Why do people believe in god?

elvinatom said:
Nope, not avoiding it at all. If you take every wording perfectly serious (and I congratulate you for that) I rephrase my statement: atheism is the logical conclusion as it is most likely the truth. Just like gravity for example. The only thing we really do KNOW is that there is not nothingness. Everything else is certainly a matter of probability.
Click to expand...
Gravity certainly doesn't require absence of evidence for a positive assertion.

Atheism is only logical in lieu of certain values being held as true ... none of which have anything to do with having a monopoly on rationalism.
 
elvinatom said:
I agree with that. But I disagree that being an atheist is a matter of taste. I just put it right on the table now: Being an atheist (provided that conclusion is achieved with intellectual exploration) is an inevitable result, not a matter of taste, values or preferences. That can certainly not be understood by the faithful, because reason and doubt are discouraged ("faith" as opposed to "reason" or "logic").
Click to expand...

what i meant was that there are those who are attracted to religion and those who are not, even naturally. evidently, there is different wiring. what might be possible is if every human brain could be deciphered and condensed, there may be a unifying theory or clue which may have nothing to do with religion, god/gods, atheism etc. the blind spot.
 
lightgigantic said:
Gravity certainly doesn't require absence of evidence for a positive assertion.

Atheism is only logical in lieu of certain values being held as true ... none of which have anything to do with having a monopoly on rationalism.
Click to expand...

No, lightgigantic, claims without proof can be dismissed without proof. Or else I might challenge you to disprove any nonsense the creative mind can construct at a whim. We have reason, so let's just agree that it's a good idea to use it.
 
elvinatom said:
No, lightgigantic, claims without proof can be dismissed without proof. Or else I might challenge you to disprove any nonsense the creative mind can construct at a whim. We have reason, so let's just agree that it's a good idea to use it.
Click to expand...
and proof finds it home in epistemology ... which brings us back to your whopper "atheism is the logical conclusion as it is most likely the truth" which, whatever way you take it, is certainly a construct of a creative mind.
 
lightgigantic said:
and proof finds it home in epistemology ... which brings us back to your whopper "atheism is the logical conclusion as it is most likely the truth" which, whatever way you take it, is certainly a construct of a creative mind.
Click to expand...

Please tell me, how does that statement make sense? Do you even know what epistemology is? I am talking about probability, logic and conclusion. Not about definite statements. I made that clear at least twice now. You are not arguing in a logical manner. Please stop doing that. It is getting annoying. If you aim at having me admit that denial of faith is a matter of personal taste, you need to reexamine the evidence surrounding the matter and ask yourself: What are the odds? Let's not waste time with rhetoric. I got better things to do with my time.
 
birch said:
I don't think humans can singly figure out what is the answer or question they seek. hypothetically, in the future, if it were ever possible for a central computer to map out every human brain alive and condense it, maybe some answers can be found. by the computer that is, not by a single individual that is unaware of the next person's thinking and wiring. besides humans are naturally subjective and biased.

perhaps this will answer at least a clue as to what we are or what makes us tick.
Click to expand...

if ppl would stop focusing on the rules and focus on the love..
 
elvinatom said:
Please tell me, how does that statement make sense? Do you even know what epistemology is? I am talking about probability, logic and conclusion. Not about definite statements. I made that clear at least twice now. You are not arguing in a logical manner. Please stop doing that. It is getting annoying. If you aim at having me admit that denial of faith is a matter of personal taste, you need to reexamine the evidence surrounding the matter and ask yourself: What are the odds? Let's not waste time with rhetoric. I got better things to do with my time.
Click to expand...
I will lay it out on the table

You said : atheism is the logical conclusion as it is most likely the truth

Later you said : claims without proof can be dismissed without proof

The absence of proof that plagues all absolute negatives renders your first statement fallacious on the authority of your second statement.

IOW you have grave epistemological issues.
:shrug:
 
lightgigantic said:
I will lay it out on the table

You said : atheism is the logical conclusion as it is most likely the truth

Later you said : claims without proof can be dismissed without proof

The absence of proof that plagues all absolute negatives renders your first statement fallacious on the authority of your second statement.

IOW you have grave epistemological issues.
:shrug:
Click to expand...

Now let me lay it on the table for you: The statement we is not that atheism is true. The statement is that theism is true. You just try to turn it backwards. I don't give a statement, I deny a statement. For heaven sake, light, without theism there wouldn't even be atheism. Think it through. And stop using the word epistemology, you don't seem to understand it's meaning. It is not concerned with truth or logic but with the limits of knowledge.
 
Hey lightgigantic, I gotta hit the pillow now, but behind all the heated arguments, I thank you for an intelligent discussion. Have a good one and see ya soon.
 
elvinatom said:
Now let me lay it on the table for you: The statement we is not that atheism is true. The statement is that theism is true. You just try to turn it backwards. I don't give a statement, I deny a statement. For heaven sake, light, without theism there wouldn't even be atheism. Think it through. And stop using the word epistemology, you don't seem to understand it's meaning. It is not concerned with truth or logic but with the limits of knowledge.
Click to expand...
I'll have to ask you to stop using the words probability, logic and conclusion since you think that these can somehow be discussed divorced from epistemology.

Much of the debate in this field has focused on analyzing the nature of knowledge and how it relates to connected notions such as truth, belief, and justification. It also deals with the means of production of knowledge, as well as skepticism about different knowledge claims.
Click to expand...
 
lightgigantic said:
I'll have to ask you to stop using the words probability, logic and conclusion since you think that these can somehow be discussed divorced from epistemology.
Click to expand...

I did address that with my math example and made sure to not state a knowledge but a probability. You strategically evaded that by bringing up apples and oranges. It's like talking to child with you. I will not waste my time arguing with you about the definition of Latin words. This is now becoming a pointless conversation divorced from the topic at hand. If that's how you defend your superstitious believes I suppose I have to thank you for affirming my suspicion that it's based on self betrayal.
 
Last edited:
elvinatom said:
I will not waste my time arguing with you about the definition of Latin words.
Click to expand...
It seems more like you will not waste your time discussing the philosophy of knowledge ... which is kind of unfortunate since that's what you are primarily on about

This is now becoming a pointless conversation divorced from the topic at hand. If that's how you defend your superstitious believes I suppose I have to thank you for affirming my suspicion that it's based on self betrayal.
Click to expand...
actually a pointless conversation is one that revolves around knowledge yet can't sport such standard terms as "epistemology"
:shrug:
 
Look lightgigantic, I just read through our entire conversation in both threads. We have now reached the point of insults. I wondered when things turned bad, so I went back and read it over and tried to see it from your point. I have to admit that you were a respectful partner here until I started to attack you. I want to apologize to you for that and reach out my hand in friendship. Never mind the topic, you seem like a smart and decent guy and I have respect for that.
 
We will know how many licks it takes to get to the Tootsie roll center of a tootsie pop before we'll know the answer to this question. Good luck!
 
You're not afraid of death because you believe in god. Do you believe in a heaven, or any kind of afterlife? Do you believe that upon your death you will be united with God?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top