cato said:
excellent thanks
A question for atheists
- Thread starter Theoryofrelativity
- Start date
- Status
excellent thanks
although there were a few interesting article, none of them (or of the 3 I read) fully pertain to this topic.
although, this one would be nice to keep in your bookmarks for fighting nutters:
http://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/papers/ShowMetheScience.pdf
although, this one would be nice to keep in your bookmarks for fighting nutters:
http://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/papers/ShowMetheScience.pdf
Theoryofrelativity said:
Hello Theoryofrelativity,
I couldn't see your 9.35 post - has it been deleted? Anyway... here's my thoughts on the interesting questions you have raised.
Most people are not 100% certain of their beliefs (atheism is a belief), how can any of us be? Therefore, when the chips are down some non-theists will lean into the (probably archaic) X% of them that still believes. A TA explanation might be that the child state holds beliefs that are denied by the adult and parent states. Such a person may try a prayer "in case" it can influence the final outcome - there is nothing to lose and much to gain. My hunch is they are praying to a childhood memory of a concept of God instilled at home or school and developed up to the point they rejected the notion.
As for Dennett's search to explain the desire for God in biological terms, he presumes a lot e.g. a materialistic (physicalist) explanation for consciousness. This brings it's own problems e.g. Davidson's "Swampman", as to what creates the identity we are. My concern to the framing of his quest is that it may result in a triumph of oversimplification by reducing our complex nature to a series of biological processes, much as behaviourism did. The whole is greater than the sum of it's parts. Theories resulting from any search for a biological basis for God can only be speculative (ironic) science as I doubt they can be tested. However, it is an interesting question.
My own wish to believe in God comes from a genuine curiosity about the perplexing mystery of our self-aware existence, combined with a dissatisfaction with the transient nature of even the best physical reality, and a consequent desire for a more satisfying transcendent ultimate reality.
Ecclesiastes (1:8) summed it up: "All things are hard, man cannot explain them by word. The eye is not filled with seeing, neither is the ear filled with hearing."
cato said:
Ah yes, I have been reading about this 'intelligent design' recently, also one of those links, atheism and evolution talked of how horseshoes did not invent blacksmiths, so why do we think we are the sole ones who can create life, kind of interesting as you say. Thanks
Diogenes' Dog said:
Hi thank you for your inetresting reply. The post I was directing to was post 9.38. Talks of how babies and children first view themselves as omnipotent (as babies) and then the parent and then when they are about 4, they realise the parent is not omnipotent but this need FOR an omnipotent parent still exists within us, hence our need for 'God', the ultimate parent. Afterall religion and the idea od 'gOd' which exists in all cultures came from soemwhere and I think this a good explanation of the origin of the concept at least. One that is acceptable to atheists?
Myself I believe in God through personal experience and observation and not in religious contexts. I expect this was also the case for others pre religion which reinforced their 'natural' need for a God (as mentioned above) with some kind of personal evidence of something more than they could see or understand, a reassurring interference in their lives, just as the parent was pre 4yrs old.
I think from a science perspective where everything pertaining to humans is about reproduction, it would be inetresting to hear sciences explanation of why it is we are designed to experience the idea of omniopotence, first in ourlseves and then in others. What would be the advantage of this to our 'survival'? I guess believing the parent is omnipotent means we would trust them blindly as children and follow them away from danger instead of resisting? Maybe this would be the argument, who knows, but the need in humans to have 'meaning' in their lives, and desire 'more' than is available is surely unique in the animal world.
Humans have the largest capacity in their brains for learning, learning what?
Why did we evolve with such a HUGE capacity for learning and very little in the way of innate knowledge. Innate knowledge assistsd other species a great deal more than a blank mind when they are born.
Why did our brains evolve to create a greater need for learning and less of a need for innate knowledge, how does learning over innate knowledge enhance our survival rate?
This may seem obvious in that learning enables us to adapt more efficiently to our environment etc, but other species manage to avoid predators and adapt without needing to 'learn' everything from scratch. Humans in the wild without parents would perish. We are inefficient in that respect. We evolved (or were designed) to be in groups and to know and have a need for 'omnipotent ' beings. Why?
Hope that makes sense?
Theoryofrelativity said:
"merely hope" seems condescending to me. what else is there to do? do you think "knowing (or praying, or whatever) god will intervene" is really different that "merely hoping"?
I guess I just don't think hope should be belittled. IMO, it's a truly majestic notion. Humans are humans be they "god fearing" or not.
Hope is optimism, and optimism is good nature. I love good nature.
The optimistic have a reason to care about life, which of course fosters good nature. Of course it doesn't mandate it, but sister... hope is alllllll right.
Who else is going to do so for my exam? If you're prepared, you're confident you'll do well. *shrug*
They may be looking confused because it's "a figure of speech". I'd think it ob obvious they don't intend "god"... though I suppose athiems is inclusive of agnosticism, which could include a "prayer to god" based on the possibility that such an entity might exist. I'd imagine some agnostics might even "merely hope" "god" exists.
In the case of immediate, life threatening danger... which I generally only experience occasionally while driving, I think it's something like "oh fuck oh fuck oh fuck fix this fix this fix this". A sense of emergency over-ride overcomes me, and every ounce of my focus goes into undoing whatever badness seems to be imminent.
In the case of a more broad crisis, I think basically the same thing, with attempts toward reducing the problem to simple choices, which evolves into trying to make the choice.
You really don't have to ask. If someone's going to lie, asking them to be honest is sort of uh... wishful? Well, nothing wrong with wishful I suppose. It's just one of those things that doesn't need to be said as I see it, but your preference is apparent. Dass smoove.
Good enough?
It'll have to be later.
Mind is, as everything else.. path of least resistance. A "need for god" must therefore be an expression of function, in that one's mind operates more efficiently toward the goal of percieved survival (success in one's environment) where a concept of god "greases the wheels" of their mind - alleviating dichotomy or discontinuity of mind for them, allowing them freedom from the distraction of pursuing specific interests, rather than being stuck in
"I can't accept 'undecided' as an answer because it generates internal strife in the form of a circular loop of reasoning that traps me there if it occurs to me. An answer (I don't know) that doesn't answer anything? Does not compute!!!!" Well, something along those lines wherein the emotional gratification of an answer satiates some obsession, allowing freedom from it which allows growth in areas that were formally tainted by the disdain of forthcoming internal conflict. Like many powerful concepts, "god" can free the mind as well as chain it.
The notion of god specifically has many interesting facets though. I'm most fascinated through what I think of as an evolutionary psychology thing. From this perspective, god is a really interesting meme, regardless of the ontological status of it object.edit for tangential psychobabble said:
I'll read it later prolly after this and respond later if I get to it.
Last edited:
God was created as a comfort -->(An opiate of the masses -Marx). Although someone may still not believe in God, they still have a subliminal hope that there is a God, and a hope that this god will help them.
Thank you for that detailed reply Wes, I wasn't meaning to be condescending re the hope thing, just hard for me to imagine what it's like without the element of 'asking for help'? I went through a horrendous ordeal once of prolonged pain and was begging for help, and when it didn't come I was surprised, although one could argue eventually it did? My belief in 'God' was shaken which demonstrates what a fragile relationship it is anyway. What I concluded however (as there were still things in my life that could only lead me to believing in something 'more' than we understand) is that my belief in the nature of God was wrong, but I can still have a belief, it has just altered now. I guess the religious (and I am not one) do this all the time, to suit their agenda. Well it's not so much an agenda with me as changing my view based on recent observations which is the way science alters it's view based on recent observations is it not?
Anyway do take a look at that posting and the one that follows D Dog. Some interesting questions. I'd be grateful for any answers.
Also re honesty thing, I wanted to deter those whipper snappers who think it's cool just to say this NEVER occurs with atheists, this hoping for something more in times of crisis, which they did!
Hence I am grateful for those not afraid to admit their desire/hope for 'more' even when they have no belief in 'more'. It's the psychological perspective I am most interested in, not proving or disproving 'God'. Just want to look at the need we have and how those needs are met in atheists. And of course sciences explanation of why these 'needs' exist in terms of our survival.
is it not?Anyway do take a look at that posting and the one that follows D Dog. Some interesting questions. I'd be grateful for any answers.
Also re honesty thing, I wanted to deter those whipper snappers who think it's cool just to say this NEVER occurs with atheists, this hoping for something more in times of crisis, which they did!
thedevilsreject said:
fadingCaptain said:
Hence I am grateful for those not afraid to admit their desire/hope for 'more' even when they have no belief in 'more'. It's the psychological perspective I am most interested in, not proving or disproving 'God'. Just want to look at the need we have and how those needs are met in atheists. And of course sciences explanation of why these 'needs' exist in terms of our survival.
Last edited:
Possumking said:
I have looked here at the 'origins' of this 'hope in a higher omnipotent being' and got some inetresting answers, I would like those on this thread to reveiw those and assist with the questions re science's explanation of this in terms of how it increases our survival.
marv said:
Theoryofrelativity said:
I think this is a matter of evolution rather than design. I think our survival instinct has diminished as civilisation as advanced - that, like our pets, we have become domesticated. Take a domestic cat or dog and put it in the jungle and it wouldn't last 2 minutes, but it's wild cousins seem to manage, as do our ape ancestors. I just think these traits have been lost in us as they no longer have any use.
But to answer your original question: my view is that belief in God is primarily social rather than innate. You raise a good point about our seeing parents as omnipotent and I'd never really connected this with religious belief, but I do think there's a lot in it.
However: I think the main thing that drives religious belief isn't a need for omnipotence but... fear of death. As far as I know, we're unique among species, in that we're able to contemplate our own demise, far in advance of the fact. I think this is what drives us to seek 'more' - an inability to accept that the end is the end, for us and for the ones we love. I wonder how many of the non-believers who say they've never prayed have ever lost, or been in danger of losing, someone close? If they can face that without God then they're stronger than me because, although agnostic, I've prayed before and will probably pray again.
I think it's this kind of fear that drives our belief in God. It's my further belief that religious doctrines have developed in response to this, as a means of social control - what better way to keep the masses in order than to tell them that, if they're bad (ie upset the social order) they'll suffer eternal damnation; but if they're good then, one day, 'the meek shall inherit the earth'?
redarmy11 said:
Hence my rejection of religion!
Interesting points redarmy.
(Q) said:
cor you don't say! Well now I have THE ultimate answer no need to press on ay?
Apparantly you are NOT going to win any 'great thinker' awards as your thinking appears to be quite limited. Care to offer something useful to this thread?
(Q) said:
don't label all atheists with your extreme level of stupidity, others here have contributed something of value. Get lost troll
Theoryofrelativity said:
So, I answered your so-called "genuine question" and I get this:
"your extreme level of stupidity... Get lost troll"
No problem, I look forward to future "trolling" on your posts.
Atheists don't pray to that which doesn't exist. In fact, atheists don't pray at all.
Bullshit, you ARE religious, that is a fact. You said it yourself:
"My belief in 'God' was shaken which demonstrates what a fragile relationship it is anyway. What I concluded however (as there were still things in my life that could only lead me to believing in something 'more' than we understand) is that my belief in the nature of God was wrong, but I can still have a belief, it has just altered now."
Your belief in "something more" is merely a result of your inability to think.
(Q) said:
You really are stupid aren't you? Where does it say I said I was religious? What religion is spoken of here? Belief in a 'God' does npt automatically sign you up for a religion, oh and atheists here have admitted to praying so read the thread before speaking on behalf of every atheist on the planet. Dumb troll go troll else where..you are not even a clever troll.
Theoryofrelativity said:
Well, if you're going to touch on the subject of stupidity, and please remember it was YOU who brought up that very subject, one should be careful of making accusations of stupidity, unless of course they were unaware of the difference between stupidity and ignorance.
One is where information has not been made available yet, and one can learn from it if it is available. The other is where the information has already been provided but one will never learn.
Can you show us which one relates to you?
Religion: a belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny.
Hmm.. it appears you don't know the difference. Let's see.
- Status