Beyond Belief- Beyond Atheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-10-2014, 06:05 PM
RE: Beyond Belief- Beyond Atheism
(17-10-2014 06:02 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  Are you talking about the specifics of what the god does, or what an actual deity is?

Either.

The former, of course, is contingent on the latter.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 06:06 PM
RE: Beyond Belief- Beyond Atheism
It's hard for me to say too much because I don't really think the label itself is that valuable at all. It simplifies things in the context of debate, but how often are you in that situation as a person? Even then, I think explaining the meaning of what you belief/think and why cuts past labels.

As for thinking the term atheist fails in a way because it doesn't inform the basic vital information about you, I feel that's a misguided hope that any label could. Lets say I used the label a writer to describe myself in actions I take and mindset, it doesn't give vital info about my belief. Even religious labels of Christian or Pentecostal could still only give you an inkling to what that person believes, because even people in deeply rooting denominations are unlikely to definitely hold the positions their religious sect proclaims to be true.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 06:10 PM (This post was last modified: 17-10-2014 06:17 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Beyond Belief- Beyond Atheism
(17-10-2014 05:49 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  
(17-10-2014 05:39 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  I find talk of God to be premature. For those religions which promise a postmortem preservation of identity the first order of business is to posit a plausible mechanism of action for dualism. Many have tried. All have failed. Dunno what that makes me, a pretheist maybe?
If by dualism you mean spirit/body, then I'd say that the plausibility depends on the audience.

I say nay. Plausible is generally accepted to mean a coherent explanation, as judged by a reasonable individual, of how the mind could possibly exist without the body and how they could possibly interact. Arguments for dualism are not only untenable, they are generally incoherent.

(17-10-2014 05:49 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  I don't understand how a guess, such as the existence of deities and their role in creation and order, can be premature. It's an unfounded guess. What timeline is such a guess be confined to make it premature?

It's only premature for those religions which promise a postmortem preservation of identity. They have the burden of supporting their premise by answering "What you talking about Willis?" For those which make no such claim ... well it's just fantasy which I got no issue with.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
17-10-2014, 06:15 PM
RE: Beyond Belief- Beyond Atheism
(17-10-2014 06:05 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(17-10-2014 06:02 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  Are you talking about the specifics of what the god does, or what an actual deity is?

Either.

The former, of course, is contingent on the latter.
I see. I'm sorry I just don't understand approaching this topic as if you are ignorant of what a person means when they speak of "gods". It seems like a game to argue for the sake of argument.

I prefer fantasy, but I have to live in reality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 06:15 PM (This post was last modified: 18-10-2014 09:41 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Beyond Belief- Beyond Atheism
(17-10-2014 05:52 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  
(17-10-2014 05:47 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  It is not.
There is no coherent definition of a god, therefore there is no reason I need to take a stand with respect to a concept that is not defined.
I would think that for 90+% of the people who you might talk to in your day to day life, if you mention the word "god", you have pretty close to the same concept in your head.

And I agree that the definition is not coherent, because the qualities are inconsistent with reality. But the definition is there.

THEY might have a generally agreed on notion in THEIR head. I could care less. I don't define MYSELF by what's in others' heads. I know what's in MY head, and no one gets to tell me what I think. If you have a "definition" let's hear it. I have no concept in my head. In fact I was going to start a somewhat similar thread called "Moving Beyond Atheism and Theism" since there ARE no coherent definitions, AND in the end, the concepts of Eastern TAO, Agnosticism, and "The Cloud of the Unknowing" (Medieval Christian mysticticism) all end up in the same place, practically, (not knowing anything).

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 06:23 PM
RE: Beyond Belief- Beyond Atheism
(17-10-2014 06:10 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(17-10-2014 05:49 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  If by dualism you mean spirit/body, then I'd say that the plausibility depends on the audience.

I say nay. Plausible is generally accepted to mean a coherent explanation, as judged by a reasonable individual, of how the mind could possibly exist without the body and how they could possibly interact. Arguments for dualism are not only untenable, they are generally incoherent.
I can't say too much as I don't know what it is like to have a supernatural belief. But I would think to those people who have them, they think it is coherent and reasonable.

Quote:It's only premature for those religions which promise a postmortem preservation of identity. For those which make no such claim ... well it's just fantasy which I got no issue with.
Why do you have a problem with a fantasy built on top of a fantasy, if you have no problem with a fantasy itself? Just curious.

I prefer fantasy, but I have to live in reality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 06:26 PM (This post was last modified: 17-10-2014 11:06 PM by cjlr.)
RE: Beyond Belief- Beyond Atheism
(17-10-2014 06:15 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  
(17-10-2014 06:05 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Either.

The former, of course, is contingent on the latter.
I see. I'm sorry I just don't understand approaching this topic as if you are ignorant of what a person means when they speak of "gods". It seems like a game to argue for the sake of argument.

So you don't understand that if I don't know what they mean I find it preferable to try to get them to elaborate? That if they can't elaborate then I don't see any point in (or basis for) discussion?

I find it unproductive to make assumptions about other people. That's all.

Let us say someone says to you, "I believe in God". Are you in America? Absent further information, they are statistically more likely to be Christian... But are they wearing a yarmulke? A hijab? But no, let's say they're probably Christian. Are they protestant or Catholic? Are they Armenian? Different understandings of "God". But no, let's say they're protestant. Are they Baptist or Lutheran? Different understandings of "God". Are they southern Baptist or Evangelical? Different understandings of "God".

But no, let's say they're Evangelical. Do they even agree with official catechism and doctrine of their stated affiliation? Most people do not. They pick and choose and interpret for themselves. They have their own areas of emphasis, their own choice of canon, their own interpretations thereof...

Note that we have not even considered the merit or substance of their understanding yet.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
17-10-2014, 06:38 PM
RE: Beyond Belief- Beyond Atheism
Looks like I've made the igtheists angry. Better run. Tongue.

Seriously do have to go though, but also not enjoying this discourse. My problem is I doubt you have less than a solid concept of what somebody means when they talk of a "god", especially given whatever cultural or situational context the discussion was raised in. I believe you might question the specifics of the god's attributes or actions (in which case a more valid question than "what is god?" would be "what does your god do?"). If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. You know yourself better than I do. I'm just doubtful, that's all.

I prefer fantasy, but I have to live in reality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 06:53 PM (This post was last modified: 17-10-2014 07:04 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Beyond Belief- Beyond Atheism
(17-10-2014 06:38 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  Looks like I've made the igtheists angry. Better run. Tongue.

Seriously do have to go though, but also not enjoying this discourse. My problem is I doubt you have less than a solid concept of what somebody means when they talk of a "god", especially given whatever cultural or situational context the discussion was raised in. I believe you might question the specifics of the god's attributes or actions (in which case a more valid question than "what is god?" would be "what does your god do?"). If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. You know yourself better than I do. I'm just doubtful, that's all.

You don't know "how I was raised". (I was reading John of the Cross, and other mystics in Grade School, and grew up in a very "liberal" theological environment). You have STILL failed to get the POINT. I don't care WHAT SOMEONE else means. If I say I am an Igtheist, it's about what I mean, not what anyone else means. Is THAT so difficult ? Be doubtful. I don't define MYSELF based on what others say they mean. And I have enough experience with theists to know they pretty much don't know what they mean. The concept of what a deity is, in 2014 has radically changed in the last 100 years. From a vengeful monarch who inspires a "fear of god", it has for liberals morphed into a "the best that is in us" bla bla bla "god is love" etc. It's meaningless. Humans invest their gods with their culture's ideals. Rejecting their gods risks making them think you reject their ideals. Which is why I almost never discuss the gods, with people who don't know me very well.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
17-10-2014, 07:38 PM
RE: Beyond Belief- Beyond Atheism
(17-10-2014 06:23 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  
(17-10-2014 06:10 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  I say nay. Plausible is generally accepted to mean a coherent explanation, as judged by a reasonable individual, of how the mind could possibly exist without the body and how they could possibly interact. Arguments for dualism are not only untenable, they are generally incoherent.
I can't say too much as I don't know what it is like to have a supernatural belief. But I would think to those people who have them, they think it is coherent and reasonable.

Dildo also thinks he's coherent and reasonable. He's not. That's the fucking problem.


(17-10-2014 06:23 PM)Adrianime Wrote:  Why do you have a problem with a fantasy built on top of a fantasy, if you have no problem with a fantasy itself? Just curious.

Fantasy only requires a temporary suspension of disbelief which Hollywood uses for entertainment purposes all the time. Got no problem with being entertained. Promising a postmortem preservation of identity of eternal bliss requires something else entirely. It requires me to relinquish and surrender my rationality.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: