Why I'm an atheist.

[KittenKoder]

Well, apparently my little story has failed to attract any interest in discussion...

Maybe if I changed it to a couple line entry that said something intentionally derogatory and provocative I could generate more traffic... hmmm...

First reason for this, most of the other atheists are too busy bashing those with religion, most specifically the christian types.

Second reason, meh ....


... that is all.

 

[gcomeau]

If you want to apply cognitive conditions on emotional processes and try to find anwers that way, I do wish you the best of luck.

You're not following.

I'm asking you why you think the kind of faith you are espousing is something desirable, and how you arrive at the conclusion that that faith should fall in the same category as emotions when it comes to the applicability of logic to the subject of it. That is a cognitive process. You yourself said you made a choice to embrace it. Choices have reasons. You appear exceedingly reluctant to examine yours.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

I don't mix the real world events with my beliefs in something supernatural, either. That makes little sense to me, too. I do know that some believers do - 'It's God's plan', for example. That's fine for them if it helps them deal with real world issues that are too complex at the moment. Personally, whenever I come across something so complex in the real world that makes little sense, I seek more information in the hope that I can better understand it. That would be a scientist thing.

So, I compartmentalize and because I do, I find your last statement in the first paragraph - "So I don't really agree so much with the "whatever you want to believe" camp" - nonsensical to me. In fact, it looks like a non sequitur. If that - being cool with someone having their views in the faith department - makes this believer stupid or out of touch with reality to some, oh well. I see little constructive to that sort of view, but some do have it.

You're right in that it isn't very constructive. But let me explain why atheists and other types of nonbelievers attack faith-based belief: because it isn't based on empirical, physical, rational, practical reasoning and logic.

As you wrote

Personally, whenever I come across something so complex in the real world that makes little sense, I seek more information in the hope that I can better understand it. That would be a scientist thing.

you stated that to solve a complex problem you seek real world information. The answer or solution you seek is based on real world information.

With so many aspects of human society based not on real world information, but faith-based belief, its no wonder there is so much strife, conflict, intolerance, etc. Because many people's reasoning is not well aligned with reality. Atheists do not have this, at least, not beyond psychological hang-ups in their own personal lives. Atheists, because of the lack of supernatual belief in their life philosophies, see the pragmatic and practical purpose of not believing and therefore are not hindered in seeking those solutions oustide of supernatural rules or religious boundaries.

For example: there is no practical reason why homosexuals shouldn't get married. From a religious perspective, there are moral reasons because they view homosexuality as wrong. But without the religious prejudice, there is nothing wrong with it and it is simply a naturally occurring phenomenon. Case closed from a nonbeliever point of view. Same with abortion. There is no soul, so there is no moral dilemma about legal abortion. It shouldn't be abused, and we should do more about educating people so that there are less abortions (and less unwanted pregnancies), but it should be a legal right for women to choose. Sentience or consciousness is the only problem with abortion for atheists, and so non-necessary late-term abortions are morally wrong.

Now if you have doubts about godless morality, well, I can assure you, all human beings have morality to one degree or another and one group can't claim to be moral than another. My own morality is pragmatic and humanistic (which means the same thing essentially).

Perhaps now you'll have a better understanding of why religion IS so important to atheists and why we feel impeded in our own personal lives by it. And therefore why we like to discuss it. We might not come knock on your door on Saturday morning, but this IS a religious forum, is it not?

 

[Si modo]

If you want to apply cognitive conditions on emotional processes and try to find anwers that way, I do wish you the best of luck.

You're not following.

I'm asking you why you think the kind of faith you are espousing is something desirable, and how you arrive at the conclusion that that faith should fall in the same category as emotions when it comes to the applicability of logic to the subject of it. That is a cognitive process. You yourself said you made a choice to embrace it. Choices have reasons. You appear exceedingly reluctant to examine yours.

I fear that you are not following.

I'll try to use pictures, now.

______________________________
|_____________|______________|
|_____________|______________|
|_____________|______________|
|______a_____-|-_______b_____|
|_____________|______________|
|_____________|______________|
|_____________|______________|

My brain (not to scale)

Section A is where cognitive processes take place (not to scale)
Section B is where emotional processes take place (not to scale)
-|- Corpus callosum (not to scale)

I process science in A. I process political analysis in A. I do bills in A. I use logic in A (real world shit)

I process love in B. I process hate in B. I process contentment in B. I process faith in B

As my corpus callosum is not severed, the cognitive areas of my brain are aware of the emotional areas of my brain just as the emotional areas are aware of the cognitive areas. I don't apply logic to emotions just as I don't try to mate a fucking zebra with a hubcap. It's just an idiotic idea.

I think about love; I know it's irrational; but I still choose to love. I don't apply love to science; I don't apply love to political analysis; I don't apply love to doing my bills.

I think about hate; I know it's irrational; yet I still hate some things. I don't apply hate to science; I don't apply hate to political analysis; I don't apply hate to doing my bills.

I think about faith; I know it's irrational; yet I still have it. I don't apply faith to science (thus the reason I don't try to publish papers without supporting information); I don't apply faith to political analysis; I don't apply faith to doing my bills. Find someone who does and argue with them. You keep trying to argue something with me that I don't do. I said it in my first post in this thread, yet you still want to argue it. It's a strawman.

 

[Big Black Dog]

I don't care if you're an atheist. It's your choice. Hope you made a wise choice.

 

[jillian]

I don't care if you're an atheist. It's your choice. Hope you made a wise choice.

Do you think people can force themselves to believe if they don't?

And if they don't believe, then what's the argument that they should? Fear?

I'd hate for my beliefs to come from fear.

 

[amrchaos]

I don't care if you're an atheist. It's your choice. Hope you made a wise choice.

Do you think people can force themselves to believe if they don't?

And if they don't believe, then what's the argument that they should? Fear?

I'd hate for my beliefs to come from fear.

amrchaos Hypothesis about Faith


The more I think about it, the more I come to realize that it is not fear that dictates a believers belief. Call it hand waving, but I think the reasons believers "believe" is to be part of something that is bigger than they are regardless if it actually can be proven to exists or not.

In other words, Faith in believers is more based on hope of a possible realliy than a fear of it. Quite frankly, I detect a kind of snicker behind some of these believers when they talk of hell and so forth.

Of course, this is my hypothesis on faith.

 

[gcomeau]

I process science in A. I process political analysis in A. I do bills in A. I use logic in A (real world shit)

I process love in B. I process hate in B. I process contentment in B. I process faith in B

As my corpus callosum is not severed, the cognitive areas of my brain are aware of the emotional areas of my brain just as the emotional areas are aware of the cognitive areas. I don't apply logic to emotions just as I don't try to mate a fucking zebra with a hubcap. It's just an idiotic idea.

I think about love; I know it's irrational; but I still choose to love. I don't apply love to science; I don't apply love to political analysis; I don't apply love to doing my bills.

I think about hate; I know it's irrational; yet I still hate some things. I don't apply hate to science; I don't apply hate to political analysis; I don't apply hate to doing my bills.

I think about faith; I know it's irrational; yet I still have it. I don't apply faith to science (thus the reason I don't try to publish papers without supporting information);

Because you choose not to. Because you know it's inapropriate to do that.

I don't apply faith to political analysis; I don't apply faith to doing my bills.

Because you choose not to. Because you know it's innapropriate to do that.

But you do choose to apply faith to the ideas and claims encompassed by religion.

You do this because __________________.

Fill that space in please. That's what I'm asking. Something goes there. Something made you decide that it was appropriate for you to place religious issues in the "deal with it using faith" compartment instead of in the "deal with it using logic" compartment.

What was the basis of that decision?

 

[eagleseven]

Because humans are not machines, Spock! We can't just turn off our emotions.

 

[gcomeau]

Because humans are not machines, Spock! We can't just turn off our emotions.

Unless you are also saying that when Si modo chooses not to use "love" to do his tax returns he's "just turning off his emotions" I don't understand your statement.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Or maybe a believer actually does say it. I believe because I make a choice to believe. I adore choice. God bless America.

Si modo, you may not realize this, but you have just admitted to a willful suspension of disbelief. Was that your intent?

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Because humans are not machines, Spock! We can't just turn off our emotions.

Unless you are also saying that when Si modo chooses not to use "love" to do his tax returns he's "just turning off his emotions" I don't understand your statement.

Dammit, Jim! I'm a Christian, not a thinker!

 

[Si modo]

Or maybe a believer actually does say it. I believe because I make a choice to believe. I adore choice. God bless America.

Si modo, you may not realize this, but you have just admitted to a willful suspension of disbelief. Was that your intent?

Absolutely, as faith IS belief. I don't need any reason for a feeling.

 

[Si modo]

Proseltyzing atheists and live-and-let-live believers? The irony.

 

[KittenKoder]

Proseltyzing atheists and live-and-let-live believers? The irony.

You learn to adapt here.

 

[gcomeau]

Proseltyzing atheists and live-and-let-live believers? The irony.

I didn't realize asking people to explain their own positions (which you are still avoiding doing) was classified as "proselytizing".

 

[Si modo]

Proseltyzing atheists and live-and-let-live believers? The irony.

I didn't realize asking people to explain their own positions (which you are still avoiding doing) was classified as "proselytizing".

You don't believe. Cool. Yet, you are so interested in why another believes? When the freaks from Jehovah's Witnesses come to my door, that's the same thing they are - interested in what I believe or don't believe. Hmmmmmmm.

I feel; I think; I prefer Coke to Pepsi. Any relevant questions that I haven't already answered?

 

[gcomeau]

Proseltyzing atheists and live-and-let-live believers? The irony.

I didn't realize asking people to explain their own positions (which you are still avoiding doing) was classified as "proselytizing".

I feel, I think. Any relevant questions that I haven't already answered?

That space remains blank.

 

[Si modo]

I didn't realize asking people to explain their own positions (which you are still avoiding doing) was classified as "proselytizing".

I feel, I think. Any relevant questions that I haven't already answered?

That space remains blank.

This space?

But you do choose to apply faith to the ideas and claims encompassed by religion.

You do this because __________________.​

I can't answer it because your premise is faulty. Your premise is that I believe the ideas and claims encompassed by [my] religion. As I don't apply faith to all of those claims and ideas, I cannot answer. It's a nonsensical question.

 

[xsited1]

... So, an atheist I remain.

So have you talked to any believers about some of the Gifts of the Spirit? In particular, have you ever witnessed anyone speaking in tongues and talked to the person afterward?