Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have sympathy for your opinion here. As an atheist, people assume I don't think there could be a god. No. There could be. I just see sufficient evidence to conclude that. I do think that if there is a god, he/she/it is not the christian god. Perhaps a deist god? It's not all black and white.
More to the point, we really should not always be so inclined to insert a god as explanation for what we don't know or understand. Has our history along those lines not well proven how faulty that default sort of "logic and reason" can be?
The inclination to resist that temptation is what I also describe as "the slow maturing of man," because once upon a time that immaturity had us assigning "everything under the sun" to one god or another for the same reason. Wrong! We now know better. Or should know better anyway...
As I understand the definitions, atheists don't say "There is no God", they say, "I believe there is no God." And agnostics say, "I'm not sure if there's a God or not; I'm pretty sure there isn't but I'm willing to entertain the possibility there is." The Christian god is such a repulsive and incompetent character that I'm also convinced beyond any shadow of doubt that if there is a God it is definitely NOT the Christian god.
Depends on the atheist when it comes to what atheists say...
This atheist says there is no evidence or proof that justifies a belief in a god, and in this particular case what we don't know, understand or comprehend is NOT evidence that justifies a belief in a god. It's simply evidence we are not as smart as we think we are. Not simply humble enough to admit we just don't know, yet. No need to call what we don't know or understand a god or a higher power. Been there done that forever now over the course of human history. Our ignorance is not evidence of any such likelihood!
Do you really think so? Our lives are what we make them (after you factor in randomness and that which is out of our control). Hence acceptance (and accountability) plays a big role, whether you believe in a god or not. Perhaps it is because I do not, it is far easier (for me) to accept such vs. blame (which is a toxic way of thinking/dealing).
A bad premise typically leads to a bad conclusion...
That said, I think what thrill typically rails about and/or blames on a higher thing is all that is so challenging for us humans to contend with that is out of our control. Disease, infirmity, aging, natural disasters, death and all that kind of fun stuff.
I would say this is on par, mordant a very good description of my problem with this higher power I call God for convenience. In the first paragraph there just one flaw: this higher power I think orchestrated life here and then abandoned us, it did not make any promises because it is a deist being; it started life and then left us to evolve on our own without any intention of helping us, much like a deadbeat dad who gets a girl pregnant and then skipped town leaving the girl all alone. I feel the way the girl and child would feel: "If you didn't intend to help us out through an anguished tragedy-filled, pain-filled existence then what was your purpose in creating this dunghole we call earth?" We come into this world, we're beset by disease, pain, suffering, the worst life has to offer and then we die. A fortunate few rise to the top 1% but the rest of us live in squalor of one form or another from the cradle to the grave--some of it of our own making but most of it by forces completely out of our control.
It's more complex of course but that is the basic foundation of my disgust with this being.
I was referring to your religious beliefs before becoming a deist. I thought your basis for having expectations of god was that he had certain ... commitments to you as a believer. Perhaps I am wrong? But as a deist I would imagine that it is hard to have such expectations since god is not involved with you (or even has turned away) anyhow.
I am not Mr. Sunshine but tend to see the world as just a little less 100% tragic than you. I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong. But I can generally wring pleasure out of a given day now that I have learned not to get stuck on the aspects of my life that are not what I planned or hoped for. I am not in the "top 1%" but am closer than most I suppose given than I'm debt free and have cobbled together some sort of plausible retirement plan. It is hard for me to know how much of my ability to have any hope or optimism comes from that. If some of the possible scenarios play out in coming months or years, I may get a chance to explore a more ... sparse sort of existence for all I know, and then I'll have a better idea, I guess.
I was referring to your religious beliefs before becoming a deist. I thought your basis for having expectations of god was that he had certain ... commitments to you as a believer. Perhaps I am wrong? But as a deist I would imagine that it is hard to have such expectations since god is not involved with you (or even has turned away) anyhow.
I am not Mr. Sunshine but tend to see the world as just a little less 100% tragic than you. I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong. But I can generally wring pleasure out of a given day now that I have learned not to get stuck on the aspects of my life that are not what I planned or hoped for. I am not in the "top 1%" but am closer than most I suppose given than I'm debt free and have cobbled together some sort of plausible retirement plan. It is hard for me to know how much of my ability to have any hope or optimism comes from that. If some of the possible scenarios play out in coming months or years, I may get a chance to explore a more ... sparse sort of existence for all I know, and then I'll have a better idea, I guess.
I have known people who have experienced such tragedy I can't imagine how they can keep from blaming God for such imaginable pain and suffering. When those sorts of emotions are generated from such hardship, who can blame anyone for lashing out at whatever could be cause? Sometimes there is the need for that sort of mental punching bag, even for atheists. Regardless whether the object of that anger is actually there or not.
For this atheist anyway, all that sort of pain and suffering is just more evidence there is no higher power somehow orchestrating all that misery, let alone to blame for it. Simple better explanation is very simply no such thing exists. This is the way of nature. Like it or not. Win or lose. Live or die. Randomly taking most life forms out of the equation entirely while leaving the remaining life forms to contend with nature as best they are able.
More to the point, we really should not always be so inclined to insert a god as explanation for what we don't know or understand. Has our history along those lines not well proven how faulty that default sort of "logic and reason" can be?
The inclination to resist that temptation is what I also describe as "the slow maturing of man," because once upon a time that immaturity had us assigning "everything under the sun" to one god or another for the same reason. Wrong! We now know better. Or should know better anyway...
I think one of the best examples of what we might call 'clinging-to-god-ism' has been a local story here on one of the other forums. I've lost track now of how old the baby is, but certainly less than 2 years old, and he has had something like a dozen surgeries and procedures all directly or indirectly related to his heart. There's a 'prayer brigade' that has formed in this forum to pray specifically for this baby health, and obviously they are working overtime. And EVERYTIME he has ANOTHER surgery or procedure they thank god. I look at it completely differently. I wanna say, "Hey god, you screwed up bad. Why do you keep putting this baby and this family through this kind of hell. Now fix it once and for all. See if you can finally get it right".
Okay. You BELIEVE there is likely a higher power, and I've addressed the flaw in your logic that has you believing what you do. You never address that point. Apparently you are quite content to dismiss alternative logic and reason without consideration, without comment, and simply repeat what you believe as if the flaw leading to your conclusion has never even been presented to you.
That's like arguing that 2 + 2 = 5. I point out why 2 + 2 does NOT equal 5. Not necessarily anyway, and rather than consider the WHY 2 + 2 does not necessarily equal 5, you simply repeat that 2 + 2 = 5. Or that you believe 2 + 2 is likely to equal 5.
Again, what thrill does not know or understand does not automatically equal a higher power. Does not automatically equal the likelihood of a higher power.
It is NOT that we should not question how the planet overcame odds as you describe. Not at all. The opposite in fact. I/we all do. The difference is about drawing conclusion(s) about odds that we don't comprehend. In more simple terms, it's no different than we humans thought earthquakes, floods, disease and all that sort of thing once equally incomprehensible to us was attributed to a higher power and/or the likelihood of a higher power. Needless to say we were wrong then for the exact same reason you are likely to be wrong again. You are doing exactly the same thing in any case.
"Don't know or understand? Must be a higher power. That's very faulty logic and reason as our history along these lines has well proven time and time again.
Hard for me to understand how you don't see or understand this, let alone address this simple flaw in your reasoning...
OK, lets' unpack this piece by piece:
>>>>>>>>>You BELIEVE there is likely a higher power, and I've addressed the flaw in your logic that has you believing what you do. You never address that point.
What is the flaw in my logic? I've been thinking up to this point that what you label the flaw is my reticence to accept, "Science not being able to explain how we got here doesn't automatically lead to accepting that a higher intelligence did it."
>>>>>>>>>>>Apparently you are quite content to dismiss alternative logic and reason
As you know, you made hundreds of posts previously and it would be like looking for a needle in a haystack to try to find what you are referring to. What alternative logic and reason am I dismissing?
I think one of the best examples of what we might call 'clinging-to-god-ism' has been a local story here on one of the other forums. I've lost track now of how old the baby is, but certainly less than 2 years old, and he has had something like a dozen surgeries and procedures all directly or indirectly related to his heart. There's a 'prayer brigade' that has formed in this forum to pray specifically for this baby health, and obviously they are working overtime. And EVERYTIME he has ANOTHER surgery or procedure they thank god. I look at it completely differently. I wanna say, "Hey god, you screwed up bad. Why do you keep putting this baby and this family through this kind of hell. Now fix it once and for all. See if you can finally get it right".
Sounds like you've got a bit of that "clinging-to-god-ism" problem too, only they want to commend God while you want to blame God. Both a little silly from my point of view...
Here's hoping that child and everyone else is spared any more pain and suffering than necessary in any case. Though some pain and suffering seems inevitable no matter what anyone believes.
>>>>>>>>>You BELIEVE there is likely a higher power, and I've addressed the flaw in your logic that has you believing what you do. You never address that point.
What is the flaw in my logic? I've been thinking up to this point that what you label the flaw is my reticence to accept, "Science not being able to explain how we got here doesn't automatically lead to accepting that a higher intelligence did it."
>>>>>>>>>>>Apparently you are quite content to dismiss alternative logic and reason
As you know, you made hundreds of posts previously and it would be like looking for a needle in a haystack to try to find what you are referring to. What alternative logic and reason am I dismissing?
My word thrill, really? I thought I had just distilled the flaw in your logic yet again in the very comment you quote here. What is this blind spot you keep demonstrating? Here it is again, distilled even more so...
"Again, what thrill does not know or understand does not automatically equal a higher power. Does not automatically equal the likelihood of a higher power.
It is NOT that we should not question how the planet overcame odds as you describe. Not at all. The opposite in fact. I/we all do. The difference is about drawing conclusion(s) about odds that we don't comprehend. In more simple terms, it's no different than we humans thought earthquakes, floods, disease and all that sort of thing once equally incomprehensible to us was attributed to a higher power and/or the likelihood of a higher power. Needless to say we were wrong then for the exact same reason you are likely to be wrong again. You are doing exactly the same thing in any case.
"Don't know or understand? Must be a higher power. That's very faulty logic and reason as our history along these lines has well proven time and time again.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
