josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on May 22, 2014 19:27:13 GMT -5
For all we know, there might be a force of some kind ... even an intelligent force. But, odds are that won't turn out to be the Messiah in the sky with diamonds and pearls .. or Yahweh throwing thunderbolts ... or Allah in various forms. I don't think supposed evidence is good enough to change that or even come close to proof. The difference between theism and religion is that the former allows for a supernatural force or deity which does not desire or require human worship. Then again, what good is belief in an indifferent or evil god? Humans can torture themselves with cosmological questions, but none of the proposed answers pays my rent. I question not only whether "god" exists but why one is even necessary, given what is already known about quantum mechanics.
|
|
|
Post by beth on May 23, 2014 0:43:40 GMT -5
For all we know, there might be a force of some kind ... even an intelligent force. But, odds are that won't turn out to be the Messiah in the sky with diamonds and pearls .. or Yahweh throwing thunderbolts ... or Allah in various forms. I don't think supposed evidence is good enough to change that or even come close to proof. The difference between theism and religion is that the former allows for a supernatural force or deity which does not desire or require human worship. Then again, what good is belief in an indifferent or evil god? Humans can torture themselves with cosmological questions, but none of the proposed answers pays my rent. I question not only whether "god" exists but why one is even necessary, given what is already known about quantum mechanics. It's a hope for immortality, a quick fix for end-of-life panic. In some folk, it's a dependency that's almost an addiction. and Always and ever are the necessary ingredients of belief and faith. It's an imaginary wall of shimmering light we are told will shield and protect us from the negative aspects of life .. if only we'll "trust" it for support and balance. Bottom line ... those who have faith and, therefore, believe and trust in religion need it for their lives to make sense. It's vital for a satisfactory quality of life. Over-all, I think they may be better off than those of us who have doubts. Now, talk to us of quantum mechanics. Some people don't believe in that, you know.
|
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on May 23, 2014 8:13:47 GMT -5
Bottom line ... those who have faith and, therefore, believe and trust in religion need it for their lives to make sense. It's vital for a satisfactory quality of life. Over-all, I think they may be better off than those of us who have doubts. Except the temporal life is cheap to believers, which makes them unreliable to the rational.
|
|
|
Post by beth on May 23, 2014 8:27:30 GMT -5
ummm .. possibly, but I suspect they are happy in their unreliable state.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2014 16:07:47 GMT -5
Well, when I spoke of logic I speak of a closed system - in the same respect as mathematics on the whole. For instance, as part of its very definition a triangle includes within itself the notion of being a three-sided figure. A four-sided or two-sided triangle is as logically self-contradictory and incoherent as a square circle. But of course people often misuse the term logic in a way that is not appropriate. Particularly perhaps in the context of a heated discussion! (Which of course mine with you is certainly not!)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2014 16:20:23 GMT -5
Although some theologians have attempted to argue for the existence of God on logical grounds none of their arguments are logically valid.
Perhaps the most bizarre example is Anselm's ontological argument where his 'reasoning' goes along these lines (I apologise for oversimplifying his argument):
We can conceive of a being that is absolutely perfect.
Such a being would not be entirely perfect if it did not exist.
Therefore it exists.
Now this particular 'argument' has been demolished many times, perhaps most trenchantly by Kant who remarked in an uncharacteristically scathing manner 'existence is not a predicate.'
The premisses beg the question and the 'deductions' are invalid.
As for the wider question of whether or not the concept of God can be rationally supported I confess I have yet to be persuaded by any of the arguments in its favour.
The cosmological argument contains within itself an inherent self-contradiction, as follows:
Every event has a cause.
Therefore there must have been a First Cause, God.
The fallacy in that argument is twofold; in the first place it is highly doubtful that the initial premisses are true and IF they were (and every event DID have a cause) how can an initial UNCAUSED event have occurred?
It is the problem of the infinite regress all over again.
The argument from design is not one that can be logically refuted but it still fails to explain how it is that order and design came into the world out of nothing and ultimately lays itself open to the same type of objection as the cosmological argument.
It goes as follows: there is order and design in the universe therefore there must have been a designer.
And of course apart from its logical problems the mechanism of evolution offers us an alternative explanation that does not require us to postulate the existence of a supernatural being as the 'prime mover.'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2014 16:21:42 GMT -5
Bottom line ... those who have faith and, therefore, believe and trust in religion need it for their lives to make sense. It's vital for a satisfactory quality of life. Over-all, I think they may be better off than those of us who have doubts. Except the temporal life is cheap to believers, which makes them unreliable to the rational. I think that's rather a sweeping generalisation, Joseph. In my experience religious believers are neither more nor less enamoured of the world in which they live than non-believers.
|
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on May 23, 2014 21:23:43 GMT -5
I think that's rather a sweeping generalisation, Joseph. In my experience religious believers are neither more nor less enamoured of the world in which they live than non-believers. I have yet to meet a vapid believer nearly as appreciative of the temporal as are atheists. This life is all the more important to those who aren't convinced of anything else, and never will be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2014 16:36:40 GMT -5
In my experience most people wish to cling on to life whatever their 'official' position in regard to an afterlife.
And I have known several non-believers who have attempted suicide.
Perhaps the real fact in the case is that people are individuals with ideas of their own and demonstrating behaviour that is often at odds with their views.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on May 24, 2014 19:33:26 GMT -5
I don't think the degree to which life is appreciated (maybe comprehended is a better word) is as simplistic as whether one is some variant of being a Theist or a variant of being an Atheist. I've seen both Theist and Atheist struggle against death and I've seen both seemingly reach out and accept death with no qualms.
I think that it is more of coming to understand and accept temporal life as limited and that such limitation is natural. An individual may look to a new life beyond or fully accept a complete end and if they have come to accept this as natural it will matter little of their view of after life.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2014 15:13:51 GMT -5
I broadly agree with what you say, men an tol. I have known supposedly firm believers in the afterlife who were terrified at the prospect of their death and non-believers who have faced it with equanimity.
I have also seen the opposite and it really does appear more a case of the individual's temperament than their attitudes towards the possibility of survival of death.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on May 25, 2014 17:37:00 GMT -5
Mike, it is a grand question and through the ages people, groups, all sorts of philosophies have approached it in many different ways. suppose a thousand years from now we may even have some entirely new ways of looking at it.
However , I suggest to the Atheists I talk to, 'get over it.!' We're a small (very small) percent of the population and it is likely we'll always be so. Don't try to fight it as that is a losing battle, just find ways to get along. I suspect (no proof here) that over the next 50 or so years Atheists as a percentage will get smaller, and I suspect that the smart thing to do is find how to get out of the way as I'll bet there is a major war coming that will basically be between two major religious groups (Gosh, I wonder who) and we will become just so much flotsam. Being dead of what ever belief it really doesn't matter just how right you were.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Jan 30, 2017 7:26:10 GMT -5
Except the temporal life is cheap to believers, which makes them unreliable to the rational. I think that's rather a sweeping generalisation, Joseph. In my experience religious believers are neither more nor less enamoured of the world in which they live than non-believers. Hi Mike Marshall, I don't think that temporal life is cheap. It exists for a very important reason and therefore is needed. Why should you think that? Sorry Mike, I've just realised that it was Josephdphillips that thought that. I apologise.!!!
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 31, 2017 7:30:43 GMT -5
Joseph don't say or indicate he though temporal life was is cheap he actually wrote this """Except the temporal life is cheap to believers, which makes them unreliable to the rational"" and Michael relied he thought it a generalisation
though we all know those who do hold life cheap and consider the afterlife as they perceive it to be greater
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2017 17:11:26 GMT -5
Well, Joseph has said that he considers the lives of people he dislikes (such as Muslims) to be cheap.
|
|