+- Southperry.net (https://www.southperry.net)
+-- Forum: Social (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Rubik's Cube (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=58)
+--- Thread: Ask an Atheist (/showthread.php?tid=41816)
Ask an Atheist - KhainiWest - 2011-05-13
Satellite Wrote:What do you mean? I don't see anyone here saying what you said. You said that Atheism means "I'm young and I don't care". I'm glad that you realised how absurd your post was.
Because it's more related to agnostic. Atheism is too me the same concept. If you don't believe in a religion that's fine but I can't really find a justified reason why it would be a religion itself, besides hating on other religions, which is what typically happens.
Ask an Atheist - Khoi - 2011-05-13
Dusk Wrote:Do atheists fear for their soul at all? It's easy to claim to believe only in logic when you're young and your mortality isn't ever on your mind. But science doesn't explain everything, and as human beings, we fear the unknown. So logic aside, are you comfortable with the idea that humans are nothing more than a certain arrangement of atoms, and that your consciousness doesn't exist? Do you foresee your views possibly changing in the future?
Not at all. I don't really think a 'soul' can really exist, if you mean it in the most literal of sense. When I look at people, I just see hunks of human flesh as well as blood, a brain, a heart, etc. You name it. I don't think my views will ever change, because there's really no right or wrong way to look at religion. No one's ever going to be able to solve this mystery. I don't blab out the fact that I'm Atheist, but I hate it when people bring up religion. I really don't know why, I just can't stand it, because it's like they're trying to make a point about something that hasn't been proven nor solved.
I really don't think my body is anything more than logical processes of thoughts, and my body is just 'atoms', like you just stated. It's just a bunch of compounds put together to form 'me'. I don't believe that a higher up being gave me a soul and a physical form, in all honesty.
Ask an Atheist - KhainiWest - 2011-05-13
Khoi Wrote:Not at all. I don't really think a 'soul' can really exist, if you mean it in the most literal of sense. When I look at people, I just see hunks of human flesh as well as blood, a brain, a heart, etc. You name it. I don't think my views will ever change, because there's really no right or wrong way to look at religion. No one's ever going to be able to solve this mystery. I don't blab out the fact that I'm Atheist, but I hate it when people bring up religion. I really don't know why, I just can't stand it, because it's like they're trying to make a point about something that hasn't been proven nor solved.
I really don't think my body is anything more than logical processes of thoughts, and my body is just 'atoms', like you just stated. It's just a bunch of compounds put together to form 'me'. I don't believe that a higher up being gave me a soul and a physical form, in all honesty.
Well if I recall your soul is considered the last breath that weighs about two nickels. or something. More of a "I DONT KNOW WHAT THIS IS SO IT MUST BE AN ACT OF GOD" two nickels.
Ask an Atheist - Satellite - 2011-05-13
KhainiWest Wrote:Because it's more related to agnostic. Atheism is too me the same concept. If you don't believe in a religion that's fine but I can't really find a justified reason why it would be a religion itself, besides hating on other religions, which is what typically happens.I deny something that has 0 evidence and more evidence against it. Just like I deny existance of witches and santa claus. If all I did was question existance of all imaginary stuff, then I think I would be going towards the situation I mentioned in my previous answer.
The line between atheism and agnostism is indeed very shady. I would even dare to say that they are almost the same thing. Right that moment when there is heavy evidence for something, it is no longer a subject of faith and therefore it must be accepted in the world view of an atheist as well.
Ask an Atheist - Alex123123 - 2011-05-13
Dusk Wrote:Do atheists fear for their soul at all? It's easy to claim to believe only in logic when you're young and your mortality isn't ever on your mind. But science doesn't explain everything, and as human beings, we fear the unknown. So logic aside, are you comfortable with the idea that humans are nothing more than a certain arrangement of atoms, and that your consciousness doesn't exist? Do you foresee your views possibly changing in the future?
Wonder why should a person feel "uncomfortable" with the idea that humans (and everything that surrounds us for that matter) are nothing more than arranged bundles of atoms? Worried about being special or something?
Hell, why does that idea goes against the teachings of religion? *ponders*
Also, am I uncomfortable with the fact that I will some day cease to exist completely? Yes I am (I want to witness the technological advancement of society! SCIENCE!!! I want to live!). However, will indulging myself in fairy tails create an afterlife? Don't think so. Although I admit, it would make me feel a bit more relieved.
Still, don't you think that the whole afterlife deal devalues the life that we already posses?
In a random note. Personally, I have no problems with people who believe in their religion. I find the atheist braggers a bit more annoying though. There's no need to trash the believes of others. If life is the pursuit of happiness, and religion brings them joy/support/hope, then let them be.
Edit: About the agnostic thing. At least I consider myself more of an agnostic than an atheist (borderline atheist though). If I classify myself correctly, then the difference could be the fact that while an atheist might deny the possibility of everything without proof, I keep myself open to the possibilities until the proof is provided.
In other words, agnostics are indecisive bastards.
Ask an Atheist - Khoi - 2011-05-13
I don't think it's too hard to decide whether one's Agnostic or Atheist. I'm going to make it simple:
Atheist = Negative => Does not believe in higher being
Agnostic = Neutral => Indecisive
[everything else that equates to believing in a higher being]
I used to be Agnostic when I was younger, I turned into Atheist when I started thinking more and more about life.
Ask an Atheist - Dusk - 2011-05-13
Alex123123 Wrote:Wonder why should a person feel "uncomfortable" with the idea that humans (and everything that surrounds us for that matter) are nothing more than arranged bundles of atoms? Worried about being special or something?Most major religions do teach that humans are special and not equals to other animals. It's not necessarily something I personally agree with.
Hell, why does that idea goes against the teachings of religion? *ponders*
Also, am I uncomfortable with the fact that I will some day cease to exist completely? Yes I am (I want to witness the technological advancement of society! SCIENCE!!! I want to live!). However, will indulging myself in fairy tails create an afterlife? Don't think so. Although I admit, it would make me feel a bit more relieved.
Still, don't you think that the whole afterlife deal devalues the life that we already posses?
I don't really believe in an afterlife, either. The trouble with the idea that we don't have some greater purpose is that it is upsetting to see all that is wrong with the world - diseases, murder, people who lack access to safe water, corrupt governments, and so on - and believe there isn't some reason behind it all. Have you ever had a loved one die of cancer, or some other slow disease? It's not something that's easy to accept.
Ask an Atheist - NoJobNoRules - 2011-05-13
Alex123123 Wrote:If life is the pursuit of happiness, and religion brings them joy/support/hope, then let them be.Agreed. If everyone in every religion treated each other this way, we'd have a lot less problems.
KhainiWest Wrote:Because it's more related to agnostic. Atheism is too me the same concept. If you don't believe in a religion that's fine but I can't really find a justified reason why it would be a religion itself, besides hating on other religions, which is what typically happens.
I don't look at being Agnostic and being Atheist as the same thing. I usually "classify" myself as not religious, but also go along with being Agnostic - not having an opinion one way or the other about an existence of a god.
Atheism is "There is no god." So I believe there is a clear difference between them.
Ask an Atheist - SaptaZapta - 2011-05-13
Dusk Wrote:I don't really believe in an afterlife, either. The trouble with the idea that we don't have some greater purpose is that it is upsetting to see all that is wrong with the world - diseases, murder, people who lack access to safe water, corrupt governments, and so on - and believe there isn't some reason behind it all. Have you ever had a loved one die of cancer, or some other slow disease? It's not something that's easy to accept.
Interesting.
For me, it's easier to accept that my grandfather died of cancer due to bad genes or random bad luck, than to think that some perfect higher being wanted him (and us) to suffer that.
Ask an Atheist - Erebus - 2011-05-13
Dusk Wrote:I don't really believe in an afterlife, either. The trouble with the idea that we don't have some greater purpose is that it is upsetting to see all that is wrong with the world - diseases, murder, people who lack access to safe water, corrupt governments, and so on - and believe there isn't some reason behind it all. Have you ever had a loved one die of cancer, or some other slow disease? It's not something that's easy to accept.
I would rather eliminate all the wrong in the world then to live with it thinking it was done for some higher purpose. I can certainly find comfort in thinking that the lost of a love one will live on or died for some greater purpose but there are so many various flaws in that way of thinking: the aspect of life and death is controlled and thus does not need to exist (a being can control reality and choose to establish one in which death is inescapable) and the purpose may not be great (E.G. a little girl could die by a drunk driver so that driver could realize he needs to stop drinking, it happens a lot and most people die in a way that most wouldn't consider a "great" destiny). To feel a sense of retribution is nice but to reduce the aspect of death to mere puppetry is horrifying if not the WORST thing that can happen to humanity.
Ask an Atheist - FenixR - 2011-05-13
NoJobNoRules Wrote:I don't look at being Agnostic and being Atheist as the same thing. I usually "classify" myself as not religious, but also go along with being Agnostic - not having an opinion one way or the other about an existence of a god.
Atheism is "There is no god." So I believe there is a clear difference between them.
That rules me out of being a Atheist then. I don't really believe that there exist these so called "Gods" but i can't rule out the influence these "Imaginary beings", as i call them, have on people. I respect each and every religion, but i don't practice any of these at most i read about them and their history.
I always thought that a "God" is as real as you want it to be, and how many people believes this may also influence on how real it seems a "god" is.
Ask an Atheist - Flonne - 2011-05-13
As someone who believes in but does not support the "divine" entity, I would like to know why atheists believe there is no higher power, but not based on the premise of "everything had to come from somewhere", rather, on the premise that, without a puppet master of sorts, how could our luck as a species be so atrociously bad for this long. War after war after natural disaster after war after genocide for our entire existence with almost zero peacetime when compared to time of chaos and strife. And, if it is all simply our doing, how could such a vastly imperfect race as our own coalesce from single celled organisms; the fact that we were even created to be so pugilistic is incredibly improbable unless a hand were forcing it.
Not attacking your point of view, just curious how you would explain it in terms of there being no god, is all.
Ask an Atheist - Erebus - 2011-05-13
Flonne Wrote:As someone who believes in but does not support the "divine" entity, I would like to know why atheists believe there is no higher power, but not based on the premise of "everything had to come from somewhere", rather, on the premise that, without a puppet master of sorts, how could our luck as a species be so atrociously bad for this long. War after war after natural disaster after war after genocide for our entire existence with almost zero peacetime when compared to time of chaos and strife. And, if it is all simply our doing, how could such a vastly imperfect race as our own coalesce from single celled organisms; the fact that we were even created to be so pugilistic is incredibly improbable unless a hand were forcing it.
Not attacking your point of view, just curious how you would explain it in terms of there being no god, is all.
You seem to have the mindset that humans are naturally divine (or rather naturally good). We're not really all that different from animals we're just better at manipulating our environment, we are neither good nor evil, that's just a label we use to make things less complicated, an example being do you think a lion is evil for eating an animal or even a baby animal or is it just a means of survival? We have nothing to base anything from we have no examples to lead us or guide us we have to make up the rules as we grow as a species and as a community. It's always hard being the first of anything especially when you have to define the world. I think the fact that we are so imperfect somewhat strengthens the argument that we came form such a weak background, if we came from the divine then the divine REALLY pineappleed up.
Though that's more philosophy.
Ask an Atheist - 2147483647 - 2011-05-13
I like Dirac's view of God.
Ask an Atheist - Flonne - 2011-05-13
Erebus Wrote:You seem to have the mindset that humans are naturally divine (or rather naturally good). I think the fact that we are so imperfect somewhat strengthens the argument that we came form such a weak background, if we came from the divine then the divine REALLY pineappleed up.
You completely mistook what I was saying, it seems. Humans are naturally corrupt, due to the fact that we were created that way, so that we would be more entertaining to watch/manipulate. The divine entity is, in my view, the ultimate antagonist in the hierarcy of the universe.
Ask an Atheist - MetaSeraphim - 2011-05-13
Erebus Wrote:if we came from the divine then the divine REALLY pineappleed up.
That is a flawed way to think about it. A creator would have obviously created perfect beings first, found them to be boring, killed them all, and then restarted. And then restarted, and then restarted until finding a right balance of non-perfect and perfect. Are we that perfect balance? Or just another experiment?
Flonne Wrote:The divine entity is, in my view, the ultimate antagonist in the hierarcy of the universe.
I find this to be flawed as well because human terminology is horrible.
Anyway, to be honest I find this thread to be nothing but a big circle jerk since most members outspoken members on Southperry have said they're Atheist.
Ask an Atheist - Flonne - 2011-05-13
MetaSeraphim Wrote:I find this to be flawed as well because human terminology is horrible.
It is flawed, but you think of a better term for it? Well, I take that back, you are not me so you don't know the actual depth of the feeling I have about the situation, so I guess I would have to come up with that term myself...
I have already thought about the fact that humans cannot grasp things on an omnidimensional level, but even still, I cannot see any merits to anything about us in any dimension we can currently understand. We are made to advance exponentially fast, then tear ourselves down and start over seemingly from scratch every few thousand years, leading to an endless cycle of wasted time and zero learning from past mistakes. "Testing" us for this long is no longer testing, it is torturing us without reason. If god is indeed omnipotent, that means it would fully understand how we feel at a level based on our own viewpoints, which means that god is knowingly putting us through endless hardship. When I was younger, I simply thought god created the universe and, like all great artists, left and started a new one, but the more I look at historical trends, the more I see that god is a sadistic beast more akin to a demon, and has in fact been here the whole time directly influencing us every step of the way down a path of endless violence and corruption. Perhaps this is not true and we were simply designed to be able to sustain this behavior even without direct influence, but that doesn't change the fact that we were designed this way specifically for the reason of torturing ourselves for gods own amusement.
Ask an Atheist - Erebus - 2011-05-13
MetaSeraphim Wrote:That is a flawed way to think about it. A creator would have obviously created perfect beings first, found them to be boring, killed them all, and then restarted. And then restarted, and then restarted until finding a right balance of non-perfect and perfect. Are we that perfect balance? Or just another experiment?
So you define god to be imperfect? If not then your argument fails. If so then I'd have to ask what's that's based from.
@above
I'm curious, why would an omnipotent being require entertainment, let alone entertainment he already knows the outcome to? You grant god human characteristics and I'm curious as to why.
Ask an Atheist - MetaSeraphim - 2011-05-13
Flonne Wrote:you don't know the actual depth of the feeling I have about the situation
I wouldn't be so quick to say that.
Flonne Wrote:I have already thought about the fact that humans cannot grasp things on an omnidimensional level
You're somebody I could play with. But this thread is Ask an Atheist, not a debate about a Divine Entity, so I'll save it for another time.
To keep on topic. This question is for Satellite only, but any others are free to comment.
Do you truly believe that the answers humans come up with are 100% correct? And just to state this isn't about God existing or not, this is in general. Every single answer humans have provided to questions over the time they have been on this Earth, do you truly believe these to be unbreakable facts?
Erebus Wrote:So you define god to be imperfect? If not then your argument fails. If so then I'd have to ask what's that's based from.
Just because God recreates and recreates doesn't make him imperfect, it doesn't make him perfect either. A perfect entity can make an imperfect creation. To believe otherwise is to be too far gone into how humans define things. To argue there is a creator you must first abandon the fact that it can be defined by human understanding.
A being above us wouldn't be explained by human means.
Ask an Atheist - Erebus - 2011-05-13
MetaSeraphim Wrote:Just because God recreates and recreates doesn't make him imperfect, it doesn't make him perfect either. A perfect entity can make an imperfect creation. To believe otherwise is to be too far gone into how humans define things. To argue there is a creator you must first abandon the fact that it can be defined by human understanding.
A being above us wouldn't be explained by human means.
Ah but you do so. You have defined that that something beyond humans can do something outside of humans. It's impossible to define god because we are limited to human concepts even saying he isn't limited to humans concepts is in itself a human concept. Nearly every aspect of god has been defined by humanity as a great being, "god" may in fact be an event, a being who temporarily transcended our plain of existence or the, or the concept of looped universes with no start or end. You say yourself you can't limit god to human concepts but you yourself limit the universe itself as being the product of god who is in fact the creation of human concepts.