Is there a value to belief?

Rev Hellfire

Most of the topics here have concerned themselves with whether one proposition or another is true/false. I’m curious though not just on the truth of religion but also the value in the belief of it.

It could be said that in many ways atheism is the reserve of the privileged (and that includes us here) who have no need of the emotional support that such religious beliefs give. For example the poor believer may accept their lot safe in the knowledge that a better world awaits them, the parents of a sick child may be prepared to let a child die in the hope they will get another turn on the cycle of life and you on your death bed may slip away content in the belief that you to go to a better place. Extreme examples yes, but that is when people turn to god. And for them it offers huge support in times of turmoil.

So the hypothetical question I have is if you found irrefutable proof that there is both no god and no afterlife would you release it?

Many will say the truth must come out, but then I’m sure these people also carry secrets, things whose release cause more damage than the value of the information. Is to lie sometimes the right thing to do? And something’s are better kept unknown ?

Dades

Rev Hellfire wrote:

So the hypothetical question I have is if you found irrefutable proof that there is both no god and no afterlife would you release it?

Interesting questions.

I wonder if we had this conversation 500 years ago would what we have learned from science up to now not be considered irrefutable evidence? I don't mean to suggest that we have explained the origins of life, but only that there has been enough evidence put forward in the last 500 years to strongly support the notion that the old religions are simply myths.

Which relates to your other point. Religion has not died, instead it has flourished. IMO it has remained because of the need to believe, and because even in the light of science it is impossible to prove something doesn't exist. Check out the creationist threads on the Christianity board for stalwart defence of very precarious stance.

I agree with the notion that atheism is, if nothing else, easier to stomach when life is peachy. It's then a true belief, not tainted by needs or wants. But some, or all of us will feel the pull throughout our lives - that yearning to believe that there is more for either ourselves or someone we love.

Beruthiel

Rev Hellfire wrote:

So the hypothetical question I have is if you found irrefutable proof that there is both no god and no afterlife would you release it?

people of strong faith still wouldn't believe you and I think I would feel bad to shove that in their faces. I have no problem with people believing in whatever their religion is, if it brings them comfort, where's the harm?


or all of us will feel the pull throughout our lives - that yearning to believe that there is more for either ourselves or someone we love.

indeed, so far, I have never in my life had to deal with any pain bad enough to make me desperate enough to need the help of an outside sourse, I have found the strength within.
In saying that, nobody close to me has died yet and I know it's in the post, will deal with that one though when it arrives..

Asiaprod

Rev Hellfire wrote:

So the hypothetical question I have is if you found irrefutable proof that there is both no god and no afterlife would you release it?

Well, if the proof was irrefutable, the only logical answer would have to be yes

Rev Hellfire wrote:

Is to lie sometimes the right thing to do? And something’s are better kept unknown ?

I think it is acceptable to lie. What would you do if you had a young child who was about to die and asked you was there a God and would she be going to a better place? If it made her less afraid to die and gave her comfort in her final hour I would lie through my teeth to comfort her. The issue here is not about what I think. I t does not matter what I think, what matters is what I can do to get her through the final suffering.

nesf

So many people draw so much strenght from their faith that I'd be loath to see that end. It would leave a vacuum in many people's lives.

Kernel

nesf wrote:

So many people draw so much strenght from their faith that I'd be loath to see that end. It would leave a vacuum in many people's lives.

yeah I agree. If I choose to believe there is life after death, and another chooses to believe there is not (is there actually any proof for either belief? I think there are cases which would lead me to believe there is a continuation to my existence), then who will be happier in death - or in life for that matter?

I'll tell you who will be: me, who has faith and believes in a point to my life and a final justice in the universe.

nesf

kernal, you misinterpret me. I said draws strenght, not is happier. A religious person can be distraught when they can't align reality and their beliefs. I've seen families that have lost two very young children within a year of each other suffer greatly because of their belief "that it's part of the plan".

There's no winning side here. Both sides have their advantages and disadvantages.

Kernel

nesf wrote:

kernal, you misinterpret me. I said draws strenght, not is happier. A religious person can be distraught when they can't align reality and their beliefs. I've seen families that have lost two very young children within a year of each other suffer greatly because of their belief "that it's part of the plan".

There's no winning side here. Both sides have their advantages and disadvantages.

I understand what you mean by strength as opposed to happiness. Happiness is often hard to find in today's overcomplicated world. But I think if one has a faith in a divine plan or in a just and pleasant afterlife, then it will at least give them one less reason to be unhappy and confused/lost. Faith can be hard to hold onto though, especially after bad things happen.

At least the family will have some comfort in the belief that their children are in a better place than this physical existence, I know it must be a horrible experience for them, but it's something better than them believing they'll never see their children again.

robindch

> If I choose to believe there is life after death, and another chooses
> to believe there is not, then who will be happier in death - or in life
> for that matter?

A good question. My own personal belief is that I'll live a happier life believing that this is, most likely, the one and only shot I'll get at life. I might be able to make myself a bit happier by making myself believe that I'll live on after I die, or that there's a man in the sky who loves me, or that I'll win the lottery next week. But it seems to make me more cheerful to reduce one's expectations and have them unexpectedly and happily expanded, rather than expecting a lot, and then having nothing delivered.

Or more succinctly, what's it better -- to have to deal with (a) the almost continual disappointment of believing you're in with a chance to win next week's lottery, and not winning, or (b) to believe that you're probably not gong to win, then find you you occasionally do? Seems an obvious choice to me!

Rev Hellfire

I'm not sure the lottery is the best example to use

Assuming its the afterlife you're talking about since there is no disappointment if there is no afterlife
You either win or you never know you've lost.

Rev Hellfire

I would disagree also with the idea that religion gives either strength or happiness.
I believe it gives hope, from which both strength and happiness can flower.

That is religions greatest gift in my own opinion, and to be honest it is a thing I envy in those with a strong religious conviction.
The idea that in your darkest hour you are never truly alone and that a better outcome is truly possible.

Dades

Rev Hellfire wrote:

I would disagree also with the idea that religion gives either strength or happiness.
I believe it gives hope, from which both strength and happiness can flower.

I'm not sure - though it is a bit of a non-issue.

People would have gained strength from the belief that "God" is on their side. Going back to the crusades even.

I agree there is a lot to envy in religion - in a very personal way. Unfortunately the religion we see in public life every day is a different animal. We see the self-serving institutions, and in extreme cases incitement to hatred.

Kernel

Rev Hellfire wrote:

I'm not sure the lottery is the best example to use

Assuming its the afterlife you're talking about since there is no disappointment if there is no afterlife
You either win or you never know you've lost.

Exactly. I think it's a no brainer to say that if you believe in a happy and just afterlife and a point to living your (often times difficult) life, then you'll be more likely to experience some kind of peace/strength/contentment/happiness/calmness than someone who essentially believes... nothing.

robindch

> it's a no brainer to say that if you believe in a happy and just
> afterlife and a point to living your (often times difficult) life, then
> you'll be more likely to experience some kind of peace/strength/contentment/happiness/calmness than someone
> who essentially believes... nothing.

Er, I don't believe "nothing" -- where did you get this idea from? And do you think that it's a good idea to believe in anything at all just because it makes you happy? Isn't that a bit stupid?

pH

Kernel wrote:

Exactly. I think it's a no brainer to say that if you believe in a happy and just afterlife and a point to living your (often times difficult) life, then you'll be more likely to experience some kind of peace/strength/contentment/happiness/calmness than someone who essentially believes... nothing.

It surely is the opposite of a 'no brainer' (a brainer?). There are plenty of examples, but for instance isn't there a standard cliche of a catholic living a life wracked with guilt?

Belief in a god, and his trying to follow his rules can lead to a lot of worry, aniexety and stress.

Kernel

pH wrote:

It surely is the opposite of a 'no brainer' (a brainer?). There are plenty of examples, but for instance isn't there a standard cliche of a catholic living a life wracked with guilt?

Belief in a god, and his trying to follow his rules can lead to a lot of worry, aniexety and stress.

It depends on the religion, of course, and your own interpretation of it. I'm not wracked with guilt at all, and I'm a 'filthy sinner'.

To Robindch: if you have no evidence of the existence of the afterlife, and no evidence of the nonexistence of the afterlife, then yeah, I'd rather believe in the afterlife. The bottle is half full. Nobody knows for certain whether it is true or not, it's a matter of faith.

Sapien

Kernel wrote:

To Robindch: if you have no evidence of the existence of the afterlife, and no evidence of the nonexistence of the afterlife, then yeah, I'd rather believe in the afterlife. The bottle is half full. Nobody knows for certain whether it is true or not, it's a matter of faith.

Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.

I dare you...

Asiaprod

Sapien wrote:

Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.

I dare you...

I have always liked the other definition best

The K.I.S.S. principle, (Keep It Simple Stupid)

Dades

My own variant used to be my sig:

"When you hear hooves, don't think of zebras."

Kernel

Sapien wrote:

Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.

I dare you...

Yes, but the simpler, and the more likely to me is that the universe was created and is maintained with an 'intelligent' design, therefore, i will believe in a God/creator.

To me there is more evidence to that than to the more selfish and unlikely principle of a fluke universe and existence. Do you not agree my friend?

Dades

Kernel wrote:

To me there is more evidence to that than to the more selfish and unlikely principle of a fluke universe and existence. Do you not agree my friend?

I'm at a loss as to how believing in life arising by chance is "selfish".

On the other hand, some might suggest arrogance in the belief that we were made in the image of god, and that we are the chosen bone-bags out of the entire, mind-bendingly enormous cosmos.

Sapien

Kernel wrote:

Yes, but the simpler, and the more likely to me is that the universe was created and is maintained with an 'intelligent' design, therefore, i will believe in a God/creator.

To me there is more evidence to that than to the more selfish and unlikely principle of a fluke universe and existence. Do you not agree my friend?

I do not. I'm with William of Ockham on this one.

The "Designer" constitutes an extra entity, in addition to the universe. There are now two things to be explained. This is not parsimony. Bad!

Kernel

Sapien wrote:

I do not. I'm with William of Ockham on this one.

The "Designer" constitutes an extra entity, in addition to the universe. There are now two things to be explained. This is not parsimony. Bad!

But the theory that the universe and all the laws of it and of reality and life itself are a matter of fluke is not an adequate solution to me. Not at all.

You believe in angelic and demonic beings and forces of nature and intelligence which exist outside the physical plane, but don't extend this belief to a supreme creator?

Kernel

The Atheist wrote:

I'm at a loss as to how believing in life arising by chance is "selfish".

On the other hand, some might suggest arrogance in the belief that we were made in the image of god, and that we are the chosen bone-bags out of the entire, mind-bendingly enormous cosmos.

Apologies, selfish was of course the wrong word to use, I should have chosen arrogant of course. The belief that we are created in God's 'image' or that we are his chosen bone bags, is not necessarily something I believe either, and is not necessary in believing that there is intelligent design to the universe.

Sapien

Kernel wrote:

You believe in angelic and demonic beings and forces of nature and intelligence which exist outside the physical plane, but don't extend this belief to a supreme creator?

Well, in some senses I do, but for more intelligent reasons than a failure to appreciate the anthropic principle.

Kernel

Sapien wrote:

Well, in some senses I do, but for more intelligent reasons than a failure to appreciate the anthropic principle.

You believe in God so, good. My work here is done, another soul saved from eternal damnation.

Stephen

:rolleyes:

al_g

Rev Hellfire wrote:

Most of the topics here have concerned themselves with whether one proposition or another is true/false. I’m curious though not just on the truth of religion but also the value in the belief of it.

It could be said that in many ways atheism is the reserve of the privileged (and that includes us here) who have no need of the emotional support that such religious beliefs give. For example the poor believer may accept their lot safe in the knowledge that a better world awaits them, the parents of a sick child may be prepared to let a child die in the hope they will get another turn on the cycle of life and you on your death bed may slip away content in the belief that you to go to a better place. Extreme examples yes, but that is when people turn to god. And for them it offers huge support in times of turmoil.

So the hypothetical question I have is if you found irrefutable proof that there is both no god and no afterlife would you release it?

Many will say the truth must come out, but then I’m sure these people also carry secrets,is that there is no knowledge things whose release cause more damage than the value of the information. Is to lie sometimes the right thing to do? And something’s are better kept unknown ?

I'm new here to this site but ive always been curious why people cannot accept the concept that when you die you decompose and that it is for eternity-oblivion. I would not say i am an atheist but an agnostic, for as a wise man said once "the greatest knowledge is that there is no knowledge", why are people afraid of the void surely it is akin to an eternal sleep without disturbing dreams? What gets people is that there may be an indifferent higher being impervious to the prayers said so that little jimmy will pass ahis inter cert with honours.

Dave!

Rev Hellfire wrote:

So the hypothetical question I have is if you found irrefutable proof that there is both no god and no afterlife would you release it?

Good question! I think I'd release it... I say that because, if a god DOES in fact exist, then he's all that matters in the universe! Everything else becomes irrelevent I guess. I mean, what's the point in taking part in scientific discovery if you know that god is behind it all? What's the point in trying to stay alive as long as possible if you're going to be reunited with your deceased relatives in heaven?

If I knew for a fact that a god exists, then I'd dedicate my life to him in a real way, and spend every waking second trying to please him so that myself and my family are granted eternal salvation. I'd study the sh*t out of theology until I think I know what god wants me to do.

Everything else on earth becomes inconsequential really... It's eternal salvation that you should be after.

I find it hard to understand people who supposedly believe in god, but they don't pray to him, or read any religious texts or anything. I guess they assume that they'll be let into heaven based on their good deeds in life. But if I were shown evidence that he exists, then I'd be praying to him like a motherf*cker!

Hivemind187

Rev Hellfire wrote:

Most of the topics here have concerned themselves with whether one proposition or another is true/false. I’m curious though not just on the truth of religion but also the value in the belief of it.

It could be said that in many ways atheism is the reserve of the privileged (and that includes us here) who have no need of the emotional support that such religious beliefs give. For example the poor believer may accept their lot safe in the knowledge that a better world awaits them, the parents of a sick child may be prepared to let a child die in the hope they will get another turn on the cycle of life and you on your death bed may slip away content in the belief that you to go to a better place. Extreme examples yes, but that is when people turn to god. And for them it offers huge support in times of turmoil.

So the hypothetical question I have is if you found irrefutable proof that there is both no god and no afterlife would you release it?

Many will say the truth must come out, but then I’m sure these people also carry secrets, things whose release cause more damage than the value of the information. Is to lie sometimes the right thing to do? And something’s are better kept unknown ?

It all depends on who is asking the question.

If the church asks the question, "is there a value to belief" (where such belief implies the faith in a monotheistic God head supported by the doctrinal dogma of organised religion) then they would say "Yes! Of course it has value".

The reason is that the church, in order to survive and for the God Head to survive, requires followers with money willing to allow themselves to be controlled and placed in a position of consentual servitude. This affords the God-head, and his keepers the Church, vaast power and control over the followers and the society they constitute.

This same rationale can be aplied to the likes of governments (especially totalitarian regiemes, theocratic regiemes and those who rely on irrational patriotism or nationalism to maintain control).

To an individual the answers are based on perception rather than tangible gain. If they feel that religion and a god head provides them with answers, or comforts them to the point where they do not feel they need answers then they would say that it has value. On the other hand, should they feel that the implications of the above coupled with irrational answers without evidence or that rely on faith does not satisfy them then they are likely to claim it does not have value in and of itself.

Does it actually have value though? I would say, outside of the above examples, it has none what so ever, in that it provides no tangible benefit that is biologically or economically viable.

Oh yes, and I would definitely release it. People can take comfort in all sorts of things not just religion. Maybe if they did things would be better, maybe they would be worse. But the truth is the truth no matter which way you cut it.

Asiaprod

DaveMcG wrote:

But if I were shown evidence that he exists, then I'd be praying to him like a motherf*cker!

That probably answers it for all of us:).

JoeB-

You can't prove a negative... so the question is flawed. Hypothetically I would release the impossible proof.

No one can prove beyond douth that the sun isn't a God... or that there isn't a God of the ocean, i.e Neptune or whatever. Or that Spaghetti Monsterism isn't true....

It is just extremely unlikely that any of the above things are Gods... as it is extremely unlikely that any Gods exist at all....

Zombrex

Kernel wrote:

But the theory that the universe and all the laws of it and of reality and life itself are a matter of fluke is not an adequate solution to me. Not at all.

I would imagine the universe, if it could talk, would say to you that all 96 billion light years of it are not here to make you feel better about life.

Whether you find the theory adequate or not is irrelevant to if it is likely or not.

It is very very unlikely that the universe was created by an intelligence, and there certainly is no evidence of this conclusion has ever been discovered (I don't get how this could happen naturally is NOT evidence btw)

Even more unlikely is the idea that this intelligence, if it exists, has any particular interest in the biological animals living on one small rather cold planet orbiting one of the billions of stars in a corner of one of the billions of galaxies in the known universe.

JoeB-

Religious comfort is only available to those who are religious... people who have never being religious simply cope in different ways, admittedly those 'ways' may not be perfect but then there is no 'perfect' answer to mans mortality.

Clinging to, or accepting a delusion simply because it offers 'delusional' people comfort isn't necessarily a good thing in my opinion. These same religious values which may offer some people comfort also definitely have negative consequences, I genuinely believe that religion on the whole is more a force for evil and non tolerance than it is a force for good...

So even though religion may offer some people some comfort I still feel we should strive to eliminate it from society... on the whole that would result in the most 'good'.

Cheers
Joe