Viewpoints

[??!!?!?_particlename]

I am distraught by the rampant lack of respect on these forums. At what point did a discussion become so difficult a task? Comments like "Christians remain detached from reality and common sense and call it faith" are blatantly inflammatory and serve no productive purpose. Please keep such comments out of this thread (that is if one is incapable of keeping such comments off the forums entirely).

My personal definition of theist vs atheist

Atheist: one who believe the power of the human mind to understand the universe and it's complexities, whether through science, logic, or philosophy. The Atheist has faith in the power of the human mind.

Theist: one who believes the universe cannot be truly and completely understood by the human mind. Generally speaking, they reply upon an outside source to provide explanation (whether physically provide, or simply as an answer to unanswerable questions). The theist has faith in doctrine.

Personally, I place myself as a theist. I hold myself as Christian, but have turned my back on organized christian doctrine (i.e. ANY specific denomination, be it catholic, orthodox, or any of the myriad of protestant denominations). If i had to place myself in one i'd say I'm a quaker, because i believe in personal interpretation of scripture. Scripture means to me whatever I interpret it as, and I am jusdged by my interpretation. Anyway, I'm rambling off topic. I believe in Christianity because I don't believe in the power of the human mind. I look at people I talk to on the streets, I lok at my fellow class mates at college, I look my proffessors, I look at my friends, I even look at these forums and the people in them (and the shennanigans they try to pull), I look all around and I can honestly say, I am not impressed. I am forlorn to be part of the same species with many people. I cannot in good concious put my faith into the mental abilities of these people, and as i put in my definition, I do truly believe it comes down to faith either way.

Now, i know many people will disagree with my definition, but please take the time to read and consider my perspective before responding. Also, please, please, please, no inflammatory remarks. We are adults here, please let us act it.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Theist: one who believes the universe cannot be truly and completely understood by the human mind. Generally speaking, they reply upon an outside source to provide explanation (whether physically provide, or simply as an answer to unanswerable questions). The theist has faith in doctrine.

Huuummm... I would actually say a theist have faith in life...!

Personally, I place myself as a theist. I hold myself as Christian, but have turned my back on organized christian doctrine (i.e. ANY specific denomination, be it catholic, orthodox, or any of the myriad of protestant denominations).

Thank you. Tough you might be feeling somewhat alone....

If i had to place myself in one i'd say I'm a quaker, because i believe in personal interpretation of scripture. Scripture means to me whatever I interpret it as, and I am jusdged by my interpretation. Anyway, I'm rambling off topic. I believe in Christianity because I don't believe in the power of the human mind. I look at people I talk to on the streets, I lok at my fellow class mates at college, I look my proffessors, I look at my friends, I even look at these forums and the people in them (and the shennanigans they try to pull), I look all around and I can honestly say, I am not impressed.

Well... this sounds odd. You don't put your faith in the human mind but at the ame time you put faith in your inerpretation, which is arrived by your own human mind....!?

I am forlorn to be part of the same species with many people. I cannot in good concious put my faith into the mental abilities of these people, and as i put in my definition, I do truly believe it comes down to faith either way.

Yes, it does....

Now, i know many people will disagree with my definition, but please take the time to read and consider my perspective before responding. Also, please, please, please, no inflammatory remarks. We are adults here, please let us act it.

Perspectives are perspectives. If you consider that, you consider everything... Or almost...

 

[SnakeLord]

I believe in Christianity because I don't believe in the power of the human mind. I look at people I talk to on the streets, I lok at my fellow class mates at college, I look my proffessors, I look at my friends, I even look at these forums and the people in them (and the shennanigans they try to pull), I look all around and I can honestly say, I am not impressed. I am forlorn to be part of the same species with many people.

Whether people are rude, ignorant nitwits or "tricksy", would not lend credence to the existence of a god.

 

[Michael]

My personal definition of theist vs atheist

Atheist: one who believe the power of the human mind to understand the universe and it's complexities, whether through science, logic, or philosophy. The Atheist has faith in the power of the human mind.

Theist: one who believes the universe cannot be truly and completely understood by the human mind. Generally speaking, they reply upon an outside source to provide explanation (whether physically provide, or simply as an answer to unanswerable questions). The theist has faith in doctrine.

My personal definitions would be:

Atheist: One who lacks a belief in Gods
Theist: One who has a belief in Gods

Many Atheists, most notability Bertrand Russell make the point that it is impossible to know everything. Russell himself says it’s impossible to know everything about a "complete complex of compresence." Which basically means we can not know everything - even about this event which is happening right now.

So your definition that a Theist is one who believes the universe cannot be truly and completely understood by the human mind – was already stated explicitly by one of the worlds most preeminent Atheists.

 

[Michael]

Anyway, it must be something different – yes?

Well, what are the similarities between Atheists and Theists – a hell of a lot I’d wager!

You say the Atheist has faith in the human mind. Well, so do you. You wake up, you take it on faith that what you perceive is indeed reality. You try to understand the world around you using your brain, if another Theist was to tell you, you are Satan and you should die for the good of Humanity, you’d certainly not believe that – even though you wouldn’t be able to logically disprove it. You faithfully turn on your TV or PC or Phone, all of which were created through the endless endeavors of scientific discovery – and, everyday you place your faith in such devices (or else you wouldn’t use them). If they break down you probably don’t think it’s the devil, you probably think there is a rational explanation for why the phone isn’t working or TV or radio etc . . . and when they turn on you probably think it’s because they were made that way, not that God is in there magically making it happen.

So really Atheists and Theist are mostly the same.

BUT, the difference is Atheist will now extend this normal everyday rational mental routine into the questions that used to only reside in the realm of religion. Like the age of the earth and it’s formation, the formation of humans, human psychology, and even into the biological effects on morality . . .. scary stuff indeed!

 

[Michael]

For me it seems simple enough, I think had you been born in ancient Japan you’d believe in Shinto, had you been born in Ancient Mexico you’d have worshipped Aztec Gods, in Ancient Egypt the Pharaoh, in modern Arabia Allah in modern India Shiva, in Modern Thailand Buddha, in Modern America most likely Jesus. As ALL of these can not be correct, I think most Atheists would agree that each of these different types of Theists are just a product of how they were taught to believe. But really, as Atheists can not know about every subject they also place their faith in doctrine – not 1650 year old biblical doctrine, but modern-day logical doctrine. This doctrine is universal, something Theism is lacking. It changes and it is actually expected to be debated and never meekly accepted.

And actually Theists accept most of this “logical docrine” as well – that is up until the point where it runs against their own version of reality. (depending on the religion it may be one thing or the other)

For example, I once read about a Saudi Cleric telling his followers that the notion the world was round was a lie told by the West to trick Good Muslims – I’m sure to you this is pretty funny stuff or sad , but as he was taught it was "truth".

Maybe you can understand when I hear another type of Theists say similar things about Evolution. I think the same as you did about this "flat-earth" fellow. And it IS the same.

If you can get that much, then maybe you can see that the only REAL difference between Theists and Atheists is exactly where in the sand the line for rational thought drawn.

For this fellow it was with a “round earth” and for you .. . . . . . .. who knows. . .

 

[Nasor]

My personal definition of theist vs atheist

Atheist: one who believe the power of the human mind to understand the universe and it's complexities, whether through science, logic, or philosophy. The Atheist has faith in the power of the human mind.

You may choose to define ‘atheism’ in this manner, but that’s not the generally accepted definition. An atheist is merely one who lacks belief in super-natural deities.

In fact, I would say that your definition is a very poor one. Most atheists would agree that it’s entirely possible that there are things in the universe that the human mind is utterly incapable of comprehending. We might not be able to understand the deepest inner-workings of the universe any more than a dog can understand Newtonian physics. Never the less, we shouldn’t simply stop trying to think rationally and believe any random thing that’s presented to us.

I suspect that you want to define atheism as ‘faith in the human mind’ so that you can reduce the question of atheism v. theism to a simple matter of one faith against another, rather than a question of rational skepticism against unthinking credulity.

 

[??!!?!?_particlename]

Well... this sounds odd. You don't put your faith in the human mind but at the ame time you put faith in your inerpretation, which is arrived by your own human mind....!?

interesting, i hadn't thought of it that way. I think i justify it through scripture when it say each will be judged according to what he believes (and i don't remember where exactly it says it and i'm too lazy to go hunting right now, if you really want the reference i can go hunting, just say the word).

 

[spidergoat]

I'm an atheist who believes the universe cannot be truly and completely understood by the human mind. Much of what we call understanding is just the manipulation of symbols, and I don't think the universe is made out of discrete objects that can be accurately represented by symbols. Reality is a continuum with no permanent boundries. You say you believe in God, but that too is a symbol. Since the nature of God is a mystery, even to Christians, do you even know what you believe in? For this reason, I think believing in God and not believing in God amount to the same thing. It takes the greatest faith to confront reality with no beliefs or expectations.

I look all around and I can honestly say, I am not impressed

What would impress you? Don't you think that the criteria determining what constitutes a satisfactory response comes from your previous conditioning? ...your upbringing and worldview that, in the western world is almost invariably Judeo/Christian? I think, until we understand that, we all can be swayed by the basic premises and unspoken assumptions built into our language and culture.

 

[Q25]

I am distraught by the rampant lack of respect on these forums.

you know sometimes the

Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault
of thoughts on the unthinking."
John Maynard Keynes

Atheist: one who believe the power of the human mind to understand the universe and it's complexities, whether through science, logic, or philosophy. The Atheist has faith in the power of the human mind.

atheist(no capital leter needed) is someone who lacks the belief in gods,

Faith is believing something as fact when you have no logical reason to do so.
atheists have no faith,just knowledge in reality.

I believe in Christianity because I don't believe in the power of the human mind.

so you let others(bible,God) do your thinking for you?

I look at people I talk to on the streets, I lok at my fellow class mates at college, I look my proffessors, I look at my friends, I even look at these forums and the people in them (and the shennanigans they try to pull), I look all around and I can honestly say, I am not impressed.

and Im not impressed what people do in the name of God
www.ogrish.com
remember 9/11 terorists attacks,how about Spanish inquisition,Crusades,Irish Catholics vs Protestants,Jews vs Arabs conflicts,Islam against Western infidels xians denying evolution,it goes on and on.
at least atheists have no reason to hate anyone.

 

[anonymous2]

Well... this sounds odd. You don't put your faith in the human mind but at the ame time you put faith in your inerpretation, which is arrived by your own human mind....!?

I wouldn't say I put "faith" in the flawed human mind, as a general statement. I would say I would rather trust my flawed human mind than another's. So, when someone claims to have had a religious experience, I don't abandon my own flawed mind in favor of someone elses flawed mind. I think you would also prefer to trust your own flawed mind in some cases. Say, for instance, a person you knew told you about something you thought was so ridiculous, that you just couldn't accept it. Say, this person said that a group of aliens, who looked like bigfoot, landed and abducted this person to a planet 4000 light years away. This person then speaks of great experiences on this planet, and in fact, other planets and supposedly wondrous things did and seen. Question: Would you trust that person's flawed mind over your own? Doesn't your own experience tell you, your own wisdom, your own rationale, your own reason, that this "experience" is so far fetched, that you can't find yourself to believe it? Sure, it COULD be true, but would you put your FAITH in it?

Since there can be physical causes for hallucinations, and the mind can be tricked, I personally wouldn't want to trust someone elses possible hallucinations/tricked mind instead of my own possible hallucinations/tricked mind. It still boils down to trusting humans, in my opinion. Those humans were the ones who wrote the stories about gods, weren't they? You can say it's trusting God instead of humans, but this is your viewpoint.

 

[TruthSeeker]

interesting, i hadn't thought of it that way. I think i justify it through scripture when it say each will be judged according to what he believes (and i don't remember where exactly it says it and i'm too lazy to go hunting right now, if you really want the reference i can go hunting, just say the word).

Do you mean that scripture that say something like "according to each own's heart" or something like that? I think that scripture talks about something else. I need to know where is it. You may find it here: www.biblegateway.com

But if you justify through scripture, aren't you ignoring your first point?

If i had to place myself in one i'd say I'm a quaker, because i believe in personal interpretation of scripture. Scripture means to me whatever I interpret it as, and I am jusdged by my interpretation.

If you think that scripture means something for each person, wouldn't the scripture that you pointed out mean something else for someone else?

 

[TruthSeeker]

I will get to you later, anonymous2

 

[jcastro]

I'll add to this.

The human mind is finite. How can we effectively comprehend the complexities of infinicity with only a three-pound brain to work with? We really can't. But the human mind is creative. It can try to comprehend infinity by "dumbing it down" and setting abstract boundaries where there are meant to be none. We only look at a portion of the entire (or is "entire" an oxymoron; infinity really isn't the same as "everything") pie. With our limited mind, we are only allowed to explore so much of the world around us. We can't come up with an answer to everything, but when we work together we can make it a little easier. However, when it comes to complex arithmetic such as multiplying infinity by zero and wondering what you get, we simply do not know as of yet. Possibly we may figure it out, but it takes a very long time and many crumbled sheets of paper to do so. See, infinity doesn't apply to the same rules of general arithmetic.

Saying this, I have given one example of the many unanswerable questions we humans face today. Is there a God? Let's take both views into consideration:

Athiest: How ignorant were humans two thousand years ago! Sure it was great they tried to figure things out, but did they know they would be dooming billions of humans for thousands of years trying to figure out if there really was an existing God that did all the wonderful things we say he did? Here we are, not wanting to be damned to hell and thus are afraid of giving up our views. We want to hold something special to our hearts and we want to know that death isn't the end of things. Well, who says death is the end of things? However, religion dwells on life after death, when we really don't know.

Theist: This wonderful and intricate Universe. Our impossibly complex and well-organized human body. Our intelligence. How could all of this have come to be? Why are we here and why do things happen the way they do? I don't know how all this could have come into existence. Why is there a Earth at all? You look up at night and see beautiful stars that are impossible to reach. How did they get up there? Of course these will be rhetorical questions for the time being, but obviously some great power had to make all of this come into existence. There must have been some great designer who made us. Someone that we can apply the term "God" to.

Both views seem logical enough. But both are restricted by the finiteness of the human mind. The intricate structure of the Universe, the abstract intelligence that we contain, the fact that anything exists at all... all of this and much more is beyond our reach at the moment. We may learn more and more about the structure of the Universe, how the brain works, and how things may have came into existence, but will we ever prove everything? Not with our individual three-pound brain. But when in numbers, perhaps we have a better chance of doing so. But, I would like to add:

With the finiteness of the human brain, we have creativity to make up for it.

, jcastro

 

[Michael]

Really, this doesn’t accurately reflect my beliefs at all – and I’m an Atheist.

Athiest: How ignorant were humans two thousand years ago! Sure it was great they tried to figure things out, but did they know they would be dooming billions of humans for thousands of years trying to figure out if there really was an existing …

1) I think you need to add a few thousands years to this
2) Two thousand years ago some people were ignorant but many others were much more intelligent than most anyone, if not everyone alive today. I was thinking Archimedes.

… God that did all the wonderful and yet seemingly hideous and appaling things we say he did?

(just a quick interjection here if we’re talking Xian God).

… Here we are, not wanting to be damned to hell and thus are afraid of giving up our views. We want to hold something special to our hearts and we want to know that death isn't the end of things. Well, who says death is the end of things? However, religion dwells on life after death, when we really don't know.

This is way off base.

1)Not wanting to be damned? There is no such place as HELL why would an Atheist be worried about being damned?

2) Death is not the end of things, but it’ll be the end of “you”.

3) However, religion dwells on life after death, when we really don't know. No, we do know, your neural activity will stop and that’ll be it – for you at least.

Both views seem logical enough.

No, as presented both were illogical.

Both views seem logical enough. But both are restricted by the finiteness of the human mind. The intricate structure of the Universe, the abstract intelligence that we contain, the fact that anything exists at all... all of this and much more is beyond our reach at the moment. We may learn more and more about the structure of the Universe, how the brain works, and how things may have came into existence, but will we ever prove everything? Not with our individual three-pound brain. But when in numbers, perhaps we have a better chance of doing so. But, I would like to add:

With the finiteness of the human brain, we have creativity to make up for it.

Sure I agree that the human mind can not understand everything, itself being a prime example. As the mind understands itself it then becomes slightly more complex thereby needing to understand a “new” self that is more complex, when this is learned the cycle starts again.

I think of the Universe in a similar fashion.

But, then again so what?
Maybe humans will augment their puny brains and will understand pretty much everything? Who knows?

I do agree that we a limited by language, maybe these new augmented brains will speak in pure maths?

 

[TruthSeeker]

The human mind is finite. How can we effectively comprehend the complexities of infinicity with only a three-pound brain to work with? We really can't.

What about the magical word? Adaptation.

But the human mind is creative. It can try to comprehend infinity by "dumbing it down" and setting abstract boundaries where there are meant to be none. We only look at a portion of the entire (or is "entire" an oxymoron; infinity really isn't the same as "everything") pie. With our limited mind, we are only allowed to explore so much of the world around us. We can't come up with an answer to everything, but when we work together we can make it a little easier.

We can always examine what is essential to all things...
And understand infinity through the concept of finity....

However, when it comes to complex arithmetic such as multiplying infinity by zero and wondering what you get, we simply do not know as of yet.

Well.... that wonuldn't make much sense since infinity is already the largest number you can get....

Both views seem logical enough. But both are restricted by the finiteness of the human mind.

Well... yes and no. There are ways to get passed that. But those ways are quite high. Paradoxes are often the answers to all Truth. But most people are not very willingly or able to use them.

The intricate structure of the Universe, the abstract intelligence that we contain, the fact that anything exists at all... all of this and much more is beyond our reach at the moment.

Certainly not. It is certainly beyond our minds, but not beyond our experience. The universe was just made to be contemplated. If you try to understand it, you will finish wasting your entire life and get to no conclusion at all.

We may learn more and more about the structure of the Universe, how the brain works, and how things may have came into existence, but will we ever prove everything?

Do you need to?

With the finiteness of the human brain, we have creativity to make up for it.

That's what theists are trying to say. At least the intelligent ones.......

 

[jcastro]

You can feel free to alter the athiest view, but those are just my own opinions. By the way, that was the athiest view of religious people "not wanting to be damned to hell."

As far as adapation goes, I am speaking of current times. I do know how the neocortex has evolved over millions of years. It was not even present in the earliest hominids.

Do we need to prove everything? No, but you did not need to include that statement either. I never said we needed to, but will we if we wanted to? Nope, at least not for modern brains.

I disagree about with what thiests are trying to say, or as you say they are. Creativity can be applied to more than just religion! In fact, I don't see how you don't disagree with yourself on that statement. I think you are merely trying to stir up an unneeded debate with that comment.

The human brain cannot do everything, but it does have creativity to help it along where it lacks in power. This doesn't mean an almighty diety helps us in our pursuit of intelligence. Creativity, being the manifestation of intelligence, as such is behavior, allows us to create things with a bit of imagination (thinking outside the box usually).

--“
However, when it comes to complex arithmetic such as multiplying infinity by zero and wondering what you get, we simply do not know as of yet.
”
Well.... that wonuldn't make much sense since infinity is already the largest number you can get.... --

No, infinity is doesn't apply to the same rules as a number does. Thus, mathematicians remain in debates about what to say about infinity and multiplication by zero. As well as other things you can possibly do with infinity. Infinity doesn't apply to the same rules as general arithmetic because the number is never a constant.

I will post more on this later, but now I really am busy and must go.

, jcastro

 

[TruthSeeker]

As far as adapation goes, I am speaking of current times. I do know how the neocortex has evolved over millions of years. It was not even present in the earliest hominids.

I wsn't talking about that kind of adaptation. I was talking about adaptation relative to the tool that we presently possess.

Do we need to prove everything? No, but you did not need to include that statement either. I never said we needed to, but will we if we wanted to? Nope, at least not for modern brains.

Why not? That's a very self-defeating argument.

I disagree about with what thiests are trying to say, or as you say they are. Creativity can be applied to more than just religion!

Certainly. I wasn't talking about religious creativity, I was talking about general creativity.

In fact, I don't see how you don't disagree with yourself on that statement.

Eh?

The human brain cannot do everything, but it does have creativity to help it along where it lacks in power.

Sure. But adaptation is even more significant.

This doesn't mean an almighty diety helps us in our pursuit of intelligence. Creativity, being the manifestation of intelligence, as such is behavior, allows us to create things with a bit of imagination (thinking outside the box usually).

Create things from where?

No, infinity is doesn't apply to the same rules as a number does.

What did I say!?

Thus, mathematicians remain in debates about what to say about infinity and multiplication by zero. As well as other things you can possibly do with infinity. Infinity doesn't apply to the same rules as general arithmetic because the number is never a constant.

This is obvious. But that brings something intereting to my mind. What if we would create a variable with the properties of infinity and try to define thoe properties through regular mthematics? Sort of what calculus does, but more in depth. Huuumm.... I should start a thread about that....

 

[marv]

An atheist has formed an opinion that there are no deities because there is no need.

A theist has formed an opinion that there may be one or more deities and has chosen to believe in a particular system.

An agnostic sits on the fence not forming an opinion saying, "I don't know".

The Jewish god, Yahweh, originally was a deity that sometimes inhabited a bush or lived on a mountain amid thunder, clouds and lightening (where Moses went to get the Ten Commandments) and was the national god of ancient Israel. Yahweh evolved over time into a somewhat distant and dispassionate god content to make rules.

The Christian god, sometimes called Jehovah, was the result of political dischord in Israel and sprang fullborn with Jesus Christ. Jehovah also began as a stern and punishing god, but has mellowed over the centuries into a more loving and forgiving god.

The Islamic god, Allah, began as al-ilah, a moon god worshipped by ancient Arabs and was one of many in a pantheon worshipped by the various tribes in the area. All he does is judge and punish and doesn't care how you live your life as long as you believe in him when you die.

None of these gods are the same despite what Christians, Jews and Moslems might say. The histories and theologies are just too different.

The common thread among these and all other theistic systems is that only the "clergy" may understand and interpret the deity(s) to the great unwashed masses. That also bothers me about cosmology as well!

BTW, I'm an atheist who doesn't proselytize.

 

[TruthSeeker]

I think the true problem with viewpoints is that we tend to focus on our own perspctive and ignore the other. Even more than that, we tend to understand our own perspective while the other puzzles us. That seems to be an indication of the different patterns of brain activity between those two groups (atheists and theists). Atheists tend to be more logical and cold. Theists tend to be more insightful and warm. Atheists lack insight and warmth while theists lack logic and has an excess of feelings. The important thing is to find a balance. You cannot jut believe in God and that' it. And you cannot just deny God and that's it. If you want to find any through, you must eximine both perspectives, and that often means that you must be open-minded and persistent to change yourself and become more balanced, not taking sides and evolving into a more balanced and whole human being.