to the atheists

[chado]

first off i cant understand how one could actualy be an atheist.heres why?
how can you conclude that theres no god no soul no consiousness that exsists after death how can you actualy conclude this?
what can you sure that you can say''there is no soul that exsists after death'' or we have no souls and are simply a body and matter
you might say lack of evidence i think there plenty of evidence out there that suggests a soul.
...
my own view on atheism is that atheism is just magical thinking or ego gymnastics,because you dont want to accept something about the soul/god/buddhism/hinduism/ect you start to look for evidence to suggest that the soul doesnt exsist,its like this one gay guy that use to eb a christian,he was a christian untill he saw that christianity doesnt accept gay people so after realizing he could not get rid of his gayism,he did an ego shift,or tricked himself into beliving god doesnt exsist,looke dfor evidence and found it...so there?

 

[á´…eparted]

There is no evidence for spiritual things and things after death. Therefore, there is no reason to believe any of that.

/end

It really is that simple. People can choose to believe what they want, but I don't see any evidence towards it, so I don't see it as fitting to believe in it.

 

[Yama]

gayism is my new favorite word of all time

 

[prplchknz]

any idealogy can be gotten through magical thinking.

 

[Lark]

I'm like 100% there's some sort of a game being played with these posts.

Its like they've tried hard to discover what have been all the forum hand grenades over a longer scale period of time and just went around posting threads which will push peoples buttons.

 

[Lark]

any idealogy can be gotten through magical thinking.

I like magical thinking, I also like magical realism in literature, some of the best examples I cant think of right now but I think that Iron Dragon's Daughter was an absolutely brilliant book.

- - - Updated - - -

gayism is my new favorite word of all time

Aye.

No.

 

[MisteurFox]

There's no direct evidence of an afterlife or God in this plane and there's obviously a reason for that. I'm assuming it has to do with it simply not being needed. Or perhaps being detrimental to what we have to learn here. As far as I'm concerned, I've had enough spiritual experiences to know there's something but most people won't need such evidence to lead their lives.

Since there's no direct evidence of the soul existing, atheism is therefore is a sane and healthy belief system to uphold in this plane. Ego is just a way of thinking about things. Change your perspective, change your life... I mention atheism being a healthy belief system because of the MANY studies that show detrimental effects to being a religious person. But then again, whatever floats your boat. One can be a person with a good heart no matter your belief system. It's about having a heart and being a good person, not what people think. If people like to think some white-haired dude in the clouds is judging everyone all the way up to the bedroom, that's their business, not yours. If people don't feel the need to make up stories about a white-haired dude in the clouds, that's also their business.

 

[Mole]

I like magical thinking, I also like magical realism in literature, some of the best examples I cant think of right now but I think that Iron Dragon's Daughter was an absolutely brilliant book.

- - - Updated - - -

Aye.

No.

The official philosophy of the Roman Catholic Church is Faith and Reason. But the sleep of Reason brings forth monsters, and we have been discovering the monsters in the Judicial Enquiry into Child Abuse in Ireland, and as I write, we are discovering the monsters in Australia at our Royal Commission into Institutional Child Abuse.

 

[Mole]

first off i cant understand how one could actualy be an atheist.heres why?

The reason is that the likelihood of any supernatural being existing, such as Ganesh, the God with the head of an elephant, or the Trinity, with three heads, is approaching zero.

Another reason is the systematic betrayal of children by religion revealed in the Irish Judicial Enquiry into Child Abuse, and in the current Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Child Abuse.

So here are two good reasons to be an agnostic or an atheist: the first reason is philosophical and the second is moral.

 

[chado]

I'm like 100% there's some sort of a game being played with these posts.

Its like they've tried hard to discover what have been all the forum hand grenades over a longer scale period of time and just went around posting threads which will push peoples buttons.

yes but its not a game its more expression,i just have all theres thoughts and would like to express tham.

- - - Updated - - -

There's no direct evidence of an afterlife or God in this plane and there's obviously a reason for that. I'm assuming it has to do with it simply not being needed. Or perhaps being detrimental to what we have to learn here. As far as I'm concerned, I've had enough spiritual experiences to know there's something but most people won't need such evidence to lead their lives.

Since there's no direct evidence of the soul existing, atheism is therefore is a sane and healthy belief system to uphold in this plane. Ego is just a way of thinking about things. Change your perspective, change your life... I mention atheism being a healthy belief system because of the MANY studies that show detrimental effects to being a religious person. But then again, whatever floats your boat. One can be a person with a good heart no matter your belief system. It's about having a heart and being a good person, not what people think. If people like to think some white-haired dude in the clouds is judging everyone all the way up to the bedroom, that's their business, not yours. If people don't feel the need to make up stories about a white-haired dude in the clouds, that's also their business.

i think there is evidence.

 

[chado]

The reason is that the likelihood of any supernatural being existing, such as Ganesh, the God with the head of an elephant, or the Trinity, with three heads, is approaching zero.

Another reason is the systematic betrayal of children by religion revealed in the Irish Judicial Enquiry into Child Abuse, and in the current Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Child Abuse.

So here are two good reasons to be an agnostic or an atheist: the first reason is philosophical and the second is moral.

first off you dont know this.how do you know that a god like ganeesh does not exsist....evidence?have you ever gone to india and experimented to find out for yourself?i think not.

 

[chado]

you guys say theres no evidence for a soul or existance after death but,you dont know this,who says theres no evidence theres plenty of evidence?,have you ever read any book on hinduism,ect...

 

[á´…eparted]

you guys say theres no evidence for a soul or existance after death but,you dont know this,who says theres no evidence theres plenty of evidence?,have you ever read any book on hinduism,ect...

Atheists do not have to prove a negative. Theists do have to prove a positive.

No, I can't prove there is some sort of life after death, but until someone does there is no reason to believe that to be true because there is currently no evidence. This is no different than someone claiming there is electrical machinery on the surface of pluto. There's no evidence to suggest that it's true, so there is no reason for anyone to believe in it other than it being some sort of personal choice. It's not the duty of people who don't believe this to prove it isn't true. That's completely unreasonable, because there's no suggestions or evidence towards. It's the duty of those who do believe it to prove it, since they're the ones saying it must be there.

As far as evidence for life after death, spiritual beliefs, religion, etc. there are many things we can explain through scientific reasoning, many things that we can suggest are some way through scientific reasoning, and many things that we can't explain. That latter category is often use as a tool to go "see, you don't know what it is, so it must be evidence!". No, it's not evidence simply because we don't know, all we can say is we don't know why. Period, we can speculate sure, but speculating a spiritual/religious reasoning when there currently isn't any solid backing for it doesn't bolster an argument. Where as, speculating a scientific reason does hold weight, because there is much solid background to illustrate the speculation as being possible.

 

[chado]

Atheists do not have to prove a negative. Theists do have to prove a positive.

No, I can't prove there is some sort of life after death, but until someone does there is no reason to believe that to be true because there is currently no evidence. This is no different than someone claiming there is electrical machinery on the surface of pluto. There's no evidence to suggest that it's true, so there is no reason for anyone to believe in it other than it being some sort of personal choice. It's not the duty of people who don't believe this to prove it isn't true. That's completely unreasonable, because there's no suggestions or evidence towards. It's the duty of those who do believe it to prove it, since they're the ones saying it must be there.

As far as evidence for life after death, spiritual beliefs, religion, etc. there are many things we can explain through scientific reasoning, many things that we can suggest are some way through scientific reasoning, and many things that we can't explain. That latter category is often use as a tool to go "see, you don't know what it is, so it must be evidence!". No, it's not evidence simply because we don't know, all we can say is we don't know why. Period, we can speculate sure, but speculating a spiritual/religious reasoning when there currently isn't any solid backing for it doesn't bolster an argument. Where as, speculating a scientific reason does hold weight, because there is much solid background to illustrate the speculation as being possible.

you know im happy that you admitted you dont know if theres life after death,because i cant understand how an atheist can be so sure there is no life after death anyways,....what about in india were there are so many mystics who speak of a soul and life after death?>

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

I'm probably an atheist, although I would describe myself more as agnostic.

I don't think the human brain is sufficient hardware to fully understand the nature of reality, so it is arrogant to draw any conclusion as an absolute truth, so I don't.

Having spent a lot of my life as a theist and experiencing a connection with something intangible, it was a long, difficult process for me to let go of that belief. I still have every emotional reason and investment in being theist, however, as I reasoned through it, I had to let go. I realized that logically, the more specific parameters one places on the concept of god, the less likely it is a reality. I started by letting go of the most concrete details about my concept of god, being tied to one specific religion. Then I let go of the concept of god as a separate, sentient, definable Being. Eventually I was left with an uncertain notion of the dim possibility of universal consciousness and the unknowable nature of the universe.

My concept is not "against theism", but "without theism". I'm not someone who has to change everyone's thinking about god. Having experienced the process of letting go, I know how deeply it runs, and that it could completely undermine someone psychologically to force them to reject the notion.

 

[á´…eparted]

you know im happy that you admitted you dont know if theres life after death,because i cant understand how an atheist can be so sure there is no life after death anyways,....what about in india were there are so many mystics who speak of a soul and life after death?>

I am 99.9% convinced there is no life after death, so in practice I treat it as a "no, there is no after life" because it's simply easier to say than "well I am 99.9% certain because of all the lack of evidence, and..." it gets really long winded. Again, because there is no evidence for it. All of the "evidence" doesn't fit into what we know of the world, physics, science, reality, psychology, etc. so it's meaningless. Regardless, it's something that is almost certainly literally impossible to know. Because of that, no one can say 100% there isn't because with our current knowledge there is no way to know. It's not fair or right to say you know with absolute certainty.

I look at it like I do in chemistry (I am a chemist). When I run a reaction and it's a perfect reaction, meaning all of the material reacts and converts to a product, you can say 100% yield because no side products at all were formed. However, you still lose a little bit in the reaction from tiny drops sticking to the glass during purification, work up, etc. It's a literal physical impossibility to get 100% yield that you can hold in your hand, but easy to get 99.9% yield (we'll "easy"). It's effectively 100% for all intents and purposes, but not literally so, and when you publish in literature, you can't claim 100% yield. 99% is the highest you can claim. Most chemists will say "quantative yield" meaning it's 99%, but functionally 100%. That analogy applies to how I look at my views as an atheist.

I see mystics as people who explore their own minds and experience the world around them in a analogical manner. What they see and claim doesn't fit into concrete world knowledge, or lie adjacent. Just because the mind experiences or sees something doesn't make it true. It's like experiencing a hallucinogenic drug (I have a lot of personal experience with this). You perceive the world around you totally different, and it's not uncommon for people to have mystical experiences on the drugs. We can reason why; the receptors in the brain these drugs act on are known to have the effects they do. That's it. Trying to extrapolate off that into saying it's a spiritual event, or you were speaking to spirits or something doesn't have any basis. All we can fairly say it was, is that it was a human experience due to the drug acting in the areas of the brain that it did.

 

[ceecee]

you know im happy that you admitted you dont know if theres life after death,because i cant understand how an atheist can be so sure there is no life after death anyways,....what about in india were there are so many mystics who speak of a soul and life after death?>

The mystics have no proof either. And no one said they are sure - they said there is no evidence or proof. If you are arguing that there is a soul and life after death, the burden of proof is on you and anyone else claiming it is so.

 

[MisteurFox]

yes but its not a game its more expression,i just have all theres thoughts and would like to express tham.

- - - Updated - - -



i think there is evidence.

This is the closest to "evidence" I've ever found that isn't pseudo-science. His research will likely not be reviewed, sadly.

Books about religion are not evidence. Anyone can write up a religion book and say it's true. That doesn't make it true.

 

[Mole]

first off you dont know this.how do you know that a god like ganeesh does not exsist....evidence?have you ever gone to india and experimented to find out for yourself?i think not.

If there was any evidence any supernatural being existed, it would be the greatest discovery in our history, and naturally, if evidence existed, everyone would believe in their existence, but we don't.

Hindus don't believe in the existence of the Trinity, the God with three heads, and Christians don't believe in the existence of Ganesh, the God with the head of an elephant.

In fact, both a three headed God, and a God with the Head of an elephant, are preposterous.

We can only believe in supernatural beings by suspending our disbelief, just as we suspend our disbelief in the movies, or watching television, or reading a book, or attending the opera.

And when we have finished enjoying the movies, television, a book, or the opera, we stop suspending our disbelief and return to the world of reality and critical thinking. Except the odd thing is that many religious people do not stop suspending their disbelief when they leave the church, mosque, synagogue, or temple.

 

[Ghost]

gayism is my new favorite word of all time

I'm the gayest gayist of all time.