Author Topic: Why Worship?  (Read 4771 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 18386
  • Darwins +446/-25
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #87 on: March 20, 2018, 02:24:28 PM »
lol

you really can't depart from your script, can you, velkyn?

since you have it all figured out, there's nothing for me to say.

let me know if you ever come up with something new, and we can move on.

I've never said I have it all figured out.  Please do show that if you think it is true, if you aren't simply making a false claim to avoid a point.   We've ended up back where you make a false claim about me and then using it to avoid answering questions and points.  That's what happened before too.    http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,20789.msg471918.html#msg471918   More false claims to avoid a discussion that you don't like where it is going for your side. 
 

« Last Edit: March 20, 2018, 02:27:25 PM by velkyn »
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline albeto

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1784
  • Darwins +360/-4
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #88 on: March 20, 2018, 04:03:22 PM »
Been there, done that a lot of times before, as Albeto mentions, that a lot of theists end up with the vague nonsense so they don't have to acknowledge that their claims are are baseless at best and completely wrong at worst.  One doesn't need Quakerism to be peaceful, kind etc.  That's pretty much humanism, without the religion.

Not even to avoid acknowledging their claims are baseless at best and completely wrong at worst. I think they don't care. I think people who have religious beliefs don't actually care if those beliefs are right or wrong. They care if those beliefs make them feel better about themselves. Sometimes if they don't feel better about themselves because people are starting to criticize their beliefs too much, people will engage in some ridiculous PR work in hopes that solves the problem.  "Christian" doesn't make them look good in public any more, so "Christ follower" it is. No more "religion," it's a "personal relationship with Jebus." I see what you mean with "non-theist." What's wrong with using the word atheist to denote a lack of belief? That is, literally, what atheism means. Using words like "agnostic" in hopes of getting a pass from criticism seems predictably dishonest and self-serving.

I worked for a boss who did the same thing. Ran rental units that had the worst reputation in town. Every few years they changed their name. Same crappy owners, shiny new name. The idea was no one would think of them when talking about the worst rental company in town.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2018, 04:12:56 PM by albeto »

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 9049
  • Darwins +446/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #89 on: March 20, 2018, 08:57:10 PM »
lol

you really can't depart from your script, can you, velkyn?

since you have it all figured out, there's nothing for me to say.

let me know if you ever come up with something new, and we can move on.

I've never said I have it all figured out.  Please do show that if you think it is true, if you aren't simply making a false claim to avoid a point.   We've ended up back where you make a false claim about me and then using it to avoid answering questions and points.  That's what happened before too.    http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,20789.msg471918.html#msg471918   More false claims to avoid a discussion that you don't like where it is going for your side.

Not directed at you velkyn...just a comment.

There are no sides in the god issue. Since the dawn of god claims, what god has ever been shown to actually exist? Every. Single. God. Is a story, and nothing more. That alone is where the difficulty and discomfort comes for those who "believe" the claims, and those who straddle any form of mysterious or spiritual woo that allows them to avoid the blinding truth. There are no gods. In the complete absence of anything more than stories passed along since the dawn of humanity, we face beautiful mysteries and unknowns, and we face them head on with excitement and wonder. We forge ahead with scientific intensity and curiosity to see what more we can learn about ourselves, and the universe we see around us.

We may never know it all. We may never find the answers we seek. But religions and gods are basically the same as giving up before we start. No curiosity, no wonder, no mystery. Just a god or a set of gods. Excuses. Scapegoats for behavior. Pointless distractions form the only life we really have. I think most adults know this, but are literally too afraid to face it. I sort of get it, but I don't condone it.

As I age, I find myself wondering more about when my last day will be - or more specifically - when will I no longer be able to do the things I enjoy? Even with that in mind, I do not yet take full advantage of every day as though the end is nigh. I don't know why. It's like knowing I don't eat healthy, and knowing what that will take, but not really changing my behavior. The self-awareness is what hurts. Still, every day is a new day, another chance to take full advantage of all that we currently know. Another day to live without the comfort of immortality (isn't that the ultimate arrogance for anyone, that they could live forever?)

It's like arguing with someone about Xenu and the planet Kolob. Despite the well documented author of Scientology, people embrace it and commit their lives to it, as though it is real. The author reportedly stated it was made up in order to make money or get rich. Sigh.





Offline junebug72

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4930
  • Darwins +358/-117
  • Gender: Female
  • MIGHT DOES NOT MAKE RIGHT. Seeing is believing!
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #90 on: March 21, 2018, 05:57:30 AM »
I do not perceive kevinagain being dishonest at all. He's being genuine with us. Some people here are being too darn pushy.
 
He can call himself whatever he darn well wants to.

I've been observing a substance recovery group for my final assignment in HSE-122. One of the most emphasized skill is being respectful of diversity in groups. The group I'm observing is diverse. Two members had a spiritual experience that felt like a higher power had taken control of their lives. Another member, a gay man, he don't believe in gods.

The point I'm trying to make here is: Some people need to believe in a Higher Power to feel like they have control over natural forces beyond their control.

A man like kevinagain that is humble about belief is a breath of fresh air.

Be well kevinagain. ;)
If you wanna make the world a better place,
Take a look at yourself, and then make a change...
Michael Jackson and Batman

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 18386
  • Darwins +446/-25
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #91 on: March 21, 2018, 07:15:44 AM »
Not directed at you velkyn...just a comment.

no problem at all.  Good points, jetson.  I just recently turned in my resignation for my job because it was making me miserable and life is too short for that. 
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline kevinagain

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Darwins +24/-4
  • mean people suck.
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #92 on: March 21, 2018, 07:48:23 AM »
I've never said I have it all figured out.  Please do show that if you think it is true, if you aren't simply making a false claim to avoid a point.   We've ended up back where you make a false claim about me and then using it to avoid answering questions and points.  That's what happened before too.    http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,20789.msg471918.html#msg471918   More false claims to avoid a discussion that you don't like where it is going for your side.

velkyn, three points of my own. first, when you spend an entire post lecturing someone about something you never heard of, its a reasonable observation to make that you think you have it figured out. if you dont, i invite you to confess your ignorance and ask questions, rather than make accusations.

second, regarding posts from years ago, i dont obsess over you tbe way you apparently have obsessed over me. i have no idea what we spoke of years ago, and do not need to relive my past.

third, and this is the only conversation i will pursue with you, the fact tbat you have a row of neat boxes into which you need to fit people does not interest me. i have found people to be more complex in tbeir tbinking and experience than neat boxes encompass. nontheist quakerism is like that. tbere's variety, contradictions, and braided streams of belief and lack of it. no tidy little box fits everybody. some nontheist friends are hardcore atheists, others are pantheists. some are explicit theravadans.

in my case, i reserve tbe decision az currently unknowable, bazdd on the evidence i have. i call that agnosticism, and am quite happy leaving it at tbat unless someone actually wants to know what i think. arguing over labels doesnt address substance in any way i find useful.
don't make excuses for nasty people. you don't put a flower in an asshole and call it a vase.

Offline kevinagain

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Darwins +24/-4
  • mean people suck.
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #93 on: March 21, 2018, 08:00:29 AM »
I've been observing a substance recovery group for my final assignment in HSE-122. One of the most emphasized skill is being respectful of diversity in groups. The group I'm observing is diverse. Two members had a spiritual experience that felt like a higher power had taken control of their lives. Another member, a gay man, he don't believe in gods.

The point I'm trying to make here is: Some people need to believe in a Higher Power to feel like they have control over natural forces beyond their control.

intrresting. i once knew a very articulate (and funny) atheist who called himself vynn. he had no belief in deities, but described states of mind and experience tbat he chose to call spiritual. i have no problem with spiritualify without spirit, so to speak, but the words are cumbersome when you try to force them to describe things they werent invented for. vynn took off and disappeared before i could get him to explain more about what he was experiencing.
don't make excuses for nasty people. you don't put a flower in an asshole and call it a vase.

Offline albeto

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1784
  • Darwins +360/-4
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #94 on: March 21, 2018, 10:24:43 AM »
in my case, i reserve tbe decision az currently unknowable, bazdd on the evidence i have. i call that agnosticism, and am quite happy leaving it at tbat unless someone actually wants to know what i think. arguing over labels doesnt address substance in any way i find useful.

I want to know what you think. Not what you don't think, but what you do.

Offline kevinagain

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Darwins +24/-4
  • mean people suck.
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #95 on: March 21, 2018, 03:07:44 PM »
sure, albeto. first, i think if you believe this applies to me, you don't know what you're talking about.

Quote
I see what you mean with "non-theist." What's wrong with using the word atheist to denote a lack of belief? That is, literally, what atheism means. Using words like "agnostic" in hopes of getting a pass from criticism seems predictably dishonest and self-serving.

i choose the term agnostic because it expresses an uncertainty that i associate with an intelligent analysis of tbe question. so called "strong atheists," in my opinion, are often idiots who express no doubts over things of which tbey have only partial understanding. there are exveptions, and tbey can be onteresting to learn from. but they are rare.

in my case, i once accepted tbe quaker belief in an active, immanent deity. i had various leadings and shared experiences which seemed to me to be supernatural in origin. doeznt matter what they were. the usual. since that time, tbe leadings have ceased, and i now doubt that tbey were genuinely divine in tbd first place. but should they return in a more certain manner, i wojld have no problem in revisiting a belief in god. i do not know there is no god, and "athiest" is a tsfm with so much baggage that i dont care to associate myself with them without qualifications tbat many object to.

what about you? why is tbe label important? is it because it provides a club of congenial travellers with an easy entrance test, just tbe use of a term for oneself? or is tbere more to it? what is it that you tbink? not what you have no belief in, but what you do?
don't make excuses for nasty people. you don't put a flower in an asshole and call it a vase.

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 9049
  • Darwins +446/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #96 on: March 21, 2018, 03:29:52 PM »
sure, albeto. first, i think if you believe this applies to me, you don't know what you're talking about.

Quote
I see what you mean with "non-theist." What's wrong with using the word atheist to denote a lack of belief? That is, literally, what atheism means. Using words like "agnostic" in hopes of getting a pass from criticism seems predictably dishonest and self-serving.

i choose the term agnostic because it expresses an uncertainty that i associate with an intelligent analysis of tbe question. so called "strong atheists," in my opinion, are often idiots who express no doubts over things of which tbey have only partial understanding. there are exveptions, and tbey can be onteresting to learn from. but they are rare.

in my case, i once accepted tbe quaker belief in an active, immanent deity. i had various leadings and shared experiences which seemed to me to be supernatural in origin. doeznt matter what they were. the usual. since that time, tbe leadings have ceased, and i now doubt that tbey were genuinely divine in tbd first place. but should they return in a more certain manner, i wojld have no problem in revisiting a belief in god. i do not know there is no god, and "athiest" is a tsfm with so much baggage that i dont care to associate myself with them without qualifications tbat many object to.

what about you? why is tbe label important? is it because it provides a club of congenial travellers with an easy entrance test, just tbe use of a term for oneself? or is tbere more to it? what is it that you tbink? not what you have no belief in, but what you do?

What did you expect when you starting posting here recently? Genuinely curious given the statement you just made. You don't sound particularly intelligent when it comes to atheism.

Offline kevinagain

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Darwins +24/-4
  • mean people suck.
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #97 on: March 21, 2018, 05:57:08 PM »
What did you expect when you starting posting here recently? Genuinely curious given the statement you just made. You don't sound particularly intelligent when it comes to atheism.

hi jet. how've you been?

i expected what i found, and i'm looking forward to listening to a variety of points of view to help me work through various questions in my own mind. i look for people who are smarter than i am, because i learn stuff from them. there are people like that here, not that they're hard to find elsewhere.

what do you find unintelligent about my comments? you didn't identify anything, so i am in the dark.
don't make excuses for nasty people. you don't put a flower in an asshole and call it a vase.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 18386
  • Darwins +446/-25
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #98 on: March 21, 2018, 07:17:34 PM »
velkyn, three points of my own. first, when you spend an entire post lecturing someone about something you never heard of, its a reasonable observation to make that you think you have it figured out. if you dont, i invite you to confess your ignorance and ask questions, rather than make accusations.

Hmmm, what have I "never heard of"?   

Quote
second, regarding posts from years ago, i dont obsess over you tbe way you apparently have obsessed over me. i have no idea what we spoke of years ago, and do not need to relive my past.

Nice attempt at dodging and more false claims. 

Quote
third, and this is the only conversation i will pursue with you, the fact tbat you have a row of neat boxes into which you need to fit people does not interest me. i have found people to be more complex in tbeir tbinking and experience than neat boxes encompass. nontheist quakerism is like that. tbere's variety, contradictions, and braided streams of belief and lack of it. no tidy little box fits everybody. some nontheist friends are hardcore atheists, others are pantheists. some are explicit theravadans.

in my case, i reserve tbe decision az currently unknowable, bazdd on the evidence i have. i call that agnosticism, and am quite happy leaving it at tbat unless someone actually wants to know what i think. arguing over labels doesnt address substance in any way i find useful.

hmmm, more baseless claims about me to avoid answering questions.  How unsurprising. 
« Last Edit: March 21, 2018, 07:19:07 PM by velkyn »
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 9049
  • Darwins +446/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #99 on: March 21, 2018, 09:55:07 PM »
What did you expect when you starting posting here recently? Genuinely curious given the statement you just made. You don't sound particularly intelligent when it comes to atheism.

hi jet. how've you been?

i expected what i found, and i'm looking forward to listening to a variety of points of view to help me work through various questions in my own mind. i look for people who are smarter than i am, because i learn stuff from them. there are people like that here, not that they're hard to find elsewhere.

what do you find unintelligent about my comments? you didn't identify anything, so i am in the dark.

I'm doing well kevin.

Perhaps I am overly sensitive to opinions about strong atheists, and what these "idiots" may or may not know when they reveal their "partial understanding" openly.

Does anyone have more than a partial understanding? These rare "exceptions", what do they know that the rest do not? Or is it really more about how they present their ideas?

Offline albeto

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1784
  • Darwins +360/-4
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #100 on: March 21, 2018, 11:24:35 PM »
what about you? why is tbe label important? is it because it provides a club of congenial travellers with an easy entrance test, just tbe use of a term for oneself? or is tbere more to it?

I guess I don't think about it as labeling. In my experience, using the word "label" in this context is similar to using the word "legalism" when classifying or defining other people's religious viewpoints. It implies the one talking is the one who has it right and others are somehow missing the mark. It's a way of implying oneself is in a position of more knowledge. I find that interesting because with faith, there is no knowledge. Claims are, well, accepted in faith.

If your question to me is why do I ask for these classifications, I'm not asking for a PhD dissertation from you or anything, but more information than I might expect a 3rd grade report, if that makes sense. Not that I have any right to expect it, it just makes the conversation more enjoyable than what otherwise amounts to meaningless small talk.

For example, you offer, "i choose the term agnostic because it expresses an uncertainty that i associate with an intelligent analysis of tbe question." And now I'm curious what you mean by that. What do you consider an "intelligent analysis of the question"? For example, how would one go about intelligently questioning the validity of the claim "god exists"?  If I have only partial understanding, where would I go to get more? How could I be certain that understanding accurately reflects reality?

what is it that you tbink? not what you have no belief in, but what you do?

I am atheist. That is, I harbor no theistic beliefs of any kind. Atheism does not claim god does not exist, like you implied in your post. Not even "strong atheism." It only claims a person does not hold any such beliefs. In the same way, I don't believe in numerology, premonition, past lives, karma, or magic of any kind. I can't claim these things don't exist because a negative can't be proven, but I don't believe there is reason to assume they do.

I do believe the world with which we interact is by its nature physical and not supernatural or magical, and can be reliably understood by factual, rational, logical explanations without needing to invoke any supernatural or ghostly or otherworldly intervention. We as a species continue to gain knowledge at an amazing rate, and we have consistently replaced superstitious, magical explanations of our world with natural ones. I know of no reason to expect that to change.



Offline Emma286

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2840
  • Darwins +124/-1
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #101 on: March 22, 2018, 06:30:35 AM »
Not directed at you velkyn...just a comment.

no problem at all.  Good points, jetson.  I just recently turned in my resignation for my job because it was making me miserable and life is too short for that.

Sorry to hear that Velkyn. I won’t disrupt the thread by going on at length about this, but I’ve got a problem boss in one of my voluntary jobs - at the religious charity I’m still doing some volunteer time with. Regarding the people management aspect of her job, she’s really not very good with it and I’ve been wanting to leave for a while now as fed up with it. Unfortunately, I’m in a current position of having to be very careful with the timing. Still, as soon as I’ve had a paid job offer that I can accept (after completing my Employment Support programme with the other charity I’m volunteering for), am planning on walking then.

Hoping that you can soon find something better. Honestly can’t blame you.

Offline kevinagain

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Darwins +24/-4
  • mean people suck.
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #102 on: March 22, 2018, 11:25:47 AM »
I'm doing well kevin.

Perhaps I am overly sensitive to opinions about strong atheists, and what these "idiots" may or may not know when they reveal their "partial understanding" openly.

Does anyone have more than a partial understanding? These rare "exceptions", what do they know that the rest do not? Or is it really more about how they present their ideas?

my point probably doesnt apply to most of tbe people here, but to tbe population at large. my experience has been that if you take 100 people off the street who are willing to positively assert that god does not exist, the vast majority would not be able to explain themselves, especially about tbe differences between the statements "god does not exist," and "i have no credible evidence that god exists." not even richard dawkins is willing to take a strong atbeism position, but instead states "god probably doez not exist." and dawkins is pretty smart.

maybe the issue is one of expression, as you suggest, and certainly noone has complete knowledge. but i am generally dubious when people express certainty about subjects whenI a few questions can reveal that tbere are aspects and facets that tbey dont understand or may even be unaware of.
don't make excuses for nasty people. you don't put a flower in an asshole and call it a vase.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 18386
  • Darwins +446/-25
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #103 on: March 22, 2018, 11:37:59 AM »
my point probably doesnt apply to most of tbe people here, but to tbe population at large. my experience has been that if you take 100 people off the street who are willing to positively assert that god does not exist, the vast majority would not be able to explain themselves, especially about tbe differences between the statements "god does not exist," and "i have no credible evidence that god exists." not even richard dawkins is willing to take a strong atbeism position, but instead states "god probably doez not exist." and dawkins is pretty smart.

maybe the issue is one of expression, as you suggest, and certainly noone has complete knowledge. but i am generally dubious when people express certainty about subjects whenI a few questions can reveal that tbere are aspects and facets that tbey dont understand or may even be unaware of.
Dawkins has stated the following:  "On a scale of seven, where one means I know he exists, and seven I know he doesn't, I call myself a six. That doesn't mean I'm absolutely confident, that I absolutely know, because I don't."

And here: "The philosopher Sir Anthony Kenny, who chaired the discussion, interjected: “Why don’t you call yourself an agnostic?” Prof Dawkins answered that he did.

An incredulous Sir Anthony replied: “You are described as the world’s most famous atheist.”

Prof Dawkins said that he was “6.9 out of seven” sure of his beliefs.

“I think the probability of a supernatural creator existing is very very low,” he added." https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9102740/Richard-Dawkins-I-cant-be-sure-God-does-not-exist.html


So, 6 out of a possible 7? 6.9 out of a possible 7?  This certainly seems to be a "strong atheist" position.  You are also committing the fallacy of assuming that since Dawkins is "pretty smart" he should be automatically trusted. 

since no one can define this god, one can be quite certain that certain claims of a god don't exist and the vagueness claimed by some theists and agnostics is essentially meaningless.  Sayign "well, something could exist, but I can't define it or determine anything about it", is rather silly when you are trying to tell someone else that they are wrong about this thing.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2018, 11:39:50 AM by velkyn »
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline kevinagain

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Darwins +24/-4
  • mean people suck.
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #104 on: March 22, 2018, 11:45:14 AM »
what about you? why is tbe label important? is it because it provides a club of congenial travellers with an easy entrance test, just tbe use of a term for oneself? or is tbere more to it?

I guess I don't think about it as labeling. In my experience, using the word "label" in this context is similar to using the word "legalism" when classifying or defining other people's religious viewpoints. It implies the one talking is the one who has it right and others are somehow missing the mark. It's a way of implying oneself is in a position of more knowledge. I find that interesting because with faith, there is no knowledge. Claims are, well, accepted in faith.

If your question to me is why do I ask for these classifications, I'm not asking for a PhD dissertation from you or anything, but more information than I might expect a 3rd grade report, if that makes sense. Not that I have any right to expect it, it just makes the conversation more enjoyable than what otherwise amounts to meaningless small talk.

For example, you offer, "i choose the term agnostic because it expresses an uncertainty that i associate with an intelligent analysis of tbe question." And now I'm curious what you mean by that. What do you consider an "intelligent analysis of the question"? For example, how would one go about intelligently questioning the validity of the claim "god exists"?  If I have  partial understanding, where would I go to get more? How could I be certain that understanding accurately reflects reality?

what is it that you tbink? not what you have no belief in, but what you do?

I am atheist. That is, I harbor no theistic beliefs of any kind. Atheism does not claim god does not exist, like you implied in your post. Not even "strong atheism." It only claims a person does not hold any such beliefs. In the same way, I don't believe in numerology, premonition, past lives, karma, or magic of any kind. I can't claim these things don't exist because a negative can't be proven, but I don't believe there is reason to assume they do.

I do believe the world with which we interact is by its nature physical and not supernatural or magical, and can be reliably understood by factual, rational, logical explanations without needing to invoke any supernatural or ghostly or otherworldly intervention. We as a species continue to gain knowledge at an amazing rate, and we have consistently replaced superstitious, magical explanations of our world with natural ones. I know of no reason to expect that to change.

thank you for comprehensive answer, albeto. im on a small screened phone, so let me address one point were discussing. i used tbe term "strong atheist" which i understand to be an azsertion of certainty tbat god or gods do not exist. it may be stated formally as "the statement tbat at least one god exists is false." this acvording to wiki, which has a whole analysis. the issue is that a strong atheist asserts 100 percent certainty, by definition. not my definition, but the one i read to be correct.
 
this is a certainty, a statement tbat implicitly has as a precondition that all relevant data is in and included. i dont see that in reality. its easy to say "i have no credible evidence that god exists, and so i have no reason to believe in one." that makes perfect sense, because it does not assert beyond what is personally known.

this is very important:

Quote
For example, you offer, "i choose the term agnostic because it expresses an uncertainty that i associate with an intelligent analysis of tbe question." And now I'm curious what you mean by that. What do you consider an "intelligent analysis of the question"? For example, how would one go about intelligently questioning the validity of the claim "god exists"?  If I have  partial understanding, where would I go to get more? How could I be certain that understanding accurately reflects reality?

to me, a lot of tbis has to do with the difference between evidenceand proof. theres lots of evidence for gods-- books, visions,  auditionz, testimonies. all thiz is evidence, but not proof unless one accepts premises tbat not everybody accepts, such as tbe truth of books or whether people happen to be sane. making a statement tbat "tbere is no evidence for god" is not an informed or thoughtful statement, in my opinion. saying instead that "tbere is no evidence tbat an intelligent person would find credible" is a statement that shows an understanding of what tbe real question actually is.

let me think about tbe rest of your post. im parked on a narrow road in front of 40000 pounds of frac sand, and i have to split my attention.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2018, 12:06:28 PM by kevinagain »
don't make excuses for nasty people. you don't put a flower in an asshole and call it a vase.

Offline albeto

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1784
  • Darwins +360/-4
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #105 on: March 22, 2018, 04:17:13 PM »
to me, a lot of tbis has to do with the difference between evidenceand proof.

Let me just stop you right here for a moment. Consider that "proofs" do not exist in science. Proofs exist in math and alcohol. Science offers laws, hypotheses, and theories (more here if you're unfamiliar with the differences). Scientific theories are not like mathematical proofs which declare a thing is fully known, because we can always learn more. Scientist Stephen Jay Gould explained it this way, "In science, 'fact' can only mean 'confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent.'"

theres lots of evidence for gods-- books, visions,  auditionz, testimonies. all thiz is evidence, but not proof unless one accepts premises tbat not everybody accepts, such as tbe truth of books or whether people happen to be sane.

Books, visions, testimonies (I'm not sure what the typo auditionz was meant to be, auditions? auditory?) are not examples of evidence for god any more than they are evidence for numerology, karma, superheroes, Hogwarts, or the proposal we're all merely the products of an elaborate computer simulation. This is an example of relying on circular logic to rationalize a belief. Since you want to conduct your inquiries in an intelligent way, you might want to be aware of this logical fallacy and how it applies to your position here. It's a relatively common cognitive bias to fall into, but I imagine you'd want to know and avoid it in the future for your own satisfaction.

making a statement tbat "tbere is no evidence for god" is not an informed or thoughtful statement, in my opinion. saying instead that "tbere is no evidence tbat an intelligent person would find credible" is a statement that shows an understanding of what tbe real question actually is.

It's an awfully broad sentiment, I would say, but I think what it means to convey is the idea that claims made that attribute any involvement of god can reasonably be rejected, without exemption. For example, we know the earth was not created as recorded in the bible's book of Genesis. No evidence has ever been found to point to an earthquake, blotting out of the sun, or previously dead people rising from their graves to socialize in Jerusalem on the first day of Easter as claimed by the gospels, not to mention the absurd nature of such notions. We know there is a great deal of crossover between Jewish and Canaanite religions, and that we can point to abrupt changes in theological doctrine based on the historical timeline of the religion (such as a virgin giving birth to the messiah). It's perfectly reasonable to reject these claims, no?

Still, the same process helps us reject even more, generally accepted xian beliefs. For example we have records that show prayer has never been shown to be effective when applied systematically and methodically, and any effects reported can be attributed to other, perfectly natural explanations. We know, because of the increasing compilation of data, that our sense of self can be attributed to natural elements, namely our physical bodies and especially the brain, and when the brain is injured it can disrupt the sense of self so much the personality after an accident or illness can be incompatible with the personality before the accident or illness. Furthermore, there is no evidence to support any claim that this sense of self survives the death of our physical bodies. Based on growing data, we're getting more and more comfortable abandoning "free will" as a useful explanation for our behavior at all.

Any other supernatural claims you make, I am certain, can be rejected, not based on an unwillingness to consider your argument, but based on information we do have that more reliably explains the phenomena to which you would be referring. I don't think I'm wrong. I don't mean to sound snarky, but I'm quite certain I'm not. Still, I'd be happy to find out if I am if you would like to show me the error in my thinking here.

Offline kevinagain

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Darwins +24/-4
  • mean people suck.
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #106 on: March 22, 2018, 04:29:54 PM »
sorry about tbe the typos. tbe ends of my fingers are much larger tban the buttons on my telephone, and i dont have time to edit tupically. plus the screen is 2 point typeface.

yes, auditions are visions that you hear instead of see. supernaturL sounds. ill answer your post when im out of the truck.
don't make excuses for nasty people. you don't put a flower in an asshole and call it a vase.

Offline albeto

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1784
  • Darwins +360/-4
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #107 on: March 22, 2018, 04:33:37 PM »
yes, auditions are visions that you hear instead of see. supernaturL sounds. ill answer your post when im out of the truck.

Are you talking about auditory hallucinations? I only knew "audition" in relation to the theater or music, so I'm glad I asked, lol!

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 9049
  • Darwins +446/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #108 on: March 22, 2018, 06:01:13 PM »
I'm doing well kevin.

Perhaps I am overly sensitive to opinions about strong atheists, and what these "idiots" may or may not know when they reveal their "partial understanding" openly.

Does anyone have more than a partial understanding? These rare "exceptions", what do they know that the rest do not? Or is it really more about how they present their ideas?

my point probably doesnt apply to most of tbe people here, but to tbe population at large. my experience has been that if you take 100 people off the street who are willing to positively assert that god does not exist, the vast majority would not be able to explain themselves, especially about tbe differences between the statements "god does not exist," and "i have no credible evidence that god exists." not even richard dawkins is willing to take a strong atbeism position, but instead states "god probably doez not exist." and dawkins is pretty smart.

maybe the issue is one of expression, as you suggest, and certainly noone has complete knowledge. but i am generally dubious when people express certainty about subjects whenI a few questions can reveal that tbere are aspects and facets that tbey dont understand or may even be unaware of.

Lol, I am a 7! But I take the position that I have no burden of proof whatsoever. I say there are no gods because there are none, not because there might be and I cannot prove the negative. People like to tell me that I now have a burden of proof because I am making a positive assertion. I understand that argument, but I don't care. The thing is, there is a reverence given to god claims because of the popularity and age of religions and gods, not because there has ever been any reason to think those claims are real. If there were a god, or gods, I would not be an atheist. Pretty simple.

I don't get into those debates anymore since it comes down to the fact that anyone can make any claim they want, and then attempt to put the burden of proof on those who simply reject the claim for lack of evidence or facts to support it. If someone would just show me their god, I would not need to be a believer, I would just accept that there is a god.

Offline kevinagain

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Darwins +24/-4
  • mean people suck.
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #109 on: March 23, 2018, 10:42:06 AM »
albeto, i cant respond to everhthing in your very tboughtful post without wfiting a stupid long essay. let me focus on what i see as tbe difference between evidence and proof. tbe simplest example is a caregorical syllogism: two premises, with three terms, and a conclusion linking the terms to provide proof of a third connection apparent only by combining tbe premises. for exampld,

all frogs live near water
some frogs live in trees
some trees are near water

tbe premises are both pieces of evidence, tbe logic is valid, and so the conclusion is valid. if tbe premises are also true, tbe conclusion must be true as well. the evidence has provided proof, a true conclusion.

another:

all things must be created
only a god can create
all things must be created by god.

^^^this is a valid argument too, taking two pieces of evidence- again, the premises-- and generating a valid conclusion. cant tell if the conclusion is true unless the premises are demonstrated true first. the conclusion follows correctly from the evidence supplied, but has not been shown to be proven until tbe evidence has been shown to be true first.

thats where visionz, auditions, holy books, miraclez, and so on are valid pjecez of evidence for their argumdnt, and thats the sticking point in a lot of discussions. tbe evidence leads correctly to tbe conclusion, but nowhere in tbe argument is tbe evidence itself shown to be true.

you consider auditions to be hallucinationz, and so you would rightly reject as untrue a valid argument using auditions to prove the existence of god. you would say that tbe evidence is false, the conclusion unproven.

courts reject evidence all tbe time, either because its decided to be false or it because it doesnt support tbe argument people want.

if someone could eztablish that an audition was in fact from god and not a hallucination or loud space aliens, you could combine it with other evidence and prove tbe existence of god. i cant do that, and havent met anyone who can convince me that tbey can.

enough words

don't make excuses for nasty people. you don't put a flower in an asshole and call it a vase.

Offline kevinagain

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Darwins +24/-4
  • mean people suck.
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #110 on: March 23, 2018, 10:48:00 AM »
[quote from jetson]
I don't get into those debates anymore since it comes down to the fact that anyone can make any claim they want, and then attempt to put the burden of proof on those who simply reject the claim for lack of evidence or facts to support it. If someone would just show me their god, I would not need to be a believer, I would just accept that there is a god.
[/quote]

i agree that experience is the only real tezt. i dont pay much attention to logic because a god known only by logic is not active in tbe world, anx is thdfefore indistingjishable from no god. shit got to go
don't make excuses for nasty people. you don't put a flower in an asshole and call it a vase.

Offline albeto

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1784
  • Darwins +360/-4
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #111 on: March 23, 2018, 11:23:30 AM »
albeto, i cant respond to everhthing in your very tboughtful post without wfiting a stupid long essay. let me focus on what i see as tbe difference between evidence and proof. tbe simplest example is a caregorical syllogism: two premises, with three terms, and a conclusion linking the terms to provide proof of a third connection apparent only by combining tbe premises. for exampld,

all frogs live near water
some frogs live in trees
some trees are near water

tbe premises are both pieces of evidence, tbe logic is valid, and so the conclusion is valid. if tbe premises are also true, tbe conclusion must be true as well. the evidence has provided proof, a true conclusion.

another:

all things must be created
only a god can create
all things must be created by god.

^^^this is a valid argument too, taking two pieces of evidence- again, the premises-- and generating a valid conclusion. cant tell if the conclusion is true unless the premises are demonstrated true first. the conclusion follows correctly from the evidence supplied, but has not been shown to be proven until tbe evidence has been shown to be true first.

thats where visionz, auditions, holy books, miraclez, and so on are valid pjecez of evidence for their argumdnt, and thats the sticking point in a lot of discussions. tbe evidence leads correctly to tbe conclusion, but nowhere in tbe argument is tbe evidence itself shown to be true.

you consider auditions to be hallucinationz, and so you would rightly reject as untrue a valid argument using auditions to prove the existence of god. you would say that tbe evidence is false, the conclusion unproven.

courts reject evidence all tbe time, either because its decided to be false or it because it doesnt support tbe argument people want.

if someone could eztablish that an audition was in fact from god and not a hallucination or loud space aliens, you could combine it with other evidence and prove tbe existence of god. i cant do that, and havent met anyone who can convince me that tbey can.

enough words

So if I may combine your argument examples it might look like this:

If auditions, visions, and miracles are real,
And if auditions, visions, and miracles come from god,
Then auditions, visions, and miracles are evidence of god.

Close?

You recognize no one can actually prove, or even give evidence to the premises, but nevertheless you're reserving your judgement in order to maintain the possibility that it might yet be proven true one day.

Close?




Offline albeto

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1784
  • Darwins +360/-4
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #112 on: March 23, 2018, 11:34:59 AM »
i agree that experience is the only real tezt.  i dont pay much attention to logic because a god known only by logic is not active in tbe world, anx is thdfefore indistingjishable from no god. shit got to go

Always? Are there exceptions? Schizophrenia? Oxygen loss to the brain? Fever? Injury?

If these exceptions exist, how can one reliably determine if an experience is being interpreted accurately? I'm not asking about the reality of the experience, because we know the brain experiences what it experiences, but we also know that its experiences can be the result of responding to stimuli that is found only in the brain, not externally.

People with temporal lobe epilepsy can often have heightened feelings of religiosity. Without being hooked up to wires to look at brain function, how could one know an experience was inspired by god as opposed to a tiny, otherwise imperceptible epileptic seizure, or a micro stroke? Do you think logic is aptly applied here? Do you think that would be an intelligent way to analyze the question?

Offline kevinagain

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Darwins +24/-4
  • mean people suck.
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #113 on: March 23, 2018, 01:38:17 PM »
ddddd double post
don't make excuses for nasty people. you don't put a flower in an asshole and call it a vase.

Offline kevinagain

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Darwins +24/-4
  • mean people suck.
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #114 on: March 23, 2018, 01:59:15 PM »


So if I may combine your argument examples it might look like this:

If auditions, visions, and miracles are real,
And if auditions, visions, and miracles come from god,
Then auditions, visions, and miracles are evidence of god.

Close?


better this way:

god communicates through visions
i have visions
god has communicated with me

the argument is flawed, because it both assumes the existence of god going in and makez a univdrsal conclusion from particular premises. visions are evidence for god, but dont prove anything. by tbemselvez visions are evidence, but not sufficient evixence, as you point out. but this is usually how it goes
don't make excuses for nasty people. you don't put a flower in an asshole and call it a vase.

Offline kevinagain

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Darwins +24/-4
  • mean people suck.
Re: Why Worship?
« Reply #115 on: March 23, 2018, 04:55:56 PM »
i agree that experience is the only real tezt.  i dont pay much attention to logic because a god known only by logic is not active in tbe world, anx is thdfefore indistingjishable from no god. shit got to go

Always? Are there exceptions? Schizophrenia? Oxygen loss to the brain? Fever? Injury?

If these exceptions exist, how can one reliably determine if an experience is being interpreted accurately? I'm not asking about the reality of the experience, because we know the brain experiences what it experiences, but we also know that its experiences can be the result of responding to stimuli that is found only in the brain, not externally.

People with temporal lobe epilepsy can often have heightened feelings of religiosity. Without being hooked up to wires to look at brain function, how could one know an experience was inspired by god as opposed to a tiny, otherwise imperceptible epileptic seizure, or a micro stroke? Do you think logic is aptly applied here? Do you think that would be an intelligent way to analyze the question?

there is no way to know anything except by experience, and if youre a brain in a vat, maybe even physical experience is questionable. solipzism aside, i dont think logic has ever been successful in answering any questions unless people agree on what assumptions-- the premises-- are either proven or observed.

for that matter, theres no reason to think that a god might not communicate better with crazy people than with sane ones. look at artists. the best ones were often half nuts. people with a preoncieved leaning towards materialsm, like tbe old logical positivists, might not be intellectually capable of recognizing a real god if one appeared in front of tbem.

you dont believe in god. let me ask a question. what evidence can you think of that would prove to you that god existed? any god, doesnt matter which one, or define one yourelf that you would find convincing?
don't make excuses for nasty people. you don't put a flower in an asshole and call it a vase.