Ask An Atheist Anything

page: 6
25
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Lurch
 


It's evolutionary psychology. In the wild monkeys that work together are much better off than a solitary one. It's also true that in the wild, monkeys that hunt together share the fruits of their labor. This ensures that the group is healthy, and thus will continue to be able to hunt at full strength. The forward planning that would allow the monkey to decide whether he was better off sharing or not is controlled by the prefrontal cortex, an area much less developed in primates than humans. Therefore, the monkey is relying on basic strategies that have basically been passed down through the generations.




posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 08:41 PM
link   
I guess some people don't see it, should I be upset by it ?
Think of it like this, all the great minds history provided beilived in a higher being, into god. It's not logical to assume that there is nothing, it is absurde to think in this sort of manner. Not all are worthy ? I'm not the one to judge tho but sometimes I do, I'm not perfect.

~Science without spirituality is lame, spirituality without science is blind~ by Albert Einstein



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
I guess some people don't see it, should I be upset by it ?
Think of it like this, all the great minds history provided beilived in a higher being, into god. It's not logical to assume that there is nothing, it is absurde to think in this sort of manner.


Plenty of great minds did and do believe in gods. The appeal to authority is irrelevant. Only evidence of these higher beings or gods is relevant.

Atheists do not necessarily presume "there is nothing". They simply see no logic in forming a belief in deities without evidence.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


A lot of great minds in history also practiced alchemy. So, by your logic the rational thing to do would be to throw out everything we know about chemistry and physics and return to a system where lead can be made into gold by mixing different plants and metals together.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Brentnauer
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


Do you feel that being an atheist precludes the existence of the soul or spirit?


my view on this question, fwiw, is that no, atheism does not preclude the existence of the soul or spirit. atheism is about one thing: an observance of the lack of evidence of a deity. atheism offers no commentary on anything else, including souls or spirits.

however, since an atheist, typically seems impressed by evidence of things in order to consider them as reality, it is unlikely an atheist would consider souls and spirits reality.

if an atheist were to find evidence of a soul or spirit, it is likely they would #1) believe in souls and/or spirits and #2) possibly become a deist because evidence of souls and/or spirits may be the evidence the atheist in question believes determines the existence of a deity.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Hadrian
 


I like this answer. I'm neither religious nor non-religious but this makes the most sense to me given the context.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 

I must admit, I haven't read the whole thread but I do appreciate the friendly attitude of your OP.

Do any of Jesus teachings (according to the Bible) contradict your personal morals?

Peace



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by jenmckin
I have not seen that here...but if you keep a circle of friends around you that share your beliefs, have you seen this among them? Or is it just my luck to find the snobby atheists? rofl



I only see snobby atheists online. The atheists I know in person generally don't discuss theology. Conversely, I found that once people find out you're an atheist they tend to be rather snobby and bigoted. I do live in "the bible belt" though and this may tip the scale.


As do I. And trust me, it's not just atheists. Generally, 'round these parts
, if you believe anything other than the Christian norm, you are judged & they turn their nose up.

You forgot to answer my other question. Were you formerly Catholic?



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by pepsi78
I guess some people don't see it, should I be upset by it ?
Think of it like this, all the great minds history provided beilived in a higher being, into god. It's not logical to assume that there is nothing, it is absurde to think in this sort of manner.


Plenty of great minds did and do believe in gods. The appeal to authority is irrelevant. Only evidence of these higher beings or gods is relevant.

Atheists do not necessarily presume "there is nothing". They simply see no logic in forming a belief in deities without evidence.

Simply put..... You were right that atheists do not necessarily presume "there is nothing" because they want to beilive there is nothing.

But how can they find it when they are not searching for it ?
I see you got an atom as your signature



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Brentnauer
 


You would fall in the guide lines of being "Agnostic".


Thomas Henry Huxley (1825 – 1895) came up with the word ‘agnostic’ while searching for a term to describe his own beliefs. He did not consider himself “an atheist, a theist, a pantheist; a materialist or an idealist; [nor] a Christian…” and while he had much in common with freethinkers, he wanted a term to describe himself more accurately. His difference with the people who gave themselves the above labels was that he did not feel certain of his knowledge- or ‘gnosis’- that he “had successfully solved the problem of existence.”
The essential problem was that Huxley believed the problem was unsolvable. And thus far, despite the existence of famous thinkers like Emmanuel Kant and David Hume who philosophically agreed with him on the matter, there wasn’t a name for someone who believed you could never know the source of, nor reason for existence.
Huxley got the term “gnostic” from the early Christian Gnostics, whom he said, “professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant”, and created the word ‘agnostic’, with the prefix giving the new word the opposite meaning of the core word, which means, "knowing". This is close to the meaning that most modern day people associate with the word. It is used to mean a person who is not certain whether God exists or gods exist. It is subtly different from the original meaning in that the term started out to mean that knowledge of the cause and origin of existence is not only an uncertainty, but an impossibility, whether you’re considering that the origin may be God, science, or something else entirely.


www.essortment.com...

It does curttail on the Atheistic assumptions and ideals, but they are different none the less.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by pepsi78
I guess some people don't see it, should I be upset by it ?
Think of it like this, all the great minds history provided beilived in a higher being, into god. It's not logical to assume that there is nothing, it is absurde to think in this sort of manner.


Plenty of great minds did and do believe in gods. The appeal to authority is irrelevant. Only evidence of these higher beings or gods is relevant.

Atheists do not necessarily presume "there is nothing". They simply see no logic in forming a belief in deities without evidence.

Simply put..... You were right that atheists do not necessarily presume "there is nothing" because they want to beilive there is nothing.

But how can they find it when they are not searching for it ?
I see you got an atom as your signature


Atheist don't simply ignore just a God or other deity. We simply don't believe in any religious figure because we believe they're false.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by pepsi78
 


A lot of great minds in history also practiced alchemy. So, by your logic the rational thing to do would be to throw out everything we know about chemistry and physics and return to a system where lead can be made into gold by mixing different plants and metals together.


But we are not talking about lead and gold. In fact I see it as a progression
to reason and understand.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 



But we are not talking about lead and gold. In fact I see it as a progression
to reason and understand.


I agree with your analogy, if it were not for self acknowledgement and personal perception, we would be as turning lead into gold.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel
 

Religions are just a tool to pick out the valid and leave out the rest. It's comon sense. You need to pick all the good stuff and leave out the rest. It's not just religion. Atheism is a form of we exist to live like computers and die from my point of view.
Computers don't dream.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


You're right. It's like music or other forms of entertainment. We give it labels and take the magic out of it.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


But at the same time, I do believe we were born to face the only true and inevitable race towards death, in other word's "We are born to die." though that may sound cold and dark, it is my reality of lifes existence.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by FearNoEvil
Do any of Jesus teachings (according to the Bible) contradict your personal morals?


Some, although I must admit that Jesus had some amazingly advanced moral concepts for the era.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by jenmckin
You forgot to answer my other question. Were you formerly Catholic?


No. Not Catholic although my mother was raised one. My father's family belonged to a baptist (northern) church.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:34 PM
link   
I must thank the OP for posting this thread, I really do. It made me crawl over from my shadow, where I was confortably lurking for many months ago, since I first came to know ATS. I finally started my profile...



Originally posted by jenmckin
What I have found though, through many conversations with atheists, is that quite a large number of them were formerly Catholic. To continue this observation in my own experience, were you Catholic before coming to your current beliefs?


I sincerely don´t get the connection between former Catholicism and later becoming an atheist, though that is exactly my own case.

Would you care to elaborate your thought?

I´m also curious to know your personal religious background, even though I fail to assign it any relevance to the topic, blame it on mere curiosity.



Originally posted by jenmckin
My other observation is that most (and I say most...not all) atheists I've encountered are unfathomably arrogant. It has seemed to me that they feel...superior? (I guess that's as good a term as any) because they do not believe in a higher force in the universe. Even though I make it a point to never judge regarding religious preference, the atheists in my circle are confrontational and superior...like they feel they must be a little smarter than the rest of us.

I have not seen that here...but if you keep a circle of friends around you that share your beliefs, have you seen this among them? Or is it just my luck to find the snobby atheists? rofl



Again I fail to see a connection here.

Though you tried to sound non-commital by adding the "most, not all" clause, your remarks made me wonder whether you have suffered in the hands of obnoxious debaters.

Unlike you, I won´t try to sound so politically correct, no sugar-coating, so please bear with me.

Your remarks reminded me of a scene I watched in a documentary, in which a famous American preacher (forgive me if I forget his name) yelled at Dr.Dawkins for his alleged smart-assery and impoliteness while trying to debate his views on religion.

Granted that Dr.Dawkins sometimes goes over-board, but it is one thing to be firm and confident, another completely different to be impolite and imposing.

What I have found through my own experience is that all serious atheists have given a lot of thought and spent a lot of time researching before reaching this stance.

Note that I mean any "serious atheist", not just someone who has read a couple of books by the same Dr.Dawkins, or Cristopher Hitchens, and thus became infatuated with the New Atheism movement (oh, people just love to give labels, don´t they?)


I confess that I´ve spent most of my short life pondering about this question.

Much like the OP, it also makes me very sad to be taken as immoral, superficial, or obnoxious just because I hold my current view.

Unfortunately, by reading the posts around here, what do I gather? People blabbering about quantum physics, repeating Pascal´s wager, and even insisting on the infamous watchmaker argument (I´m impressed that no one else has come out with the 747 analogy).

Not to mention those who plainly sound like preachers on the pulpit. What was that flaming hell youtube video?


This topic will always attract my attention.

Unlike many theists (and even agnostics) would like to believe, atheists are indeed open to discussion.

It is that very openess that has made them to think critically in the first place.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
Simply put..... You were right that atheists do not necessarily presume "there is nothing" because they want to beilive there is nothing.

But how can they find it when they are not searching for it ?


I don't presume "there is nothing" nor do I want to believe as such. I happen to have a career in science and I search for things all the time. What I try to do is avoid believing in anything. Hypotheses are fine but must be substantiated by evidence.





new topics




 
25
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join