Atheism Rules !
Just thought I would share a few quotes from my favorite atheist - Douglas Adams - and open them up for discussion:
"Yes, I think I use the term 'radical' rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as 'atheist,' some people will say, "Don't you mean 'agnostic' " I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It's easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it's an opinion I hold seriously."
"Now it is such a bizarrely improbably coincidence that anything so mindbogglingly useful [the Babel fish] could have evolved by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
The argument goes something like this: "I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED"
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic."
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
"He hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife."
I'm listening
And if you want more - there are loads here - Positive AtheismAt least Mr. adams is acknowledging that his atheism is a religion and not based on fact.
Feel free to explain that, because it makes about as much sense as.....
Let's say I have favorite writers, some of whom happen to be atheist. Or happened in this case.
Nice hub you linked to. No where near good enough to be considered for nomination though.
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/4393
Does it upset you to think that you are descended from a monkey?
Bumping this up for the latest influx of scripturebots.
Saves repeating myself.
Or could it be that the "feeling of fairies" is just that - a feeling -- not a sense - I don't see them, I don't smell them; I can't hear them or touch them - I have yet to taste one.
But I feel them just the same.
You said : Atheism Rules ...ummm...Rules WHAT!?I suggest you read some of this thread before using a feeble argument like this which has already been tried several times. Give me your address - next time I am in your town I will pop in and say Hi.
I am flattered that you compare me to god - but what sense is this argument supposed to make? Because I say I exist and you have never met me - this must mean that a god exists?
Interesting logic...........LOL
It is beginning to wear thin.
Actually I prefer simple. I am a big fan of communicating as clearly as possible.
"Nothing larger outside ourselves."
I do not believe I have ever said such a thing. What I have said is that there is no god with a personality.
There are many things larger outside ourselves. Nationalism. Family. The Universe. Just watch a flock of birds wheeling and you will see something in action that is clearly larger than the individual birds.
But a personal god, who created us and has a set of rules to follow?
I see no evidence for such a thing. In fact - my understanding of the way the universe and the world works does not allow for such a being. Evolution as a theory is useless and broken if there was a pre-arranged destination. It just doesn't work that way.
So why is my refusal to believe in a god when there is no evidence of one the same as believing there is a god when there is no evidence of one?
Nobody said anything about shame but you Thom!
I guess I forgot to put in some smilies so people wouldn't make assumptions that come from within their own subconscious!
I read Douglas Adams when I was a teen...so its been a few decades! Obviously I didn't pursue his work because I intuitively knew his path was not mine to follow. So no, I never knew he was an atheist. Just like you may have never considered that Jesus had a sense of humor...riding an ass...you have to admit that's a pretty good oneLOL
Well, I was just having a little fun. I never see Jesus laughing in all those thousands of paintings I have seen of him, but I am keen to learn more about his sense of humor.
Thom - no I hadn't seen that clip.
DA was very much an atheist - no question.
And I guess atheism is the other side of the coin.
Fairies - No, never seen one. Felt them? who knows? LOL
No, of course not - there is only one way to be certain whether or not there is an after life
But, what I found funny was the praying that there wasn't an afterlife. Douglas Adams was awesome and definitely one of my all time favorite writers. He could put a smile on any one Well, almost anyone.Both
You didn't know? :
I have this on my computer somewhere. And one about "Atheism."
Is atheism, though, a relevant religion? Or more of a science thing?Neither
I will take that as a compliment.
As you should.
"I've found my God in a Box of Crack Jacks. Such a neat toy they've included!"
Marisa, I dare to disagree
There are conscious atheists like Mark, who came to this conclusion after careful studying and observations - and there are religious ones, who still have the body of their atheistic god in Mausoleum on Red Square
LOL Mark, I used to be in your camp for quite some time. In fact, probably 90 to 95 percent of Soviet Union population were atheist. Based on everlasting works by Marx, Engels, Lenin and Brezhnev we religiously believed there is no such thing as god.
Well, I already got rid of quite a bunch of lies I was taught at that times. And while I'm not 100% sure yet, I strongly suspect this "scientific atheism" was a lie, too
And you know me - I'm not likely to believe to a bunch of ministers whose religious zeal is based on what they were taught themselves and do not really understand. This does not differ a tiny bit from "scientific atheism" of Soviet times.
But we have people here whose experience is no doubt first hand (at least for me) - people like Sandra, Peter, and Jenny... And that makes me thinking hard...
I guess you too are thinking - cause your interest to the topic is obvious
Oh really? I hadn't noticed
You're not the only one reading this thread, though, so it's a point worth making.And the great thing about it is - It's banter.
As I mentioned to some one in one of the financial threads - these are public forums that any one can read. And part of my goal is to spread "the gospel according to Mark." LOL
Misha - Yes, you are correct. But I have a very strong belief system.
It doesn't include an all-powerful God though. Nor does it include the need to believe there are fairies at the bottom of the garden
Nor the need to turn it into a connection with the universe. You are connected to the universe whether you like it or not - and there is NO getting away from it. But you are connected in the same way a grain of sand on the beach is connected. And there is no grand plan - unless it's an huge joke.
As everyone will agree - there is no certainty until you are dead - that's when you find out what's true and what's untrue - for sure - and I suspect there are a lot of disappointed people out there.Almost everyone.
If you are dead - you are dead. In my belief system, there is no coming back from being dead. If you have been there and come back, you were never dead.
Exactly my point But, I never said there was nothing after death. Work that one out. LOLYes, it's a good discussion.
I had a similar experience and came to much the same conclusion as you. I watched my first wife die a slow agonizing death from breast cancer age 34. It took 6 years from first diagnosis. One of the best people you could hope to meet. Not a pleasant experience for either of us.
So, I pretty much laugh at the idea of a God now. Without going into details this was the icing on the cake as far as God went
Well, I guess I must be in the middle of believers and atheists
.
Yes, being agnostic [A person who claims that they cannot have true knowledge about the existence of God (but does not deny that God might exist)] I can not agree with both believers or atheists cause none of them can really prove their points.
But if I had to choose, and looking backward in time, I should say "Atheism Rules!"
I´m totally harmonize with Kenny`s words: "Beliefs can be more dangerous than no belief."Cool an interesting, non-confrontational discussion
Sparkling Jewel - I don't see how the very essence of evolution is our consciousness. And as far as I can tell, most religions have made a backward step in this regard. When I think of the "older" religions, they seem to have more awareness of our place in the scheme of things and the connection we have to our environment. This would seem to be devolution.
Thom - that's the best question yet. (Looking forward to the reply Peter) LOL
funride - You don't need to prove the non-existence of something. It requires proof of the existence. Therefore my friend, whether you know it or not, you are an atheist.
I don´t need to prove non-existance because I never alleged that it doesn´t really exist.
But I would love to hear an atheist proving the non-existence of something, let´s say for example - god.OK -
always up for a challenge.
Have you seen God?
Have you been spoken to by God?
Have you smelled God?
Have you met God?
Have you heard God?
Have you ever been shown any proof whatsoever that God exists? (other than other people saying he/she/it exists)
If you can answer yes to any of these questions, God exists and you already believe
If you answered no to all these questions, God does not exist.
My point was that you cannot prove the non existence of something - and you don't need to. It's a presumption, like the presumption of innocence. The onus is to prove it exists, not the other way round It must be proven to exist and until that time, it's fair to say it doesn't
And when I say you, I mean "one."Have you seen God?
I use glasses so I might have passed by Him and never notice.
Have you been spoken to by God?
I don`t think so, but I`m not surprised about that
Have you smelled God?
LOL I don´t think even believers ever smelled Him.
Have you met God?
I`m not sure, I have very bad memory for faces.
Have you heard God?
Well, I don´t think He wants to have me as his spokesman
.
Have you ever been shown any proof whatsoever that God exists? (other than other people saying he/she/it exists)
Ok ok, you made your point.
Call me atheist if you like but I prefer to consider myself as agnostic (Someone who is doubtful or noncommittal about something).funride wrote:
Mark Knowles wrote:
OK - always up for a challenge.
Have you seen God?
Have you been spoken to by God?
Have you smelled God?
Have you met God?
Have you heard God?
Have you ever been shown any proof whatsoever that God exists? (other than other people saying he/she/it exists)
If you can answer yes to any of these questions, God exists and you already believe
If you answered no to all these questions, God does not exist.
Some people believe that the existance of something does not have to be proved by the five senses. the existance of sub atomic particles was not known about until recently. Is it possible that maybe we just havent found a way to " See" God? yet?
It did say in the bible that his mere presence was something that humans could not comprehend or withstand.
SJ - You seem to be using the term, "evolution," in a different sense. i.e personal evolution, as opposed to "evolution of a species."
And also - as you believe to be true. Not everyone subscribes to the beliefs you are suggesting here. Plus, as I understand it, a Yogi can live innumerable life times in a single day thanks to their ability to control their perception of time?Well, you mentioned mystics and Tibetan monks. I assumed you meant Yogis in there as well? No?
And - what adepts that have prevented us from total destruction?
I agree - it is complicated. So complicated in fact that it is almost impossible to explain to someone else. I rarely try Other than to point out the obvious flaws in their own argument LOLWell, I can't say I didn't ask for this LOL
I don't think so. Without getting too metaphysical, I am stating that it is impossible to "prove," the non-existence of something. If it doesn't exist, there is the proof in and of itself. But - you do have to "prove" the existence of something.
As far as I am concerned, until I am presented with evidence to the contrary, God doesn't exist. I am more than happy to be proved wrong and will immediately go out and buy a skull cap, or clothe my woman from head to foot in black or whatever - depending on which God is proven to exist
Me too. But, as we have both agreed , it is extremely difficult to explain in words, what our TRUTH is.
It is certainly easier to say what it is not.
I will try and explain my truth:
I am part of the system we call the universe (not God - very different)
But - I am a very, very, very small part of this system. I do my thing. I help people I see that I can help. I recycle. I argue with people who try to force "Religion," down my throat and others'. I prevent as much garbage being spread as I can. I make people feel good - or I question them in a way that makes them question themselves.
I am a physical person. I revel in the physical experience. I love food. I love to eat macrobiotically. It works. It makes sense.
It is physically impossible to destroy or create something from nothing. Therefore what I am physically now was part of something else before, and will be a part of something else after I am gone. You might call this reincarnation. I don't
Jenny might wonder if I "exist" at all. LOL- sandra rinckposted 16 years ago
0 - I was just using scientific terminology for Jenny's benefit
- sandra rinckposted 16 years ago0
I hear you knocking but you can't come in. - cheech marin.
Awww. Let me in. Look up Morphogenetics. It's an interesting phenomenon.
Actually, what attracted me to it was the ability to learn.
There was a study done. can't remember when (after WW2) - about shared learning. 2 groups of students studied how fast they could learn two codes - Morse code, and another similar code. The group learning Morse code learned much faster than the other group.
So they taught he other code to a bigger group. After a while, the two codes became just as easy to learn
Morophogenetics.You were supposed to convert Mark, so he starts spending all his time in the church and gives a break to spammers over here
Umm, my impression was he considered church to be spammers motherland - so this shouldn't surprise him a tiny bit
Yesterday a preaching couple knocked on my door. I told them the truth: I believe in Jesus and God but not in religions. Also that I thought God would not have a problem with the way I am. They left, non-plussed.
I will never believe anybody who says that theirs is the right way. In that regard, I feel people like Mark are better. I would take Mark with me on a trip, but not a fanatic who suddenly sees a vision in which his god asks him to kill me! Atheists are safer!- sandra rinckposted 16 years ago0
I don't know for sure, beliefs vary so widely, but it may be that their claiming the child to be special, is their way of accepting the child..not be repulsed and unaccepting. A human cultural thing.
An incarnation of God from what I understand of Hinduism is a soul that had balanced their karma and earned a position in this life to "embody" a being of higher consciousness, a buddha (of course Hindus don't call them a buddha), that will teach important lessons, just by being alive, to those they are involved with in this life. It is an honor, to the child and the people the child is involved with. Not a comparison or put down of any kind of others.
And yes of course God seems two faced (I think you mean a negative way, right?) but I mean in a mystical way...the whole duality concept and the "is a person human or divine" question.
All souls are of God, and we are all where we are in our journey to uncovering and discovering how we are of God.
just IMHO (is that the right use of that acronym "in my humble opinion"?) I am having a lot of fun learning these things!
Inspirepub wrote:
That's profound, Jenny; must meditate on this and hope to get insights.Thom Carnes wrote:
This is certainly fascinating stuff. But isn't the biggest problem with faith-based knowledge the fact that it's got such a bloody awful track record? The annals of human history are littered with the abandoned husks of myths, legends, fables, folk stories and other old wives' tales that were once believed to be true but were then comprehensively debunked and discredited by science and reason. Sure, once in a while one or two of them may turn out to be "scientifically" true - but wouldn't the simple law of averages or the vagaries of random chance be sufficient to account for that?
I draw a distinction between the observation of a phenomenon and the explanation of it.
Observations may be valid , eg "the trees are moving even though nothing is visibly pushing them", but explanations (which we seem to insist on attaching, whether or not we have any basis for them) may be completely invalid, eg "invisible spirits are pushing the trees".
Later on, the explanation is replaced by "there is an invisible substance called "air" which is a medium for pressure waves", but the original observation "the trees are moving even though nothing is visibly pushing them" remains completely accurate.
If somebody says "There ARE no invisible spirits, therefore you cannot possibly have seen the trees moving when nothing was visibly pushing them", they are making an error of logic, and I see people who were raised with a blind faith in "science" make that logical error all the time.
I never said spirituality was supernatural or involved paranormal agency.
I expect all observed phenomena to have a "perfectly rational, natural explanation".
I expect that one day kids will be required to learn how to "contact their higher power", and will not be given any fanciful superstitions about the nature of that "higher power".
It probably isn't objectively "higher", even, but people's experience is when they have a spiritual moment is a feeling of something much larger, grander, and higher than themselves, which is why I use that term.
But should we wait until science has definitively pinpointed the electrochemical correlates of gratitude before we start actively working to increase our experience of it?
Observations indicate that the higher the proportion of your time you spend in a state of gratitude, the more capable you become of having the things you want to happen actually happen.
Will you wait for the explanation of HOW that happens, or just make use of the observation in your own life and see if it works that way for you?
JennyThe problem comes when an attempt is made to inflict their belief system on some one else. I personally have no problem with people believing whatever they need to believe.Just don't try and make me believe it.
I for instance, still believe that the only reason planes don't fall out of the sky is because more than 50% of the people on it think it won't. Once you reach critical doubt, the plane crashes. That's why I rarely fly
Bit busy today, but I will definitely be back to explain what I am not LOL
Welcome to the discussion Kenny. Piercing questions and insights as always
Related Discussions
- 16
Religion and Atheism Jokes
The best way to get out aggression is through laughter.Post your jokes here.No getting offended. Remember they are jokes. Don't take it personal..Its not always about YOU!
- 114
How can atheists improve their image?
How can atheists improve their image?For whatever reason, the mainstream theists in the U.S. have trouble separating average atheists from the extremists in the news. Not all atheists want to watch Christianity crumble or start their own dictatorship. But how can we spread the image of a more...
- 135
Do you really know the difference between agnostic and atheist?
I find most people are clueless. They say they are atheist, but can't properly form an argument as to WHY, or they say they are agnostic, with zero clue as to WHAT that is.Ignorance, above all, is our weakness. Not religion. Although ignorance and religion are good bedfellows.
- 424
Define atheism & its purpose
Well like religion, i think atheism too varies from atheist to atheist..what is the standard form of atheism, its purpose and strengths over religions??
- 81
Is Atheism really just another religion or faith based concept?
Is Atheism really just another religion or faith based concept?It seems like the notions that there is a God or there is not a God, are both founded in belief because there is not proof either way. Well there is proof, but not conclusive in either direction. So aren't organizations with set forth...
- 2102
Why Do Christians Have Such A Problem With Atheism?
Atheism only means the lack of a belief in God. Why is it so hard for Christians to realize that we dismiss their religion for the same reasons that they dismiss all other religions? It doesn't make us horrible people, immoral, or mean that we are going to hell. It just means that we think the...
working
