Why I am Not an Atheist

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

Illogical Logician
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 1:22 am UTC

Why I am Not an Atheist

Postby Illogical Logician » Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:16 am UTC

Sidenote: Mods, if you don’t think this belongs in Serious Business, feel free to move it where you deem appropriate. From my perspective, building ourselves moon brains and seeding life and intelligence throughout the galaxy is about as serious as you get.

Another Sidenote: Apologies if there any discontinuities, strangenesses, or things that don’t really make sense. I have been up for about 34 hours now, and really don’t feel like proofreading much. On the other hand, it might be perfect? Who knows?. ^_^


Why I am Not an Atheist.

Or

Why I think that if there are gods, it is perfectly reasonable that they would seem like supreme jerks from our perspective.

I tend to enjoy the idea that intelligence has the potential to reach truly staggering heights. In my eternal optimism, I tend to think that as humans we are only just beginning to grasp the potentials of intelligence. I allow myself to believe that, in time, intelligent species can grasp knowledge of their own physiology so deep that they are able to augment themselves in order to continuously expand on their own inherent physical limits. Once a species has reached this point, we are talking about a serious neural rollercoaster baby! All the way up! Moon brains? Solar system brains? Galaxy brains? Awesome quantum parallel universe brains? Damn straight!

It does not seem unreasonable to me that a species within this universe has already undergone such a tremendous advancement in their understanding of the deeper structures of the universe that they are able to interact with and manipulate elements of this universe that we have yet to even conceive of.

Now, speaking for myself, if I were at this stage in my life, I would most certainly go find myself a kickin’ primordial planet somewhere, seed it up with some cosmic lovin’, and get the cycle going once again. Over the epochs I would mess things up a little. I wouldn’t always seem like a benevolent god, and I certainly wouldn’t give them a paradise (well… maybe just a taste, just to screw with their heads). It seems to be that it is awfully easy to sit back during the easy times, and not really be too concerned with anything outside of comfortable boundaries of life. I would give them as much pain and beauty as I thought they could stand. I would want them to evolve, to grow, to learn! I would want them to feel so desperate to get off their lovely little rock, that they would look up at the stars, feel that raging awe inside them, and let nothing get in the way of their dreams of what might be possible.

So, you see, I have no problem with the conception of any god. Christian god, muslim god, hindu gods, buddhas, you name it. I certainly don’t have the same conception of them as their religious devotees do. Rather, I see them as a future version of what we might one day be capable of. Not to mention, I totally dig the idea of getting together with those dudes, kickin’ it back over a cosmic brew, playin’ some quantum hold-em, and coming up with some wicked-cool awesome plan for another species over a nice relaxing game of quantum hold-em. All in the name of more intelligence, more gods, more life!

Sooooo….Any more thoughts on this? ^_^


Illogical Logician out

User avatar
Peshmerga
Mad Hatter
Posts: 2061
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:56 am UTC
Contact:

Postby Peshmerga » Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:48 am UTC

I don't know what a "moon brain" is so I'm going to assume it's another one of those atheist, pseudo scientific types have so gallantly "theorized".

There is a God; He who watches over his children with infinite wisdom and undeniable judgment. His Son is the Lord our Christ. I have a big problem with these so called atheist types; they never seem to accept the fact that they themselves are being judged.

And you, Illogical Logician, are just like them. Firstly - if it were at all possible to "transcend" into a higher being, it's doubtful they would retain the same human needs and wants. You're basing this "Godly figure" off a human archetype, when in reality there is only He Himself, God. Our Earth is being fought over by the forces of Heaven and Hell, not childishly manipulated by "galaxy brains". How many "brains" are pulling our strings? What if one decided to destroy the universe with the flick of a switch?

The only truth is that God does exist. He exists just out of reach from our fingers, our breaths, our most inner prayers and darkest desires. You cannot see Him, but he can see you. And he is judging you, but protecting you from the hooded man in the dark forest who carries his black book with an iron pen.
i hurd u liek mudkips???

User avatar
yy2bggggs
Posts: 1261
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 6:42 am UTC

Postby yy2bggggs » Thu Apr 05, 2007 4:13 am UTC

Peshmerga wrote:There is a God; He who watches over his children with infinite wisdom and undeniable judgment. His Son is the Lord our Christ. I have a big problem with these so called atheist types; they never seem to accept the fact that they themselves are being judged.
I think you're off topic.

User avatar
Xanthia
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 7:30 pm UTC
Contact:

Postby Xanthia » Thu Apr 05, 2007 4:33 am UTC

When speaking generally, I tend to label myself an atheist because it means that I've rather detached from any sort of religion and takes a lot less explaining to people than "Semi-Atheistic Polytheistic Theist Episcopalian." I rather agree with you, Illogical Logician. I think there very well could be some other "godly" race, but as to their divine-ness? I dunno.

I sort of think that there are these other beings, that came to earth, and humans mistook their meaning and worshiped them and it was cool for awhile and then...things got out of hand and the "gods" got out of the situation. Or, they were just traveling through and forever changed the course of the human race.
que je ne soie pas prête à trouver des responses pour la vie

User avatar
A neutral shade of black.
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:14 pm UTC
Location: University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom of Great Britain.
Contact:

Re: Why I am Not an Atheist

Postby A neutral shade of black. » Thu Apr 05, 2007 11:13 am UTC

Illogical Logician wrote:Now, speaking for myself, if I were at this stage in my life, I would most certainly go find myself a kickin’ primordial planet somewhere, seed it up with some cosmic lovin’, and get the cycle going once again. Over the epochs I would mess things up a little. I wouldn’t always seem like a benevolent god, and I certainly wouldn’t give them a paradise (well… maybe just a taste, just to screw with their heads). It seems to be that it is awfully easy to sit back during the easy times, and not really be too concerned with anything outside of comfortable boundaries of life. I would give them as much pain and beauty as I thought they could stand. I would want them to evolve, to grow, to learn! I would want them to feel so desperate to get off their lovely little rock, that they would look up at the stars, feel that raging awe inside them, and let nothing get in the way of their dreams of what might be possible.


Okay, so admitting that in the reasonably small lapse of time since the Big Bang, a civilisation managed to reach the point you mention (without wiping themselves out early in the process *cough*), and then proceeded to see Earth with life and oversee its development.

How is that the traditional, arabic-judeo-christian omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent creator God who, one morning, decided his nonliving room needed to be redecorated with a universe that would eventually be filled with bigoted cretins?

I'm not doubting your reason up to the point where you claim something could have created human life on Earth; and for a good reason, since I agree that there's something fishy, and until someone provides mathematical proof that I can understand of the probability of humanity occurring without outward intervention, I'll continue to think it seems a bit too good. What I do doubt is the illogical leap you make from "something could have created us" to "God exists" (note the capital "g," establishing that I mean the supergod previously mentioned).

Peshmerga wrote:The only truth is that God does exist. He exists just out of reach from our fingers, our breaths, our most inner prayers and darkest desires. You cannot see Him, but he can see you. And he is judging you, but protecting you from the hooded man in the dark forest who carries his black book with an iron pen.


And in science, we call that a fallacious claim unsupported by even a single speck of evidence - but that's a debate for another thread.
Image

Macho Nachos
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:08 am UTC
Location: Australia

Postby Macho Nachos » Thu Apr 05, 2007 12:08 pm UTC

I tend to agree with neutral shade, again. I think you've made a big leap from superintelligence to supernatural.

If you are talking about something that can interact with Earth in a way that we cannot currently detect or understand (ie outside the laws of the universe as we know them), then you're in a similar boat to Peshmerga over there *points to the chapel*... untestable hypotheses.

If you can come up with a plausible mechanism for something so crazily amazing to exist by thinking itself awesome, then it's testable. You just need to find that mechanism and describe it. Good luck.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I am saying that your 'theory' is, currently, about as useful as Peshmerga's. It just incorporates being a prick a little bit more. It's kind of a personal God who likes a bit of a laugh.

Personally I think dark matter is a valuable field of 'gap' for people to wildly postulate deities into right now. Perhaps there's a civilisation comprising the 96% of the universe that we can't detect who is using the 4% that we can as a bit of an experiment?

User avatar
Solt
Posts: 1912
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:08 am UTC
Location: California

Re: Why I am Not an Atheist

Postby Solt » Thu Apr 05, 2007 12:15 pm UTC

Illogical Logician wrote:It does not seem unreasonable to me that a species within this universe has already undergone such a tremendous advancement in their understanding of the deeper structures of the universe that they are able to interact with and manipulate elements of this universe that we have yet to even conceive of.


It is certainly possible. But there is a difference. Smart man with space ship with mastery of genetics != Omnipotent and Omniprescient being. The difference is important because of the ramifications. If our creator is omni, we must listen to his will. If he's just another life form, then we can exist how we choose.

I agree, it would be pretty cool to one day meet these beings, if such a thing really happened. There is no evidence that suggests the influence of outside forces in the formation of our world and evolution of life.

Peshmerga wrote:There is a God; He who watches over his children with infinite wisdom and undeniable judgment. His Son is the Lord our Christ. I have a big problem with these so called atheist types; they never seem to accept the fact that they themselves are being judged.

[...]

The only truth is that God does exist. He exists just out of reach from our fingers, our breaths, our most inner prayers and darkest desires. You cannot see Him, but he can see you. And he is judging you, but protecting you from the hooded man in the dark forest who carries his black book with an iron pen.


Pretty poetry and vague statements do not make it any more true.
"Welding was faster, cheaper and, in theory,
produced a more reliable product. But sailors do
not float on theory, and the welded tankers had a
most annoying habit of splitting in two."
-J.W. Morris

User avatar
davef
NomNomNommin' the Rockenclature!
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 1:56 pm UTC
Location: The Ice Pit!
Contact:

Re: Why I am Not an Atheist

Postby davef » Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:42 pm UTC

Illogical Logician wrote:It does not seem unreasonable to me that a species within this universe has already undergone such a tremendous advancement in their understanding of the deeper structures of the universe that they are able to interact with and manipulate elements of this universe that we have yet to even conceive of.


This seems to me to be a restatement of Arthur C. Clarke's 3rd law, namely -

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Ciúnas, bóthar, cailín, bainne.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Postby Belial » Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:52 pm UTC

The fact that something is feasible does not make it true, or even likely, given a lack of evidence in its favor.

In other words, Illogical, what you theorize is very much possible. But as we've never seen any evidence that it's *true*, I'm going to go on not assuming unknown actors when the known actors (the laws of physics and chemistry, natural selection, human sociology, etcetera) can do the job.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
space_raptor
Posts: 1497
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 5:02 pm UTC
Location: Calgary
Contact:

Postby space_raptor » Thu Apr 05, 2007 4:37 pm UTC

You know, I don't think Illogical was really trying to prove the existence of an omnipotent super race. He does have an interesting idea. Just because it's completely speculative doesn't mean it doesn't belong in Serious Business. Postulating on the unknowable can still be interesting, even if you can't back it up with your "science" and your "logic".

I think it would be pretty cool if there were superadvanced beings who could manipulate pure energy, and through their actions cause galaxies and planets to be formed. Maybe it just takes a few billion years to evolve both biologically and technologically* until such things are possible.

That said, I doubt they'd take an interest in humans. Maybe to the point where they'd create a planet with certain conditions, but I doubt they'd be interested in the activities of some tiny animals on it.


*Perhaps at some point the two become the same thing!
The drinking will continue until morale improves.

User avatar
Shro
science genius girl
Posts: 2139
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:31 am UTC
Location: im in ur heartz, stealin ur luv.
Contact:

Postby Shro » Thu Apr 05, 2007 4:50 pm UTC

I always had this silly little idea of how we control the cells within our body kind of like a god would control us. I'm an "atheist" in the fact that I don't believe in some supernatural being, but instead believe that somehow, cosmologically, we are made of the stuffs of these supernatural beings.

I feel that due to our ridiculous lack on intelligence, we shouldn't even try to typify what this supernatural being is like. There's no evidence of there even being a supernatural being, other than this feeling of connected-ness I have with other human beings, with other places, ideas, thoughts, feelings. I feel like those things can't just be inconsequential byproducts of the human brain because of the multitude of connections everyone has with people.

Illogical Logician wrote:I would give them as much pain and beauty as I thought they could stand. I would want them to evolve, to grow, to learn! I would want them to feel so desperate to get off their lovely little rock, that they would look up at the stars, feel that raging awe inside them, and let nothing get in the way of their dreams of what might be possible.


That was very poetic. Especially for after being awake for 34 hours.
argyl3: My idea of being a rebel is splitting infinitives.
Alisto: Rebel without a clause?

I made this thing:
www.justthetipcalculator.com

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Postby Belial » Thu Apr 05, 2007 5:05 pm UTC

You know, I don't think Illogical was really trying to prove the existence of an omnipotent super race. He does have an interesting idea. Just because it's completely speculative doesn't mean it doesn't belong in Serious Business. Postulating on the unknowable can still be interesting, even if you can't back it up with your "science" and your "logic".

I think it would be pretty cool if there were superadvanced beings who could manipulate pure energy, and through their actions cause galaxies and planets to be formed. Maybe it just takes a few billion years to evolve both biologically and technologically* until such things are possible.


Oh yeah. Don't get me wrong, that would be awesome
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
LE4dGOLEM
is unique......wait, no!!!!
Posts: 5972
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:10 pm UTC
Location: :uoıʇɐɔol

Postby LE4dGOLEM » Thu Apr 05, 2007 5:51 pm UTC

God does not act, even though he is benevolent because it is better to learn for ourselves what is okay/doable and what is not. Would telling a child what to do and how to do it, and whether or not they could or should do it all the damn time make it mature, learn or grow? Even if it did, would it be the most productive way to do so?
Image Une See Fights - crayon super-ish hero webcomic!
doogly wrote:It would just be much better if it were not shitty.

User avatar
Rorgg
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:06 pm UTC

Postby Rorgg » Thu Apr 05, 2007 5:59 pm UTC

Or there is no god to act.

If it's indistinguishable, why work on an assumption?

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Postby Belial » Thu Apr 05, 2007 6:06 pm UTC

God does not act, even though he is benevolent because it is better to learn for ourselves what is okay/doable and what is not. Would telling a child what to do and how to do it, and whether or not they could or should do it all the damn time make it mature, learn or grow? Even if it did, would it be the most productive way to do so?


Assuming he's omnipotent, he defines the rules of the universe, so saying "He doesn't do this because it would spoil us" is a mischaracterization because, very simply, he could change the rules so it *wouldn't* spoil us.

Same with the old argument: "There has to be bad for us to appreciate the good". No. Not really. God, if he exists and has all the power, could have simply created us in such a way that we *could* appreciate the good without the bad.

Which, I have to admit, makes Illogical's story much more likely (though still not likely), as it posits a "god" that *isn't* omnipotent, so much as just *really* powerful.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Solt
Posts: 1912
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:08 am UTC
Location: California

Postby Solt » Thu Apr 05, 2007 6:39 pm UTC

argyl3 wrote:I feel that due to our ridiculous lack on intelligence, we shouldn't even try to typify what this supernatural being is like.


Why are people so negative about our own abilities? That's what I dislike the most about the idea of there being a God or higher being, that it strongly suggests that we are not, in fact, the masters of our own universe. I don't know what it is, but for some reason people are uncomfortable with admitting that humans are quite powerful.

If people would admit that the power and responsibility is in their own hands that we are quite conceivably the most powerful species in the universe, I think they'd do a lot more to better their world while they had a chance, instead of leaving such things to "God."


this feeling of connected-ness I have with other human beings, with other places, ideas, thoughts, feelings. I feel like those things can't just be inconsequential byproducts of the human brain because of the multitude of connections everyone has with people.


I think it's a product of millions of years of evolution. We are born able to exist in and work within a society. That would suggest we need to feel some sort of strong emotional connection to the people around us. Without it, our bonds would be weaker and we'd be less likely to work together and survive.


Illogical Logician wrote:I would give them as much pain and beauty as I thought they could stand. I would want them to evolve, to grow, to learn! I would want them to feel so desperate to get off their lovely little rock, that they would look up at the stars, feel that raging awe inside them, and let nothing get in the way of their dreams of what might be possible.


I must have skipped over this part the first time I read it :)

Beautiful as it sounds, I'd also like to point out another inconsistency- from whence could this powerful species have originated?
"Welding was faster, cheaper and, in theory,

produced a more reliable product. But sailors do

not float on theory, and the welded tankers had a

most annoying habit of splitting in two."

-J.W. Morris

User avatar
A neutral shade of black.
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:14 pm UTC
Location: University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom of Great Britain.
Contact:

Postby A neutral shade of black. » Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:42 pm UTC

Solt wrote:Why are people so negative about our own abilities? (...) I don't know what it is, but for some reason people are uncomfortable with admitting that humans are quite powerful.


Gross speculation: fear, I suppose. That's why religion is so successful; it strips people of having to think for themselves and realising that no, they're not being guided by some all-knowing force, but they really are a tiny speck in the grand frame of things left to its own design, shit happens, and it is possible to screw up due to nothing but random chance.
Image

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Postby Belial » Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:45 pm UTC

A neutral shade of black. wrote:Gross speculation: fear, I suppose. That's why religion is so successful; it strips people of having to think for themselves and realising that no, they're not being guided by some all-knowing force, but they really are a tiny speck in the grand frame of things left to its own design, shit happens, and it is possible to screw up due to nothing but random chance.


"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure."

-Nelson Mandela
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Peshmerga
Mad Hatter
Posts: 2061
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:56 am UTC
Contact:

Postby Peshmerga » Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:47 pm UTC

That is definitely not my deepest fear :<
i hurd u liek mudkips???

User avatar
LE4dGOLEM
is unique......wait, no!!!!
Posts: 5972
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:10 pm UTC
Location: :uoıʇɐɔol

Postby LE4dGOLEM » Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:57 pm UTC

Perhaps God is answerable to a higher-order God?
Image Une See Fights - crayon super-ish hero webcomic!
doogly wrote:It would just be much better if it were not shitty.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Postby Belial » Thu Apr 05, 2007 9:00 pm UTC

Perhaps God is answerable to a higher-order God?


And *that* one isn't benevolent?
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Bluesprite
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:41 am UTC

Postby Bluesprite » Thu Apr 05, 2007 10:57 pm UTC

Rorgg wrote:Or there is no god to act.

If it's indistinguishable, why work on an assumption?


In that case, one can certainly say that they enjoy the aesthetic. I am such a one that feels this way. I do not believe in an interventionist god, nor do I believe in any established religion, but a godless universe doesn't fit with my aesthetic.

So long as one does not appeal to the will of such a god and accepts that such a god is non-interventionist, I don't see any reason not to believe it that isn't fundamentally the same reason as to believe in it, which is to say for the aesthetic that one should not exist.
Where does the light go when the light goes out?

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Postby Belial » Thu Apr 05, 2007 10:58 pm UTC

Ahh, to be able to believe things just because I'd prefer they were true...
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
OmenPigeon
Peddler of Gossamer Lies
Posts: 673
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:08 am UTC
Contact:

Postby OmenPigeon » Thu Apr 05, 2007 11:13 pm UTC

Belial wrote:Ahh, to be able to believe things just because I'd prefer they were true...


Man, I do that all the time.

Sometimes I have a choice between believing two different things, and it doesn't matter at all which I believe. So I choose the one that I'd prefer. Take, for example, free will. I may or may not have it. But either way I'm going to act as though I am actually making all my decisions for myself because it's a useful illusion. So I might as well believe that I do have free will, since it won't change anything.

Other times I just decide that I don't like things the way they are, so I might as well assume they aren't that way. It was snowing last night, for example. Except I didn't really want it to be. So I refused to acknowledge the snow's existence. I wake up this morning, and no snow! The boring and lame among you might say that it melted. The enlightened and awesome among us know that it was never there in the first place.

Reality, quite often, sucks. Why should I be stuck with it all the time?

(N.B.: I know I'm being a little silly. And that trying to retcon reality to my own whims is harmless as long as it stays in my head, but dangerous if I start trying to inflict my reality on others.)
As long as I am alive and well I will continue to feel strongly about prose style, to love the surface of the earth, and to take pleasure in scraps of useless information.
~ George Orwell

User avatar
Bluesprite
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:41 am UTC

Postby Bluesprite » Thu Apr 05, 2007 11:14 pm UTC

Belial wrote:Ahh, to be able to believe things just because I'd prefer they were true...


Why not?

If an assumption leads to no conclusions, who cares? The assertion that there is no god leads to no conclusions except that interventionist religion is incorrect.
Where does the light go when the light goes out?

User avatar
A neutral shade of black.
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:14 pm UTC
Location: University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom of Great Britain.
Contact:

Postby A neutral shade of black. » Fri Apr 06, 2007 1:29 am UTC

Bluesprite wrote:Why not?


Because of how blown out of proportion things like the Catholic Church are, and how the resulting set of (in this case, christian) morals pervade every aspect of our lives and force us to abide by their (often nonsensical) rules. I wrote a long-ish post about that, but decided it'd be best off in a separate thread. It was a tad off-topic from the original post.
Last edited by A neutral shade of black. on Fri Apr 06, 2007 2:28 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Image

User avatar
space_raptor
Posts: 1497
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 5:02 pm UTC
Location: Calgary
Contact:

Postby space_raptor » Fri Apr 06, 2007 1:49 am UTC

The Catholic Church pervades every aspect of your life and forces you to live by it's rules? Huh. I suggest you move, then. That's not what its like where I live.
The drinking will continue until morale improves.

User avatar
A neutral shade of black.
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:14 pm UTC
Location: University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom of Great Britain.
Contact:

Postby A neutral shade of black. » Fri Apr 06, 2007 2:28 am UTC

space_raptor wrote:The Catholic Church pervades every aspect of your life and forces you to live by it's rules?


Not just the Catholic Church, but christianism in general - it's an integral part in the history of the Western world, and you can easily notice it. Most people's value systems are based on the christian virtues and sins. That's the kind of "forcing to live by its rules" I meant. As I said, I made a longer post on the subject in another thread.
Image

Fluff
See You Next Tuesday
Posts: 1085
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:27 am UTC
Location: The Departure Lounge

Postby Fluff » Fri Apr 06, 2007 3:03 am UTC

LE4dGOLEM wrote:Perhaps God is answerable to a higher-order God?


It's turtles all the way down.

User avatar
TheTankengine
Our Fora-father
Posts: 3328
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:09 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, KY
Contact:

Postby TheTankengine » Fri Apr 06, 2007 5:05 am UTC

I, for one, am very much in support of this particular sentiment:
If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. If there can be anything without a cause, it may just as well be the world as God, so that there cannot be any validity in that argument. It is exactly of the same nature as the Hindu's view, that the world rested upon an elephant and the elephant rested upon a tortoise; and when they said, "How about the tortoise?" the Indian said, "Suppose we change the subject."
be centered
be compassionate
be interesting

siren
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 4:45 am UTC
Location: New Brunswick, NJ/Va

Re: Why I am Not an Atheist

Postby siren » Sat Apr 07, 2007 8:21 pm UTC

Illogical Logician wrote:
Now, speaking for myself, if I were at this stage in my life, I would most certainly go find myself a kickin’ primordial planet somewhere, seed it up with some cosmic lovin’, and get the cycle going once again. Over the epochs I would mess things up a little. I wouldn’t always seem like a benevolent god, and I certainly wouldn’t give them a paradise (well… maybe just a taste, just to screw with their heads). It seems to be that it is awfully easy to sit back during the easy times, and not really be too concerned with anything outside of comfortable boundaries of life. I would give them as much pain and beauty as I thought they could stand. I would want them to evolve, to grow, to learn! I would want them to feel so desperate to get off their lovely little rock, that they would look up at the stars, feel that raging awe inside them, and let nothing get in the way of their dreams of what might be possible.




I identify myself as an agnostic, though i was raised christian/baptist. But this reminds me of a thought i always enjoyed: That we are one of a god-like entities little experiements. We are an ant farm. I don't think there is someone out there poking at the world causing natural disasters and such. I kind of think it is just watching, to see what happens. I don't know, it seems kind of detached, but for some reason the idea always comforted me. It is distressing to feel like, whatever you do, that things will turn out a certain way because someone bigger or more powerful wants it to be that way.

In general, one of my biggest problems with religion is the forced morality. Not because I am an "immoral" person, but too many people don't do things because it is against god, not because they think it is wrong or unfair or mean. I can be a good person because it makes me feel good to be that person. Not because i fear hell or god's wrath.

User avatar
LE4dGOLEM
is unique......wait, no!!!!
Posts: 5972
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:10 pm UTC
Location: :uoıʇɐɔol

Postby LE4dGOLEM » Sat Apr 07, 2007 8:31 pm UTC

Fluff wrote:
LE4dGOLEM wrote:Perhaps God is answerable to a higher-order God?


It's turtles all the way down.


Turtles swim though..?
Image Une See Fights - crayon super-ish hero webcomic!
doogly wrote:It would just be much better if it were not shitty.

User avatar
duckshirt
Posts: 567
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:41 am UTC
Location: Pacific Northwest

Postby duckshirt » Mon Apr 09, 2007 1:44 am UTC

TheTankengine wrote:I, for one, am very much in support of this particular sentiment:
If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. If there can be anything without a cause, it may just as well be the world as God, so that there cannot be any validity in that argument. It is exactly of the same nature as the Hindu's view, that the world rested upon an elephant and the elephant rested upon a tortoise; and when they said, "How about the tortoise?" the Indian said, "Suppose we change the subject."
So basically there are two choices:
1. God just exists
2. The universe just exists

Neither one seems logical, but which one would make more sense? A finite universe being illogical, or an infinite God who created logic seeming illogical to his creation? An atheist would say #2 is more because it uses fewer words and is simpler, but I say #1, because I would rather have a full explanation that gives an answer than a simple, unexplained one.
lol everything matters
-Ed

Fluff
See You Next Tuesday
Posts: 1085
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:27 am UTC
Location: The Departure Lounge

Postby Fluff » Mon Apr 09, 2007 2:15 am UTC

Richard Feynman wrote:It is a great adventure to contemplate the universe, beyond man, to contemplate the universe without man, as it was in a great part of its long history and as it is in a great majority of places. When this objective view is finally attained, and the mystery and majesty are fully appreciated to then turn the objective eye back on man viewed as matter, to see life as part of this universal mystery of greatest depth, is to sense an experience which is very rare and very exciting. It usually ends in laughter and a delight in the futility of trying to understand what this atom in the universe is, this thing—atoms with curiosity—that looks at itself and wonders why it wonders. Well, these scientific views end in awe and mystery, lost at the edge in uncertainty, but they appear to be so deep and so impressive that the theory that it was all arranged as a stage for God to watch man's struggle for good and evil seems inadequate.

User avatar
yy2bggggs
Posts: 1261
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 6:42 am UTC

Postby yy2bggggs » Mon Apr 09, 2007 3:01 am UTC

duckshirt wrote:An atheist would say #2 is more because it uses fewer words and is simpler, but I say #1, because I would rather have a full explanation that gives an answer than a simple, unexplained one.

#1 explains no more than #2.

User avatar
ArmonSore
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 10:40 pm UTC
Location: Pennsylvania, United States
Contact:

Postby ArmonSore » Mon Apr 09, 2007 3:21 am UTC

Solt wrote:If people would admit that the power and responsibility is in their own hands that we are quite conceivably the most powerful species in the universe, I think they'd do a lot more to better their world while they had a chance, instead of leaving such things to "God."


This is my point of view exactly. When I was younger my father used to say things like "What man can perceive, man can acheive." And I was fascinated by our abilities to create airplanes, cars etc. More recently I've been fascinated by our brilliant formulations of Mathematics and Physics. It is utterly bizarre to me that there would be a super-race in the universe that has surpassed us, and even went so far as to create us. While it is possible, I find it highly unlikely (based purely on my opinion).

Human beings are the greatest.
I was useful Yesterday.
-Paul McCartney.

User avatar
Pathway
Leon Sumbitches...?
Posts: 647
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 5:59 pm UTC

Re: Why I am Not an Atheist

Postby Pathway » Mon Apr 09, 2007 4:52 am UTC

What Illogical Logician is saying is that, once we cure him of his irrational optimism, he will be an atheist. :lol:

User avatar
Pathway
Leon Sumbitches...?
Posts: 647
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 5:59 pm UTC

Postby Pathway » Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:06 am UTC

ArmonSore wrote:
Solt wrote:If people would admit that the power and responsibility is in their own hands that we are quite conceivably the most powerful species in the universe, I think they'd do a lot more to better their world while they had a chance, instead of leaving such things to "God."


This is my point of view exactly. When I was younger my father used to say things like "What man can perceive, man can acheive." And I was fascinated by our abilities to create airplanes, cars etc. More recently I've been fascinated by our brilliant formulations of Mathematics and Physics. It is utterly bizarre to me that there would be a super-race in the universe that has surpassed us, and even went so far as to create us. While it is possible, I find it highly unlikely (based purely on my opinion).

Human beings are the greatest.


What happens once we surpass ourselves, though? If we have the capacity to do so then what's to stop another race from achieving less, but still achieving as much as we have so far?

I think there is quite a lot we haven't touched yet, compared to what's out there, even though we're the most powerful, knowledgeable species in the known Universe. :lol: So compared to what's possible--we're nothing. And if that peculiar subset of the possible, the optimal, ever comes about, it'll make all our glory look like a sand castle.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Postby Belial » Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:21 am UTC

yy2bggggs wrote:
duckshirt wrote:An atheist would say #2 is more because it uses fewer words and is simpler, but I say #1, because I would rather have a full explanation that gives an answer than a simple, unexplained one.

#1 explains no more than #2.


Pretty much. There's nothing *more* sensical about a sentient, omnipotent being coming into existence for no reason than an ordered, rational universe coming into existence for no reason.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
ArmonSore
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 10:40 pm UTC
Location: Pennsylvania, United States
Contact:

Postby ArmonSore » Mon Apr 09, 2007 2:17 pm UTC

Pathway:

This is why I inserted the clause "based purely on my opinion".

I am well aware that I cannot justify the claim that we are the greatest. And of course it's possible that someone has already gotten to the place that we're going to. But here's the punchline: I happen to think that we are unique. Only human beings can discover the secrets of the universe.

This is my opinion, nothing more. It cannot be argued.
I was useful Yesterday.

-Paul McCartney.


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests