Then you have no reference point to even begin to discuss the subject intelligently. You have to establish your criteria before you can prove or disprove anything.
Why do people still believe in gods?
- Thread starter Vladimir1984
- Start date
-
- Tags
- gods
Joined Jan 2010
4,338 Posts | 19+
North Georgia
I stated my criteria #625 as a starting point. My question was what would then constitute evidence? You may also suggest other criteria.
Last edited:
Let's give credit to the Europeans who did that the last time, overdue that we are for another period like that, yes they were running off earlier Greeks and Romans who had done the same but they advanced on those discoveries, they didn't just re-use them. It may be just me but I don't believe that those Greeks and Romans who discovered what they did, would have believed in Zeus or Jupiter.
Joined Oct 2011
3,937 Posts | 76+
Korea
People have always had the freedom to think for themselves. After all, it's not as if ancient man had brain-scanning thought interpreters or the like. No, the difference between the past and the present in this regard is not one of freedom, it is one of entitlement. Man has always been free to think as he pleased, but now we are expected to politely listen to those thoughts and refrain from judging or criticizing them. He has a "right to an opinion," which would be fine if it were accompanied by a "responsibility to pursue truth," but it is not. The national dialogue on everything -- but most especially matters like religion -- becomes driven purely by subjective opinion. It's like taking some sort of Internet-esque "like" button and making an epistemological theory out of it!
In my circle of friends, relatives and coworkers there is not one who is an atheist because they are following a trend. Most don't see any evidene for the truth of religion and are therefore apathetic towards it. Some are just not sure, but are willing to take the word of intellectuals like Sam Harris.
Though i was brought up in a religious family that attended church regularly, i was never a believer. Don't see the evidence or the need.
Though i was brought up in a religious family that attended church regularly, i was never a believer. Don't see the evidence or the need.
Joined Oct 2011
3,937 Posts | 76+
Korea
"Taking the word" of fashionable pseudo-celebrities like Sam Harris is definitely following a trend.
Joined Jan 2010
4,338 Posts | 19+
North Georgia
oh, you mean the interconnecting energy force that we can neither define nor detect. you've set your parameters so broad and innocuous that they have no practical value, at all.
Joined Sep 2012
10,148 Posts | 703+
India
n
What is the significance the " Big Bang " ? What was there before the Big Bang ? What exploded and into what space did it explode ? Was Space there before the Big Bang and the what was that Space occupying ? Who created that Space and who created the stuff which went boom-boom ( sorry there ! soundless boom-boom if you will accept that because there was not any air to carry any sound at the time of Big Bang ) ? The Cosmologists have " devised " that Time will start from the instance of the " Big Bang ". According to these scientists , there was no such thing as Time before the Big Bang !!! Highly convenient dodgy attempt to hide massive ignorance about the origins of the Universe.
What is the significance the " Big Bang " ? What was there before the Big Bang ? What exploded and into what space did it explode ? Was Space there before the Big Bang and the what was that Space occupying ? Who created that Space and who created the stuff which went boom-boom ( sorry there ! soundless boom-boom if you will accept that because there was not any air to carry any sound at the time of Big Bang ) ? The Cosmologists have " devised " that Time will start from the instance of the " Big Bang ". According to these scientists , there was no such thing as Time before the Big Bang !!! Highly convenient dodgy attempt to hide massive ignorance about the origins of the Universe.
Joined Aug 2010
6,752 Posts | 17+
The Far East
for the past few days i have been lıvıng wıth a group of muslum collage students ın Trabzon, Turkey, ı was travelıng and i met one of them onlıne who invıted me to stay wıth them for my stay.
They are all very relıgıous and regularly pray and attend meetıngs wıth other devotees and are also very acceptıng of my athısem (ı prefer to say ı'm agnostıc but they coudlen't understand my meanıng). İ wıll say that ıt ıs an ınterestıng culture experence. the guy who ınvıted me gave me some translated prayer booklets ıf ı wıshed to understand theır belıefs more. from that perspectıve ıt ıs ınterestıng to see and understand theır lıfe outlook. they all have full faıth ın an afterlıfe and that thıs lıfe ıs just a test for the real thıng. ı can even feel a great ınner peace ın all of them and harmoney ın lıfe and how the world ıs.
i stıll hold to my pragmatıc vıew of the world and ı have leaned enough ın physıcs and cosmology for thıs vıew to not be shaken. sometımes ı wısh ı could open theır eyes more to the wonders of what we do know about the unıverse yet ı don't thınk ıt would do any good, the world for them ıs already ıncredıble and ı can see anyway that theır fath ıs what lends purpose to theır lıves, takıng that away would do no good and ı thınk leave them feelıng very lost.
They are certınly not arrogent ın theır belıefes, they are acceptıng of other faths and open as well to other studys, many of them are studıeıng ın engıneerıng and other scıences. ı guess what ı can say ı have learned from my tıme wıth them ıs that everyone has theır own vıew on what lıfe and the world ıs. on a bare level were not really that dıfferent ın our outlook, what they would call God ı call Nature but we can both admıre it's wonder whatever we call ıt. for these and many other people theır fath ıs what gıves purpose to their lıves and we all need a purpose. perhaps that's really all relıgıon ever ıs somethıng to gıve purpose to people's lives, somethıng we all need yet not always fınd.
They are all very relıgıous and regularly pray and attend meetıngs wıth other devotees and are also very acceptıng of my athısem (ı prefer to say ı'm agnostıc but they coudlen't understand my meanıng). İ wıll say that ıt ıs an ınterestıng culture experence. the guy who ınvıted me gave me some translated prayer booklets ıf ı wıshed to understand theır belıefs more. from that perspectıve ıt ıs ınterestıng to see and understand theır lıfe outlook. they all have full faıth ın an afterlıfe and that thıs lıfe ıs just a test for the real thıng. ı can even feel a great ınner peace ın all of them and harmoney ın lıfe and how the world ıs.
i stıll hold to my pragmatıc vıew of the world and ı have leaned enough ın physıcs and cosmology for thıs vıew to not be shaken. sometımes ı wısh ı could open theır eyes more to the wonders of what we do know about the unıverse yet ı don't thınk ıt would do any good, the world for them ıs already ıncredıble and ı can see anyway that theır fath ıs what lends purpose to theır lıves, takıng that away would do no good and ı thınk leave them feelıng very lost.
They are certınly not arrogent ın theır belıefes, they are acceptıng of other faths and open as well to other studys, many of them are studıeıng ın engıneerıng and other scıences. ı guess what ı can say ı have learned from my tıme wıth them ıs that everyone has theır own vıew on what lıfe and the world ıs. on a bare level were not really that dıfferent ın our outlook, what they would call God ı call Nature but we can both admıre it's wonder whatever we call ıt. for these and many other people theır fath ıs what gıves purpose to their lıves and we all need a purpose. perhaps that's really all relıgıon ever ıs somethıng to gıve purpose to people's lives, somethıng we all need yet not always fınd.
Joined Aug 2010
6,752 Posts | 17+
The Far East
Last edited:
science dose not claim to know everthıng, ındeed ıf ıt dıd then it would stop. there are many thıngs out there that are beyond our experence so ıt ıs very dıffıcult to understand them (such as Quantum Physıcs). the best we can do is postulate on some thıngs yet ı fınd that wonderful, i feel thıngs are far more ınteresting when we don't fully understand thıngs rather then the rosy picture of thıngs that relıgıon presents whıch ın my vıew ıs not satısfactory enough to my ınquısıtıve mınd.
ıf you have the tıme thıs documantary ıs truley wonderful and tells much of what we know whıle leavıng much wonder for what we don't know. the second vıdeo ıs nıce and short may be of ınterest to you on your quıstıons of the bıg bang.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tptgwvNmFTM"]Into The Universe With Stephen Hawking - The Story of Everything - YouTube[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uabNtlLfYyU"]What Caused the Big Bang? - YouTube[/ame]
(bonus video) ıf you stıll hold to a vıew of god then at least have a humble vıew of everythıng we are not as specıal as relıgıon makes us out to be, we have reason for humility.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PN5JJDh78I"]Carl Sagan - You Are Here (Pale Blue Dot) [Sagan Time] - YouTube[/ame]
I think it's both obious and natural that people believe in gods, although I personally am an atheist.
Joined Sep 2012
10,148 Posts | 703+
India
Last edited:
My point is that if Science admits that there are vast areas of ignorance about the Universe then why is it intruding on Metaphysics which is not its area, or for that matter simpler sector of human behaviour like Faith ? Why does Science ridicule and is contemptuous of humans who believe in God ? Yes, any number of people here on Earth have experienced the presence of God or Ultimate Reality or Brahman, whatever you may choose to call it ? Many thousands if not hundreds of thousands have experienced para-normal occurrences / events which have continued to defy scientific theories--which experiences indicate a world beyond our world, a Reality not knowable of our five senses .
It is a child's play to ridicule this or that book of Religion and hold past malpractices of believers as the proof of the absence of God but that is not consistent with the aims and objectives of science and scientists which is basically to explain ( if not to know ) the Reality as is perceived by our senses and to harness that knowledge for the betterment of Man. Nothing more. Even the explanations by Science of the Reality around us involves modelling and approximations. So why claim the Crown of the Knowledge of Everything--jusy look at some posts here in this thread. Are they not arrogant?
Joined Mar 2008
9,993 Posts | 7+
Damned England
Good posts, Fox and Irish Crusader.
Those who don't feel the need for religion mustn't think very much. Look around you: can you really have faith in mankind? I damned well can't.
As I have said, I go out early into the countryside, and I am something of an expert on the subject of nature. I see its patterns, beauty, cruelty and yet nothing about it is random. It is unbelievably complex, rich and far, far removed from human society. At times like that, I could almost catch a dose of religion. But it is mankind's presence that stops me. I find it hard to take humanity seriously.
There's a need for explanation within most of us, and science is (a) very fallible (b) often dictated by exterior forces and trends and MONEY and (c) usually gives unsatisfying answers (42?). It may even be correct at times, in the same way as not drinking, not eating anything but fruit and lettuce and other self denials are "right". Science is often too sure of itself. It may be right but is deeply human and therefore flawed and unsatisfying. That is why some need God.
Atheism is so widespread now simply because it is like these pseudo religions that apparently allow adherents to do exactly as they please. It asks nothing of its adherents. Perfect for a consumer society. I don't see that as an accident.
Those who don't feel the need for religion mustn't think very much. Look around you: can you really have faith in mankind? I damned well can't.
As I have said, I go out early into the countryside, and I am something of an expert on the subject of nature. I see its patterns, beauty, cruelty and yet nothing about it is random. It is unbelievably complex, rich and far, far removed from human society. At times like that, I could almost catch a dose of religion. But it is mankind's presence that stops me. I find it hard to take humanity seriously.
There's a need for explanation within most of us, and science is (a) very fallible (b) often dictated by exterior forces and trends and MONEY and (c) usually gives unsatisfying answers (42?). It may even be correct at times, in the same way as not drinking, not eating anything but fruit and lettuce and other self denials are "right". Science is often too sure of itself. It may be right but is deeply human and therefore flawed and unsatisfying. That is why some need God.
Atheism is so widespread now simply because it is like these pseudo religions that apparently allow adherents to do exactly as they please. It asks nothing of its adherents. Perfect for a consumer society. I don't see that as an accident.
Joined Sep 2012
10,148 Posts | 703+
India
I see your point reg. the Consumer Society turning into a majority of atheists. That is very true. Science buttresses the consumerist tendency of humans. There is the primary motive of enjoying better and better things even at the cost of degradation of our planet and also at the cost of fellow humans. Science furnishes Man with all the means to enjoy and having no concern or jurisdiction in the moral spheres can easily make people into insensitive and greedy persons willing to justify consumption on account having no accountability. That was the precise point Voltaire was making when he stated in A,B,C that " I want to believe in God so that my lawyer, my tailor and my wife will not cheat me ".
BlackDog I see religion as existing because of elites making something up for the plebs that will keep them compliant in the elites interests. So although I take your point that money can be a corrupting influence on science I think it's more of a corrupting father of religion. And I see climate science denial as a potential peek into the methods used.
Joined Dec 2011
8,206 Posts | 14+
Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk.
I would say the opposite. Religion is for those who can't think for themselves. And as religion is a creation of man, can you then have faith in that either.
I agree with you there, that last sentence especially. But I see religion, especially western ones, as being one of the problems when it comes to nature. Its the western religions that put man above nature. I have more respect for the religions of the peoples who live in places like the Amazon.
I would hardly say Atheism is wide spread. Less than 20% of the worlds population don't associate themselves with an organised religion, and some of those believe in god.
Have we really become more of a consumer society, or do we just have more access to more 'stuff'. Was there less greed when religion was more wide spread.
I do find it amusing that you are associating Atheism with an increase in the consumer society, something we would associate with Capitalism when the only modern governments that have tried to ban religion were socialist ones.
I am confused by your posts though. You clearly don't believe, but you don't seem to have much love for Atheists.
Joined Mar 2008
9,993 Posts | 7+
Damned England
- Bish
Well mate, I don't have much faith in that, either
"Religion" isn't the same thing as a need for a non-human omnipresent being or reason for everything. We'd all like to think that there's a reason for all this, that it's not just meaningless accidents. I agree that most organised (western) religion holds its dogma so closely that it is tantamount to unthinking obedience to be a believer, but that is not what the original Church wanted nor is it what Christ apparently wanted. Christ apparently spent much of his time attacking such things. Atheism, as opposed to religious apathy or agnosticism, is far more widespread and whilst most Atheists in the recent past saw religion or God as simply an absence (something that doesn't exist and therefore there's no point railing at it than shouting that the fairies under the bridge don't exist), nowadays many rave on about it and attempt to pass it off as demanding a secular society. Which we already have, apart from a few small symbols. One has to question their motives, and believe me, they are rarely noble or humanitarian or even moral. I've argued with many, and haven't found one yet who (a) didn't have ulterior motives (which they finally admit) and (b) didn't call me a bastard
An example would be the militant atheist who threw a cross from the local church into a lake, even though most of the other villagers either wanted it or weren't concerned by it. The moron concerned is elderly and a retired lawyer. He's guilty of exactly the same "you must do it my way" attitude he accuses the Church of.
The atheist/consumer society thing is easy. Those who want us to be consumers know that in order for this to happen, it is far easier if moral breakdown happens and stupidity reigns. That self gratification becomes the number one goal of everyone. To paraphrase JFK: "ask not what you can do for society, but what society can do for you". This mentality has been increasing for quite some time, and a conscience is a terrible thing to have in this day and age. In order to promote this, morality must be either non-existent, selective or downright ambiguous. For example, it is considered fine to attack the religious or men, but not homosexuality, women or race. It's a very, very selective sort of "tolerance" we're sold.
We're taught that we're "consumers" not "producers" and yet logically, capitalism demands that most of us produce more than we consume. In short, we're lied to. And yes, the Church HAS been complicit in this for centuries, but nevertheless also had a regulating influence, too. No matter the Church's bad points, nevertheless, many of things it taught were beneficial to society in general even if seen as repressive to the individual. Greed, envy, disrespect, lawlessness etc are not good, never will be. But who now is saying so? Not the capitalists. They're trying to make virtues out of these things.
That Socialists tried to ban religion is because of two basic tenets of Socialist belief:
1. Religion (organised religion) was (note past tense!) a tool of the ruling elites. It helped to retain the status quo. It preached sobriety, labour and respect for one's social superiors etc. It was also "the opium of the masses".
2. Religion, like race, can be extremely divisive. This is self evident and probably a side effect of point 1.
I don't agree 100% with what even classic Socialists said, since I view socialism entirely as class war and class strife. Modern socialism, with PC and obsession over middle class issues isn't even worthy of the name. Believe me, I make this very clear on other forums
They call me a bastard, too. I'm glad you're confused by my posts, since that makes two of us. It's a bugger, not believing in one or the other.
Put simply, I don't have much love for humanity in general, ("come back when you have 4 legs and a waggy tail") and this is the sticking point with religion: it is human. Therefore afflicted with all the faults anything else human has. However, I do believe that it is unfairly blamed for wider human faults and find ridiculous the notion that no religion equals no oppression, injustice or war etc.
And, in my view, most atheists are fakes. They have ulterior motives and grudges or they simply don't think/or want to think about the core issues surrounding our existence. As the old blues song went:
"Everybody wants to laugh,
no-one wants to cry.
Everyone wants to go to heaven
But no-one wants to die".
It's the intellectual equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears so you can't hear what you don't want to. I don't believe, can't believe but I can't accept that not believing is satisfying or even the right thing. There must be pills for this?
Joined Sep 2012
10,148 Posts | 703+
India
Surely even Marx did not say that ! Or even if he did describe Religion as the opium of masses, his devoted follower Stalin had to open the churches closed after the Revolution once again for the devotees and start using the Term God with capital G in Pravda when mobilising the people in defence of the motherland at the time of Barbarossa. He did realise-- although in a snide,cynical, contemptuous way -- that Religion unites people in a Noble Way for a Noble Cause that demands sacrifices of everything one can call his/her own including one's life.
Joined Sep 2012
10,148 Posts | 703+
India
In a way you right about thinking and Religion, although I prefer to call it the practice of Spirituality rather than Religion. Spirituality requires that , in order to realise God, you have to dump your ego, you have to give up the idea that you are an intellectual blessed with Occam's Razor in your hand and sundry other tools that decide whether a statement is valid or not ( rather than whether a statement is true or not ). Knowledge of thinking processes and habits of an intellectual will not take you far. You must love Nature as a lover loves his/her love. You must get thrilled when you see the starry sky.You must feel for God and you must build a relation with God in order to understand him/her.
A Guru was listening to various complaints from people when a person told him that he loved his parrot and then the parrot died. Now he feels devastated. The Guru asked him whether he had ever felt the same way for the cockroaches which must be occupying his house and numerous cockroaches must be dying frequently. So did he feel sad for the cockroaches? Of course not, replied the man. The Guru said that because the man had developed a bond with the parrot as" his " parrot he felt bad when the parrot died, there was no bond developed between the roaches and the man, so no sadness. Unless you treat God as your friend, or a Master, or as a Confidante, or as a lover, you will not know God. Relationship rather than Ph.D. earned by getting theses accepted in a peer reviewed journal is what God demands.
More History Discussions
- Locked
- Locked
Trending History Discussions
-
The Great Captains of History - How Many Battles? - Version 7- Started by DiocletianIsBetterThanYou
- Replies: 861
-
-
The Great Captains of History - How Many Battles? - Version 5
- Started by DiocletianIsBetterThanYou
- Replies: 3K
-
The Diversity Of Early African Architecture/Ruins Thread- Started by Kilwa Sultanate
- Replies: 2K
-