So, why is your choice atheism?

[moxnix46]

I am somewhat curious to hear differant ideas of why people have chosen atheism as there belief. Other than saying religion sucks. Is it that many of you are questioning deeply and not finding anwers? Still looking maybe and settled for atheism while you search? Try and state your reason without slamming other religions if you can. Your truthful answers may be of help to many, including possibly insight into yourself :)

[Tenspace]

Bald isn't a hair color, health isn't a disease, and atheism isn't a belief system.

Baldness == no hair
Healthy = no disease
Atheism = no god

Therefore, my belief wasn't chosen. It is the default condition left by lacking a religious belief system.

Tenspace

[Metman07]

^^^ what he said

[Kamikaze189]

There is no evidence for a god.

[God, my arse]

ya... what tenspace said

[moxnix46]

Bald isn't a hair color, health isn't a disease, and atheism isn't a belief system.

Baldness == no hair
Healthy = no disease
Atheism = no god

Therefore, my belief wasn't chosen. It is the default condition left by lacking a religious belief system.
Forgive me for asking as I don't wish to argue, only to understand. If one is to be a part of a large group who claim no beliefs, is that common thought not also a belief? To believe in nothingness? Also, isn't your belief in nothing a choice?

[God, my arse]

Bald isn't a hair color, health isn't a disease, and atheism isn't a belief system.

Baldness == no hair
Healthy = no disease
Atheism = no god

Therefore, my belief wasn't chosen. It is the default condition left by lacking a religious belief system.
Forgive me for asking as I don't wish to argue, only to understand. If one is to be a part of a large group who claim no beliefs, is that common thought not also a belief? To believe in nothingness? Also, isn't your belief in nothing a choice?

That's open for interpretation. And what you're saying is perpetual, which is confusing and I would rather not think about it.

[ocmpoma]

"If one is to be a part of a large group who claim no beliefs, is that common thought not also a belief?"
No - what you're saying, re-phrased, is: Isn't not believing a belief? - which it obviously is not.

[miata]

I am somewhat curious to hear differant ideas of why people have chosen atheism as there belief. Other than saying religion sucks. Is it that many of you are questioning deeply and not finding anwers? Still looking maybe and settled for atheism while you search? Try and state your reason without slamming other religions if you can. Your truthful answers may be of help to many, including possibly insight into yourself :)
I got tired of pretending that there was magic and supernatural beings and I just felt more stupid than usual so I gave up pretending. I also saw how some religious people used religion as a business and how people were staving for truth and found only fantasy.

I don't mind others being religious as it is a great mind control game. Christians do not break into my home so that's good.

I don't need to love a god that I think is a delusion, that would make me delusional.

[Crackerus Dadderus]

moxnix46
Atheism isn't a belief in nothing, it is no belief. I think Ten said it as best as possible. I don't pray to nothing, I don't worship nothing, I don't believe in nothing. I don't believe in a god.

[Tenspace]

Bald isn't a hair color, health isn't a disease, and atheism isn't a belief system.

Baldness == no hair
Healthy = no disease
Atheism = no god

Therefore, my belief wasn't chosen. It is the default condition left by lacking a religious belief system.
Forgive me for asking as I don't wish to argue, only to understand. If one is to be a part of a large group who claim no beliefs, is that common thought not also a belief? To believe in nothingness? Also, isn't your belief in nothing a choice?

Every moment of our existence is a choice. Do we define certain ones as more relevant than others? The difference is that I don't have to regularly reaffirm my belief through ritualistic practices. I guess you could say that I believe in nothing. But, the important thing is that I don't practice nothingism.

Tenspace

[Metman07]

To lack belief in something is not belief at all.

[psyadam]

Let me tell you a story. As a boy, I fell in love with a certain friend of mine. I decided it was our fate to be together for ever. This did not happen. As my life has gone on, things seem to just be getting worse and worse. This is not what a world with meaning would be like.

[Aristarchus]

"If one is to be a part of a large group who claim no beliefs, is that common thought not also a belief?"
No - what you're saying, re-phrased, is: Isn't not believing a belief? - which it obviously is not.
Obviously you don't know what belief is.

Do you believe in God?

No.

That is your belief.

You don't practice "nothingism" as Tenspace said, so you are without religion, but certainly with belief. The same goes for everyone else who says such a silly thing.

As far as I can tell, only Tenspace understands this. :P

[TheSnake]

Aristarchus: Tenspace said, that he basically believes that God doesn't exist, so he believes in nothingness instead of a God. Not believing in something is simply not a belief, it's the opposite of belief. Not believing in God, doesn't mean that you'd believe he doesn't exist.

[TheRadicalHumanist]

Hey folks,
I am new to the raving atheist. First I will respond to the original question of why I chose atheism. I apologize ahead of your reading, I did not intend to write so much, but I had these things going on in my head and I got a little carried away.

First, I was raised a Jehovah's Witness, and decided to dis-believe both the specific theology of the JWs around the time I was 15, and I extended this skepticism to other Judeo-Christain religion ideas. I cannot recall the specific issues I had at that time and about all I can say about my thinking is that I was not convinced. I may have identified as an agnostic and or atheist at various times in my life, but mostly I did not give the existence of God much thought. There were times in my very early twenties when I explored variations of Taoism and Buddhism, but in the end I simply did not have much feeling for any kind of mysticism.

I was very much a science minded kid both in the natural and social sciences which ultimately led to studies in anthropology and archaeology to the post-graduate level and specializing in the latter. An anthropological perspective on religion, both in the ethnographic present and the ancient past is probably a cornerstone of my disbelieving all religious traditions, but being even more critical of modern religion. I think that if one lives in the modern western world, with its long historical connection to Western science and philosophy, then there is no excuse for believing in the nonsense of God. But I digress.

Ironic twist number 1, about seven years ago when I was about to be married to my wife who is Peruvian. I actually converted to Catholicism! At that time I would probably could be described as a weak atheist or agnostic, and atheism was not a key part of my identity. My fiancee very much wanted to get married in one of the historic colonial cathedrals of Cuzco Peru's Plaza de Armas, and I actually liked the idea myself.

However, to get married in a Catholic churh, I had to convert. But I was a dis-believer, and I had been told that if I sincerely prayed to God and asked for the Holy Spirit to reveal God to me, then my prayers would be answered and I could be a believer. Now it seems as though I actually tried to do this. Was I truly being sincere? Hell, I don't really know but I thought so at the time. Regardless, I did jump through these necessary hoops to convert to Catholicism, talks with the priest and baptism. For at least a year after our wedding I think I really tried to believe in God. I talked to a priest back here in the U.S., and read a book he gave me that was supposed to help me arrive at a genuine belief in god. My wife and I would go to church, I would say a prayer for us before dinner, and I tried to believe. But it just didn't take. After awhile I stepped back and reflected and thought all this religious thought is nonsensical and unsubstantiated! And in fact through these experiences of trying to believe in God, I began to much more actively engage in the question of the possible existence of God.

So ironic twist number 2. My attempt to believe in God led me to consider arguments for God's existence, and counter arguments against the existence of God. And this led me to a much more explicit and strong atheism.

Recently I have been thinking about scales of plausability for the possibility of God's existence and the converse levels of certainty for the denial of God's existence. Through these reasonings, and I can only provide some examples, I continue to choose atheism.

Related to my experience told above is the argument from divine hiddeness and the argument from reasonable disbelief. Now if God desires, and indeed requires me to believe in him (or her), then why has he made his existence so difficult to detect? Why not reveal himself to me and others in an unambigous manner? There are reasonable and rational people who disbelieve in God, they do not deny his existence because they are simply crazy and delusional. So again, if God exists, and it is necessary to believe in him then why not make his existence undeniably true? Heck, he doesn't even have to make himself visible. We can't see molecules, atoms and sub-atomic particles, but we can make reliable predictions based on our knowledge of the property of these entities and we can make sense of our natural world. Why doesn't God answer prayers, if he exists, in a manner that can be substantiated by independent inquiry?

Presently I can come to only two conclusions (although there may be alternatives) based on God's divine hiddeness and the existence of reasonable disbelief. First, God may exist, but it really doesn't matter if I and other religious skeptics believe in him or not. So he chooses to not reveal himself in an unambigous manner. This of course is contrary to most religious doctrine. The second possibility, and in my opinion the most plausible, is that God does not exist. I choose the latter, but choose it with based on further criteria.

Another compelling argument against the existence of God is the problem of evil and suffering. Now this argument has various versions, most atheists are familiar with it, and theists can investigate it elswere. Now for the purposes of my exposition here I am not concerned with how a omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent God could create a world with such evil and suffering. I do ask the believer however to answer the following question. If this so-called loving and compassionate God exists, then how can he not intervene to stop the suffering of innocent children who live in extreme poverty, famine, and violence, for example in the Sudan of today or Ethiopea a decade or so ago? Many of these children die before reaching adulthood and may never experience anything but suffering? If God has the character described by Christains as loving and compassionate. Then he must intervene to stop this suffering! But he doesn't. In fact these trajedies of human suffering re-occur over the course of decades. So a benevolent God of Christainity does not exist.

The theist might respond that God allows this suffering and evil to exist for greater purposes of good not yet revealed to us. But why then must he be so unfair about it, allowing such evil it to exist in places like Africa and not in Europe and the U.S.? Is God a racist? Maybe a God does exist, but if he has the power to stop these trajedies and doesn't then he must be heartless and indifferent at best; or worse, evil and sadistic! But don't worry, such a God, or any God, probably doesn't exist.

So now for a final reason for why I choose atheism and which is a much broader assault on all types of religious beliefs that claim the existence of disembodied consciousness, i.e. "spirit". Note, the two arguments above allow for the possibility that some kind of conscious supernatural being exists, just not the one claimed by Christianity.

However, how exactly does a disembodied conscious personality, one that is able to act and intervene in the natural world actually exist? What exactly is spirit or soul? No theist or mystic has been able to give an adequate description of spirit or soul that is rationally and empirically investigatable. Probably because the notion of "spirit" is simply an imaginary construction of human psychology, the illusion of mind-body dualism.

Cognitive science has been developing rapidly in recent years and the reader will have investigate the following assertions on their own. However, one basic conclusion from this science is that the mind and consciousness, mental processes, are dependent on a material housing, the brain. There has been no discovery or even a rationally plausible theory of how one's personhood, mind, and consciousness could somehow continue on after the death and decomposition of one's body.

The study of brain damaged persons has shown that some injuries have had the effect of drastically altering the victims character and personality. In one experiment, the stimulation by electrodes in a particular area of a subject's brain had the effect of turning her from happy to suicidally depressed. The response could be turned on like a light switch. This suggests that the very character, personality, mind and consciousness of a person is dependent on the material chemical-electrical processes of the brain. If this is so then this suggests that all sorts of notions of the existence and immortality of the soul/spirit are merely imaginary illusions.

There is no way for one's personhood to travel to heaven or hell, or to some mysterious "other side", "afterlife" or what have you; nor is there a way for ones personhood to live on after the death of one body to be reincarnated into the body of another. Furthermore, if consciouness needs a material home then how can a non-material, disembodied consciousness exist? Until theists can answer that question without resorting to nonsensical gobbley-gook, then I choose atheism.

[moxnix46]

Welcome to the boards RadicalHumanist! What a great first post on your part!
I'm new here myself, hope you hang around awhile I look forward to your input and I'm sure others do to.
I have a small interrest in anthropology and archaeology myself. So your out there in Anasazi country huh? :) Now, you've testified about findings of placing electrodes in the brain to apply external electricity(energy) and that the brain does respond to it. Can this not also be taken as fact that the brain requires energy(internal) to function? So heres the question. Since energy can never be destroyed. What happens to the bodies internal energy apon death? :) I know, I'm bad. haha Thats what these boards are all about though isn't it...to keep us all thinking? :)

[TheSnake]

... electrodes in the brain to apply external electricity(energy) and that the brain does respond to it. Can this not also be taken as fact that the brain requires energy(internal) to function? So heres the question. Since energy can never be destroyed. ...
That's great! :lol: Sounds like some new age BS.
Of course nerves just use electricity to pass signals.

[moxnix46]

That's great! :lol: Sounds like some new age BS.
Of course nerves just use electricity to pass signals.
Haha, actually it isn't new age at all. It's quite well documented that our bodies do possess internal energy. It's also a fact that energy cannot be destroyed. It becomes philosophical when one wonders what happens to it. :)

[TheSnake]

If you're talking about physical energy, not some new age 'bioenergy', then nothing special happens to the energies in your body when you die, so there isn't much to philosophise. When you use the term energy suitably vaguely just the way you did, you'll soon be making a lot of money as a new age guru. :lol:

[moxnix46]

If you're talking about physical energy, not some new age 'bioenergy', then nothing special happens to the energies in your body when you die, so there isn't much to philosophise. When you use the term energy suitably vaguely just the way you did, you'll soon be making a lot of money as a new age guru. :lol:
Morning Snake. :) I see your point. No, I was speaking of physical energy. No new age guru here, haven't taken in a dime. So theres money in it? Hmmmm...haha.

[miata]

Welcome Radicalhumanist,

I can tell you have done your research and I enjoyed your post. I am glad to see people are thinking rather than following the herd. I hope you will stay with us as the ideas you share are needed. Even a drop of water in a desert is a start. You are needed here as the desert is vast.

[Purity]

i belive that there is no afterlife, when an insect or animal dies, we dont believe that animal is crawling around up in the clouds, we use religion to feel comfort, it was a old way to try and keep the public in control, while still giving them the generalised answers they need, "if you belive in this god, you will have an everlasting life in heaven" etc. i honestly cant see how people have faith anymore, we've had hundreds of years to over come the petheticness of religion, but yet the unstability of the human race wins once again and i guess will for ever due to ignorance in society.

[Philboid Studge]

Hey RadicalHumanist, welcome aboard. Poke around the forum a bit, I think you'll find some discussion threads that are right up your alley. E.g., there's one going on re the problem of evil. You'll also find an enthusiastic poster on brain pathologies (:P) and religiosity.

[miata]

If you're talking about physical energy, not some new age 'bioenergy', then nothing special happens to the energies in your body when you die, so there isn't much to philosophise. When you use the term energy suitably vaguely just the way you did, you'll soon be making a lot of money as a new age guru. :lol:
Falwell has already tied up all moneys related to religious related income. It would be nice if a person could make money telling the truth but in the religious fantasyland mother goose would take the ribbons. The truth is not needed as Hitler said people will believe a big lie and easily as a small one. He also said yell lound and long and someone will hear you.

[Tenspace]

Hey folks,
I am new to the raving atheist. First I will respond to the original question of why I chose atheism. I apologize ahead of your reading, I did not intend to write so much, but I had these things going on in my head and I got a little carried away.
Welcome to the forum.

Why doesn't God answer prayers, if he exists, in a manner that can be substantiated by independent inquiry?
Exactly. Are you familiar with Bell's theorem of nonlocality? I would think that by using coincidence counts (or a similar method) someone could devise a similar test to determine the efficacy of prayer. To me, one of the biggest failings of science in general is to tout the importance of its predictive abilities. When Darwin discovered an orchid with an 11" tube leading to its nectar sac, he exclaimed, "Somewhere, there is a moth with an 11" proboscis." The moth was discovered nearly 150 years later. If prayer makes a difference, we should have a methodology to predict what kind of difference it makes.

Tenspace

[Rhinoqulous]

Welcome TheRadicalHumanist, thanks for the story. As others have said, poke around the threads and pick a few fights. You should have a good time here.

Rhinoq

[Lurker]

... poke around the threads and pick a few fights...
Them are fightin' words son :mad:

[schemanista]

If prayer makes a difference, we should have a methodology to predict what kind of difference it makes.
What about this (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.12/prayer.html)?

[GodlessHeathen]

If prayer makes a difference, we should have a methodology to predict what kind of difference it makes.
What about this (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.12/prayer.html)?
Or, maybe this (http://www.medpagetoday.com/Surgery/GeneralSurgery/tb/1362).

[schemanista]

Or, maybe this (http://www.medpagetoday.com/Surgery/GeneralSurgery/tb/1362).
I knew I was going to get trumped when the highest card in my hand was a Wired article.

[miata]

If prayer makes a difference, we should have a methodology to predict what kind of difference it makes.
What about this (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.12/prayer.html)?
Or, maybe this (http://www.medpagetoday.com/Surgery/GeneralSurgery/tb/1362).
Great book. I read it and now I am reading again. It's even better the second time.

[GodlessHeathen]

Or, maybe this (http://www.medpagetoday.com/Surgery/GeneralSurgery/tb/1362).
I knew I was going to get trumped when the highest card in my hand was a Wired article.
Nah, I wasn't trying to trump you. The Wired article seemed to say that prayer does help, and I found a recent article that I read that shows the other side.

Great book. I read it and now I am reading again. It's even better the second time.
You mean The End of Faith from my sig? I read it in 2 days. Couldn't put it down.

[miata]

Or, maybe this (http://www.medpagetoday.com/Surgery/GeneralSurgery/tb/1362).
I knew I was going to get trumped when the highest card in my hand was a Wired article.
Nah, I wasn't trying to trump you. The Wired article seemed to say that prayer does help, and I found a recent article that I read that shows the other side.

Great book. I read it and now I am reading again. It's even better the second time.
You mean The End of Faith from my sig? I read it in 2 days. Couldn't put it down.
sam@samharris.org <sam@samharris.org>

[Ownthink]

What tenspace said, but no it wasn't Nihilism. He was just trying to make a point. Atheism is not a "chosen belief".

[moxnix46]

Aristarchus: Tenspace said, that he basically believes that God doesn't exist, so he believes in nothingness instead of a God. Not believing in something is simply not a belief, it's the opposite of belief. Not believing in God, doesn't mean that you'd believe he doesn't exist.
Hahaha, it is kind of like mental masterbation isn't it? I believe there is no god. My belief is that I don't believe in god. I believe in a godless universe. I used to believe in god, but now I believe he doesn't exist. SOooo... you have a belief? Yes, I believe god does not care what I get in my stocking for christmas, Oops, I meant Santa. Oh, so you believe in Santa? Yup, he's a fairy tale. So is god a fairy tail? Nope, he doesn't exist. You believe he doesn't exist? Yup, so thats your belief. Yup. :)

[miata]

Aristarchus: Tenspace said, that he basically believes that God doesn't exist, so he believes in nothingness instead of a God. Not believing in something is simply not a belief, it's the opposite of belief. Not believing in God, doesn't mean that you'd believe he doesn't exist.
Hahaha, it is kind of like mental masterbation isn't it? I believe there is no god. My belief is that I don't believe in god. I believe in a godless universe. I used to believe in god, but now I believe he doesn't exist. SOooo... you have a belief? Yes, I believe god does not care what I get in my stocking for christmas, Oops, I meant Santa. Oh, so you believe in Santa? Yup, he's a fairy tale. So is god a fairy tail? Nope, he doesn't exist. You believe he doesn't exist? Yup, so thats your belief. Yup. :)
Amen brother, Jesus commit suicide he was dangerous to himself because he wanted to die for his religion. He was the Osama of his day.

[TheRadicalHumanist]

Well I should have anticipated that somebody would have brought up the alleged efficacy of prayer in healing, health etc.. The Skeptical Inquirer within the past year has published an expose on one of the Colombia Unv. studies that had numerous methodolgical problems. And even if prayer and or religious beliefs had some positive effect on health, the correlation is likely spurious and can be explained more plausibly as the result of other factors. There apparently isn't any predictable regularity to any positive effects of prayer.

However, as I said in my long exposition, I want to see unambigous evidence of God's hand and existence. As far as prayer goes we know that on the 9-11 flight that crashed in PA that people were praying. Now damn it, I want to see prayer save airplanes from crashing when people know they are going down. And what about the those children who for their whole lives only know of war, poverty and famine. I know some good Christians (yep, some are good people) are praying for these children, and some are even Christians. I want to see something done about that. But they still die after their miserable lives.

[miata]

As an atheist I spend time helping people rather than praying. If the time people spend begging an invisable god was converted into money it would feed millions. The money churches do not pay in taxes on the income they use to built shrines would feed the world. Most ministers work hard to help their flock but most large churches sit empty 90% of the time while homeless people die in the streets. Even empty churches are warmer than freezing rain.
Ask a church goers why they don't do more with that building and most say I give my 10%. They do not want to low life in that building they built for Jesus. They are afraid of the street people and they may catch something from them.

If there was a Jesus would he let this happen in his church???

[psyadam]

As an atheist I spend time helping people rather than praying. If the time people spend begging an invisable god was converted into money it would feed millions. The money churches do not pay in taxes on the income they use to built shrines would feed the world. Most ministers work hard to help their flock but most large churches sit empty 90% of the time while homeless people die in the streets. Even empty churches are warmer than freezing rain.
Ask a church goers why they don't do more with that building and most say I give my 10%. They do not want to low life in that building they built for Jesus. They are afraid of the street people and they may catch something from them.

If there was a Jesus would he let this happen in his church???
Noone knows if Jesus actually existed. But I guess you said if. A well put post, thanks.

[miata]

No Jesus here. Jesus is like the WMD's Bush could not find under the carpet. Now Bush makes me proud to be an atheist. I think there is nothing worse than a CHICKEN-HAWK. I try not to judge people but reich wing Christian war mongers get the best of me.

This country is in the toilet and these a holes are praying. What's next invade Canada???

My Jack Russell Terrier has more compassion for people than the slime balls like Turd Blossom Rove, and Jerry dodo Falwell. Is there any better reason to give up on religion when this is their best and brightest?? What a dog pile that is.

We need need a magic supernatural holy roller to fix the mess we have but Jesus, what a sad, sad way to live, looking for magic from a man who may have never existed to make it all better. What a joke on human beings to buy that crap.

[Crackerus Dadderus]

"If one is to be a part of a large group who claim no beliefs, is that common thought not also a belief?"
No - what you're saying, re-phrased, is: Isn't not believing a belief? - which it obviously is not.
Obviously you don't know what belief is.

Do you believe in God?

No.

That is your belief.

You don't practice "nothingism" as Tenspace said, so you are without religion, but certainly with belief. The same goes for everyone else who says such a silly thing.

As far as I can tell, only Tenspace understands this. :P
You can play with the words all day.

Do you have a God?

No.

That is what you have.

[miata]

Makes me think of the Song "Imagine" by John Lennon. Religion is the cancer of reason. Like smoking it's addictive, it stinks and it kills. I have watch people with cancer continue to smoke but they also prayed asking god to heal them.

[moxnix46]

Makes me think of the Song "Imagine" by John Lennon. Religion is the cancer of reason. Like smoking it's addictive, it stinks and it kills. I have watch people with cancer continue to smoke but they also prayed asking god to heal them.
"Imagine" by John Lennon, probably the most significant song ever written, a true stroke of genious on John Lennon's part. I have been a "dreamer" since the first time I ever heard it. :)

Imagine

Imagine there's no heaven,
It's easy if you try,
No hell below us,
Above us only sky,
Imagine all the people
living for today...

Imagine there's no countries,
It isnt hard to do,
Nothing to kill or die for,
No religion too,
Imagine all the people
living life in peace...

Imagine no possesions,
I wonder if you can,
No need for greed or hunger,
A brotherhood of man,
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...

You may say Im a dreamer,
but Im not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
And the world will live as one.

[Philboid Studge]

Every moment of our existence is a choice.
Is this provable? Or is its antithesis -- that moments of existence, including human behavior, are governed by immutable natural laws -- dis-provable?

[moxnix46]

Every moment of our existence is a choice.
Is this provable? Or is its antithesis -- that moments of existence, including human behavior, are governed by immutable natural laws -- dis-provable?

Of course it's provable, what is stopping you right now from killing yourself? Choice. You are making the choice to exist. None can keep you from this choice if you choose otherwise. Except possibly modern medical science may have the ability to keep you on life support in a failed attempt. The same goes for the whole of mankind. Our present existance is by choice, although we are flirting with disaster through ignorance.

[Philboid Studge]

moxnix, this hardly constitutes 'proof.' Perhaps I don't kill myself -- or perform any other hypothetical 'choice' of action -- because I am a product of my environment. All my 'decisions' follow from my genetic makeup and experience. If I do kill myself, it won't be because I choose to, but because I had to, given the input that is the totality of me. Actions only seem like they are choices because the human brain treats the future as if it exists, which by definition it does not. (You wouldn't be able to give an example of so-called choice without appealing to either a future action or a past non-action -- neither of which exists.)

Bear with me here. I'm still working on whether there is a flavor of determinism that might work foe me as a world-view. Your criticism is certainly appreciated.

[Rhinoqulous]

Bear with me here. I'm still working on whether there is a flavor of determinism that might work foe me as a world-view. Your criticism is certainly appreciated.
I've thought about this as well. Maybe when we're wearing our "physics hats" and describe the world through deterministic laws, when we switch to our "Free Individual Hats" those laws become motivations (same "thing" going on, just different description types).

Rhinoq

[Philboid Studge]

The criticisms outlined here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism#Arguments_against_Determinism) are not particularly pursuasive. Rhinoq you might have others on hand. Share if you do.

[Philboid Studge]

You mean The End of Faith from my sig? I read it in 2 days. Couldn't put it down.
I've been meaning to ask what you thought (it came up on another thread). I was riveted to the first half, but a bit disappointed with the second. There were a couple of things that bothered me. His almost childish refutation of moral relativism, for one (his argument wouldn't last five minutes in these threads). Also, he spoke glowingly of intuitive knowledge without really defining what it is. Pretty lazy for a philosopher-neuroscientist, since he could have brought both talents to bear. Still, I like how he tears faith a new one.

[Rhinoqulous]

I don't have any online arguments on hand, but I'll poke around my usual online sources and see what comes up. The wiki link mentioned both David Hume and Donald Davidson, both of whose ideas have greatly influenced how I think about this matter (especially Davidson's Essey's on Action and Events).

Ahh, working on a Saturday. No one in the office but me doing some dubbs. Too hot outside to do anything anyway (I'm the master of sour grapes).

Rhinoq

[moxnix46]

moxnix, this hardly constitutes 'proof.' Perhaps I don't kill myself -- or perform any other hypothetical 'choice' of action -- because I am a product of my environment. All my 'decisions' follow from my genetic makeup and experience. If I do kill myself, it won't be because I choose to, but because I had to, given the input that is the totality of me. Actions only seem like they are choices because the human brain treats the future as if it exists, which by definition it does not. (You wouldn't be able to give an example of so-called choice without appealing to either a future action or a past non-action -- neither of which exists.)

Bear with me here. I'm still working on whether there is a flavor of determinism that might work foe me as a world-view. Your criticism is certainly appreciated.
Both of the things you mentioned are indeed determining factors of wether or not you commit the act. However, that still does not rule out choice. The questions of why you would do it are not relevant in this case. Forget reasoning, genetic will to survive, religion, etc. The choice is still there. When you strip the apparent away. You are suspended by merely choice. I would like to hear others opinions on this, as well as more from you. :)

[Philboid Studge]

Hey moxnix. I think I need for you to expand a bit on this:

The questions of why you would do it are not relevant in this case.
I'm going to take the position (for now!) that 'questions of why' are not only relevant, but essential and perhaps -- with the answers to those qestions -- all that there is. In other words, when you 'strip the apparent away,' nothing is left. I submit that everything has a cause, even if we do not always know what it is. This thing you call a 'choice' appears to be outside the causal chain of events. Where does it come from?

[Rhinoqulous]

Forget reasoning, genetic will to survive, religion, etc. The choice is still there. When you strip the apparent away. You are suspended by merely choice. I would like to hear others opinions on this, as well as more from you. :)[/b]
If you remove genetic predisposition, cultural conditioning, and physical causality, what are you left with? You claim there is still "choice" left, but I'm not clear what this would be. Like Philboid said, you seem to be adding something that's not really there, that operates outside of the system. What is this "choice"? Who is making it? You are nothing more than your genetics, conditioning, and results of causality. If you strip it all away, there's nothing left to even make the "choice".

Rhinoq

[moxnix46]

Hey moxnix. I think I need for you to expand a bit on this:

The questions of why you would do it are not relevant in this case.
I'm going to take the position (for now!) that 'questions of why' are not only relevant, but essential and perhaps -- with the answers to those qestions -- all that there is. In other words, when you 'strip the apparent away,' nothing is left. I submit that everything has a cause, even if we do not always know what it is. This thing you call a 'choice' appears to be outside the causal chain of events. Where does it come from?
Okay, be happy to try. :)

The original quote we are working on is this:
"Every moment of our existence is a choice."
I think what you are getting at is that a logical person does not commit suicide for no reason. And you are saying that things such as environment and genetics(ingrained survival) dictate to us our choice. Making it not our choice to terminate.
What I am saying is. To evaluate the first quote, and find it's true meaning."The questions of why you would do it are not relevant in this case."

The choice remains a constant, underlaying all logical pros or cons. For instance, if for some reason I just sudenly decided to kill myself. The logical minds around me would probably say, that was insane. I'm sure they would have a whole host of negative things to say about it, possibly some would say I wonder why? They would apply their logic to find understanding. But the choice was mine alone. There was choice, wether or not I made the right one, was irrelevant to the freedom of choice I had. Did this help:)

[Philboid Studge]

For instance, if for some reason I just sudenly decided to kill myself. The logical minds around me would probably say, that was insane. I'm sure they would have a whole host of negative things to say about it, possibly some would say I wonder why? They would apply their logic to find understanding. But the choice was mine alone.
I don't agree with this. The answer to why you committed suicide can't be because you chose to, because my next question is, Why did you 'choose' to? If the answer is, 'because you were insane', that means there was no choice. (And by the way, we can explore reasons behind the insanity too.) We can always find antecendents -- causes - to our so-called choices, simply by asking how or why an action was made.

Look at Rhinoq's question: "If you remove genetic predisposition, cultural conditioning, and physical causality, what are you left with?"

One of those three things or a combination them underlies your 'choice' to commit suicide. Even your wording acknowledges some cause: 'for some reason I just sudenly decided to kill myself ..."

(You bring up an interesting example, because philosopher Donald Davidson argued that if people behaved in an uncaused way then one would describe their actions as insane, not as free. [wiki])

[Another brick in the wall]

That's great! :lol: Sounds like some new age BS.
Of course nerves just use electricity to pass signals.
Haha, actually it isn't new age at all. It's quite well documented that our bodies do possess internal energy. It's also a fact that energy cannot be destroyed. It becomes philosophical when one wonders what happens to it. :)
Hardly. The thermal and chemical energy of a dead person dissipates into the surroundings.

[moxnix46]

For instance, if for some reason I just sudenly decided to kill myself. The logical minds around me would probably say, that was insane. I'm sure they would have a whole host of negative things to say about it, possibly some would say I wonder why? They would apply their logic to find understanding. But the choice was mine alone.
I don't agree with this. The answer to why you committed suicide can't be because you chose to, because my next question is, Why did you 'choose' to? If the answer is, 'because you were insane', that means there was no choice. (And by the way, we can explore reasons behind the insanity too.) We can always find antecendents -- causes - to our so-called choices, simply by asking how or why an action was made.

Look at Rhinoq's question: "If you remove genetic predisposition, cultural conditioning, and physical causality, what are you left with?"

One of those three things or a combination them underlies your 'choice' to commit suicide. Even your wording acknowledges some cause: 'for some reason I just sudenly decided to kill myself ..."

(You bring up an interesting example, because philosopher Donald Davidson argued that if people behaved in an uncaused way then one would describe their actions as insane, not as free. [wiki])
haha, it can go round and round but it's still a matter of choice. Reason can motivate choice. But as I said, choice is constant. When I used the words, "for some reason I suddenly decided to kill myself". The reason in this case would be simply to prove a point. Illogical and a stupid reason perhaps, but the choice is still there, wether I act or not. The choice of wether or not we exist is perhaps man's most basic freedom.

[Rhinoqulous]

haha, it can go round and round but it's still a matter of choice. Reason can motivate choice. But as I said, choice is constant. When I used the words, "for some reason I suddenly decided to kill myself". The reason in this case would be simply to prove a point. Illogical and a stupid reason perhaps, but the choice is still there, wether I act or not. The choice of wether or not we exist is perhaps man's most basic freedom.
Your "choice" is not just something floating around in the void. If you decided to kill yourself "just to prove a point", your decision still stems from that psychological motivation (to prove something).

I'm curious, what is it that is your Personal Identity that is separate from your cultural/social conditioning and genetic predispositions? Are you a dualist (your identity is something that is separate from causal/deterministic laws)?

Rhinoq

[moxnix46]

I'm curious, what is it that is your Personal Identity that is separate from your cultural/social conditioning and genetic predispositions? Are you a dualist (your identity is something that is separate from causal/deterministic laws)?

Rhinoq
Well, in my limited knowledge of phyciatric levels of the mind. I would call your attension to psycopaths. The 5th level(I believe) Psycopaths come in differant flavors. Not all are bad. The real description of a psycopath is that they do not subscribe to the normal moral laws of society. They pick and choose which ones they will abide by. Some, Dr. Kevorkian comes to mind, actually devote time to changing morals they percieve as wrong. All in all they seem to follow their own drummer. Anyway, in my particular case, I would credit my sometimes boundless views on near death experiences. In some ways I now understand particular things I wouldn't have before, or possibly I just see them through differant eyes. Who knows, I know my views have broadened. But have I become more like a psycopath? I have only once in my life spoken to a psychologist, it was an in depth conversation about the meaning of life.(not an office call) He himself admitted to having psycopathic tendencies. He assured me I was sane. Even after I asked him to pay my bill for the consultation with me.haha :)

[Autolite]

moxnix46
Your use of the word "choose" may not be the most appropriate word when refering to Atheism. However, I shall try and answer your question in the context that it was presented.
I "choose" not to believe in a god for the same reason that I choose not to believe in Santa Claus or the tooth fairy. Santa Claus, the tooth fairy and god don't exist. Suggesting that I chose to be an Atheist is like saying that one chooses to believe that "2+2=4". I guess that you could simply say that I chose to acknowledge reality ...

[Sartre]

moxnix46
Your use of the word "choose" may not be the most appropriate word when refering to Atheism. However, I shall try and answer your question in the context that it was presented.
I "choose" not to believe in a god for the same reason that I choose not to believe in Santa Claus or the tooth fairy. Santa Claus, the tooth fairy and god don't exist. Suggesting that I chose to be an Atheist is like saying that one chooses to believe that "2+2=4". I guess that you could simply say that I chose to acknowledge reality ...
Well put. I also 'chose' to use reason and shed the trappings of theism. That made me an atheist.

[moxnix46]

moxnix46
Your use of the word "choose" may not be the most appropriate word when refering to Atheism. However, I shall try and answer your question in the context that it was presented.
I "choose" not to believe in a god for the same reason that I choose not to believe in Santa Claus or the tooth fairy. Santa Claus, the tooth fairy and god don't exist. Suggesting that I chose to be an Atheist is like saying that one chooses to believe that "2+2=4". I guess that you could simply say that I chose to acknowledge reality ...
Yup, theres that nasty word again. Choice. Concepts of reality and how we percieve them. Sometimes we adapt to others concepts lacking vison of our own. What of the atheist who converted from religion. Was it not their choice? Some who find fault with organized religion start their own (mormonism for example) Freedom to chose our own perception of reality is often overlooked. What exactly is atheism? One might say it is the lack of belief in a god. Where did that perception come from? If you or I are not the original creator of the perception then we must be followers. Studies of ancient man do not indicate atheism, in fact, they show quite the opposite, belief in god's. Somewhere along the line, someone percieved thier reality as a choice not to believe.

[miata]

Did someone say reality? what a good idea; like gravity it is a law.

[Autolite]

moxnix46 ...

"choice not to believe". I would like to ask moxnix46 when and why did you "choose" not to beleive in Santa Claus? Assuming that you did in fact once believe in Old Saint Nick, why did you convert from a believer to a non-beliver? Was it a conscious choice or more of a realization based on your observations and rationalizations???

[GodlessHeathen]

You mean The End of Faith from my sig? I read it in 2 days. Couldn't put it down.
I've been meaning to ask what you thought (it came up on another thread). I was riveted to the first half, but a bit disappointed with the second. There were a couple of things that bothered me. His almost childish refutation of moral relativism, for one (his argument wouldn't last five minutes in these threads). Also, he spoke glowingly of intuitive knowledge without really defining what it is. Pretty lazy for a philosopher-neuroscientist, since he could have brought both talents to bear. Still, I like how he tears faith a new one.
I have to agree I liked the first half of the book much better than the second half. I was actually a little surprised at the way he completely discounted moral relativism, and I found myself a little confused at his coverage of intuitive knowledge and meditation. I guess what I took away from the last 2 chapters is that he's trying to show that a person can be "spiritual" without being religious.

I agree with his primary assertion, however, that in order to survive as a species, we need to abandon religion.

[moxnix46]

moxnix46 ...

"choice not to believe". I would like to ask moxnix46 when and why did you "choose" not to beleive in Santa Claus? Assuming that you did in fact once believe in Old Saint Nick, why did you convert from a believer to a non-beliver? Was it a conscious choice or more of a realization based on your observations and rationalizations???
Good question, well last year in fact it all came to an end. I chose to believe in Santa, but he chose to believe in sitting on his big fat ass watching his wide screen TV instead of bringing me what I wanted. Considering my steadfast observations that lacked ever actually seeing an old, fat, bearded man landing on a roof top in a sleigh. I quickly rationalized that he probably did intend to bring me Pamela Anderson in the beginning, but once he gave her a spin, the big fat bitch kept her for himself. :)

[miata]

I would just settle for the easter bunny.

[bobfritzelpuff]

I have read a lot of books, and most of them are not true stories. The bible is one of those books. The existance of a cult believing in the bible does not make me want to believe in the bible. If there was a cult that believed in the Legend of Drizzt books, I would not believe in Drizzt. If there was a cult beleiving in the Death Gate Cycle, I would not believe in Death Gates. The existance of a cult beleiving in God does not make me believe in god, not even when the cult is really big.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

I am an atheist because I make decisions based on logic and reason, not faith and superstition.

[WITHTEETH]

I am an Atheist because i believe the leap of faith to believe the laws and theorys of science that are hear today will be hear tomarrow is a smaller leap, then to leap into the abyss of unreason with god.

[God, my arse]

I believe in Atheism because it is logical and makes sense, unlike other religions <cough> christianity<cough>

[peepnklown]

No evidence, shorty…
No evidence.

[Stop the Robots]

I'm not an atheist, I'm anti-god.

[snooples]

To say that I CHOSE Atheism seems to show a bias on your part . Atheism is ,as I see it ,the default position . When one has spent ones life coming to understand the world through honest scientific exploration ,it seems quiet natural and intellectually honest to not accept supernatural causes for any given phenomena. By a rational standard, the supernatural is nothing more than aspects of the natural Universe that are not currently understood,or possibly a name for an imaginary realm outside of our universe that is not supported by evidence.
The God belief associated with Christianity makes no sense unless you embrace a whole host of unlikely supernatural assumptions. First that there is a God , that there is such a thing as a soul that can survive death , the resurrection , the existence of a (God-Man) which is part of a threesome of oneness , the holy trinity which dictates that the son is the father ,whom caused the problem in the first place and sent an aspect of himself to die a mock death to give blood sacrifice (pagan) for the sins of man ,which involved doing something they wouldn`t know was wrong until they did it ,eating fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Somehow this makes mankind totally depraved. God sets up damnation, and makes the cure. A game of hide and seek that sets the stage for 2000 years of intellectual stagnation and persecution of the keenest minds . Mythology.
The concept of heresy and the innumerable executions in the name
God. Burning people alive for their attempt to stand up for what they knew to be true. Tied to a stake with half green wood and a wreath of sulfur put round their heads. The followers of Catholicism and Protestantism all had their human bonfires. They did not constitute a perversion of the faith they followed, they were all good Christians , by scripture , until the enlightenment of course.
After the (Black Death) that wiped out much of the population of Europe their seemed to be a new tolerance for learning that has carried through to the 21st century.

The concious mind seems to be very much a property of the brain . It`s processes can be influenced by drugs. Injury to it can lead to a loss of memories or the ability to make new memories. Mental disorders can be treated using drugs. If a drug can influence your concious experience (your soul or essence) ,it goes to follow that it is very much tied to the funtioning of millions of neurons and how they interact with each other.
I myself accept that conciousness is a property of the brain . No brain, no conciousness, no memories, and yes, nothing to survive and go on to an afterlife. It seems far more plausable to me to understand that the irrational belief in the soul came from the human ignorance of how the brain works and the fear of mortality.
The Christian faith also posits the concept that God made everything as well as man, in his own image to say the least! We now know that mankind is nothing more than a recent development in the history of life on earth. ( If you could stretch life on earth into a 24 hour day ,man arrives at 30 seconds before midnight ). This has been confirmed cross referencing data from numerous sciences. The very fact of Evolution seems to refute biblical claims, and I`m afraid that the truth of Evolution is as demonstrable as the earth going around the sun, which the bible also was wrong about . Now how could holy scripture that was guided by the Holy Spirit be wrong about so many things?
The fact that Christianity is so anti-science is deplorable to me . Personally I consider it child abuse at this point to teach small children that the bible is fact and the word of God, two highly dubious claims! Yet the practice of indoctrination and the discrediting of scientific discoveries that don`t fit with scripture is rampant everywhere today! I see it as willfull ignorance reinforced by the threat of eternal damnation and the promise of reward in an afterlife. An obvious ploy for control.
I`m sure it is no surprise to God believers that such an entity is logically impossible. The contradictions associated with having an omnicient, omnipresent, omnibenevolent,atemporal,emotional God are insurmountable. (See-The case against God-George H Smith) for more details regarding that issue. It gives me a headache getting into those so I`ll leave that research in your hands.
All the while the God of the gaps is finding himself with less and less to do. Every year there are new discoveries that leave the God concept less room for operation.
I must also say something about the Religious demand to place things such as morality in an objective realm. To place such important human issues in the realm of the supernatural is irresponsible and dangerous! I`m sure we all remember 9-11. Morality ,put simply is the intent to minimise harm, it is relavent to human life , it can be a simple issue or it can be more complex. But it is not a list handed down by any religion . That can only be a code of obedience.
Why don`t I believe in God? Simply put . The concept is absurd , and there is no evidence of any kind to accept it. Snooples

[MrsMoe]

I am an antheist because an omnipotent creative being AKA God does not exist... why else?

[kmisho]

I am somewhat curious to hear differant ideas of why people have chosen atheism as there belief. Other than saying religion sucks. Is it that many of you are questioning deeply and not finding anwers? Still looking maybe and settled for atheism while you search? Try and state your reason without slamming other religions if you can. Your truthful answers may be of help to many, including possibly insight into yourself
I do not chose to be an atheist. I am forced to be an atheist beased on all of my experiences. Anything else would and I would be lying to myself.

kmisho

[vheltrite]

there is simply no god!!!
damn those who says that there is a god!!!
they are only fooling themselves!!!
believing that such a creature exist!!!

no god and thats it........................................
the hardest part of being an atheist is that.................
its hard to convince others that theres no such thing as god.........
some even think of us as a cult...............

[miata]

Even christians are partly atheist as they deny, Apollo and Thor as gods. There are so many gods they reject.

[ocmpoma]

I'm an atheist because God made me that way.

[James]

Heh heh, I like it.

I am an atheist because God did not make me that way. ;)

[Daniel]

I had no choice. I was raised atheist. As I grew up and read a few books it seemed pretty sound to stay an atheist. I've read books and studies concerning religion and they all have major flaws. To me it seemed just as silly as believing in Santa Claus. Besides, what do I care what happens after I die? I'm alive!

[vheltrite]

i dont believe in such creature exist...........
i dont believe god.................
and thats what makes me a atheist.....................
and i can stand that out!!!

[ChiefOfAss]

Forgive me for asking as I don't wish to argue, only to understand. If one is to be a part of a large group who claim no beliefs, is that common thought not also a belief? To believe in nothingness? Also, isn't your belief in nothing a choice?

Is it this type of thought process that leads believers to see the Virgin Mary in a burnt piece of toast?

To search for answers where there are no questions is so silly. There are so many GOOD questions you could be asking.

Why INSIST that people who freely declare their freedom from dogma are participating in dogma of your own creation.

Believers are soooo affected.

[moxnix46]

Is it this type of thought process that leads believers to see the Virgin Mary in a burnt piece of toast?
Well, granted I am not above making a fake piece of toast, or a shroud of turin for that matter if there are those who will pay for it. I do think if one hopes to understand why people believe you must experience their thought process, so yes maybe it is.
To search for answers where there are no questions is so silly. There are so many GOOD questions you could be asking.
Why? How else will I know the answers before you ask the questions? It's hard to stay ahead of the gods...really. :)

I can't think of a single GOOD question I haven't already answered, can I use some of yours? :) No wait...you ask, I'll give the answers.


Why INSIST that people who freely declare their freedom from dogma are participating in dogma of your own creation.
Well if you must know, creating dogma is a passion of mine, enslaving free thinkers in it makes me just plain horny.:D

Believers are soooo affected.
I prefer the word inflicted

[Bighead]

Haha, actually it isn't new age at all. It's quite well documented that our bodies do possess internal energy. It's also a fact that energy cannot be destroyed. It becomes philosophical when one wonders what happens to it. :)
Sorry, I know this quotes been beaten up a bit already, but I had to add....
It's also a fact that when you unplug a radio, it dies (turns off), but there is no "radio spirit" that floats out of it and goes on to do other things. All the electrical energy just gets used up before it finally "dies"

Anyways, I'm an atheist because I know that there is no god. I know that there is no god because I killed him.

[clambake]

What, there is no Spirit of Radio? Since when?

[Tenspace]

What, there is no Spirit of Radio? Since when?
Since Rush broke up?

Off on your way, hit the open road
There is magic at your fingers
For the Spirit ever lingers
Undemanding contact in your happy solitude

Invisible airwaves crackle with life
Bright antennae bristle with the energy
Emotional feedback on timeless wavelength
Bearing a gift beyond price, almost free

:D

[clambake]

What, there is no Spirit of Radio? Since when?
Since Rush broke up?

:D
They've taken some well deserved breaks but I doubt they are finished.

Bonus points if you can identify the song featuring my sig.

[Eva]

entre nous?

[GodlessHeathen]

What, there is no Spirit of Radio? Since when?
Since Rush broke up?

:D
They've taken some well deserved breaks but I doubt they are finished.

Bonus points if you can identify the song featuring my sig.
"Circumstances" from Hemispheres.

[Tenspace]

What, there is no Spirit of Radio? Since when?
Since Rush broke up?

:D
They've taken some well deserved breaks but I doubt they are finished.

Bonus points if you can identify the song featuring my sig.
That would be Circumstances (http://www.songfacts.com/detail.lasso?id=3848) from Hemispheres.

_ _
\ / <---- deposit bonus points here.
--

I keep forgetting that they've never broken up. Kinda like I keep forgetting that Abe Vigoda (http://www.nndb.com/people/225/000022159/) isn't dead yet.

Tenspace

[clambake]

Points to Godless Heathen and Tenspace!

Not a bad guess Eva, Entre Nous is another great song though

[ChiefOfAss]

Well, granted I am not above making a fake piece of toast, or a shroud of turin for that matter if there are those who will pay for it. I do think if one hopes to understand why people believe you must experience their thought process, so yes maybe it is.
FYI - The whole statement doesn't make sense. Are you trying to understand why people believe? I thought you were asking why people don't believe.
Why? How else will I know the answers before you ask the questions? It's hard to stay ahead of the gods...really. :)
I can't think of a single GOOD question I haven't already answered, can I use some of yours? :) No wait...you ask, I'll give the answers.
Again, you're words, put together, make a jumble of nonsense. But, since I'm used to trying to figure out what people with poor writing skills are trying to say, it looks like you're trying to be clever. Were you?

How would you even be able to recognize a good question? If you are a believer, then the part of your mind that copes with rational thought has a hole in it. You think made up, fantasy-style Gods actually exist.

Oh and... I did ask some questions, and you didn't answer them.

Well if you must know, creating dogma is a passion of mine, enslaving free thinkers in it makes me just plain horny.:D
If you can't answer a question, just say so... don't try to be clever... it just doesn't work for you.
Believers are so affected
I prefer the word inflicted
Hmm... you prefer the word inflicted. Well, how super for you. Hey, so... there are several online dictionaries that have the official meanings of words within the English language.

Some of the definitions evenhave examples of proper usage of the word. So, since you've picked "inflicted" as your favorite, you can go look it up and find out what it stands for!

Some of the online references also have a thing you can sign up for like a "Word of the day". It sends you an email each day with a new word. You could "prefer" a new word EVERYDAY! Doesn't that sound fun!?!

[moxnix46]

ChiefOfAss.
I'm not quite sure why you have chosen to be insultive, whatever your personal reasons I choose not to play. Thanks anyway. :)

[ChiefOfAss]

ChiefOfAss.
I'm not quite sure why you have chosen to be insultive, whatever your personal reasons I choose not to play. Thanks anyway. :)
You're not sure? Well.... you were being stupid.
I even asked if you were trying to be a jerk.
And, for the record, you again succeeded in not answering my quesiton. Bravo.

[ChiefOfAss]

Let me tell you a story. As a boy, I fell in love with a certain friend of mine. I decided it was our fate to be together for ever. This did not happen. As my life has gone on, things seem to just be getting worse and worse. This is not what a world with meaning would be like.
I'm going to try something new and try NOT to be offensive.

But first, I have to acknowledge that I am going out on a ledge by inferring from your story that you, psyadam , are an atheist because God is so mean. So, I acknowledge that I may have reached this conclusion in error.

If I'm right, psyadam , then you are what I call a bad atheist (if there is such a thing). It's that line of reasoning that allows theists to think they can "save" us, or that atheists' souls are merely smarting from God's indifference.

"Oh, it's not because religion is foolish and belief in God is tantamount to intellectual retardation, it's only because atheists need God to hug them. Whew! Now I don't have to examine myself and my lunatical beliefs."
May I suggest, you do the cause of extricating man kind from the shackles of religion. Maybe that cause shouldn't matter to you or anyone for that matter.... I'm just sayin', Godfullness is fed by the shared belief that infidels are just like them, but they've just lost their way.

Have you since figured out that, atheism is the only thing that makes sense regardless of what bad stuff has happened in the world?

[ChiefOfAss]

ChiefOfAss.
I'm not quite sure why you have chosen to be insultive, whatever your personal reasons I choose not to play. Thanks anyway. :)
You know what - you're the prick here. It WAS your question, after all.

Right now, I am trying to make my way through the entire thread. Just because, I want to make sure that someone else didn't already get through to you and you responded in kind.

Cause, you sure as hell didn't respond to me... and, when I picked on you for being a prick, you said the equivalent of, "I don't want to play anymore... you're a meanie."

Gawd - I hope, for the sake of your relatives and any dependents you may have, that you think the unexamined life IS worth living.

[Downslide]

I'm an atheist because I don't believe in god, or gods, or goddess or goddesses or prophets or... well, the list is kinda big but you get the idea.

pretty straight forward.

On the other hand, the question: 'Why are you a theist?' has much potential.

[moxnix46]

ChiefOfAss.
I'm not quite sure why you have chosen to be insultive, whatever your personal reasons I choose not to play. Thanks anyway. :)
You know what - you're the prick here. It WAS your question, after all.

Right now, I am trying to make my way through the entire thread. Just because, I want to make sure that someone else didn't already get through to you and you responded in kind.

Cause, you sure as hell didn't respond to me... and, when I picked on you for being a prick, you said the equivalent of, "I don't want to play anymore... you're a meanie."

Gawd - I hope, for the sake of your relatives and any dependents you may have, that you think the unexamined life IS worth living.
Chief,
I do apologise if I offended you in any way, that was not my intent. Obviously I failed to answer your question. Actually I didn't see a question from you. I only saw what I thought was sarcasm directed at me and the thread title. I am here to see differant points of view. I 'm just not interested in bickering and name calling(I generly call an ex-wife for that) Hence my reply, I didn't want to play. Nothing bad intended on my part so no need to put your war bonnet on. :)

[ChiefOfAss]

I am here to see differant points of view.
Okay, well.. if that's true, then do you think you learned anything? Will you at least acknowledge that atheism is not a "choice"?

[moxnix46]

I am here to see differant points of view.
Okay, well.. if that's true, then do you think you learned anything? Will you at least acknowledge that atheism is not a "choice"?
Yes, I am learning things. I do see it from you point of view that using logic and reasoning there is no choice, it can only be atheism. Am I right?

In my personal case, I was raised with religion, I made a personal choice to not believe in it. I guess my choice was to go with logic, possibly I am confusing my personal "choice" of belief or logic as a choice everyone has. Once arriving on logic, there is no longer a choice.
Am I making sence to you? I am trying here to communicate thought, sometimes I fail, but I try. :)

[ChiefOfAss]

I do see it from you point of view that using logic and reasoning there is no choice, it can only be atheism. Am I right?
I think we're pretty close on this... but, it goes even further than logic. Like somebody already said, atheism is the default position.

Remember, religion and theism is not some sort of built-in component of human nature. It’s an artifact of human interaction (and social evolution).
Once arriving on logic, there is no longer a choice.
It’s as if each of us were in an airplane flying at 100,000 feet. If you look out the window, you’ll KNOW that the Earth isn’t flat. You might not know for sure what, exactly, the world is… but, for sure, it isn’t flat.

So, it's theists that really make the choices here. I think most theists choose not to look out the window (maybe the better analog is that they are afraid to fly). The rest choose to pretend they didn’t see anything.

[Out of Sight]

Which of these don't belong?

a) Santa Claus
b) The Easter Bunny
c) The Toothfairy
d) God
e) unicorns
f) vampires

Give up? HA! It was a trick question! ALL OF THEM belong to this category! The category being: Things That Don't Exist.

[moxnix46]

I do see it from you point of view that using logic and reasoning there is no choice, it can only be atheism. Am I right?
I think we're pretty close on this... but, it goes even further than logic. Like somebody already said, atheism is the default position.

Remember, religion and theism is not some sort of built-in component of human nature. It’s an artifact of human interaction (and social evolution).
Once arriving on logic, there is no longer a choice.
It’s as if each of us were in an airplane flying at 100,000 feet. If you look out the window, you’ll KNOW that the Earth isn’t flat. You might not know for sure what, exactly, the world is… but, for sure, it isn’t flat.

So, it's theists that really make the choices here. I think most theists choose not to look out the window (maybe the better analog is that they are afraid to fly). The rest choose to pretend they didn’t see anything.
Okay, I get it now. It's very hard for a theist to go to the default position. Thats where I got the choice term. I just asumed(my mistake) that most people were originally theists before turning atheists. I left no area for natural atheists in my thread title. Which makes me wonder, I wonder what the percentage of natural atheists are compared to converts?

[miata]

It's not always a choice sometime reality just kicks you in the head; you awaken and you are cured of this deadly disease. I got lucky.

[Rhinoqulous]

Which of these don't belong?

a) Santa Claus
b) The Easter Bunny
c) The Toothfairy
d) God
e) unicorns
f) vampires

Give up? HA! It was a trick question! ALL OF THEM belong to this category! The category being: Things That Don't Exist.
So they all exist as members of a set? HA! Oh, I'm sorry that was really, rreeeeaaalllly bad. Ah, fun with set theory.

[Tenspace]

dim global godshapedhole as hyperbeing
dim array whichgod(Vishnu, Yahweh, Vlad, Rael, Eric Clapton, Fred Phelps, Ahuru Mazda, Ghoulslime, Valentino Rossi, Any Remaining Living Beatle (except Ringo))
dim brainwash_threshold as (1/sqrt(theabilitytocallbullshitwhenyouseeit))

main function Pick_My_Fairytale(godshapedhole)
if isnull(godshapedhole) then
return "Atheist"
else
for i=1 to count(godshapedhole)
if Max_Delusion(whichgod(i),godshapedhole) >= brainwash_threshold then
return "Your Religion Shall Be " & whichgod(i)
else
next i
end if
end if
end function

function Max_Delusion(delusion_array_pointer, delusion_rvalue)
while no delusion
if delusion_array_pointer = delusion_value then
return delusion_array_pointer
exit function
end if
return "Agnostic"
end function

[Tenspace]

Pseudocode and courvosier don't mix. :P

[GodlessHeathen]

I disagree. That was pretty funny.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Tenspace,

That is way too clever for this thread. You ought to have your own site if you don't already.

[Tenspace]

Thanks for the kind words. :)

I used to have a website, in a sense.... it was called AOL. In the early/mid '90s, I ran the Computing/Software department... I left after butting heads with Steve and other executives over the direction of content. I wanted to build interactive, open communities - they wanted to follow the network broadcast model, shoving sugar-coated crap down everyone's throat. It got really nasty toward the end, including some really dirty tricks. But that's a story for another time.

Actually, I'd love to build my own site, and write a couple of books too, but I work too much at my regular job to have the time. Now, if I had a benefactor.... hmm... :)

Tenspace

[Tenspace]

Okay, if I was going to start my own website, this (www.mondaymorningatheist.com) might be what it would be like.

Please note that I have not added any links, and the look/format is just a quick and dirty sendup.

Advice and opinions welcome.

Tenspace

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Not bad, Tenspace. It looks like a blog is the direction you intend. If you go for it, I'll put it in my favorites list and promise to visit.

I've got a few dot-coms myself. I have a history in management - of one thing or another - and was a P&R major, but I am self-taught in website development starting in 2000. I know HTML/XHTML, CSS, FML and some Dynamic HTML, JavaScript, FLASH and XML (along with various animation and image rendering software). I do sites on the side in my spare time and hand-code everything. The sites are mainly informational so far, and not very interactive or database oriented (but I am beginning to learn PHP, MySQL, & Apache). I wouldn't mind getting into it more - maybe changing careers (sick of management, I am) if the right thing came along. I don't quite know enough yet to start as a head guy somewhere (and I don't have a degree in it), so I would have to start as an associate or try to go it alone. I came very close to getting a job as an associate webmaster with the Red Cross in DC on their intranet but they decided to make the temp an offer first and he took it.

I probably would have majored in computer science if I had started college in the 80s rather than the 70s. Back then, my impression of computer scientists were guys that went to school forever to hang out in lab coats in cold rooms with wall-to-wall computers and it didn't look all that exciting.

Anyway, if you do decide to get into this, I have been working with another group in NYC to try and develop a network of "Reality-Based" sites with an agenda towards overcoming negative attitudes towards atheism and trying to get more of a seat at the table of political discourse.

Exchanging links with others of like mind is one way of increasing your traffic (but I'm sure you know more about that than I do). (I'm not sure GoDaddy would be the best host for the long run unless you want to keep it small.)

If you are interested, let me know.

[Tenspace]

Not bad, Tenspace. It looks like a blog is the direction you intend. If you go for it, I'll put it in my favorites list and promise to visit.
It's a start, and it does have that weblog look. Not sure what direction I'll take with design. I think my next article will have a more positive tone.

Ten

[Ickybod]

If the second coming of christ came and never proved he was god's son but, instead, he expected you to believe in him through faith like you believe in god, would you believe him or not? If so, I'm the second coming so worship me. If not, then now you know why I'm an atheist.

[AGENT-ADAIR]

I just lost faith...i got tired of feeling like a pawn in a game that doesnt exist.

This universe is complex, saying there is a god is an easy answer to a more complex question.

[ChiefOfAss]

Which makes me wonder, I wonder what the percentage of natural atheists are compared to converts?
I wonder more: how many people would be "natural theists"?

If history is any sort of guide, people may deify and promptly worship whomever their leader is... or whatever their leader is represented to be. In just the last century, some people considered their national leaders as gods.

Maybe the default position is to follow.