Atheism and faith

[Emma_Acid]

1 hour ago, Guyver said:

That's one viewpoint.......another viewpoint is that he has had an experience that he completely believes in and he's willing to go on record about it.  I admit, this idea is completely different from yours. 

Do you criticize people like Richard Dawkins for attempting to make money selling paperbacks?  Just curious....because the title "The God Delusion" seems as much or more the kind of tactic that you just accused Alexander of using.

In any event, have you praised Dawkins for that work?  If so, then wouldn't you be able to consider yourself a person who is extremely cognitively biased?  I mean, you can't praise Dawkins for doing something you disparage Alexander for.......right?

All humans are "extremely cognitively biased". Additionally, just because you don't agree with Dawkins, doesn't mean he's guilty of same issues psyche101 levels at Alexander.

[psyche101]

9 hours ago, Stubbly_Dooright said:

Reading this post, (your response to A.King) has me considering some things. I see where you are getting at, ( I totally feel the same ) that you're discussing those who publish books and go on lecture tours about their myths and feel they are backing them up. (If I'm getting that correctly.) In which, I can see that. I think, though, what about those who have had personal experiences, and are not on the path with an agenda to make everyone believe, just to have this bit as part of their point of view? Maybe like............. me!   I do get the feeling, you don't have anything against people who have these 'ideals' because of their experiences, and are not trying to pass them off as truth for everyone else to believe, just wanting to keep them within their own sole world view or point of view. (And yeah, hoping that there is always the understanding of logic and facts as their priority in their point of view) In which, I do think you know I have...............................      ................. you do, right? 

Anyhow, there are things, that I find fascinating. If it's to read about it as a hobby, or to validate in one sense, (just wanting to know, if there is more than just me having these same experiences), I'm glad there are books, and tv programs and such. And forums, like this one, (in which is how I got here!   ............ wait.................   ) And all I want, is to just read fellow experiences, or different one's, just to see and understand things for my benefit alone. I think, this is just awesome to have, as well as your science books, and such, to read and be educated about. 

I guess, it depends if the goal for selling books for the entertainment and personal education or it's to push an agenda. But, in the end, as a past bookseller for so many years, one has to have a main genre to categorize such book, and hoping that it's contents is understood as to the topic it's filed under. Even though the paranormal and the separate religious books are filed under None fiction, I myself tend to reflect on that a bit, as oppose to other none fiction genres like science, business, and history, etc. But, it is also not filed under fiction either. 

In the end, the books are for the reader, and the reader has their path to deal with. 

My point is, the author of the various books, are the writing for themselves or for their readers. I think it's should be considered if it's for their readers, and realize a lot of readers are doing this for themselves and are still logical to see the world for what it is. (I have disputed the romance reader, and think, really?!?!    

Then, all of a sudden I have this desire to read about dukes and poor helpless young ladies and then.............................. 

Never mind! That's different!!!  .................................................    

But, my point is, what about those who just want to read about experiences, that they themselves have and want different perspectives on? 

But, yes, I agree with you on most of this. 

 

I know where your coming from, and it's the people calling experiences answers that create these situations. I don't call into the 'Spirituality Religion and Beliefs' section, unless invited to do so, or the 'Sightings and Experiences' section of this forum. I understand some just wish to discuss their personal views, so I leave those sections be and don't challenge whatever people wish to imagine or interpret an experience. There is live and let live, and then you get posters with a chip in thier shoulder about 'materialism' and how they need to defend the world from the evil of reality. 

But in Eben's case, its not that he doesn't have better answers. I've posted a few time where he discusses his version of the experience he sold books about with Sean Carroll and Steve Novella. I just don't believe his intentions are honest seeing how he denies what he knows is real world data that we'll explains his Swiss cheese story. Considering his education and background, I just can't see his claims as honest. 

Sort of how I hold people like Tom Cruise in contempt, he is obviously an intelligent person, I don't believe for one second that he swallows that Xenu garbage as even slightly plausible. I feel people like that are lying to my face for their own ahenfa and I just find that offensive and distasteful. 

 

[XenoFish]

6 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

 

They never get my name right.

To sorta be on topic. I'm sure atheist hold faith in different things, except god. They might hold faith in the reliability of a co-worker or family member. They may even hope in the recovery of a very sick relative.

[psyche101]

4 hours ago, Guyver said:

That's one viewpoint.......another viewpoint is that he has had an experience that he completely believes in and he's willing to go on record about it.  I admit, this idea is completely different from yours. 

I've seen his debated and talks which formed that opinion, it particular the debate where he and Ray Moody challenge Sean Carroll and Steve Novella, have you seen these situations, or read his book to come to that opinion? 

4 hours ago, Guyver said:

Do you criticize people like Richard Dawkins for attempting to make money selling paperbacks?  Just curious....because the title "The God Delusion" seems as much or more the kind of tactic that you just accused Alexander of using.

In any event, have you praised Dawkins for that work?  If so, then wouldn't you be able to consider yourself a person who is extremely cognitively biased?  I mean, you can't praise Dawkins for doing something you disparage Alexander for.......right?

I have to admit to geing thoroughly confused by your response 

Richard Dawkins is and evolutionary biologist. He has devoted a large part of his life to study and gathering knowledge, and that's what his novels are based upon. Real facts that he has transcribed to a layman level. He has written many peer reviewed papers on the subject and his view are supported by things like DNA results and the fossil record. 

How do you see that as akin to some personal interpretation of a singular event that is not supported by anything more than that individuals opinion? 

A lifetime of hard work and study somehow compares with a personal opinion? 

[psyche101]

3 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

They never get my name right.

To sorta be on topic. I'm sure atheist hold faith in different things, except god. They might hold faith in the reliability of a co-worker or family member. They may even hope in the recovery of a very sick relative.

Well, I've always had faith that anyone is capable of greater knowledge, but recent threads have had me reevaluate that concept......... 

[XenoFish]

1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

Well, I've always had faith that anyone is capable of greater knowledge, but recent threads have had me reevaluate that concept......... 

I got to the point where I felt as if I was just repeating myself. Decided to leave and do a write up on my occult stuff. Almost deleted it, but decided to post it. Yet, though brief my break was. I see nothing has changed and threads are still getting locked. *sigh*

[psyche101]

7 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

I got to the point where I felt as if I was just repeating myself. Decided to leave and do a write up on my occult stuff. Almost deleted it, but decided to post it. Yet, though brief my break was. I see nothing has changed and threads are still getting locked. *sigh*

Yep not much has changed

Everytime Illy gets involved, we get thread closures and lots of animosity. 

Wheres your write up? Blog or thread? I'll have to check it out. 

[Illyrius]

23 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

They never get my name right.

To sorta be on topic. I'm sure atheist hold faith in different things, except god. They might hold faith in the reliability of a co-worker or family member. They may even hope in the recovery of a very sick relative.

But then, how to explain their vehement condemnation of faith in all things that can't be empirically proven?

Isn't this contradictory?

[XenoFish]

41 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Yep not much has changed

Everytime Illy gets involved, we get thread closures and lots of animosity. 

Wheres your write up? Blog or thread? I'll have to check it out. 

I've got illy on ignore so it's no stress on myself. As for my write up. It's in the New Age section. Have a read and give me your thoughts. Hopefully it won't crash and burn by page 3.

Edited May 2, 2018 by XenoFish

[psyche101]

29 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

But then, how to explain their vehement condemnation of faith in all things that can't be empirically proven?

Isn't this contradictory?

No  it's offering the benefit of the doubt. Not a fact and not preached as such to others, its personal. 

[XenoFish]

1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

No  it's offering the benefit of the doubt. Not a fact and not preached as such to others, its personal. 

In this context an "act of faith" amount to a form of optimism. A hope that is tempered with a dash of doubt.

[psyche101]

1 minute ago, XenoFish said:

In this context an "act of faith" amount to a form of optimism. A hope that is tempered with a dash of doubt.

Yep exactly, not somthing you use to insult great minds that have pioneered new branches of science. 

[Illyrius]

5 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

No  it's offering the benefit of the doubt. Not a fact and not preached as such to others, its personal. 

Do you doubt theory of evolution?

[XenoFish]

Just now, psyche101 said:

Yep exactly, not somthing you use to insult great minds that have pioneered new branches of science. 

The idea of faith only seem to apply to spirituality. However its a natural idea that most people have, sometimes on a daily basis. Someone might hope they make it to work on time. Put a little faith (trust) in a friend to pay them back, etc. I think for the most part it's a normal human dynamic. But it is easier to put trust in someone or something when there is solid evidence to support such a belief. Other than that it's blind faith.

[psyche101]

2 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

Do you doubt theory of evolution?

Of course not, it's factually supported. Evolution is both fact and theory. 

[Illyrius]

1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

Of course not, it's factually supported. Evolution is both fact and theory. 

So is religion.

[psyche101]

4 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

The idea of faith only seem to apply to spirituality. However its a natural idea that most people have, sometimes on a daily basis. Someone might hope they make it to work on time. Put a little faith (trust) in a friend to pay them back, etc. I think for the most part it's a normal human dynamic. But it is easier to put trust in someone or something when there is solid evidence to support such a belief. Other than that it's blind faith.

Even then based on evidence. If someone is known to welch on payback deals, you're not going to continue to loan them money. Trial and error, like anything. 

Edited May 2, 2018 by psyche101

[psyche101]

Just now, Illyrius said:

So is religion.

What facts support religion? I'm not aware of any. 

[XenoFish]

2 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Even them based on evidence. If someone is known to welch on payback deals, you're not going to continue to loan them money. Trial and error, like anything. 

Very true and you lose faith in such a person. Since it is due to actual real world experience. If negative results are repeated enough, one might lose faith (trust) in people. Same works in reverse and the gain faith in humanity. 

Edited May 2, 2018 by XenoFish

[Illyrius]

2 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

What facts support religion? I'm not aware of any. 

The fact that origin of universe and existance is a mystery.

[eight bits]

I read Dr Alexander's statement at his website.

http://ebenalexander.com/about/my-experience-in-coma/

I think we can all agree that his is a fairly typical VIBE narrative. Regular listeners know that I find these reports uninformative about the prospects of an afterlife, or of the hidden constitution of the Universe, or what manner of beings dwell in the happy places visited by the nearsies-only-count-in-horseshoes not-yet-dead.

That said, however, I am confident that his statement accurately tells what Dr Alexander remembers. So, what exactly is he supposed to do now? Why shouldn't he tell what he remembers to whoever cares to listen, and also tell  how he interprets what he believes to be real memories?

There's no earthly reason why he should substitute anybody else's interpretation of his experience for his own. There's also no reason why he shouldn't write books, and if people want to buy them, then it's their money - or it was, and now it's his . So, too, with Dawkins.

I favor Justice Brandeis' dictum that the fitting remedy for evil counsels is good ones. I would let Dr Alexander have his say, confident that his many and obvious limitations as a reliable witness will be pointed out at fitting length.

I also wonder why some who are quick to recognize the mythological content in Dr Alexander's report are equally quick to dismiss that reports like his might have been the origins of religious myth-making and belief in the supernatural.

[psyche101]

11 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

The fact that origin of universe and existance is a mystery.

Its not a complete mystery, there are very good models competing to provide the best fit to data.

Even if it was, how would that support religious claims? 

[Illyrius]

2 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Its not a complete mystery, there are very good models competing to provide the best fit to data.

Even if it was, how would that support religious claims? 

Lets start with a simple question, to clarify is it a complete mystery or not.

Can something come out of nothing?

Edited May 2, 2018 by Illyrius

[psyche101]

11 minutes ago, eight bits said:

I read Dr Alexander's statement at his website.

http://ebenalexander.com/about/my-experience-in-coma/

I think we can all agree that his is a fairly typical VIBE narrative. Regular listeners know that I find these reports uninformative about the prospects of an afterlife, or of the hidden constitution of the Universe, or what manner of beings dwell in the happy places visited by the nearsies-only-count-in-horseshoes not-yet-dead.

Going to an authors website for confirmation? 

11 minutes ago, eight bits said:

That said, however, I am confident that his statement accurately tells what Dr Alexander remembers. So, what exactly is he supposed to do now? Why shouldn't he tell what he remembers to whoever cares to listen, and also tell  how he interprets what he believes to be real memories?

There's no earthly reason why he should substitute anybody else's interpretation of his experience for his own. There's also no reason why he shouldn't write books, and if people want to buy them, then it's their money - or it was, and now it's his . So, too, with Dawkins.

If he is going express his opinion as fact then he will be challenged on that claim. And he has been. And he has discussed better answers with learned people, but I'm sure that doesn't sell. Paperbacks. 

What Alexander is selling, and what Dawkins is writing are chalk and cheese. 

11 minutes ago, eight bits said:

I favor Justice Brandeis' dictum that the fitting remedy for evil counsels is good ones. I would let Dr Alexander have his say, confident that his many and obvious limitations as a reliable witness will be pointed out at fitting length.

Where do these limitations see the light of day and to whom? 

11 minutes ago, eight bits said:

I also wonder why some who are quick to recognize the mythological content in Dr Alexander's report are equally quick to dismiss that reports like his might have been the origins of religious myth-making and belief in the supernatural.

What are you referring to? 

I often find your posts cryptic. 

[psyche101]

9 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

Lets start with a simple question, to clarify is it a complete mystery or not.

Can something come out of nothing?

Yes.