Do atheists have a God complex?

[sniffy]

I think I'd call it the religion of 'curiosity'....... of wanting to know what lies beneath.....

 

[one_raven]

Crux:


"The religious geniuses of all ages have been distinguished by this kind of religious feeling, which knows no dogma and no God conceived in man's image; so that there can be no church whose central teachings are based on it. Hence it is precisely among the heretics of every age that we find men who were filled with this highest kind of religious feeling and were in many cases regarded by their contemporaries as atheists, sometimes also as saints. Looked at in this light, men like Democritus, Francis of Assisi, and Spinoza are closely akin to one another."

Thank you!

 

[sniffy]

Thank you!

I would be careful though people automatically assume that this sort of thinking equates to him being a theist and on it goes...

He was also very forthright about science and rational vs emotional thought....hmm wonder where the quote is.... he felt too much rationality and too little emotion when applied to creative as well as critical thought would lead us to.....well exactly where we are now.... a bit stuck between a rock and a hard place......

 

[sniffy]

In his own words which is always best....

http://www.alberteinstein.info/

 

[one_raven]

The simple fact of the matter is that such binary oppositions unnecessarily place people into limiting boxes from the outside.

As I said, fundamental apologists could care less about subtlety of meaning. Either you are theist or atheist - conservative or liberal - republican or democrat - gay or straight...
It's pointless to discuss such things with people without the capacity to see that reality has shades and color.

 

[sniffy]

The simple fact of the matter is that such binary oppositions unnecessarily place people into limiting boxes from the outside.

As I said, fundamental apologists could care less about subtlety of meaning. Either you are theist or atheist - conservative or liberal - republican or democrat - gay or straight...
It's pointless to discuss such things with people without the capacity to see that reality has shades and color.

ha ha....have you ever asked yourself why humans think in binary....?

Two that's the magic (chordate) number....!

 

[phlogistician]

Whatever you say.
Facts don't matter and the sublety of meaning is lost on most fundamentalist apologists - so I'll stop wasting my time.

There is no 'subtlety'. It's a BINARY proposition. You either believe in God, or you don't.

It's you who is the apologetic, trying to create some midground by being vague, and looking for an interpretation of Einsteins quotes that lead to the conclusion he "believed in and revered something greater than himself", but despite that, you shy away from labelling that "something" God, while dishonestly saying that makes him kind of sorta like a theist.

Well, stop tugging on the corner of that blanket. It's BINARY. Einstein was NOT a theist, that makes him an atheist.

 

[sniffy]

Einstein's 'gods' were curiosity, imagination and open mindedness. He was not a theist but you may have to use your own imagination to work out exactly what he meant.

 

[one_raven]

There is no 'subtlety'. It's a BINARY proposition. You either believe in God, or you don't.

But when asking myself what religion is I cannot think of the answer so easily. And even after finding an answer which may satisfy me at this particular moment, I still remain convinced that I can never under any circumstances bring together, even to a slight extent, the thoughts of all those who have given this question serious consideration.

But science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.

Right...
No subtlety there.
Just as black and white as your dull, little world.

 

[one_raven]

The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer.

I said before, the most beautiful and most profound religious emotion that we can experience is the sensation of the mystical. And this mystically is the power of all true science. If there is any such concept as a God, it is a subtle spirit, not an image of a man that so many have fixed in their minds. In essence, my religion consists of a humble admiration for this illimitable superior spirit that reveals itself in the slight details that we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds.

What is the meaning of human life, or of organic life altogether? To answer this question at all implies a religion. Is there any sense then, you ask, in putting it? I answer, the man who regards his own life and that of his fellow creatures as meaningless is not merely unfortunate but almost disqualified for life.

You will hardly find one among the profounder sort of scientific minds without a peculiar religious feeling of his own. But it is different from the religion of the naive man. For the latter God is a being from whose care one hopes to benefit and whose punishment one fears; a sublimation of a feeling similar to that of a child for its father, a being to whom one stands to some extent in a personal relation, however deeply it may be tinged with awe. But the scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation. The future, to him, is every whit as necessary and determined as the past. There is nothing divine about morality, it is a purely human affair. His religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.

If one purges the Judaism of the Prophets and Christianity as Jesus Christ taught it of all subsequent additions, especially those of the priests, one is left with a teaching which is capable of curing all the social ills of humanity.
It is the duty of every man of good will to strive steadfastly in his own little world to make this teaching of pure humanity a living force, so far as he can. If he makes an honest attempt in this direction without being crushed and trampled under foot by his contemporaries, he may consider himself and the community to which he belongs lucky.

No subtlety there, huh?

 

[phlogistician]

No subtlety there, huh?

None. It's clear reading that that Einstein was in awe of science and nature and was an atheist.

All you are doing is diluting down the terms so you can swallow your own concoction. That's flawed logic I'm afraid. Einstein did not believe in a 'god', was therefore not a theist, making him an 'atheist'. Tough shit if you don't like the absolute nature of this, you don't have to like the truth. It's the mark of a true scientist to be able to work with results they do not favour, ...

 

[sniffy]

Golly i may have said this before but I'm not against repeating myself...

The danger in using 'god terminology' is that people will assume one is a theist. Now if I say 'god is a particle' (the god of small things) or 'god is the universe' or even 'god is life' does that mean I am a theist? Not necessarily but I could understand it if people mistook me for one.....

Eisntein stated very clearly that he got quite upset by those who insisted he was a theist. He was not. He did however understand the power of religion, the awe that religion inspires in people....

 

[sniffy]

Whatever turns you 'on' people....get it?

Whatever turns you on might not turn me on, however so be careful about what you try to shove down my throat....

 

[visceral_instinct]

Why just political talk? Why not ban all stimulation since we don't know which one will "fuck up" the minds of children? Let them grow up and decide which stimulation they prefer. Keep them isolated till they are 10 perhaps. Minus any potential brainwashing like language, school, learning, culture, religion, discipline, art, drama, dance or play. Lets leave it all to the children to pick and choose when they are old enought o decide for themselves. Lets not impose our choices on them.

There is a massive fucking moloch difference between language, school etc, and religion.

The first is about facts, skills, necessary social behaviours, and self expression.

The second boils down, however much you glorify it, to teaching children that something is true when there is no evidence for it.

Can I teach a child that there is a blue scorpion god who will eat his intestines if he sins? Since it's my legitimate religion and all...

 

[Doreen]

There is a massive fucking moloch difference between language, school etc, and religion.

There is very little difference between politics and religion when it comes to brainwashing children.

The first is about facts, skills, necessary social behaviours, and self expression.

The second boils down, however much you glorify it, to teaching children that something is true when there is no evidence for it.

I'm not sure what you mean by first and second here. School seems left out. In school I was taught a very distorted view of the world, one that no doubt contributes to other people's rather naive acceptance of things like the war in Iraq.

 

[Doreen]

Nope.

Well, it was a clear yup. You said she was insane. She is not.

Yet, religious believers are diagnosed to be insane.

Not for being religious believers, no Catholic, for example, will be labeled insane by a psychiatrist for attending and believing in the Catholic Mass. You are quite incorrect. It is clever to word it that way, since of course religious people can be diagnosed as having a variety of disorders. But that proves nothing.

Check the definition of insane if you're unsure of yourself.

(Please avoid ad homs: iow don't focus on the person.) Sure, the dictionary includes lay meanings of the word. But in a science forum I expect better. You are using an ad hom and throwing in a sloppy, everday use of a very charged word. You say above that religious believers are diagnosed to be insane, implying that you are using the word in a more correct sense. Now you refer to dictionaries which have everyday usage in them: iow mistaken use of the word.

And, even in dictionaries, the word insanity is used as a global description of a person. It is not refering to single beliefs. This is also how it is used in the law.

If you referred to a belief as insane, that might pass muster. But referring to people, the way you have, is incorrect usage.

 

[earth]

Atheists are people at animal level; I calculated 98% of population.

A more accurate estimation would be that 16% of the world’s population is nonreligious. To claim 98% are atheist is fallacy.

 

[CptBork]

I don't care what other people want to believe on their own, you can believe in Santa Claus for all I care. All I ask is that theists don't judge atheists, don't discriminate against them, and don't base any of the rules, laws and policies of their societies on religious reasons, when those rules, laws and policies apply equally to both believers and non-believers.

I also hope, for their own sakes, that every theist is humble enough to know that their beliefs might possibly be assinine and baseless, and are thus constantly willing to evaluate their deepest and most cherished beliefs. I consider myself humble enough to always question my own cherished personal beliefs, and only ask for overwhelming evidence before I'd be willing to consider changing them.

I don't feel any sort of God complex as an atheist/agnostic, but I do feel a bit of a power trip as a scientist, I must admit. Scientists and people using scientific methods are the only people in the world who can describe, predict and manipulate complex things in nature with any degree of success. How much closer could one possibly get to communicating with "God" than by doing what scientists do on a daily basis? We perform miracles all the time in a way that leaves religious leaders drooling with desire, wishing they could somehow do the same by their own methods.

 

[earth]

I don't care what other people want to believe on their own, you can believe in Santa Claus for all I care. All I ask is that theists don't judge atheists, don't discriminate against them, and don't base any of the rules, laws and policies of their societies on religious reasons, when those rules, laws and policies apply equally to both believers and non-believers.


I don't feel any sort of God complex as an atheist/agnostic, but I do feel a bit of a power trip as a scientist, I must admit. Scientists and people using scientific methods are the only people in the world who can describe, predict and manipulate complex things in nature with any degree of success.

What is your opinion about secular humanism or scientific humanism philosophy?

 

[jessiej920]

Not the usual atheist bashing thread. But I am curious. It would seem that most ardent and "militant" atheists have a God complex and want control over what other people should believe.

Is this present in all atheists to some extent? Do all atheists wish people believed like them?

I have to say that I think your statement is biased. The same could be said of theists. And most atheists and theists always say the above about one another. So, IMO, no, not all atheists have a God complex, but I do tend to find (and I'm only speaking from personal experience, not in general) that many "militant" atheists, as you put it, tend to be rather angry and condescending just like many fundamentalists and radical theists when it comes one anothers beliefs.

I think the door swings both ways on this one.

Orleander,

"Worshiper" may be debatable, but certainly atheism to some degree or other
is a form of satanism, at least symbolically, if nothing else.

jan.

What???

This makes no sense whatsoever. Atheism is not a form of satanism, seeing as satanism requires one to believe in and worship satan, and atheists don't do either one. And how does atheism symbolically represent satanism? Because they don't believe in God? The lack of belief in God, I'm afraid, does not equal satanism either. That is a ridiculous thing to say :bugeye:.