To the Anti-Religious

[Madhuri]

Well, of course - we all need purpose and meaning in our lives, atheists are no different. What I see as a bit egotistical is this idea of a "higher purpose" being bestowed upon us from this ultimate authority.

I just want to explain this, because my view is nothing like the Christian view.

I do not believe that God created man for some wonderful purpose.
I believe that the individual (including any form of life) is an actual part of God. Our existence is natural, it was not a decision made. So I guess 'purpose' might not be the best word to use, except that perhaps the idea that there is something more gives me a sense of purpose, or something to work toward. When I imagine a reality where there is only this life and nothing beyond, then I feel devoid of purpose. Nothing seems important any more. But that feeling never lasts because I end up coming back to the very strong feeling that 'there must be more'.

In the end, we all percieve the world differently. I understand the logic behind atheistic perception, but I can't seem to adopt it and more importantly, I really wouldn't want to. It would compromise my self or self as well. I just...can't see the world without God. That probably has something to do with my concept of God. I don't know. But I can't help but feeling justified in my feelings. Oh well.

 

[Commoner]

Well, my default position on God's inexistence is skepticism until I am disproven. I see God every time I read a science text book, every time I sit in a Biochemistry lecture listening to the sheer complexity and intricacy of the body's mechanisms, every time I stare into the stars, every time I see something in this world that blows me away. To me, I don't see how a Creator of some form couldn't exist. That's where we differ, I guess.

That's not really skepticism - you can't ever really get proof for the inexistance of anything, so your opinion is not likely to ever change, is it? Demonstrating something does exist is pretty simple on the other hand - that's why skepticism is useful.

 

[DarkSun]

I just want to explain this, because my view is nothing like the Christian view.

I do not believe that God created man for some wonderful purpose.
I believe that the individual (including any form of life) is an actual part of God. Our existence is natural, it was not a decision made. So I guess 'purpose' might not be the best word to use, except that perhaps the idea that there is something more gives me a sense of purpose, or something to work toward. When I imagine a reality where there is only this life and nothing beyond, then I feel devoid of purpose. Nothing seems important any more. But that feeling never lasts because I end up coming back to the very strong feeling that 'there must be more'.

In the end, we all percieve the world differently. I understand the logic behind atheistic perception, but I can't seem to adopt it and more importantly, I really wouldn't want to. It would compromise my self or self as well. I just...can't see the world without God. That probably has something to do with my concept of God. I don't know. But I can't help but feeling justified in my feelings. Oh well.

Remind me to frubal you the next time I get the chance.

 

[DarkSun]

That's not really skepticism - you can't ever really get proof for the inexistance of anything, so your opinion is not likely to ever change, is it? Demonstrating something does exist is pretty simple on the other hand - that's why skepticism is useful.

How is my view different from yours in any way when there are equal amounts of evidence for both views? That is to say - there is no evidence whatsoever.

 

[DarkSun]

I don't believe god doesn't exist. I don't believe god exists.

You just paraphrased the same thing.

There can be no "proof" of the inexistance of anything, it would be a bit silly to expect it.

Unless you believe something to be true (or not true). Then it wouldn't be silly to expect proof otherwise.

 

[Commoner]

I just want to explain this, because my view is nothing like the Christian view.

I do not believe that God created man for some wonderful purpose.
I believe that the individual (including any form of life) is an actual part of God. Our existence is natural, it was not a decision made. So I guess 'purpose' might not be the best word to use, except that perhaps the idea that there is something more gives me a sense of purpose, or something to work toward. When I imagine a reality where there is only this life and nothing beyond, then I feel devoid of purpose. Nothing seems important any more. But that feeling never lasts because I end up coming back to the very strong feeling that 'there must be more'.

In the end, we all percieve the world differently. I understand the logic behind atheistic perception, but I can't seem to adopt it and more importantly, I really wouldn't want to. It would compromise my self or self as well. I just...can't see the world without God. That probably has something to do with my concept of God. I don't know. But I can't help but feeling justified in my feelings. Oh well.

I can completely understand that. We hardwired to perceive the world in a certain way, to see patterns and symbols everywhere (even when there are none). There's no way of eliminating that completely, especially after being bombarded by the ideas and imagery of different religions in childhood.

I think if every theist thought like you, I wouldn't have this problem with religions that I have "developed". It seems strange that your life should lose value without an afterlife. It seems to me the opposite would be true - its value should rise dramatically. Maybe it's the fear of death that "keeps the price down"

 

[Commoner]

You just paraphrased the same thing.

No, it's not the same thing at all. Believing something doesn't exist and not believing something exists is not the same thing. One is a skeptical position and the other is just arrogance.

Unless you believe something to be true (or not true). Then it wouldn't be silly to expect proof otherwise.

You can prove there are no monsters under my bed, but you'd be hard pressed to prove that no monsters exist anywhere. And with the vagueness of "god", you can't ever disprove it. It's just a bit too elusive - there's an infinite supply of beds to look under.

 

[Madhuri]

I can completely understand that. Not only are we hardwired to perceive the world in a certain way, to see patterns and symbols everywhere (even when there are none). There's no way of eliminating that completely, especially after being bombarded by the ideas and imagery of different religions in childhood.

I think if every theist thought like you, I wouldn't have this problem with religions that I have "developed". It seems strange that your life should loose value without an afterlife. It seems to me the opposite would be true - its value should rise dramatically.

I don't think that my life would seem less valuable without an afterlife, I don't think that it would change at all really. That's how I approach spirituality; I take what feels right. So I love life and people and I have a lot of empathy. So then I interpret 'God' as Love. Stuff like that, just an example.

Sorry to rush this, I have to do something quickly...

 

[DarkSun]

No, it's not the same thing at all. Believing something doesn't exist and not believing something exists is not the same thing. One is a skeptical position and the other is just arrogance.

I just realised something. I believe that the sky isn't green. But don't be mistaken. It's not that I don't believe that the sky is green. These are two completely different stances.

You can prove there are no monsters under my bed, but you'd be hard pressed to prove that no monsters exist anywhere. And with the vagueness of "god", you can't ever disprove it. It's just a bit too elusive - there's an infinite supply of beds to look under.

I give up.

 

[dogsgod]

God represents a lot mroe than invisible pixies though. It doesnt matter to me if the pixies exist or not. However, it does matter to me if God exists or not. Actually, it might be more correct to say that it seems unlikely that God does not exist. I just cannot tell you what god is exactly, or how to find Him. But the existene in a Higher Intelligence, and 'something more' or 'purpose' is extremely important to me. That is what makes od and pixies different.

What makes a God provide purpose anymore than a pixie would? Besides, it's you that decides God provides purpose so it is you that grants God his authority.

 

[Madhuri]

What makes a God provide purpose anymore than a pixie would? Besides, it's you that decides God provides purpose so it is you that grants God his authority.

I'm not providing God with anything.
God represents somethign that the pixie doesn't, unless the pixie is the actual reality behind life but then the pixie would be God.
I give myself purpose by believing in 'something more'.

 

[dogsgod]

I'm not providing God with anything.
God represents somethign that the pixie doesn't, unless the pixie is the actual reality behind life but then the pixie would be God.
I give myself purpose by believing in 'something more'.

You ultimately grant God the authority to provide purpose. It's you that has decided that he can do this.

 

[Madhuri]

You ultimately grant god the authority to provide purpose. It's you that has decided that he can do this.

How have I implied that God -provides- purpose? I could believe in God and feel no purpose to my life, hypothetically. I feel purpose because if there is a God, I want to discover Him. I'm granting myself this purpose.

 

[dogsgod]

How have I implied that God -provides- purpose?

You stated: " But the existene in a Higher Intelligence, and 'something more' or 'purpose' is extremely important to me."

 

[Commoner]

I just realised something. I believe that the sky isn't green. But don't be mistaken. It's not that I don't believe that the sky is green. These are two completely different stances.

I agree that in casual conversation, there's no need to distinguish between the two points. But when you're trying to imply that the fact that I don't believe in a god is somehow "the same as faith" because I simply "have faith" that there is no god, then I feel obligated to explain why that's not the case.

You used a bad analogy.

You can see the sky from Earth seems blue, you can come to the logical conclusion that it is not "not blue". Green is not blue - so the sky isn't green. I'm sure the sky on some planets seems green(ish) and on others seems red(ish), but I don't really know. So if you wanted to apply that to your analogy - you would have to claim there is no such thing as a green sky. See the difference?

 

[Madhuri]

You stated: " But the existene in a Higher Intelligence, and 'something more' or 'purpose' is extremely important to me."

I think I corrected myself on this thread..or was it another...I think it was this one.
'Purpose' wasn't the best word for me to use. But even though I do feel a sense of purpose, I will not say that it is something given to me. Purpose IS important to me, but I give it to myself. It is just that when I take away God from reality I start to feel a lack of purpose as my perception changes. So you could say that God is my purpose, though that is entirely my own giving.

 

[Commoner]

How is my view different from yours in any way when there are equal amounts of evidence for both views? That is to say - there is no evidence whatsoever.

Exactly - no evidence, no belief.

How is not believing something a belief? If that's the case, each of us has an infinite number of beliefs. How is that practical in any way?

 

[darkendless]

Non-belief in God is not a belief.

Non-belief does not require faith. Why would it. Why would something have faith in something that isn't there to them? There's no belief, no faith. Non-belief cannot be equated to belief. Belief requires a leap of faith that non-belief does not.

 

[PureX]

No, it's not the same thing at all. Believing something doesn't exist and not believing something exists is not the same thing. One is a skeptical position and the other is just arrogance.

Actually, this is wrong. The only possible choices are existence, non-existence, or "I don't know". To believe that God does not exist is the same as not believing that God does exist because they both place God in the non-existent category. Your only other option, and the only logical option to choose when you have no evidence either way, is to admit that you simply don't know.

 

[PureX]

Non-belief in God is not a belief.

Non-belief does not require faith. Why would it. Why would something have faith in something that isn't there to them? There's no belief, no faith. Non-belief cannot be equated to belief. Belief requires a leap of faith that non-belief does not.

"Non-belief", like non-existence, is an irrational category. It's an attempt at labeling nothing, as though it were something.