Why you believe what you believe I

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Starr Polish

How can we know that Brownjenkins actually exists?

she figured me out!!

i actually am a brain in a vat

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

IMO, philosophy used correctly is a great thing. Philosophy that just says, "How do we know everything is not just an illusion?" just doesn't cut it for me. It doesn't put bread on the table or ease suffering or increase beauty or show love. I think the correct answer to that question is, "Well, I don't know - but I'm going to act like we are NOT brains in a vat. If we are indeed brains in a vat, it certainly wouldn't hurt to act like we're not. If we are NOT brains in a vat, it would CERTAINLY hurt to act like we ARE. So the best choice, given that we'll never know for sure, seems to be to act like we are NOT brains in a vat. End of answer - let's go out there and do good!"

EXACTLY!!!

and this kind of logic is exactly why i do not put much thought into the existance of god... it doesn't put bread on my table, make me happy, or help the world around me... i do good for it's own sake, because it is good for society and humanity as a whole, which is ultimately good for me

i can't answer the unknowns of whether i exist, or whether god exists... so i leave them out of the equation and look at the here and now... what work's, what doesn't work... or, more importantly, what use to work but doesn't quite work so well anymore due to changes in society, technology, etc.

[Ragnarok]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

More thoughts from my vat ...

IMO, philosophy used correctly is a great thing. Philosophy that just says, "How do we know everything is not just an illusion?" just doesn't cut it for me. It doesn't put bread on the table or ease suffering or increase beauty or show love. I think the correct answer to that question is, "Well, I don't know - but I'm going to act like we are NOT brains in a vat. If we are indeed brains in a vat, it certainly wouldn't hurt to act like we're not. If we are NOT brains in a vat, it would CERTAINLY hurt to act like we ARE. So the best choice, given that we'll never know for sure, seems to be to act like we are NOT brains in a vat. End of answer - let's go out there and do good!"

That is exactly how I feel, I'm an atheist an after some thought I have came to a conclusion or guideline on which to base my actions and live my life... it is based on three principles...

The three principles are, truth, love and courage; and that from truth arises honesty, and from love arises compassion; and from courage rises valor; and that truth comingled with love gives rise to justice; and love comingled with courage gives rise to sacrifice; and courage comingled with truth gives rise to honor. And truth, love and courage all united creates spirituality; and the absence of all three principals leads to the vile of pride, which leads us to humility.

I'll sum this post up with a quote..

If I were not an atheist, I would believe in a God who would choose to save people on the basis of the totality of their lives and not the pattern of their words. I think he would prefer an honest and righteous atheist to a TV preacher whose every word is God, God, God, and whose every deed is foul, foul, foul. ~ Isaac Asimov

[Starr Polish]

Rian, that was mostly tongue-in-cheek. I really liked my philosophy class, and I had a lot of stuff thrown at me that I'd never seen before (huzzah for being one of FOUR freshman in this class...not a good idea) all at once. Yay for "intro" classes that try to cover such a complex topic.

It's easier to imagine "brain in a vat" if you think about the movie The Matrix...at least, that's how the prof explained it to us.

Inked, I was actually referring to some Cartesian philosophy there. We never went over that Socratic/Platonic story...only the convo with Euthyphro and Socrates.

Believing in God, or a certain religion, doesn't necessarily make people happy or put bread on the table, Rian. I think pursuing both religion/spirituality and philosophy are great aspects of human nature, but not necessary. I know plenty of people who have no God or spirituality who have done more for society and mankind than the hardcore fundamentalist church I attended in high school.

[inked]

Yes, the problem of epistemology, as it is properly called, IIRC.

And no doubt your observation may well be true, but does one generalize from the specific to the general or vice versa?

And, if the thought process is correct from your local congregational experiences, how long do you predict it will likewise be true of those atheists or agnostics who currently seem so much better?

[Rían]

Originally Posted by brownie

and this kind of logic is exactly why i do not put much thought into the existance of god... it doesn't put bread on my table, make me happy, or help the world around me...

Lots of thoughts pop up here ...

First of all, do you think it's good to find out as much truth as possible? IOW, if you want to accomplish something, such as pick up a friend at the airport, and someone tells you, "You can use my car - the keys are hanging by the back door. He's coming into the Ontario airport today at 3:20." - would you prefer to know that the keys are on the bedside table and he's coming into Burbank airport tomorrow at 8:05? Of course you would!

Another situation - even if the truth might be unpleasant, isn't it better to know the truth? If you were a doctor, and you examined a close friend and found that he had a form of cancer that was fatal unless treated, would you hold the truth back from him, just because it's unpleasant? Would you think, "Well, if I don't tell him the truth, then it will take about a year until the signs of cancer become glaringly obvious, and it will be too late to treat him by then, but at least he had a year where he didn't know he had cancer!" I don't think you would.

My point is that I think knowing the truth is a good and important thing, and more importantly - it lets you deal more accurately and effectively with life.

If you agree with this, then the question of God's existence is suddenly shown to be quite important. If God, as described in the Bible, exists, then don't you think that is a fairly important truth, especially considering that He claims that seeking and knowing Him changes your heart for the better and actually enables you to love others more? Since your goal is to do good and love others, wouldn't it be worthwhile to seriously investigate a valid claim (I'm not talking Jim Jones and Koolaid here) that claims to drastically increase your love for others and your capacity to do good for others?

Now you can look at individual Christians and spot the ones that are pretty messed up. And I can do the same with atheists and agnostics Christianity doesn't claim that its followers are perfect, or even near perfect; it claims that its followers improve, substantially and permanantly, from what they were, as they draw close to the God that made them and loves them.

And I can tell you, from first-hand experience, that that is SO true - so true - marvellously and wonderfully true. I was probably the second most selfish person on the planet (one of my brothers-in-law edged me out for first place) before I became a Christian. I can't even begin to describe the magnitude of the change that has taken place as I have drawn closer to the One who is Love (the Bible claims not only that God is loving, but that He is love). Our family puts a lot of time and money into helping the needy, and we do it out of love and because we want to, not out of some idea of reward in the hereafter. If you seriously look at worldviews and their accomplishments in the area of helping those in need, I think you would probably have to agree that Christian-based organizations have the best track record. Not that Christians are perfect - often those who become Christians are what we would consider "terrible" people, because they can see their need of a Savior easily than those who look good on the outside. But I think overall that Christianity has the best track record for helping the poor and needy; would you agree?

So given those thoughts, and given your goal of doing good and helping others, has the question of whether or not God exists has taken on any more importance for you, given the claim (which I can attest to first-hand) that knowing God empowers and enables you to love and do more good?

[Rían]

WOW! Three posts while I was typing in my response to brownie!

Originally Posted by Ragnarok

That is exactly how I feel, I'm an atheist an after some thought I have came to a conclusion or guideline on which to base my actions and live my life... it is based on three principles...

The three principles are, truth, love and courage;

Those are good things to seek, Ragnarok - keep at it!

If I were not an atheist, I would believe in a God who would choose to save people on the basis of the totality of their lives and not the pattern of their words. I think he would prefer an honest and righteous atheist to a TV preacher whose every word is God, God, God, and whose every deed is foul, foul, foul. ~ Isaac Asimov

Are you claiming that Christianity saves people based on the "pattern of their words"? Do you think God prefers a TV preacher "whose every word is God, God, God, and whose every deed is foul, foul, foul."? If so, you don't understand the Bible, IMO Can you provide references for those opinions?

To kill of the second misconception, here's a ref (Jesus speaking) : "Not every one who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven." (Matthew 7:21) (and God's will is clearly NOT doing foul things)

As far as the first, are you saying that if someone says some magic words, that they'll be "saved"?

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Starr Polish

Rian, that was mostly tongue-in-cheek.

Yes, I thought it was, but I thought it was not entirely tongue-in-cheek, and anything that tends to make people apathetic (which that does, IMO) really galls me. I probably over-reacted to it - I'm sorry if I offended you. There's just so much pain and hurt in the world, and to have anyone seriously think that might be true, and stop trying to help themselves and help others because it might all be useless or worse, just about kills me, and I have to speak out against it. For you, it was mostly tongue-in-cheek; there might be someone lurking in this thread to whom it is a new thought, and they would be inexperienced in thinking things like this thru (as in, "if that's true, what are the implications in my life?"), and who would be seriously harmed by that thought.

It's easier to imagine "brain in a vat" if you think about the movie The Matrix...at least, that's how the prof explained it to us.

Yes, I've seen that ... movie And again, so what if it's true? If it IS true, then why bother with anything? But if it is NOT true, then it's terribly harmful to not bother with anything. So since we can't tell, why not just be safe and assume it's not true.

Believing in God, or a certain religion, doesn't necessarily make people happy or put bread on the table, Rian.

I disagree IMO, and from personal experience, and from first-hand experience with a Christian aid organization that is fabulous, I disagree with you It won't put bread on EVERY table, or make EVERYONE happy, but it does a GREAT deal of good and helps immensely towards those things, IMO.

I know plenty of people who have no God or spirituality who have done more for society and mankind than the hardcore fundamentalist church I attended in high school.

See my post to brownie. I agree that there are many atheists and agnostics that are kinder than many Christians. That's not the point. Christianity takes anyone - ANYONE - where they ARE (typically, if they're in a bad place, it's thru VERY little fault of their own and a LOT of fault from parents and those around them) and starts the healing process in their hearts, and a natural outcome of this is increased love and good towards others. It's just that some Christians have a long way to go from their starting point.

I hate hardcore fundamentalist churches (altho I don't hate hardcore fundamentalists, I only feel tremendously sorry for them, and angry with them if they harm others) - IMO, they do more damage than good.

[Ragnarok]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

WOW! Three posts while I was typing in my response to brownie!

Those are good things to seek, Ragnarok - keep at it!

Are you claiming that Christianity saves people based on the "pattern of their words"? Do you think God prefers a TV preacher "whose every word is God, God, God, and whose every deed is foul, foul, foul."? If so, you don't understand the Bible, IMO Can you provide references for those opinions?

To kill of the second misconception, here's a ref (Jesus speaking) : "Not every one who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven." (Matthew 7:21) (and God's will is clearly NOT doing foul things)

As far as the first, are you saying that if someone says some magic words, that they'll be "saved"?

I'm not claiming anything, the quote was by Isaac Asimov. I'm not saying what Christianity is or isn't. Mr. Asimov said, "I would believe in a God who would choose to save people on the basis of the totality of their lives and not the pattern of their words.

[Rían]

Why did you put up the quote, then? Do you agree with it, or not?

And as I pointed out, Mr. Asimov may freely believe in the God described in the Bible, because He is not that way.

[Starr Polish]

Originally Posted by inked

Yes, the problem of epistemology, as it is properly called, IIRC.

And no doubt your observation may well be true, but does one generalize from the specific to the general or vice versa?

And, if the thought process is correct from your local congregational experiences, how long do you predict it will likewise be true of those atheists or agnostics who currently seem so much better?

Did I ever say all agnostics/atheist are like this? For every good person, no matter what religion or lack thereof I know, I know two more who are hypocritical, selfish, greedy, etc.

I never said that all atheists and agnostics are better than Christians. I know of great, TRUE Christians out there as well, and appreciate what they do for the world, and I hope to someday be able and willing to help society this way, regardless of my spirituality (which is and has nearly always been incredibly fluid). And I believe many Christians, whether or not they are contributing good things to society, have good hearts...they may just go about things the wrong way.

I am actually quite cynical overall, and don't see a lot of good in the majority of the world's population. When I do see it it makes me very happy, regardless of the person's beliefs.

[Starr Polish]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Yes, I thought it was, but I thought it was not entirely tongue-in-cheek, and anything that tends to make people apathetic (which that does, IMO) really galls me. I probably over-reacted to it - I'm sorry if I offended you. There's just so much pain and hurt in the world, and to have anyone seriously think that might be true, and stop trying to help themselves and help others because it might all be useless or worse, just about kills me, and I have to speak out against it. For you, it was mostly tongue-in-cheek; there might be someone lurking in this thread to whom it is a new thought, and they would be inexperienced in thinking things like this thru (as in, "if that's true, what are the implications in my life?"), and who would be seriously harmed by that thought.

I wasn't offended, just wanted to show that I wasn't trying to hurt anyone, and I think it's kind of farfetched myself.

Who says that thinking such things would create apathy? Perhaps, if someone does believe this, they will attempt to discover a way to understand WHY they are a brain in a vat, etc, etc. Even if all of our experiences are fabricated, who's to say we shouldn't enjoy them? If they seem real to us, we should embrace it, even though this may be false.

Yes, I've seen that ... movie And again, so what if it's true? If it IS true, then why bother with anything? But if it is NOT true, then it's terribly harmful to not bother with anything. So since we can't tell, why not just be safe and assume it's not true.

Like I said before, even if our experiences are fabricated, if we can find real beauty in the fabricated world, life is still worth living.

I disagree IMO, and from personal experience, and from first-hand experience with a Christian aid organization that is fabulous, I disagree with you It won't put bread on EVERY table, or make EVERYONE happy, but it does a GREAT deal of good and helps immensely towards those things, IMO.

I'm not saying it doesn't make some people happy or do good...but many people do plenty well wihtout spirituality, and they are not depressed nor do they feel lost.


See my post to brownie. I agree that there are many atheists and agnostics that are kinder than many Christians. That's not the point. Christianity takes anyone - ANYONE - where they ARE (typically, if they're in a bad place, it's thru VERY little fault of their own and a LOT of fault from parents and those around them) and starts the healing process in their hearts, and a natural outcome of this is increased love and good towards others. It's just that some Christians have a long way to go from their starting point.

I hate hardcore fundamentalist churches (altho I don't hate hardcore fundamentalists, I only feel tremendously sorry for them, and angry with them if they harm others) - IMO, they do more damage than good.[/QUOTE]

[Ragnarok]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Why did you put up the quote, then? Do you agree with it, or not?

And as I pointed out, Mr. Asimov may freely believe in the God described in the Bible, because He is not that way.

To sum up Mr. Asimov's quote he is saying that if he did believe in a God, it would be a God who would prefer a honest and righteous atheist over a hypocritical christian. Believe me, there are alot of people who call themselves Christians but do not follow the examples of how Christ wanted them to lives their lives, which would be the reference to the preacher in his quote.


Heres a question for you, suppose that your God does exist and there is in fact a heaven and hell would an atheist who lived a honest and righteous life, would he go to hell?

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

just reading through the last page, i notice a few disturbing things.
it is true religion does not make you happy directly
religion is a sense of feeling, that is all - humankind has always filled gaps in knowledge with myth and religion.

I am currently reading the Stargate novel, and Ra states that the way to hold control over people is by three things
Myth, Religion and Habit
if you can govern these, you can rule the people,
and it got me thinking how much of a universal truth it is
until these can be broken away, humankind can not be truly free, or is that just the neo-socialist in me talking?

[Starr Polish]

Human beings can never be free. We are prisoners of our own genetic makeup and influences (in essence, nature and nurture).

Or maybe that's just the psychologist student in me.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

psychology, eh?
i am quite sure that sociology is the superior of the two, you merely challenge science, whilst i challenge everything, life, but most importantly existence, morality etc

[Starr Polish]

Ohoho! You do, now, do you? I find little difference in the two studies. Sociology focuses on the group while psychology focuses on the individual.

And what do you mean, question science? I'm confused by your idea of psychology.

(perhaps we should continue this in PMs )

[inked]

Alas, that I should live to see this day! Entmooters, ostensible Tolkien fans, who are iron-clad determinists succling on the discredited theories of Marx and psychology and sociology! Have you not read, have you not known, have you not understood? Yea, sayeth Tolkien, Man is free to choose and CHOICES COUNT!

LCoU - under the mistaken notion that religion is to make one happy as a general proposition! And swallowing whole heartedly the notion that freedom exists in absence of restraint rather than achieving one's Eru appointed tasks?!

Star Polish - caught in the tangled web of determinism that denies the efficacy of choice. Swallowing whole heartedly the inescapable fetters of genetics, nature and nurture whilst denying the creativity of tranformation in the person and the family and the society!?


I am distraught! Read Tolkien again!!!

[Ragnarok]

Originally Posted by Starr Polish

Ohoho! You do, now, do you? I find little difference in the two studies. Sociology focuses on the group while psychology focuses on the individual.

And what do you mean, question science? I'm confused by your idea of psychology.

(perhaps we should continue this in PMs )

I think there are distinct differences between sociology and psychology besides the obvious group vs. individual, theres a reason why they are considered seperate studies.

[Ragnarok]

Originally Posted by Starr Polish

Human beings can never be free. We are prisoners of our own genetic makeup and influences (in essence, nature and nurture).

Or maybe that's just the psychologist student in me.

I think Victor E. Frankl would disagree...

We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms -- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way. ~ Victor E. Frankl