"I'm an Atheists for Emotional Reasons."
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-03-2016, 07:51 PM
RE: "I'm an Atheists for Emotional Reasons."
(23-03-2016 06:50 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(22-03-2016 02:30 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  I do believe that any sense of identity we form whether a theistic one, or an atheistic one, has a great deal to do with emotional reasons regardless if we want to acknowledge it or not.
You are projecting Tom, and making the assumption (intended or not) that because you think that way so does everyone else. My views on atheism/theism, insofar as which side of the fence I'm on, are purely to do with evidence and the lack thereof. I have thoughts on the two which are informed partially based on emotion: the genital mutilation of children, the subjugation of gays and women, the purposeful indoctrination of children into a cult of ignorance for examples are all things I find intellectually and emotionally abhorrent. However while I find theism abhorrent that is not why I'm an atheist, I'm an atheist because theism is undemonstrated hogwash with no basis in reality or fact.

I love Celtic mythology, if I allowed my emotions to dictate my position is such away I'd still be worshiping gods far older than yours, but I'm not because I don't.


(22-03-2016 02:30 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  And it's more the tendency of folks that suggest that they're atheists purely for intellectual reasons, that are not being entirely honest with themselves.
Yes yes yes, we're all quite familiar with your willingness to play make believe and pretend you know other peoples minds better then they do. However I'd like to point out that one CAN be an atheist for intellectual reasons because unlike theism atheism is intellectually sound.
Theism is so emotionally charged and informed because it can't be informed based on fact and evidence because it has none. Atheism does not have that problem.


(22-03-2016 02:30 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  While I wouldn't say they're atheists for purely emotional reason either, just that emotional reasons are a significant part of it.
For some but not all, my atheism is rooted firmly in the complete lack of evidence supporting theism. My view on god is not informed by my emotions anymore than my view on pixies is. Bolstered sure, but I'm an atheist because theism is factually inaccurate and utterly lacking in evidence.

Agreed 100%.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
23-03-2016, 08:30 PM
RE: "I'm an Atheists for Emotional Reasons."
(23-03-2016 05:29 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(23-03-2016 06:42 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  I acknowledge that quote from the abstract, something I only came to realize after you quoted it, and i had to search for where it came from.


Well, there's a variety of studies behind pay walls, it seems to be a common thing, that the only resources us laymen have are the articles available freely that summarize them. I work with the hands I'm dealt, but the highlighted points, seems to be less a matter of editorial spin, and more or less what the studies themselves point out.

Pro tip: Read the abstract as a quick check on the accuracy of the article.

Yabut, this is how he goes in and stirs up the atheist's nest. I don't spend a lot of time in these threads for this reason. Just compare the number of his posts to the number of responses. We're getting played, plain and simple. I move we dedicate one interested person to grind his ass, and have the rest just watch.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Fireball's post
23-03-2016, 09:29 PM
RE: "I'm an Atheists for Emotional Reasons."
(23-03-2016 07:14 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  You've made a great point, I also love to read and mythology, folk lore and fantasy series are some of my favorite genres and I admit if some of these stories were true I would be more than happy to believe it but there is still no factual basis for them so I am happy still to believe they are fiction. I just don't see the stories in the Bible as being any more true or based on fact, they're just more myths. Just because many people believe it's true isn't enough reason to believe it myself and that's not an emotional response, it's completely logical.

While not entirely related to the OP, you reminded me of a conversation I had a while back at one of my "Whisky Debates" (these are informal debates/conversation between as few as 5 people and as many as 15+ at the pub back home), the topic of conversation being that if you assume for the sake of argument that the Bible is a work of fiction is it good fiction?

It's not, in fact taking away all the faith and "godly" nonsense it's just so so sooo poorly written. Repetitive, vague, plot holes like a motherfucker, contradictions even more so, almost no likeable characters and those that are are generally killed for the crime of "possession with intent to distribute vagina", the heroes (Noah, Abraham, Moses, Daniel, Jesus) are as presented utterly shit human beings with no real redeeming qualities outside of "blind faith" and "follows orders real nice like". It's poorly formatted, in need of an editor worse than Hamlet is, and the only morals to be taken from it are almost entirely authoritarian, and it's poorly researched if researched at all, making so many mistakes when compared to reality to be laughable when labeled non-fiction. It's just a shitty shitty book, easily the most overrated tome ever produced, and it's sole redeeming facet is the window into the evolution of language over 1900ish years.

I'd take the Iliad or Beowulf over it any day of the week.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
23-03-2016, 10:23 PM
RE: "I'm an Atheists for Emotional Reasons."
(23-03-2016 09:29 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(23-03-2016 07:14 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  You've made a great point, I also love to read and mythology, folk lore and fantasy series are some of my favorite genres and I admit if some of these stories were true I would be more than happy to believe it but there is still no factual basis for them so I am happy still to believe they are fiction. I just don't see the stories in the Bible as being any more true or based on fact, they're just more myths. Just because many people believe it's true isn't enough reason to believe it myself and that's not an emotional response, it's completely logical.

While not entirely related to the OP, you reminded me of a conversation I had a while back at one of my "Whisky Debates" (these are informal debates/conversation between as few as 5 people and as many as 15+ at the pub back home), the topic of conversation being that if you assume for the sake of argument that the Bible is a work of fiction is it good fiction?

It's not, in fact taking away all the faith and "godly" nonsense it's just so so sooo poorly written. Repetitive, vague, plot holes like a motherfucker, contradictions even more so, almost no likeable characters and those that are are generally killed for the crime of "possession with intent to distribute vagina", the heroes (Noah, Abraham, Moses, Daniel, Jesus) are as presented utterly shit human beings with no real redeeming qualities outside of "blind faith" and "follows orders real nice like". It's poorly formatted, in need of an editor worse than Hamlet is, and the only morals to be taken from it are almost entirely authoritarian, and it's poorly researched if researched at all, making so many mistakes when compared to reality to be laughable when labeled non-fiction. It's just a shitty shitty book, easily the most overrated tome ever produced, and it's sole redeeming facet is the window into the evolution of language over 1900ish years.

I'd take the Iliad or Beowulf over it any day of the week.

As fiction goes, the Bible reads as though it were written by a pack of preliterate savages, all of which were tripping on bad acid and bathtub gin and none of which shared a common language. It was subsequently editted by a congresional sub-committee, redacted by the NSA, infected by Kapersky Labs' entire library of malware, translated to Cantonese, Urdu, Klingon and then back to English and masticated, digested and shat out by an incontinent wildebeast, though not necessarily in that order.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Paleophyte's post
23-03-2016, 10:43 PM
RE: "I'm an Atheists for Emotional Reasons."
(23-03-2016 10:23 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(23-03-2016 09:29 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  While not entirely related to the OP, you reminded me of a conversation I had a while back at one of my "Whisky Debates" (these are informal debates/conversation between as few as 5 people and as many as 15+ at the pub back home), the topic of conversation being that if you assume for the sake of argument that the Bible is a work of fiction is it good fiction?

It's not, in fact taking away all the faith and "godly" nonsense it's just so so sooo poorly written. Repetitive, vague, plot holes like a motherfucker, contradictions even more so, almost no likeable characters and those that are are generally killed for the crime of "possession with intent to distribute vagina", the heroes (Noah, Abraham, Moses, Daniel, Jesus) are as presented utterly shit human beings with no real redeeming qualities outside of "blind faith" and "follows orders real nice like". It's poorly formatted, in need of an editor worse than Hamlet is, and the only morals to be taken from it are almost entirely authoritarian, and it's poorly researched if researched at all, making so many mistakes when compared to reality to be laughable when labeled non-fiction. It's just a shitty shitty book, easily the most overrated tome ever produced, and it's sole redeeming facet is the window into the evolution of language over 1900ish years.

I'd take the Iliad or Beowulf over it any day of the week.

As fiction goes, the Bible reads as though it were written by a pack of preliterate savages, all of which were tripping on bad acid and bathtub gin and none of which shared a common language. It was subsequently editted by a congresional sub-committee, redacted by the NSA, infected by Kapersky Labs' entire library of malware, translated to Cantonese, Urdu, Klingon and then back to English and masticated, digested and shat out by an incontinent wildebeast, though not necessarily in that order.

I don't even think that's poetic I think that might be literally what happened haha Thumbsup

Honestly i'll never understand how people can get so wrapped up in that book. Harry Potter I get, Lord of the Rings, a Song of Ice and Fire, Wheel of Time, Dune, and more I get but the Bible? Never understood it.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
24-03-2016, 01:06 PM
RE: "I'm an Atheists for Emotional Reasons."
If your identity and emotions are "truth" for you, I don't care what your views are. You are just a moral and intellectual relativist, which is really just childishness. It is emotionally satisfying to eat lots of milk chocolate, but it isn't truthful to claim that its the best nutrition for a human diet. Your feelings don't change the way the world is.

In matters of taste there is no such thing as "right" or "wrong". I don't see religion as a matter of taste. Its claims are about the inner-workings, the gears, of the universe. It claims to answer questions of origins, meaning, and ethics. So, when I investigate the universe, I don't judge with my identity or emotions. They have their place at home, when I am searching inside myself for personal meaning and happiness, hope, and joy. Thinking for myself is the most personal affair possible.

Your premise, that Atheists need to be more honest about their emotional motivations, is a mistake. Don't fall prey to solipsism. For those of us who don't respect feelings over facts have nothing to be more honest about. We know our feelings, because we actively restrain them.

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness.

-Karl Marx
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dark Phoenix's post
24-03-2016, 01:53 PM
RE: "I'm an Atheists for Emotional Reasons."
(23-03-2016 09:29 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(23-03-2016 07:14 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  You've made a great point, I also love to read and mythology, folk lore and fantasy series are some of my favorite genres and I admit if some of these stories were true I would be more than happy to believe it but there is still no factual basis for them so I am happy still to believe they are fiction. I just don't see the stories in the Bible as being any more true or based on fact, they're just more myths. Just because many people believe it's true isn't enough reason to believe it myself and that's not an emotional response, it's completely logical.

While not entirely related to the OP, you reminded me of a conversation I had a while back at one of my "Whisky Debates" (these are informal debates/conversation between as few as 5 people and as many as 15+ at the pub back home), the topic of conversation being that if you assume for the sake of argument that the Bible is a work of fiction is it good fiction?

It's not, in fact taking away all the faith and "godly" nonsense it's just so so sooo poorly written. Repetitive, vague, plot holes like a motherfucker, contradictions even more so, almost no likeable characters and those that are are generally killed for the crime of "possession with intent to distribute vagina", the heroes (Noah, Abraham, Moses, Daniel, Jesus) are as presented utterly shit human beings with no real redeeming qualities outside of "blind faith" and "follows orders real nice like". It's poorly formatted, in need of an editor worse than Hamlet is, and the only morals to be taken from it are almost entirely authoritarian, and it's poorly researched if researched at all, making so many mistakes when compared to reality to be laughable when labeled non-fiction. It's just a shitty shitty book, easily the most overrated tome ever produced, and it's sole redeeming facet is the window into the evolution of language over 1900ish years.

I'd take the Iliad or Beowulf over it any day of the week.

I totally agree, I often describe the Bible as the horror story of an all powerful wizard who decided one day for no real reason to create a universe and only populate one planet in that universe with mini powerless versions of himself. He's not very moral or "good" so he messes up a lot and can't seem to control the sentient, self-aware, easily tempted creatures he's created. Even wiping most of them out with a flood wasn't good enough, he still had to send his kid down to guilt trip us all into believing in him and trying to be good. He figures playing a game with them where their eternal souls will be bartered between himself and his sadist friend Satan will do for some good fun while they live out their immortality.

I honestly feel like any good literary critic will find the major plot hole of "Why" he created the universe to begin with too big to ignore. I mean where did he come from? How did he amass so much power? When did he decide to hinge the entire future of the humans on eating a fruit? Why was the talking snake allowed to tempt them anyway? These are all questions more Christians either can't answer or they all answer it differently and in ways that would be comical if they weren't so depressing but seriously we need a prequel to the Bible that details what he was doing before he created literally everything in existence.

[Image: sagansig_zps6vhbql6m.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like SitaSky's post
24-03-2016, 02:00 PM
RE: "I'm an Atheists for Emotional Reasons."
(24-03-2016 01:53 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  
(23-03-2016 09:29 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  While not entirely related to the OP, you reminded me of a conversation I had a while back at one of my "Whisky Debates" (these are informal debates/conversation between as few as 5 people and as many as 15+ at the pub back home), the topic of conversation being that if you assume for the sake of argument that the Bible is a work of fiction is it good fiction?

It's not, in fact taking away all the faith and "godly" nonsense it's just so so sooo poorly written. Repetitive, vague, plot holes like a motherfucker, contradictions even more so, almost no likeable characters and those that are are generally killed for the crime of "possession with intent to distribute vagina", the heroes (Noah, Abraham, Moses, Daniel, Jesus) are as presented utterly shit human beings with no real redeeming qualities outside of "blind faith" and "follows orders real nice like". It's poorly formatted, in need of an editor worse than Hamlet is, and the only morals to be taken from it are almost entirely authoritarian, and it's poorly researched if researched at all, making so many mistakes when compared to reality to be laughable when labeled non-fiction. It's just a shitty shitty book, easily the most overrated tome ever produced, and it's sole redeeming facet is the window into the evolution of language over 1900ish years.

I'd take the Iliad or Beowulf over it any day of the week.

I totally agree, I often describe the Bible as the horror story of an all powerful wizard who decided one day for no real reason to create a universe and only populate one planet in that universe with mini powerless versions of himself. He's not very moral or "good" so he messes up a lot and can't seem to control the sentient, self-aware, easily tempted creatures he's created. Even wiping most of them out with a flood wasn't good enough, he still had to send his kid down to guilt trip us all into believing in him and trying to be good. He figures playing a game with them where their eternal souls will be bartered between himself and his sadist friend Satan will do for some good fun while they live out their immortality.

I honestly feel like any good literary critic will find the major plot hole of "Why" he created the universe to begin with too big to ignore. I mean where did he come from? How did he amass so much power? When did he decide to hinge the entire future of the humans on eating a fruit? Why was the talking snake allowed to tempt them anyway? These are all questions more Christians either can't answer or they all answer it differently and in ways that would be comical if they weren't so depressing but seriously we need a prequel to the Bible that details what he was doing before he created literally everything in existence.

Oh no... not a prequel. Star Wars proved that's a terrible idea.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dark Wanderer's post
24-03-2016, 02:37 PM
RE: "I'm an Atheists for Emotional Reasons."
(24-03-2016 02:00 PM)Dark Wanderer Wrote:  
(24-03-2016 01:53 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  I totally agree, I often describe the Bible as the horror story of an all powerful wizard who decided one day for no real reason to create a universe and only populate one planet in that universe with mini powerless versions of himself. He's not very moral or "good" so he messes up a lot and can't seem to control the sentient, self-aware, easily tempted creatures he's created. Even wiping most of them out with a flood wasn't good enough, he still had to send his kid down to guilt trip us all into believing in him and trying to be good. He figures playing a game with them where their eternal souls will be bartered between himself and his sadist friend Satan will do for some good fun while they live out their immortality.

I honestly feel like any good literary critic will find the major plot hole of "Why" he created the universe to begin with too big to ignore. I mean where did he come from? How did he amass so much power? When did he decide to hinge the entire future of the humans on eating a fruit? Why was the talking snake allowed to tempt them anyway? These are all questions more Christians either can't answer or they all answer it differently and in ways that would be comical if they weren't so depressing but seriously we need a prequel to the Bible that details what he was doing before he created literally everything in existence.

Oh no... not a prequel. Star Wars proved that's a terrible idea.

As much as I would gleefully watch Jar Jar Binks dragged tongue first into a jet turbine I am having a hard time seeing how he wouldn't be an improvement to the Bible.

I think that Sita's idea is brilliant and that we need to implement it immediately, if for no other reason than the fact that it doesn't appear to be possible to make the prequel worse than the original in this case.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Paleophyte's post
24-03-2016, 02:42 PM
RE: "I'm an Atheists for Emotional Reasons."
So, if I'm not emotional, I can't be an atheist?

Awe shucksWeeping

Marburg virus, Ebola, Rabies, HIV, Smallpox, Hantavirus, Dengue Fever all brought to you by god - who cares for us and loves us all Censored
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes god has no twitter account's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: