Re: What use does an atheist have for deities?

[Aupmanyav]

.. getting sustenance (as the Qur'an even puts it) from Ultimate Reality.

Ah, without that the 'Ultimate Reality' would not sustain us?

 

[sealchan]

I put no stock into anything you are trying to say about dreams, symbolism and religion. None.

Your challenge is meaningless because it is easy to "interpret" any dream in just about any way.

It is a valid point given that one might assume that sufficient creativity will guarantee results. And this is further ensured if one understands that the myths of the world arose partly from the experience given by dreams.

Still dreams do exist and come from brain activity. As strange as they are they do have many recognizable and oft used patterns and motifs. They even reflect brain structure to some extent. And those patterns and motifs are also found in myths. Within these patterns there is embedded our sense of meaning and our passion and will to act.

To me this says that our psychological experience is a ground for a comparative objective study of a natural phenomenon.

 

[SalixIncendium]

And what happens if you stop the placebo? We are depended on placeboes? fake hapiness.

What is "fake happiness?" Is that like fake news?

 

[SalixIncendium]

Why would it be different for a Hindu?
Also... Why exactly are there no pickles?
I am not very familiar with Hinduism.

From the advaita perspective in Hinduism, the bodies in which we live and the world which we inhabit are illusory. In one's true nature there is no birth, death, creation, destruction, etc. This true nature, Atman, is immortal, and is the same as Brahman, the highest form of existence/reality.

 

[sealchan]

When you dream, where does the content of your dream come from, other than from your unconscious mind? When you dream of another person, is that other person actually interacting with you, or is it a representation of that person created within your mind? It might seem like "other," especially if your conscious mind hasn't scripted the interaction, but is it really "other?" (Your unconscious mind may have scripted the interaction.)

Dreams do come from the unconscious. I dont believe they come from any supernatural source. The experience of the supernatural is actually natural.

My theory on what our conscious ego is is as follows: the brain supports a vast layering of semi-independent voices whose opinions are merged in the activity of the brain. Voices, in this sense, combine and compete in a bottom-up fashion. In a top-down fashion we experience our selves as one among many external voices which are our fellow human beings. We develop a biased configuration of the psyche known as a personality. Our external personalities strengthen either our biased ego or other voices within us. We have a standard set of complimentary-opposite inner voices within our minds at the higher levels of voice conglomeration.

When awake the brain is flooded with sensory information and our egos are formed around that neural energy and its impact on our psychic configuration. When we are asleep and dream, the external flood is now gone and our egos are weakened with respect to the other voices within us. All these voices are a part of our own personality but they are not experienced in the same way due to the low energy present for the ego.

But the interaction of the dreamer with these other voices which may reflect the experience of other known external personalities are just as often seemingly invented others. For that reason a dream reflects ones own psychology rather that that of others. It is a cast of characters authored by the dreamer with significant inspiration taken from waking world experience.

But given the more or less similar nature of the human brain in every individual, the dream experience does give us access to an objective phenomenology of our own and others psychological experience. Also certain rare experiences in the brain can overwhelm one with a sense of an encounter with an other which brings with it a sense of awe and meaning and purpose that even the most confirmed atheist will look back at that experience and have to wonder from time to time even as they confidently maintain their stance with respect to the existence of gods.

What is "scripted" in the mind can be experienced convincingly as real no matter what is scripted. Some experiences carry such force of neural energy that they leave behind an impact, a presence, which feels like a persistent contact with an other even after countless days of the flood of sensory experience continues to bathe our neural circuits with practical reality.

 

[crossfire]

Dreams do come from the unconscious. I dont believe they come from any supernatural source. The experience of the supernatural is actually natural.

My theory on what our conscious ego is is as follows: the brain supports a vast layering of semi-independent voices whose opinions are merged in the activity of the brain. Voices, in this sense, combine and compete in a bottom-up fashion. In a top-down fashion we experience our selves as one among many external voices which are our fellow human beings. We develop a biased configuration of the psyche known as a personality. Our external personalities strengthen either our biased ego or other voices within us. We have a standard set of complimentary-opposite inner voices within our minds at the higher levels of voice conglomeration.

When awake the brain is flooded with sensory information and our egos are formed around that neural energy and its impact on our psychic configuration. When we are asleep and dream, the external flood is now gone and our egos are weakened with respect to the other voices within us. All these voices are a part of our own personality but they are not experienced in the same way due to the low energy present for the ego.

But the interaction of the dreamer with these other voices which may reflect the experience of other known external personalities are just as often seemingly invented others. For that reason a dream reflects ones own psychology rather that that of others. It is a cast of characters authored by the dreamer with significant inspiration taken from waking world experience.

But given the more or less similar nature of the human brain in every individual, the dream experience does give us access to an objective phenomenology of our own and others psychological experience. Also certain rare experiences in the brain can overwhelm one with a sense of an encounter with an other which brings with it a sense of awe and meaning and purpose that even the most confirmed atheist will look back at that experience and have to wonder from time to time even as they confidently maintain their stance with respect to the existence of gods.

What is "scripted" in the mind can be experienced convincingly as real no matter what is scripted. Some experiences carry such force of neural energy that they leave behind an impact, a presence, which feels like a persistent contact with an other even after countless days of the flood of sensory experience continues to bathe our neural circuits with practical reality.

So, might some of these "presence" experiences bubbling up from the unconscious mind be mistaken for god?

 

[ecco]

It's sad that your bias has blinded you to any of the other possible ways of interpreting it.

My "bias" is the result of looking at religion and religions over many years. My "bias" is the result of seeing the harm caused by religion and religions over many years.

The denigration of Science by the Religious Right puts us at a disadvantage with competing nations.

Most science fiction could be viewed as propaganda, as well.

What propaganda was put forth in Rendezvous with Rama?
What propaganda was put forth in Ringworld?
What propaganda was put forth in Star Wars?
What propaganda was put forth in Star Trek? Oh horrors - a white man kissed a black woman.

But most of us are able to see past that kind of narrow, constricting bias.

Care to address the questions I raised above?
Care to comment on the negative effects of the denigration of science?

 

[ecco]

If "satan" serves as a symbolic figure rather than a literal one, then obviously they don't believe in satan as a supernatural entity.

Now all you have to do is explain what you mean by a symbolic Satan. Then you can go on to explain who and why people would worship a symbolic Satan if they did not associate Him with anything real?


ETA:

Is this the scenario you envision...

Oh, look! There is a picture of Satan.
But you know that's not a real picture of the real Satan - right?
I know. It's only a symbolic Satan. But we could worship it, couldn't we?
OK. Let's worship the symbolic Satan even though we know that a real supernatural Satan cannot exist.

Really?

 

[crossfire]

Now all you have to do is explain what you mean by a symbolic Satan. Then you can go on to explain who and why people would worship a symbolic Satan if they did not associate Him with anything real?

Jungian Shadow is one example. As for worship, that's not something I can really understand.

 

[ecco]

nm

 

[LuisDantas]

As for worship, that's not something I can really understand.

Worship is a pretty personal thing, far as I can tell. I suspect that at least some people are not even capable of doing it at all, and that people who can manage it don't always realize how divergent their means of worship are.

 

[ecco]

Still dreams do exist and come from brain activity. As strange as they are they do have many recognizable and oft used patterns and motifs.

Such as?

They even reflect brain structure to some extent.

How so?

 

[syo]

That is the standard procedure, isn't it?

No. logic makes gods.

 

[syo]

What is "fake happiness?" Is that like fake news?

fake happiness = adam and eve in eden

 

[SalixIncendium]

fake happiness = adam and eve in eden

So eating apples then?

Or being naked?

 

[Father Heathen]

Now all you have to do is explain what you mean by a symbolic Satan. Then you can go on to explain who and why people would worship a symbolic Satan if they did not associate Him with anything real?


ETA:

Is this the scenario you envision...

Oh, look! There is a picture of Satan.
But you know that's not a real picture of the real Satan - right?
I know. It's only a symbolic Satan. But we could worship it, couldn't we?
OK. Let's worship the symbolic Satan even though we know that a real supernatural Satan cannot exist.

Really?

What a dumb straw man. Atheistic satanists worship neither a literal nor symbolic Satan. Do you not understand how symbolism works (think team mascot)? The only thing they "worship" are themselves as their own "gods". You have access to Google and Wikipedia just like the rest of us.

 

[syo]

So eating apples then?

Or being naked?

adam and eve were supposed to live happy if they didn't eat apples. what kind of happiness is that?

 

[SalixIncendium]

adam and eve were supposed to live happy if they didn't eat apples. what kind of happiness is that?

I didn't know there were different kinds of happiness. That's why I'm asking you what "fake happiness" is.

 

[syo]

I didn't know there were different kinds of happiness. That's why I'm asking you what "fake happiness" is.

Being happy only with certain criteria. when the criteria vanish you become miserable.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Being happy only with certain criteria. when the criteria vanish you become miserable.

So there is no middle ground? One is either happy or miserable?

Happiness, in my experience is temporary, and is dependent on what one is experiencing at the time. I have yet to meet anyone in a perpetual state of happiness.