one", and I'm not a dummy who won't question anything, nor is it some kind of emotional crutch because without the belief in God, I'd be so emotionally ****** up that I would spend my life in depression (I'd be fine with or without God, and with or without an afterlife, I just believe in both), so it's not that, either.


So, honestly I don't know. Perhaps I'm wired up that way. It just comes naturally to me, like writing with my left hand.


As to how I came to believe in God, well, that's very, very, very personal. Put it this way, my family don't even know why I came to believe in God. That's mine, and mine only.



Sorry I couldn't offer you any real answer, the whole post is probably a waste.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Is it possible that a god may exist?

Also, before we move on, do you concede that you misunderstood what being an atheist means and that I've never made the claim that you said I'd made?

 

[jarofthoughts]

Yeah, that is what I think - although my interpretation of God is not the same as those of the Abrahamic religions would hold. I'm doubtful of such an entity existing.


Why do I think there is a God?
Good question.

Hmm...

I know you're not insinuating any of these, but I wrote them out as I was thinking, so I thought I would share:

I was not really brought up with religion in my household so it is not from family. My parents, although religious, are mixed religions (Buddhist and Unitarian) and are very liberal and "nominal believers", the majority of my family are weakly religious, with very little mention of God and so on, and I can't tell who believe in God and who do not for the most part. My father was very adamant about how his children would decide their religion for themselves - so it's not that I was brought up with it and am brainwashed into it.

Likewise, I'm not ignorant of science or subscribe to creation (in fact, I follow atheistic, blind evolution, without Divine intervention or anything, we're just a form that became lucky, and I don't believe that God was necessary for the Big Bang) or eschatology myths so it's not some innate notion of "Well, the universe is sooo magical it needs one", and I'm not a dummy who won't question anything, nor is it some kind of emotional crutch because without the belief in God, I'd be so emotionally ****** up that I would spend my life in depression (I'd be fine with or without God, and with or without an afterlife, I just believe in both), so it's not that, either.


So, honestly I don't know. Perhaps I'm wired up that way. It just comes naturally to me, like writing with my left hand.


As to how I came to believe in God, well, that's very, very, very personal. Put it this way, my family don't even know why I came to believe in God. That's mine, and mine only.



Sorry I couldn't offer you any real answer, the whole post is probably a waste.

Well, your reasons are your own and I am certainly not in a position to tell you that you can't believe in a god if that is what you wish, nor would I want to. Being of an empirical mind myself I just find it interesting how people reconcile all the things that we know scientifically (not to mention how we know what we know) and still end up believing in something for which there is no evidence, at least not of the objective empirical kind. In science personal anecdotes count for nothing, which, let's face it, is what personal "evidence" is.

I'm not saying this is what led to your belief, I'm just talking in general here though. For me though, personal "evidence" wouldn't be enough to change even my own mind. Even if I were to see the archangel Gabriel descend from my ceiling this very moment and declare that god exists I would sooner suspect myself to have gone mad rather than accept what this presumed illusion was telling me.

 

[Breathe]

Even if I were to see the archangel Gabriel descend from my ceiling this very moment and declare that god exists I would sooner suspect myself to have gone mad rather than accept what this presumed illusion was telling me.

As would I.

 

[Danmac]

That depends a lot on the definition of the god in question. Some definitions of god makes them illogical and thus it would seem that such gods cannot exist, just as certain concepts cannot coexist.
But if you are willing to define exactly what you mean by the term "god" then I will be happy to argue whether such a god could logically exist or not.

I do agree that many religions are very far fetched, along with the gods that represent those religions. On the other hand, science cannot rule out the possibility that a God exists, or they would have done so already. In fact, science is branching out into the paranormal.