Why do the God-haters persist?

[thebrucebeat]

Well, it's pretty clear that Boss is not a PhD in psychology. But he does get to play one on the internet.

If he was one, he would realize that his constant self-promotion in his avatars and his declarations of his brilliance without supporting evidence clearly demonstrates a massive insecurity and a profound sense of a lack of accomplishment. His childish descents into tantrums and vulgar, invective filled tirades shows a maturity level arrested at a middle school level.
Can you possibly imagine a highly educated Doctor of Psychology behaving the way he does on here, with the possible exception of one that had completely slipped a gear?

 

[orogenicman]

Well, it's pretty clear that Boss is not a PhD in psychology. But he does get to play one on the internet.

If he was one, he would realize that his constant self-promotion in his avatars and his declarations of his brilliance without supporting evidence clearly demonstrates a massive insecurity and a profound sense of a lack of accomplishment. His childish descents into tantrums and vulgar, invective filled tirades shows a maturity level arrested at a middle school level.
Can you possibly imagine a highly educated Doctor of Psychology behaving the way he does on here, with the possible exception of one that had completely slipped a gear?

Yes, he does seem to present us with delusions of grandeur. Hence the user name "Boss".

 

[BreezeWood]

.

I'll go out on a limb and just say I believe Boss does live up to his PHD billing .... exmpl. by how much subject matter he is able to condense in a few sentences / paragraph.

They don't need to rationalize, they have no morality.

is that because as a Scripturalist you rely on a single book for all your beliefs ... ? - when in Nature the opposite is abundantly evident.

.

 

[daws101]

They don't need to rationalize, they have no morality.

bullshit! you have no idea if they do or do not have morality....it's obvious you have none..

 

[koshergrl]

.

I'll go out on a limb and just say I believe Boss does live up to his PHD billing .... exmpl. by how much subject matter he is able to condense in a few sentences / paragraph.

They don't need to rationalize, they have no morality.

is that because as a Scripturalist you rely on a single book for all your beliefs ... ? - when in Nature the opposite is abundantly evident.

.

I find it amusing that you jeer at Boss. Your comment above makes zero sense. No, my "Scripturalist" beliefs (whether or not that is accurate) have absolutely zero bearing on whether or not animals have a sense of morality.

The two things are utterly unrelated.

 

[westwall]

Keep it civil and topical.

 

[thebrucebeat]

They don't need to rationalize, they have no morality.

They don't need to rationalize, they have no morality.

You don't have any idea how funny what you just said is.

Let me explain why your argument is absolutely hilarious to me.
You just made the case that the need to rationalize is directly connected to having"morality".
Your morality immediately creates the need to create artificial excuses to avoid the behavioral changes that morality would require.
No morality, no need for rationalization.
Your words, not mine.
It's like being a bible believer but making excuses not to be influenced by the Fruits of the Spirit.
Very, very funny.

 

[Boss]

I'll watch the videos later, but again, I have to wonder what definition of rationalize you are using. None of the articles in any way showed crows rationalizing. They showed an ability to understand causal relationships, but not an attempt to make the irrational or illogical seem rational.

Crows are pretty smart as animals go. OK. That is not the same as rationalizing, sorry.

There are numerous ways in which the dictionary definition of "rationalize" is written, but I don't find any which indicate this is exclusive to humans. Seems as if this were something only humans have, the definitions would universally state such a thing. So I should think most intelligent people don't recognize it as an attribute exclusive to humans.

Here is one of the more easily understood definitions for you--
rationalize: use or exercise the mind or one's power of reason in order to make inferences, decisions, or arrive at a solution or judgments.

Every link I posted demonstrates crows with such ability. In one of the videos, the scientist literally uses the word "rationalize" to describe what he observes in their behavior. I think i provided ample evidence to support the point I made, and you've shown nothing to refute it other than your opinion. If you have anything tantamount to evidence to show otherwise, here is where you need to present that.

As to the mass delusions, again, it's not been the same mass delusion throughout human history. Human spiritual beliefs have been very varied over our history, and they are and have been varied at any given time as well. And there have probably always been those who do not believe in any supernatural or spiritual things. Even many believers likely think that those who do not agree with their beliefs are suffering delusion, as you like to put it.

Seems to me that we are able to rationalize what constitutes spirituality or spiritual belief and can recognize such behavior in humans. And it generally always involves the faith in a power greater than self. So now this supposed "mass delusion" can take on different forms and incarnations depending on cultures and histories, yet curiously still retains the same general belief in something greater than self. While I think it's bizarre you believe spirituality is mass delusion, I find it even more bizarre you think this "delusion" has the ability to morph and change incarnation across culture and time yet retain the same basic conceptualization of something greater than self.

I wonder what makes you think you have a rare ability to see the truth of spirituality that most others do not seem to? Certainly you've argued that atheists are incorrect because of the volume of believers in this thread.

I don't think I have any rare ability, in fact, I think what I believe is what most humans now and in the past have believed. Overwhelmingly, humans have spirituality. So it is actually YOUR ability that is rare. Mine is the norm. I've never argued that anyone is correct or incorrect based on popularity of support, and I actually think it is kind of stupid to do so. It shows a complete lack of ability to rationalize.

 

[Montrovant]

I'll watch the videos later, but again, I have to wonder what definition of rationalize you are using. None of the articles in any way showed crows rationalizing. They showed an ability to understand causal relationships, but not an attempt to make the irrational or illogical seem rational.

Crows are pretty smart as animals go. OK. That is not the same as rationalizing, sorry.

There are numerous ways in which the dictionary definition of "rationalize" is written, but I don't find any which indicate this is exclusive to humans. Seems as if this were something only humans have, the definitions would universally state such a thing. So I should think most intelligent people don't recognize it as an attribute exclusive to humans.

Here is one of the more easily understood definitions for you--
rationalize: use or exercise the mind or one's power of reason in order to make inferences, decisions, or arrive at a solution or judgments.

Every link I posted demonstrates crows with such ability. In one of the videos, the scientist literally uses the word "rationalize" to describe what he observes in their behavior. I think i provided ample evidence to support the point I made, and you've shown nothing to refute it other than your opinion. If you have anything tantamount to evidence to show otherwise, here is where you need to present that.

As to the mass delusions, again, it's not been the same mass delusion throughout human history. Human spiritual beliefs have been very varied over our history, and they are and have been varied at any given time as well. And there have probably always been those who do not believe in any supernatural or spiritual things. Even many believers likely think that those who do not agree with their beliefs are suffering delusion, as you like to put it.

Seems to me that we are able to rationalize what constitutes spirituality or spiritual belief and can recognize such behavior in humans. And it generally always involves the faith in a power greater than self. So now this supposed "mass delusion" can take on different forms and incarnations depending on cultures and histories, yet curiously still retains the same general belief in something greater than self. While I think it's bizarre you believe spirituality is mass delusion, I find it even more bizarre you think this "delusion" has the ability to morph and change incarnation across culture and time yet retain the same basic conceptualization of something greater than self.

I wonder what makes you think you have a rare ability to see the truth of spirituality that most others do not seem to? Certainly you've argued that atheists are incorrect because of the volume of believers in this thread.

I don't think I have any rare ability, in fact, I think what I believe is what most humans now and in the past have believed. Overwhelmingly, humans have spirituality. So it is actually YOUR ability that is rare. Mine is the norm. I've never argued that anyone is correct or incorrect based on popularity of support, and I actually think it is kind of stupid to do so. It shows a complete lack of ability to rationalize.

Well you certainly don't seem to be using rationalize as it was used before this side-track started. You've picked a definition that fits your argument rather than the one that was in context.

Have you not said that the fact that most of humanity has had some sort of belief in something greater than themselves is evidence that something greater actually exists?

Atheism/agnosticism may be rare, but so is your non-religious spiritual belief. The vast majority of people today and, I would guess, throughout history, have believed in an established religion. You claim that people are all connecting to the same thing with the many and varied religions and faiths that humanity has followed. Is that a common belief?

That you find it strange beliefs would change over time, whether the belief is centered on something real or a mass delusion, is strange in itself. Of course they would change. Most things do. Why, if spiritual belief is delusion, would it remain static?

I don't think I'd characterize religious or spiritual belief as delusion, anyway. I don't think it quite fits, at least not most of the time.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I'll watch the videos later, but again, I have to wonder what definition of rationalize you are using. None of the articles in any way showed crows rationalizing. They showed an ability to understand causal relationships, but not an attempt to make the irrational or illogical seem rational.

Crows are pretty smart as animals go. OK. That is not the same as rationalizing, sorry.

There are numerous ways in which the dictionary definition of "rationalize" is written, but I don't find any which indicate this is exclusive to humans. Seems as if this were something only humans have, the definitions would universally state such a thing. So I should think most intelligent people don't recognize it as an attribute exclusive to humans.

Here is one of the more easily understood definitions for you--
rationalize: use or exercise the mind or one's power of reason in order to make inferences, decisions, or arrive at a solution or judgments.

Every link I posted demonstrates crows with such ability. In one of the videos, the scientist literally uses the word "rationalize" to describe what he observes in their behavior. I think i provided ample evidence to support the point I made, and you've shown nothing to refute it other than your opinion. If you have anything tantamount to evidence to show otherwise, here is where you need to present that.

As to the mass delusions, again, it's not been the same mass delusion throughout human history. Human spiritual beliefs have been very varied over our history, and they are and have been varied at any given time as well. And there have probably always been those who do not believe in any supernatural or spiritual things. Even many believers likely think that those who do not agree with their beliefs are suffering delusion, as you like to put it.

Seems to me that we are able to rationalize what constitutes spirituality or spiritual belief and can recognize such behavior in humans. And it generally always involves the faith in a power greater than self. So now this supposed "mass delusion" can take on different forms and incarnations depending on cultures and histories, yet curiously still retains the same general belief in something greater than self. While I think it's bizarre you believe spirituality is mass delusion, I find it even more bizarre you think this "delusion" has the ability to morph and change incarnation across culture and time yet retain the same basic conceptualization of something greater than self.

I wonder what makes you think you have a rare ability to see the truth of spirituality that most others do not seem to? Certainly you've argued that atheists are incorrect because of the volume of believers in this thread.

I don't think I have any rare ability, in fact, I think what I believe is what most humans now and in the past have believed. Overwhelmingly, humans have spirituality. So it is actually YOUR ability that is rare. Mine is the norm. I've never argued that anyone is correct or incorrect based on popularity of support, and I actually think it is kind of stupid to do so. It shows a complete lack of ability to rationalize.

Boss I just don't know for sure but rationalize seems to be the wrong term. Being a hunter and someone who has raised horses and dogs. I think the proper term to describe what you're discussing would be instinct.

 

[thebrucebeat]

I'll watch the videos later, but again, I have to wonder what definition of rationalize you are using. None of the articles in any way showed crows rationalizing. They showed an ability to understand causal relationships, but not an attempt to make the irrational or illogical seem rational.

Crows are pretty smart as animals go. OK. That is not the same as rationalizing, sorry.

There are numerous ways in which the dictionary definition of "rationalize" is written, but I don't find any which indicate this is exclusive to humans. Seems as if this were something only humans have, the definitions would universally state such a thing. So I should think most intelligent people don't recognize it as an attribute exclusive to humans.

Here is one of the more easily understood definitions for you--
rationalize: use or exercise the mind or one's power of reason in order to make inferences, decisions, or arrive at a solution or judgments.

Every link I posted demonstrates crows with such ability. In one of the videos, the scientist literally uses the word "rationalize" to describe what he observes in their behavior. I think i provided ample evidence to support the point I made, and you've shown nothing to refute it other than your opinion. If you have anything tantamount to evidence to show otherwise, here is where you need to present that.

As to the mass delusions, again, it's not been the same mass delusion throughout human history. Human spiritual beliefs have been very varied over our history, and they are and have been varied at any given time as well. And there have probably always been those who do not believe in any supernatural or spiritual things. Even many believers likely think that those who do not agree with their beliefs are suffering delusion, as you like to put it.

Seems to me that we are able to rationalize what constitutes spirituality or spiritual belief and can recognize such behavior in humans. And it generally always involves the faith in a power greater than self. So now this supposed "mass delusion" can take on different forms and incarnations depending on cultures and histories, yet curiously still retains the same general belief in something greater than self. While I think it's bizarre you believe spirituality is mass delusion, I find it even more bizarre you think this "delusion" has the ability to morph and change incarnation across culture and time yet retain the same basic conceptualization of something greater than self.

I wonder what makes you think you have a rare ability to see the truth of spirituality that most others do not seem to? Certainly you've argued that atheists are incorrect because of the volume of believers in this thread.

I don't think I have any rare ability, in fact, I think what I believe is what most humans now and in the past have believed. Overwhelmingly, humans have spirituality. So it is actually YOUR ability that is rare. Mine is the norm. I've never argued that anyone is correct or incorrect based on popularity of support, and I actually think it is kind of stupid to do so. It shows a complete lack of ability to rationalize.

We are talking about the uniquely human habit of constructing rationalizations to justify behavior or opinions that are not legitimate.
You don't have a rare ability.
You are just like everyone else.
You create rationalizations to protect your self-identity. Only man does this.
This is taught to first year Psych students.
By your avatar I would think that guy sells vitamin supplements or Medicare plans to seniors.

 

[Boss]

Well you certainly don't seem to be using rationalize as it was used before this side-track started. You've picked a definition that fits your argument rather than the one that was in context.

How can a dictionary definition be "out of context?" You asked which definition I was using and I showed you one. I also said there were many, so you can pick one to as well. Find any recognized dictionary source which indicates rationality is an exclusive human attribute, since that was your argument. There didn't seem to be one of those when I looked. None of them indicated this was exclusive to humans, and I would think if that were the case, they would all mention this. Maybe all the dictionaries are being irrational and taking things out of context? Maybe they all suffer from mass delusions?

Have you not said that the fact that most of humanity has had some sort of belief in something greater than themselves is evidence that something greater actually exists?

I've said that 95% of the species has exhibited a behavioral characteristic for the entirety of it's existence and this is evidence the characteristic is fundamental to the species. But actually, I didn't state this, it comes from a cat named Darwin.

Atheism/agnosticism may be rare, but so is your non-religious spiritual belief. The vast majority of people today and, I would guess, throughout history, have believed in an established religion. You claim that people are all connecting to the same thing with the many and varied religions and faiths that humanity has followed. Is that a common belief?

Yes, everyone is connecting to spiritual nature and believe in something greater than self.

That you find it strange beliefs would change over time, whether the belief is centered on something real or a mass delusion, is strange in itself. Of course they would change. Most things do. Why, if spiritual belief is delusion, would it remain static?

I don't think I'd characterize religious or spiritual belief as delusion, anyway. I don't think it quite fits, at least not most of the time.

I find it strange that a mass delusion would need to take on different incarnations. If it's just some fake thing that man invented in their mind to console their mortality, then why would it need to change at all? Now I've explained why I believe different religions exist, it's because man can't quite comprehend spiritual nature, and as a result, conjures up different versions of what he thinks it may be. Perhaps some of those beliefs have been dilusional? I won't argue that, but spirituality is consistent and constant belief in something greater than self.

Ahh.... so now you are running away from your compadres mass delusion theory? Can't say I blame you for that at all. It's pretty fucked!

 

[Boss]

Boss I just don't know for sure but rationalize seems to be the wrong term. Being a hunter and someone who has raised horses and dogs. I think the proper term to describe what you're discussing would be instinct.

Well, when I watch a video of a crow who has to implement a multi-step plan to obtain food... get the small stick from the end of a dangling string-- use the small stick to get a longer stick inside a cage-- use the longer stick to get the food in a box... this is an exhibition of something rationalizing. Another experiment demonstrates crows recognizing faces of people who were mean to them as opposed to those who were kind and responding accordingly... again, rationalizing. Not only did they do this, they passed down the information to other crows who had never seen the faces. They're rationalizing all over the place... amazing creatures God created!

But we have a couple of morons here who refuse to accept the evidence when it's presented. Oh no, I've taken 'rationalize' out of context using my dictionary definition... it can't mean that because it has to mean something they believe it means, a trait only known to humans! Funny, the dictionary definitions don't mention this, and the dang crows certainly do seem to be rationalizing how to get the food from the box or who the mean humans are. And crows are FAR from the only example, I just picked crows because it's a simple animal. Dolphins and chimps also rationalize thought and they've done experiments to prove this as well. It's just that we have some really dumb people here who can't accept the fact they are dumb.

They'd rather make stupid arguments they cannot support, then hurl insults at me over my avatar.

 

[koshergrl]

Crows are super smart! They are the only bird that will recognize particular people..and follow them..regardless of the cars they drive!

I read that on a crow site..and have experienced it as well. For a while we had a group of crows that would descend upon our driveway as soon as the kids and I left each am, to eat whatever had fallen out of the car, whatever dog food might be left on the patio. My son put something on the roof the car for them a time or two...and there for a couple of weeks, everywhere we went, including DOWNTOWN at the LIGHT, we had our own crow escort.

I made him stop that post haste. Kinda freaky to drive around town in a swirl of crows.

Also my boss at the time was walking down by the marina (which is our touristy-place) with some out of town relatives, and a crow swooped down, literally landed on her head and started attacking her..HAHAHAHA...she's still all traumatized by it.

 

[thebrucebeat]

I'll watch the videos later, but again, I have to wonder what definition of rationalize you are using. None of the articles in any way showed crows rationalizing. They showed an ability to understand causal relationships, but not an attempt to make the irrational or illogical seem rational.

Crows are pretty smart as animals go. OK. That is not the same as rationalizing, sorry.

There are numerous ways in which the dictionary definition of "rationalize" is written, but I don't find any which indicate this is exclusive to humans. Seems as if this were something only humans have, the definitions would universally state such a thing. So I should think most intelligent people don't recognize it as an attribute exclusive to humans.

Here is one of the more easily understood definitions for you--
rationalize: use or exercise the mind or one's power of reason in order to make inferences, decisions, or arrive at a solution or judgments.

Every link I posted demonstrates crows with such ability. In one of the videos, the scientist literally uses the word "rationalize" to describe what he observes in their behavior. I think i provided ample evidence to support the point I made, and you've shown nothing to refute it other than your opinion. If you have anything tantamount to evidence to show otherwise, here is where you need to present that.



Seems to me that we are able to rationalize what constitutes spirituality or spiritual belief and can recognize such behavior in humans. And it generally always involves the faith in a power greater than self. So now this supposed "mass delusion" can take on different forms and incarnations depending on cultures and histories, yet curiously still retains the same general belief in something greater than self. While I think it's bizarre you believe spirituality is mass delusion, I find it even more bizarre you think this "delusion" has the ability to morph and change incarnation across culture and time yet retain the same basic conceptualization of something greater than self.

I wonder what makes you think you have a rare ability to see the truth of spirituality that most others do not seem to? Certainly you've argued that atheists are incorrect because of the volume of believers in this thread.

I don't think I have any rare ability, in fact, I think what I believe is what most humans now and in the past have believed. Overwhelmingly, humans have spirituality. So it is actually YOUR ability that is rare. Mine is the norm. I've never argued that anyone is correct or incorrect based on popularity of support, and I actually think it is kind of stupid to do so. It shows a complete lack of ability to rationalize.

We are talking about the uniquely human habit of constructing rationalizations to justify behavior or opinions that are not legitimate.
You don't have a rare ability.
You are just like everyone else.
You create rationalizations to protect your self-identity. Only man does this.
This is taught to first year Psych students.
By your avatar I would think that guy sells vitamin supplements or Medicare plans to seniors.

Well you certainly don't seem to be using rationalize as it was used before this side-track started. You've picked a definition that fits your argument rather than the one that was in context.

How can a dictionary definition be "out of context?" You asked which definition I was using and I showed you one. I also said there were many, so you can pick one to as well. Find any recognized dictionary source which indicates rationality is an exclusive human attribute, since that was your argument. There didn't seem to be one of those when I looked. None of them indicated this was exclusive to humans, and I would think if that were the case, they would all mention this. Maybe all the dictionaries are being irrational and taking things out of context? Maybe they all suffer from mass delusions?

Have you not said that the fact that most of humanity has had some sort of belief in something greater than themselves is evidence that something greater actually exists?

I've said that 95% of the species has exhibited a behavioral characteristic for the entirety of it's existence and this is evidence the characteristic is fundamental to the species. But actually, I didn't state this, it comes from a cat named Darwin.

Atheism/agnosticism may be rare, but so is your non-religious spiritual belief. The vast majority of people today and, I would guess, throughout history, have believed in an established religion. You claim that people are all connecting to the same thing with the many and varied religions and faiths that humanity has followed. Is that a common belief?

Yes, everyone is connecting to spiritual nature and believe in something greater than self.

That you find it strange beliefs would change over time, whether the belief is centered on something real or a mass delusion, is strange in itself. Of course they would change. Most things do. Why, if spiritual belief is delusion, would it remain static?

I don't think I'd characterize religious or spiritual belief as delusion, anyway. I don't think it quite fits, at least not most of the time.

I find it strange that a mass delusion would need to take on different incarnations. If it's just some fake thing that man invented in their mind to console their mortality, then why would it need to change at all? Now I've explained why I believe different religions exist, it's because man can't quite comprehend spiritual nature, and as a result, conjures up different versions of what he thinks it may be. Perhaps some of those beliefs have been dilusional? I won't argue that, but spirituality is consistent and constant belief in something greater than self.

Ahh.... so now you are running away from your compadres mass delusion theory? Can't say I blame you for that at all. It's pretty fucked!

See you are still avoiding my posts that rip yours to pieces.
Can't blame you.
The rest of us are discussing rationalizations. Ironically, your avoiding that discussion could be considered a rationalization itself. You don't negate my theory, you confirm it.
The delusions change over time because the old ones are proved to be in error by increased knowledge.
Thus, we don't have a thunder god because we no longer need one to explain thunder.
As the delusions are revealed as such, they systematically melt away. That process continues.

 

[koshergrl]

good grief.

You just don't get any smarter. Ever.

One of the wonders of the world. Even crows figure things out better than anti-Christian pukes.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Boss I just don't know for sure but rationalize seems to be the wrong term. Being a hunter and someone who has raised horses and dogs. I think the proper term to describe what you're discussing would be instinct.

Well, when I watch a video of a crow who has to implement a multi-step plan to obtain food... get the small stick from the end of a dangling string-- use the small stick to get a longer stick inside a cage-- use the longer stick to get the food in a box... this is an exhibition of something rationalizing. Another experiment demonstrates crows recognizing faces of people who were mean to them as opposed to those who were kind and responding accordingly... again, rationalizing. Not only did they do this, they passed down the information to other crows who had never seen the faces. They're rationalizing all over the place... amazing creatures God created!

But we have a couple of morons here who refuse to accept the evidence when it's presented. Oh no, I've taken 'rationalize' out of context using my dictionary definition... it can't mean that because it has to mean something they believe it means, a trait only known to humans! Funny, the dictionary definitions don't mention this, and the dang crows certainly do seem to be rationalizing how to get the food from the box or who the mean humans are. And crows are FAR from the only example, I just picked crows because it's a simple animal. Dolphins and chimps also rationalize thought and they've done experiments to prove this as well. It's just that we have some really dumb people here who can't accept the fact they are dumb.

They'd rather make stupid arguments they cannot support, then hurl insults at me over my avatar.

You are completely avoiding the conversation about rationalization.
The rest is your usual.

 

[Boss]

See you are still avoiding my posts that rip yours to pieces.

You couldn't rip wet toilet paper to pieces, you're an idiot. I ignore idiots.

Watch out for the crows!

 

[Boss]

You are completely avoiding the conversation about rationalization.

No, I addressed it thoroughly. I'm waiting on your accredited dictionary definition which states it is an exclusively human attribute. I guess you must fail at conversation like everything else you do?

 

[thebrucebeat]

See you are still avoiding my posts that rip yours to pieces.

You couldn't rip wet toilet paper to pieces, you're an idiot. I ignore idiots.

Watch out for the crows!

More avoidance.
Noted.

My little Runaway.