Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Atheism and faith


Only_

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, psyche101 said:

No  nothing like that. Religion is not part of anyone's physical makeup. 

More like it. Are you an Australian because you are of Caucasian appearance or because your parents told you what you were or because this is where you live as a citizen? 

No, that's not even close to a comparison. Those values are aspects of daily life that everyone must deal with. Religion should be a personal choice. 

 Bigoted thoughts like being labelled a certain religion by a others choice. Lack of freedom to make that choice through indoctrination. Being labelled a certain religion from birth is a part of indoctrination. 

He doesn't condone that either, the reality of that situation is given genuine information that God has no reason to be invoked. But children should be given that choice if they wish to consider it. Religious labelling removed that choice 

Why separate religious beliefs and values from  all other ones? They are actually a subset  of general beliefs and values.

Why is it ok for an atheist to tech their child that  god does not exist but not ok for theist to teach their child that he does?

why is it ok to teach a child not to steal but not ok to teach them gods laws and rules  (which are often identical to secular ones) 

If religion should be a personal choice then, arguably ALL values moralities and beliefs should be personal  and not imposed by parents or other authorities  No parent should tell a child what to wear, what to eat, or how to behave  but allow them to decide their own attitudes to all those things. Boys should not be encouraged to wear boys clothes or girls to wear girls clothes  EVERY thing a parent teaches a child is a form of indoctrination You only oppose the values/ beliefs you don't approve of . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, psyche101 said:

Are you referring to some infant version of an imaginary friend? 

To clarify, I mean an imaginary friend like drop dead fred, not a fecetious reference to a God. 

I'm sure most of humanity is driven by the desire for meaning and purpose in life. This doesn't mean its a desire for God. I think that's what Wally doesn't get (not to mention others).

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Are you referring to some infant version of an imaginary friend? 

To clarify, I mean an imaginary friend like drop dead fred, not a fecetious reference to a God. 

The nature of human cognition, even in infants demands that our mind supplies rational/logical answers to observed phenomenon.Our minds do not feel safe, and cannot cope with not knowing, precisely because we are self aware and inquisitive, needing to know  it is part of the process of making sense of our world 

   Where we have no knowldge or experience to provide the right facts, our mind constructs agents   that explain what we observed.

Thus a child soon knows that some things move with intent and purpose, while other things only move when moved by something with intent and purpose To  a child' s mind everything happens due to intent and purpose, or it does not happen. Thus the mind constructs agents which do the things a child sees have been done, but did not see being done.   

These constructs are "magical agents" or "god forms" who perform all the tasks a child does not understand, but knows occur;  so seeds don't get inside a gourd without something putting them there.  The wind does not blow, or the sun " move" , without some agent causing it to blow or move.  Food does not get put on the table unless an agent put it there.

Some agents are parents etc., or family pets,  but some are unseen and unknown, created in the child's mind to explain the inexplicable   To get a practical understanding of this, the  next time you and a 2-3 year old encounter a mushroom ring ask the child why the mushrooms are growing in a circle or ring. 

It really is not connected to imaginary friends, which are a separate  form of cognitive construct, which is developed  as a child explores the connection between the real world, and the wold within their mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Why is the concept of atheism so hard for people to understand? 

Because they don't want to understand.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Aquila King said:

I don't personally think the problem is as much lack of education, as it is the prevalence of indoctrination.

An education merely presents someone with information, and the tools to learn logic, critical thinking skills, and think independently. Indoctrination teaches people what to think from an early age due to over-exposure to religious ideas, and isolation from alternative viewpoints, all whilst instilling fear and disdain for any and all doubt as well as independent thought.

Eliminate the indoctrination, and education comes naturally.

Ok so if i teach a child to be competitive or cooperative, socialist or individualistic, material or spiritual,  greedy or giving, passive or aggressive,    and so on, how am i not indoctrinating the child into a value system of my own, based on the beliefs i hold to be true  if i teach a child to like certain foods or certain types of people and dislike others, is that not indoctrination?  If i teach them to be  careless consumers or  sustainable users of our resources, isn't that indoctrination?  What about the things i leave out, either by deliberate omission or because i am not aware of them myself How much should i push a child to eat healthily, exercise regularly and to live healthily ? 

Should i push a child into sport, or reading, or socialising, or whatever i believe is necessary for good development of a child, or not?  .  What about the treatment of others?  How should l i indoctrinate/teach my child to treat  others, and on what values and logic do i base this decision? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

I'm sure most of humanity is driven by the desire for meaning and purpose in life. This doesn't mean its a desire for God. I think that's what Wally doesn't get (not to mention others).

  I do get it 

it is this property of human self aware cognition which drives humans to first construct gods, and second, into a powerful propensity to believe in them. Belief and faith  confer marked advantages on human beings in; life expectancy  and physical and psychological health and well being.  

it is also why no animal except humans construct gods, believe in them, or show any evidences of worshipping gods, because no other animals have the sophistication of self aware cognition which allows them to do this They have no need for gods, because the y dont face the questions of existence that humans do.  

   Education is no  proof, what so ever, against these propensities for belief . It does reduce creationism but  even in today's educated world,  only about 10% of humans profess that the y have no belief in gods or higher powers etc. We are so predisposed by evolutionary influence on our cognitive processing, that it is extremely difficult to put aside magical thinking.

In psychological testing even the most educated people use such thinking to problem solve and rationalise.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

No :)  I know a real powerful alien entity which is just as real as my wife or dog and which as physically saved my life on many occasions and which teaches mentors, guides, and empowers me . I do have faith in its love of me as i have faith in my wife and dog's love of me.And of course anyone else,standing along side me can see the entity just as clearly a  i ca or hear it or feel it  It is solid  (except when it is not) :) 

I don't expect people to believe this ,but to understand me, it is important that the y realise this has nothing to do with faith or belief.  My wife doesn't exist just  because i believe in her and neither does this being . 

See my explanation above as to why the human souls is self evident. We all have one. i know mine very well and have worked all my life to shape it as i want it to be; strong, resilient, loving, constructive,    capable etc  Even those who don't realise it have it . 

Don't confuse the hypothetical immortal soul, with the real evolved soul which  all functioning adult humans possess, via evolution as a part of our self aware cognitive skills   Ever heard of feeding the soul, or soul music, or soul food,  or a kindred soul? 

Without a soul no one would ever feel guilty, for example. 

You are wrong about animals, at least in degree They don't have the language skills or cognitive abilities  to be self aware to the agree humans are  and thus may feel physical emotions but not self aware intellectual ones  An elephant is not aware that it's dead young is gone forever.

  it doesn't have the psychological worry and fear and grief  caused by that knowledge nor does it require the coping mechanisms humans evolve (like relgion) to compensate for our understanding 

I agree strongly, however, that as animals and artificial intelligences evolve the same level of self aware consciousness as humans, then the y must be accorded the same rights and responsibilities as humans First, like young human children then, as their self awareness evolves, as adult humans.

And yes, indeed, they will  then have souls like humans Souls are not religious, or given by god, the y are a property of evolution

Ever hear of the Zetetic Method ? That's what your employing to reach your conclusion?

It's counter scientific and wrong. It is how flat Earth people come to their conclusions.

Edited by danydandan
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Brother_Spirit said:

You expect me to agree with you. I unfortunately do not. So now you are accusing me of deception.

I gave you 3 choices. You chose option B.

I guess you know yourself and your motivations better than I.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Brother_Spirit

You should just embrace the good news of the Holy Dopamine Ghost. It's backed by science wether you believe it, or not. Your belief is backed up by belief, and that's not the pathway to truth.

 

4274ee9a1074d02d32c936dbee7a92bb.jpg

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Why separate religious beliefs and values from  all other ones? They are actually a subset  of general beliefs and values.

Because beliefs are a choice 

Values are a survival strategy 

12 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Why is it ok for an atheist to tech their child that  god does not exist but not ok for theist to teach their child that he does?

I didn't say it was. The information should be presented and available from all views and a personal choice made on what works for the individual. 

12 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

why is it ok to teach a child not to steal but not ok to teach them gods laws and rules  (which are often identical to secular ones) 

Because its counter productive to ascribe good behaviour to a Diety and pleasing it. Some religious people actually think that without God's guidance people would revert to a primal status and abandon all morals and ethics. In my opinion, that's an unhealthy mindset. Ascribing the church or a god to that promotes individual confusion and bad guidance. No need to convolute morals with imaginary beings. 

12 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

If religion should be a personal choice then, arguably ALL values moralities and beliefs should be personal  and not imposed by parents or other authorities 

No that's stupid. Social order requires cooperation. Those values need to be instilled as a modern survival mechanism. 

Religion is an ancient superstition. People survive fine without it. It doesn't affect your ability to work or learn whereas appearance and behaviour do. 

12 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

No parent should tell a child what to wear, what to eat, or how to behave  but allow them to decide their own attitudes to all those things.

Some don't and that's generally where the troublesome parts of society are to be found illustrating how morals and ethics are a survival mechanism. Ever seen a lone chimp joining a group? Submission, humility, cooperation and manners all count when being initiated into a group. Failure to comply with the existing hierarchy results in failure and expulsion. 

Survival mechanism. 

12 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Boys should not be encouraged to wear boys clothes or girls to wear girls clothes  

Standards are part of living in a society. There's nothing wrong with expressing modesty and pride in appearance. And it's not a belief either, it's a community standard. 

12 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

EVERY thing a parent teaches a child is a form of indoctrination

No it's not. It's a mix of life skills and choices. 

12 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

You only oppose the values/ beliefs you don't approve of . 

No, I don't approve of removing a choices by taking advantage of one's position when guiding another through life. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, danydandan said:

Ever hear of the Zetetic Method ? That's what your employing to reach your conclusion?

It's counter scientific and wrong. It is how flat Earth people come to their conclusions.

I don't accept, or believe, this to be the case,   but i am not sure which part of my post you are referring to, so i cant comment further.

   The human soul absolutely exists, but, like anything, it depends on how you define it, or are prepared to accept it  whether you believe this or not.  For example i would refute anyone who claimed that an immortal soul existed,   but for me a soul is not, and never was, immortal.

It is a  recognisable /observable property of human consciousness . i KNOW I have a human spirit or soul, in the same way that i know i am capable of love 

it is not immortal or religious.

it is a part of my evolved cognitive tool box,  like my Id or my ego. 

Just did some quick research.

From my reading the zetetic method is an alternative scientific method. It actually uses the two main components of the scientific method but does not begin with a fixed hypothesis allowing for more latitude and flexibility in investigations.

I cant see how it could be used to prove the earth was flat  Both methods use observation and measurement/experimentation, but the  zetetic method does not begin with an hypothesis such as  "The  world is flat"  or The world is an oblate spheroid"  It makes no assumptions and uses observ ations and evidences to find the truth.

  No form of science could prove the earth is flat, as simple observation  and experimentation would prove that it was not.

Can't see anywhere i am using the zetetic method to understand anything, but  it wouldn't matter what scientific method you used.  The evidences would prove the same conclusions,  given the known data.

I understand how, as a theoretical physicist ( among the most traditionalist of all scientific  endeavours)  you would be wary of the zetetic method  

http://rationaltheory.wikia.com/wiki/Zetetic_Method

It would seem that  the  zetetic method can be incorrectly applied as can the standard scientific method   Eg You look out your window and the earth seems flat so it must be flat. However further observation and experimentation in either method  will show you that  you can see the top of a mast or a tall building at a distance showing yhat the earth  curves    The observation that water in a glass is concave rather than convex simply does not allow for other variables such as  meniscus  or for the small size of the glass.   The same error could occur using the  standard scientific method.

   As with a sailing ship appearing over the horizon, observation will show that large bodies of water are indeed  convex, not concave.   That would be true, which ever method you used   

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Because beliefs are a choice 

Values are a survival strategy 

I didn't say it was. The information should be presented and available from all views and a personal choice made on what works for the individual. 

Because its counter productive to ascribe good behaviour to a Diety and pleasing it. Some religious people actually think that without God's guidance people would revert to a primal status and abandon all morals and ethics. In my opinion, that's an unhealthy mindset. Ascribing the church or a god to that promotes individual confusion and bad guidance. No need to convolute morals with imaginary beings. 

No that's stupid. Social order requires cooperation. Those values need to be instilled as a modern survival mechanism. 

Religion is an ancient superstition. People survive fine without it. It doesn't affect your ability to work or learn whereas appearance and behaviour do. 

Some don't and that's generally where the troublesome parts of society are to be found illustrating how morals and ethics are a survival mechanism. Ever seen a lone chimp joining a group? Submission, humility, cooperation and manners all count when being initiated into a group. Failure to comply with the existing hierarchy results in failure and expulsion. 

Survival mechanism. 

Standards are part of living in a society. There's nothing wrong with expressing modesty and pride in appearance. And it's not a belief either, it's a community standard. 

No it's not. It's a mix of life skills and choices. 

No, I don't approve of removing a choices by taking advantage of one's position when guiding another through life. 

Oh deary weary me. If you cant see the inconsistencies biases and lack of  logic in this i cant help you 

beliefs and values are ALL human constructs and generally they ALL have  a purpose; either to promote survival or social cohesion or the improvement of life. 

if something works for you and something else does not then why expose your child to BOTH?  Logic would say only teach the child that which is constructive, productive, and works for you. A child is not informed or experienced enough to make informed choices. It can do the t when it becomes an adult. Until then it is a n adults role to tell it how to behave and keep out of trouble :)

 

Why should i care about social order if i can do better by disregarding it Why worry about others, if i am not taught to do so as part of my parent's values? 

 As  humans we have laws which prevent animal like behaviour, thus humans can choose all sorts of behaviours and not just survive, but thrive because their right to do so is protected by law..

belief and religion serve important social purposes For example people trust those who think like them and believe as the y do and thus will cooperate better. Humans still trust more  (according to psychological tests) other humans who believe in invisible gods. They assume those people will be better behaved and controlled by the concpet of a god watching them  and judging them  The same tests show that indeed those who believe a god (or a policeman)  is watching them, ARE better behaved)    

lol its a parent's duty and responsibility to remove some choices from a child's repertoire  when guiding that child through life. For example insisting they are clothed in public, and don't yell and scream in the supermarket.    To do this one must sometimes impose ones own wil,l by "force"  or compulsion, on the child.

In general adults know better than children even teenagers  (due to life experience) and thus must be ultimately responsible for the behaviour of children until the child becomes adult and can take responsibility for their own choices and behaviours. This will be done through a gradual and negotiated transition period, where a child demonstrates good judgement and the abilty to be trusted to act wisely and safely.

Sometimes in male children this can take 30 years or more  :)   

Edited by Mr Walker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, XenoFish said:

Why is the concept of atheism so hard for people to understand? 

I think it is Christians and Muslims that have a hard time understanding because they think the world revolves around them and their gods. It is my thought that these two religions alone have left the world mainly in ignorance.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Truthseeker007 said:

I think it is Christians and Muslims that have a hard time understanding because they think the world revolves around them and their gods. It is my thought that these two religions alone have left the world mainly in ignorance.

For once, I agree with you. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

For once, I agree with you. 

I know we can agree on some things especially when it come to religions.:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Truthseeker007 said:

I know we can agree on some things especially when it come to religions.:lol:

Who'd have thought?!?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Brother_Spirit said:

According to the Bible, man was created in God’s image. Part of that image makes man a moral being. We are moral agents who make moral choices and are able to differentiate between right and wrong. The basis upon which we differentiate between right and wrong is our knowledge of God’s law, and that knowledge comes from two sources—revelation and conscience. Atheists can certainly be moral, but they do borrow their sense of morality from Theism.

You think "God" is moral?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Who'd have thought?!?

I try to go wherever my research and intuition takes me. Maybe reason why I am so far off the track of many others in some topics.:lol: I try with the best of my ability to look outside the box of this perception we have been given since being born on this Earth. Many in here are very aware of what religion is so that is refreshing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, MysticWolf said:

You think "God" is moral?

 

Morality is only a human "thing" which constantly evolves.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Sherapy said:

How is education, indoctrination?

 

They're roughly the same thing. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Morality is only a human "thing" which constantly evolves.

 

 

That is assuming there isn't any other intelligent life in the vast universe.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Morality is only a human "thing" which constantly evolves.

 

 

You help give meaning to revelation 1:18.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Will Due said:

 

They're roughly the same thing. 

 

 

It depends on the education. If we are talking about US schools and colleges I could agree it is a lot of indoctrination. But that is going a bit off the subject here.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

They're roughly the same thing. 

 

 

No there not, that's a ridiculous false assumption.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.