Forum
#Topics
+Start a topic
?Search __________________________________

-Log In
-Register
Atheism
Log In to post a reply
Pages: 15 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Next ]

View: flat \ threaded
________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

hito
hito
1745 posts

Re: Atheism

Mars Rover wrote:
and to quote my favorite philosopher:

"If a voice from the clouds suddenly addressed me, speaking my name in trombone tones, or some angel suddenly addressed me in an aura of blue flame came floating toward me...I think I would be more embarrassed than frightened --frightened by the vulgarity of such a display. That is what depresses me about the mysticism of Carlos Castaneda and his like: their poverty of imagination. As any honest magician knows, true magic inheres in the ordinary, the commonplace, the everyday, the mystery of the obvious. Only petty minds and trivial souls yearn for supernatural events, incapable of perceiving that everything --everything! --within and around them is pure miracle." Ed Abbey


I think Ed Abbey gave away too much in his criticism here. He wanted to mock Christianity but in doing so, he trashed drama, dreams, art, music, literature and so much more. He would have been better to make a point about relying on the supernatural to make his case.

I think Christian texts about Heaven being paved with gold and big and the like are disappointingly hedonistic. It suggests that ignoring hedonistic pleasures on Earth will lead to even bigger hedonism in the hereafter. You don't read much about heaven being a chance for one to kneel in the dirt and pray.

I think this may have been Abbey's point but the quote makes him sound narrow and mean.

Jun 22, 2012, 07:00


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Kazak
Kazak
1618 posts

Re: Atheism

hito wrote:
Kazak wrote:
calapia wrote:
jauntymonty wrote:
Just to cut to the chase, when you die your are dead meat. There is no hereafter. The whole concept of God was to give hope to those who can't deal with death ...so rest easy, in death you go to another plane of life.

I'm sorry - and what is your proof of this? Please don't mistake me as religious, but if you are an atheist, and "believe" in what you say, and mock religious people for believing in a hereafter, what proof do YOU have that this is what happens after death? Isn't the disturbing truth that we don't know with any certainty what happens after death?



To me, the proof lies in understanding that the effect we call our conscience is the result of the material neural networks that reside in each of our respective brains. Once the neural networks that results in the effect we collectively call "Kazak" inevitably decays, what will produce and sustain my conscience?


Sounds like faith to me. I have heard many religious people use the same logic as yours. "What will produce and sustain my conscience but God?"


Heh, I just tackled this on another forum. It IS faith, and my faith is immense. Any and all belief is based on faith. The difference is, my faith is based on the scientific method, not on Bronze Age mythology. Is it wrong? Can you answer the question I posed? Will a spirit neural network produce my conscience? I'm going to need a neural network, we can agree?

Jun 22, 2012, 08:00


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Kazak
Kazak
1618 posts

Re: Atheism

hito wrote:
Both pantheism and theism are perfectly compatible with evolution, just not Old Testament style fundamentalist Christianity.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theism

"Life on Earth originated and then evolved from a universal common ancestor approximately 3.7 billion years ago." is not compatible with "God as personal, present and active in the governance and organization of the world and the universe." Is God present, or isn't God? BTW, before you even go there, I do not dispute deism and never have, I don't think we'll ever know, it does preclude theism though.

Jun 22, 2012, 14:20


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

cyberpainter
cyberpainter
5928 posts

Re: Atheism

Kazak wrote:



Thanks for the theism link, since I know so little about the distinctions. Maybe I'm more of a pantheist, or maybe a duelist pantheist than an agnostic. But I vacillate. :)

Jun 22, 2012, 18:21


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

GaryB2
GaryB2
2327 posts

Re: Atheism

"The mystery of the obvious". Love that.

Jun 22, 2012, 21:53


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Mars Rover
Mars Rover
1337 posts

Re: Atheism

hito wrote:
jauntymonty wrote:
calapia wrote:
jauntymonty wrote:
Just to cut to the chase, when you die your are dead meat. There is no hereafter. The whole concept of God was to give hope to those who can't deal with death ...so rest easy, in death you go to another plane of life.

I'm sorry - and what is your proof of this? Please don't mistake me as religious, but if you are an atheist, and "believe" in what you say, and mock religious people for believing in a hereafter, what proof do YOU have that this is what happens after death? Isn't the disturbing truth that we don't know with any certainty what happens after death?


Scientific research proves their isn't treasure at the end of the rainbow. Refracted light in drops of moisture. We are left to form opinions about a god without such study. So, there you go. Acknowledged. I was inadvertently mocking as you say. Actually, I respect con opinions. It is a fucking miracle that we exist. Accident.


Science doesn't prove there isn't treasure, it merely provides an alternate and more feasible answer. I cannot prove that there isn't a monster in my cupboard that disappears every time I look in there but I can use science to suggest that it is highly unlikely. There is no proof that there isn't a god.


"There is no proof that there isn't a god." jesus i hate that argument. theists are the ones claiming something exists and is theirs to prove, not ours to disprove.

Jun 23, 2012, 03:59


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

jauntymonty
jauntymonty
1623 posts

Re: Atheism

Stereolab is there.

Jun 23, 2012, 05:23


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

revox
revox
800 posts

Re: Atheism

Kazak wrote:
For the record, I too participate in ritual self-sacrifice. I too experience reverent awe and wonder at the mystery of nature, of the totality of existence. I just don't claim it know its name.


Its name is CHOCOLATE!

~8^)>

Jun 23, 2012, 10:21


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

BOTE_
381 posts

Re: Atheism

Dupe threads-flattering :)

Jun 23, 2012, 23:24


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

The Greatest
The Greatest
309 posts

Re: Atheism

hito wrote:
The Greatest wrote:
Kazak wrote:
(Sorry, about the dupe thread, actually sort of wanted to discuss this...)

The problem is, theism doesn't exactly jive with evolution, yes? Well, hell, neither does non-geocentrism! If one loses theism, or never has it, what is one left with? But, it is!

(I, personally, do not think theism and religion are mutually exclusive.)


There are other ways of believing in God besides theism. One is called panentheism, and this is the way of believing that allows for evolution. It is the belief that people and the universe are in God and God is in them, but that God is also more than everything in the universe.

Sort of like when you take some ocean water and put it in a cup. The ocean is in the cup, but the cup does not contain the ocean.


Panteism is theism. It is not an alternative. Pantheism has no more validity than monotheism in that they both rely on superstition. Both pantheism and theism are perfectly compatible with evolution, just not Old Testament style fundamentalist Christianity.


I'm not talking about pantheism. I'm talking about panentheism. And it is different than supernatural theism (man in the sky), which is probably what Kazak means when he says "theism." Each kind of theism is an alternative to the others. You can't lump them together. They mean totally different things.

Jun 25, 2012, 04:15

Pages: 15 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Next ]

add a reply to this topic
________________________________________________________________\______________________________________
stereolab table Index