Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Part 2)

tommy2bad wrote: »

Self conscious maybe, a huge factor in religious affiliation and I include nationalism, socialism and man utd as religions, is self identity.
It's as much about how we perceive ourselves as about how we perceive reality.
By that rationale of course atheism is a religiously motivated affiliation so it can't be the whole story. If we define religion as loosely as this then everything and nothing is religion.
Theirs a point where a thing changes from conviction born of reason to ideology held to by more than just rational thought.

In the example of nationalism fixed points would be needed for there to be any progress in debating the pros and cons of it.
In my theoretical Irish nationalist the starting points would be that there is a physical place called Ireland, inhabited by real people, some of whom would define themselves as nationalists. Debate could then start.
This thread shows that it's not so easy with a deity!
Perceptions of reality. Reality as it is(?) and how we would like it to be.
A decade ago there was a newspaper report of a man who meandered home from the pub only to find he'd lost his front door key.
He tried to climb through a window and got stuck - he was an overweight man.
In a film or a tv sitcom this would be a cue for hilarity. Overweight, drunken man stuck in a window, half in half out. Cue relatives and/or neighbours arriving. Much derision and embarrassment.
In reality the house was empty and unheated, it was winter with sub-zero temperatures.
The man was found in the morning frozen to death.
We supply our interpretations to our perception of reality.
In this case reality was sadly lacking in humour.
As I've suggested before, we may be able to infer some values of the agency running this universe from our perceptions of our experiences here.

tommy2bad wrote: »

Yeah if only it were that simple, if you think you can reason a nationalist into a position of, what's the polar opposite of nationalism? Internationalism? Go for it.
I'm wondering if existence of god and how we interpret his desires is pretty much the same argument, I feel threatened by other opinions and will retreat into siege mode once challenged.
It stops being a rational argument and becomes personal. Rationally I can reason why I believe, I make no claim that the same reasons will convince you, nor should they. However I do get irritated when someone keeps saying " that's just stupid, you must be a disillusioned peasant to believe in iron age superstition" I'm not sure if it's the affront to my sense of what makes a good counterargument or if it's a personal insult that someone would have such an opinion of me. Then again I get irritated by a lot of the " the bible says" arguments too.
I could just be contrary.

Well, for me, the nationalist example was simply that - an example of what may be discovered by what is before us.
If someone wants a stick to hit the "other side" they'll find it.
In fairness if we contribute to this thread it's not unreasonable to be questioned about our posts.
But I know what you mean.
I put together what I think is a brilliant point and someone then finds the (usual) flaws in it!
I find this thread obliging me to think carefully abut what I'm trying to gain from it. Hopefully not just an ego-boost.

Max I think you nailed it, the creed we espouse becomes superior to any truth, we become willing to defend it with actions our creed condemns, using special pleading to justified why this is an exception.
Makes no difference whether it God or Chelsea or Intel versus amd, we define our validity by the validity of out chosen brand.

This thread is getting depressing! Devoid of hope and filled with despair at the sight of humanity in its naked ignorance. Turn to God I tell you! , for a small contribution towards costs, I can offer you hope and a reason to rejoice!

O.k. I've been drinking, sorry!

tommy2bad wrote: »

O.k. I've been drinking, sorry!

*checks time*

banned

:pac:

MaxWig wrote: »

I would. Consciousness of our own death to be more specific. Its an absurd predicament, and unique in the animal kingdom (to the best of our knowledge).

Culture, including religion, is our attempt to transcend the physical limits that seem impossibly out of sync with our unlimited imagination.

Our animal nature, or creatureliness, is something we are absolutely unwilling to acknowledge. We disavow it - and shun, ridicule and ostracise those who fail to do so also.

But death hangs around, and when it raises its head, two things happen. We become viciously protective of our own particular culture, while at the same time shedding like clothes the high values that characterise that same culture. We destroy all in front of us, and lose all the respect for human life that provides the basis for civilisation.

From this perspective, yes even atheism has the potential to be religious. In a clash of two peoples divided only by belief or non belief, there would be nothing to distinguish them in terms of the violence they would visit upon each other, provided the survival of each 'culture' depended on victory. Custom and tradition are sacred, regardless of the culture.

So, aware of our own mortality, do we look for a way out, an escape from the inevitable?

MaxWig wrote: »

We seek immortality.
Or the closest thing to it.

If we ourselves can't live on in the minds of others, we at least seek to be part of something that will.

Religion. Ideology. Art. Children.

Something of us must remain. There is nothing sadder, more pathetic to us than a (wo)man forgotten before they die. Our worst fear. As though it makes a difference.

Men and women will walk over fire, through bullets if it means they will be a cultural hero. That they will be remembered among their peers, and that their peers will continue the culture they themselves gave their lives to.

If we take for granted that our biology determines our behaviour, it stands to reason that there is a psychological reflection of this.

Reason is one thing.

Reality another.

For some this desire ends with the production of offspring. I'm told it's a kind of immortality. Don't get it myself. Your children are here for themselves, as we were as children.
Who wants to be remembered?
As Woody Allen put it, "I don't want to live on in peoples hearts - I want to live on in my apartment".

Angrybastard wrote: »

Religion, if you break it down, with it's moral codes (subjective, of course) and promises of an afterlife, is just an insurance policy.
As somebody above said, we seek immortality.
Or meaning.

Religion is just a way of justifying life and booking a place in the forever after.
The fact that billions of people put their faith in various religions doesn't mean it isn't just silly.

Yeah trying to justify life, that's just silly! I mean what do we want a meaning for? Isn't it enough to eat sleep and occasionally shag? It's like these religious types think we are more than just beasts in the field.

tommy2bad wrote: »

Yeah trying to justify life, that's just silly! I mean what do we want a meaning for? Isn't it enough to eat sleep and occasionally shag? It's like these religious types think we are more than just beasts in the field.

Some try to justify life - I suspect most of the rest spend most of their time just living life. Is one right or are they both?
We try to explain life, and sometimes explain it away - and how often do we feel overcome and try to blot it out - not think at all.
I'd like to think we are more than just beasts in the fields. But we can't deny our similarities to other creatures - so hopefully our difference is not just a matter of degree.
Having said that I've just enjoyed eating part of one of those beasts - nice piece of beef.
The cat was waiting for me as I came home. Eye contact, verbal communication ("Meow") and this continued until I opened the tin - whereupon it took no more notice of me.
The trouble with the world as we experience it is that it's so awfully real.

tommy2bad wrote: »

Yeah trying to justify life, that's just silly! I mean what do we want a meaning for? Isn't it enough to eat sleep and occasionally shag? It's like these religious types think we are more than just beasts in the field.

Trying to justify life by viewing it through the lens of a myth isn't clever.
No matter how popular that myth might be.

Angrybastard wrote: »

Trying to justify life by viewing it through the lens of a myth isn't clever.

While I don't think it has anything to do with justification - without the myth, there's nothing to justify.

No matter how popular that myth might be.

The implication being (always) that faith based religions are delusional because there is often references to mythical stories/parables?

I don't get the point!

silverharp wrote: »

It becomes neurotic though. If you look at animal behavioural studies where you set up feeding routines based on reward and then you mess with them before long the poor animal is doing all kinds of elaborate dances to try and fix the situstion , the human cargo cults are similar.

Not sure what a 'human cargo cult' is, but if you are suggesting that religion is similar to the animal experiment - it really, really isn't.

If you go on YouTube and type in Rapture , there seems to be a whole Christian sub cult of people expecting the rapture as soon as the day they post the video which is amusing if you see one that's years old. Its not healthy, you can't invest in your own future or the present for that matter if you think you are heading into the clouds any day now

This is, for me, the issue. You assume that everyone who espouses some religious belief, or hope, is part of a homogeneous group - which is way off the mark.

MaxWig wrote: »

Not sure what a 'human cargo cult' is, but if you are suggesting that religion is similar to the animal experiment - it really, really isn't.



This is, for me, the issue. You assume that everyone who espouses some religious belief, or hope, is part of a homogeneous group - which is way off the mark.

Pacific cargo cults may be clearer.

I see it as a scale ,some beliefs are going to effect someone more in the real world in a negative way more than others. Islam being an example for instance that holds back societies in a tangable way. But even moderate scientific believing Christians are investing a lot of time and energy in a bet without any evidence and in many cases desperately looking for miracles or other signs which must create various levels of self deception

tommy2bad wrote: »

I don't think so! I doubt they invest time or energy in a bet, they invest in themselves. If you really think Christians are in it for the slice of pie in the sky when they die, you don't get it at all.
It's not about heaven or hell, it's far more about justice, fairness and being true to yourself than about any fear of punishment or reward.

But who's definition of Justice tommy ? The RCC, ISIS, Sharia , is this not the old debate in new clothes - objective vs subjective ?

indioblack wrote: »

But I bet you don't own a mythological car - if you have one at all it's a real one, one you can do something with - get in and drive.
Myth, allegory, imagination - vital for us.
But you know as well as anyone there are times when you want to get a bit closer to the actuality. Sometimes that's necessary.

What actuality?

Closer to what?