InspiringPhilosophy: Is Atheism a Delusion?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-02-2017, 06:20 AM
RE: InspiringPhilosophy: Is Atheism a Delusion?
(09-02-2017 03:30 PM)Glossophile Wrote:  



I've watched a couple of this guy's videos, most memorably about how "Where did God come from?" is supposedly a horrible counter-argument, and though I obviously still disagree with him, I think he's one of the more respectable YouTube apologists. To his credit, he acknowledges towards the end that none of what he's said ramifies on the actual existence of a deity, but he also drops clear hints of "You're just angry at God!" and "Y'all just wanna sin!" which I think is a bit unbecoming of an aspiring philosopher.

Regarding his central point, this is what I had to say, for whatever it's worth:

"Naturality does not beget validity. There are many impulses that come naturally to us which would often lead us astray if left unchecked. The human mind, powerful though it may be, is as flawed as any product of evolution. Fortunately for us, one of the human brain's most potent features is the capacity to realize its own limitations and learn how to correct for them (or at least minimize their impact). This is heightened self-awareness, not delusion. By your reasoning, then, a case could be made that theists are essentially surrendering to comparatively primal instincts when they accept theism uncritically."

If anyone's interested in my entire response, I'm "TranslatorCarminum" in the comments.

Imo there's no such thing as a respectable religious apologist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-02-2017, 10:00 PM
RE: InspiringPhilosophy: Is Atheism a Delusion?
Let me get this straight, NOT having a delusion is a delusion ?

WTF ?

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Rahn127's post
11-02-2017, 12:50 AM
RE: InspiringPhilosophy: Is Atheism a Delusion?
For most of my life I've felt like deep down no one really believes in God. I'm not saying the video defends its thesis well but even though I'm pretty old over the past year I've started to kind of get slapped in the face that a lot of things I thought most people understood intuitively I've been wrong about. Maybe belief in some kind of designer that creates meaning out of life is a default psychological position. To me it seems stupid as shit but I'm starting to get an alienated feeling that I'm actually the odd man out on things I used to think were universally but not openly agreed upon. Theism is one of them but in other parts of life, like work, shit that is very obviously stupid and fucked up... well it turns out my colleagues don't see it that way. It's so crazy. It's like they're telling me they actually enjoy getting kicked in the balls. Maybe it's a defense mechanism. Maybe it's a psychological safeguard I don't have. Maybe there's an evolutionary advantage for believing stupid weird shit.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes I'mFred's post
11-02-2017, 01:13 AM
RE: InspiringPhilosophy: Is Atheism a Delusion?
It can be pragmatic. Some people are very uncomfortable with the answer, "I don't know". So uncomfortable that they need an imaginary "answer" so that they can carry on functioning.

Of course, religion takes that to a whole new level by dressing up this answer like a Barbie doll.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2017, 04:15 AM (This post was last modified: 11-02-2017 04:19 AM by Glossophile.)
RE: InspiringPhilosophy: Is Atheism a Delusion?
Well, IP and I have exchanged a few comments in a sort of mini-debate, prompted by me giving a brief peak into why the Cosmological, Teleological, and Ontological Arguments just don't work. I won't rehash the whole thing here. If anyone's interested, they can go to the original video page. But there is one point on which I wouldn't mind getting some feedback, if any of you are inclined to humor me. Out of all the primary arguments, I think the Ontological is the weakest, but one of my two main reasons for this opinion (the first being that it basically just tries to define God into existence) is rather difficult to put into words, especially if my audience isn't familiar with the logic of possible worlds.

First, here's a bit of background, since the Ontological Argument isn't always stated in terms of possible worlds, but when it is, it goes something like this: God is a maximally great being, and as such, he must exist in all possible worlds, because for there to be even one world in which he doesn't exist would mean that he could yet be greater than he is, which would mean he is not already maximally great being. So since God must exist in all possible worlds, a set which necessarily includes our actual world, then God must exist in the actual world.

I was wondering how well you think I got my point across with this comment:

"It assumes that it makes sense to evaluate the applicability of a predicate across multiple possible worlds, which is questionable at best. A possible world refers to any possible configuration of the entire cosmos. That is, any form the totality of reality could take, with any possible rules governing it. Any possible world, then, must be self-contained, which means that when we posit a maximally great being, it only makes sense to define maximal greatness within the context of an individual possible world."

Did that make any sense?

The only sacred truth in science is that there are no sacred truths. – Carl Sagan
Sōla vēritās sancta in philosophiā nātūrālī est absentia vēritātum sanctārum.
Ἡ μόνη ἱερᾱ̀ ἀληθείᾱ ἐν φυσικῇ φιλοσοφίᾳ ἐστίν ἡ ἱερῶν ἀληθειῶν σπάνις.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2017, 06:52 AM
RE: InspiringPhilosophy: Is Atheism a Delusion?
(11-02-2017 04:15 AM)Glossophile Wrote:  Well, IP and I have exchanged a few comments in a sort of mini-debate, prompted by me giving a brief peak into why the Cosmological, Teleological, and Ontological Arguments just don't work. I won't rehash the whole thing here. If anyone's interested, they can go to the original video page. But there is one point on which I wouldn't mind getting some feedback, if any of you are inclined to humor me. Out of all the primary arguments, I think the Ontological is the weakest, but one of my two main reasons for this opinion (the first being that it basically just tries to define God into existence) is rather difficult to put into words, especially if my audience isn't familiar with the logic of possible worlds.

First, here's a bit of background, since the Ontological Argument isn't always stated in terms of possible worlds, but when it is, it goes something like this: God is a maximally great being, and as such, he must exist in all possible worlds, because for there to be even one world in which he doesn't exist would mean that he could yet be greater than he is, which would mean he is not already maximally great being. So since God must exist in all possible worlds, a set which necessarily includes our actual world, then God must exist in the actual world.

I was wondering how well you think I got my point across with this comment:

"It assumes that it makes sense to evaluate the applicability of a predicate across multiple possible worlds, which is questionable at best. A possible world refers to any possible configuration of the entire cosmos. That is, any form the totality of reality could take, with any possible rules governing it. Any possible world, then, must be self-contained, which means that when we posit a maximally great being, it only makes sense to define maximal greatness within the context of an individual possible world."

Did that make any sense?

Instead of god being a maximally great being, let's define him as an imaginary being and as such does not exist in all possible worlds, including our own actual world. Since god is imaginary and can't exist in any possible worlds, then by definition, god cannot exist.

Until a god can be shown to exist, it only exists in our imagination, with imaginary powers and characteristics that we have bestowed upon it.

To prove that something exists that was created soley in our imagination is a supremely up hill battle.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Rahn127's post
11-02-2017, 07:04 AM
RE: InspiringPhilosophy: Is Atheism a Delusion?
(09-02-2017 03:32 PM)Banjo Wrote:  Life's too short.

Pfft. It's the longest thing you'll ever do. Smartass

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like houseofcantor's post
11-02-2017, 10:33 AM
RE: InspiringPhilosophy: Is Atheism a Delusion?
The linked video—which I actually watched in full—contains more bullshittery, misrepresentation and outright lies than I've seen in only a few minutes. His reasoning [sic] is even more suspect than W L Craig, and that's saying something LOL.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes SYZ's post
11-02-2017, 06:24 PM
RE: InspiringPhilosophy: Is Atheism a Delusion?
Glossophile - Why didn't you simply ask him what a "great" being is, in the first place, let alone how one could have greater beings?

Beings are just beings. Once you accept the premise that there exists some sort of ranking scale (upon what criteria would we base such a scale?) by which things could be greater or lesser, you have already forfeited their argument. Never let bullshitters make up bullshit terms and then argue from that basis.

"God is defined as the maximally great being."

Really?!

1) Are all beings not simply beings, despite varying capacities? I am not "greater" than a bacterium, simply because I'm smarter and made up of more cells.

2) Even if we presume for argument's sake that we can rank beings on some scale, how can one presume there exists some being greater than all that is within the universe(s)? Perhaps the maximally-great being is Jim the Plumber, in Milwaukee. It makes the aliens of Griznorph IV in the Andromeda Galaxy very jealous, as they thought they had a "great being" candidate. It certainly doesn't require that the Maximally Great Being be something beyond-space-and-time, even though we can imagine such a concept.

3) Even if there exists a being beyond space and time, which is the most powerful being imaginable, it still does not equate to "this being is god", let alone proving that the creator of our universe is this being. It may not even know we're here, any more than you know the bacteria on the surface of your left eye.

4) Even if there exists such a being, and it is in fact God the Creator, it does not in any way establish that this God the Creator gives a shit about its creation, let alone that it resembles in any but the most superficial way the Christian deity.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
13-02-2017, 09:30 AM
RE: InspiringPhilosophy: Is Atheism a Delusion?
(11-02-2017 12:50 AM)ImFred Wrote:  For most of my life I've felt like deep down no one really believes in God. I'm not saying the video defends its thesis well but even though I'm pretty old over the past year I've started to kind of get slapped in the face that a lot of things I thought most people understood intuitively I've been wrong about. Maybe belief in some kind of designer that creates meaning out of life is a default psychological position. To me it seems stupid as shit but I'm starting to get an alienated feeling that I'm actually the odd man out on things I used to think were universally but not openly agreed upon. Theism is one of them but in other parts of life, like work, shit that is very obviously stupid and fucked up... well it turns out my colleagues don't see it that way. It's so crazy. It's like they're telling me they actually enjoy getting kicked in the balls. Maybe it's a defense mechanism. Maybe it's a psychological safeguard I don't have. Maybe there's an evolutionary advantage for believing stupid weird shit.

It seems to me that people don't really believe in the religion they espouse. They believe in believing.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kemo boy's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: