A-believerism or A-deism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-04-2013, 06:46 AM
RE: A-believerism or A-deism?
I think the correct way to understand the quote from the original post is that Bertrand ran out of things he believed and reasons to believe them, so he discarded belief in God. It's a pretty common deconversion process, I think, when you were a dedicated believer and delved into questions about why you believed certain things. You start out confident you will find good answers, but it soon becomes clear that even beliefs you really counted as unshakable have no firm foundation. When the last reasons to believe start to fall away you get the urge to peek out from under the covers and just... entertain the idea that the might not actually be a God out there. Once you do you just might find there is no good reason to return to entertaining the idea that there is a God.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-04-2013, 09:44 AM
RE: A-believerism or A-deism?
I'm not sure I get the whole "sun rising" thing as an example of anything.

No, of course we're not absolutely completely 100% positive the sun will rise tomorrow. And science never claims to be 100% positive on anything.
But what reason would the sun not rise tomorrow?

We know why and how the sun "rises", the earth rotates. The amount of energy required to stop the earth's rotation in its tracks would probably be so massive that the sun not rising wouldn't be a concern. The concern would be more likely that that amount of energy would wipe us out so quick we'd never realize the sun wasn't moving in the sky anymore. Tongue

[Image: h8m4.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-04-2013, 10:01 AM
RE: A-believerism or A-deism?
(08-04-2013 09:44 AM)LostLocke Wrote:  I'm not sure I get the whole "sun rising" thing as an example of anything.

No, of course we're not absolutely completely 100% positive the sun will rise tomorrow. And science never claims to be 100% positive on anything.
But what reason would the sun not rise tomorrow?

We know why and how the sun "rises", the earth rotates. The amount of energy required to stop the earth's rotation in its tracks would probably be so massive that the sun not rising wouldn't be a concern. The concern would be more likely that that amount of energy would wipe us out so quick we'd never realize the sun wasn't moving in the sky anymore. Tongue

LL, don't forget the miracle at Fatima when the sun zigzagged and danced in the sky in front of 70,000 spectators! That had to be true right?

The sun was then reported to have careened towards the earth in a zigzag pattern,[4] frightening those who thought it a sign of the end of the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_Sun

Don't tell me that
mass hallucination
didn't happen!

Throughout history conversions happen at the point of a sword, deconversions at the point of a pen - FC

I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's. - Mark Twain in Eruption
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
08-04-2013, 08:17 PM
RE: A-believerism or A-deism?
I just found this thread today, so thanks. I am probably the least educated here, and possibly the least intelligent, so if I'm a bit slow I apologize in advance. I do this out of politeness, not because anyone here would require it.

First I had a few minor points I disagreed with, that do not change the substance of the debate. But I will address them so they don't percolate in my head and distract me from the subject.

1) The starting point of the thread you make great assumptions about the nature and focal points about atheist. I understand that happens on both sides of the fence. There are quite a few atheist (count myself in) that started out as believers with many factors that caused deconversion( for lack of a better term). Some of them had to do with facts, or experience,etc.. Your experience with atheists you know in no way represents the majority. On the other hand it might not misrepresent, without polling maybe there is no way to know?

2) The car example, I didn't get how it related. I don't look at it as faith, but a reasonable assumption if you will. I have a new car, I do maintenance on it. I put gas in it to go. I don't have faith it will last forever, and carry insurance just in case it does go kablooey. If I had faith, I wouldn't waste money on insurance or extended warranty. As I said, small points that stuck with me.


As far as "true faith " goes, as I understand, and please correct me if I'm wrong. What you are basically saying is we operate on faith everyday on a myriad of life decisions without realizing it? Since we don't know the future, or what life will throw at us, like for example, going through an intersection? So we have faith that we will not crash, or that the car won't stall, or another thousand possibilities that we face going through life.

From a biological point of view, I don't equate that with faith( right or wrong) but with being efficient. If we stopped to over analyze every situation I don't think we would have survived long as a species. I think we go on a type of auto pilot with much of our lives, while subconsciously analyzing and adapting. If you've played sports, the more you play something the better you anticipate and react. Same with driving, the more you drive, or work on your car, the more confident you are with obtaining the expected results. There is always a chance at failure, but you expect to win, or survive or whatever. I would not put that in the faith category.

I am not the most eloquent, and may have misunderstood the subject matter. But have enjoyed the thread none the less. peace..
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2013, 05:37 AM
RE: A-believerism or A-deism?
(08-04-2013 10:01 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  LL, don't forget the miracle at Fatima when the sun zigzagged and danced in the sky in front of 70,000 spectators! That had to be true right?

The sun was then reported to have careened towards the earth in a zigzag pattern,[4] frightening those who thought it a sign of the end of the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_Sun

Don't tell me that
mass hallucination
didn't happen!
[Image: droids.jpg?w=300&h=130]
"This isn't the sun you're looking at"

Hmmm, those people seem to be impervious to Jedi mind tricks!! Shocking
They're evil I say, EVIL!

[Image: h8m4.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2013, 06:55 AM (This post was last modified: 09-04-2013 08:45 AM by ClydeLee.)
Re: A-believerism or A-deism?
I never saw the thread appear again, so I didn't see a response.

I'm not following your point again because I read done assertions I don't agree with, nor do I understand the origin of.

All this talk about certainty and having to make a gap between reason to get to faith. That idea is well out of my comprehension right now. Maybe because I don't agree with it at all. I take it as too much of a black/white right/wrong kind of explanation on what we know.

I agree how reason is formed through evidence. I just don't think it's truly without reason when one makes a decision. Reasoning that you do not know the outcome is a fine action. Certainty isn't always important.

I still think your use of faith describes intuition and that's fine. There are ways we don't use it even when not knowing the outcome.

"Love is hot, Truth is molten!"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: