Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-08-2014, 02:17 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-ba
(17-08-2014 08:28 AM)Brian37 Wrote:  
(17-08-2014 04:45 AM)phil.a Wrote:  I am curious wether there are any strong atheists in here (e.g. persons who are happy to make the negative truth claim that god does not exist) whose position on the existence of God is actually facts-based.

Notes:

* I am not really interested in hearing from people who reference any external authority as a source of truth. Please refrain from posting if this is the source of your ideas.
* I am not really interested in hearing from people who operate from theories of "refuting intelligent design". Godel's incompleteness theorem proves mathematically to my satisfaction that all "intelligent design" arguments, wether for or against, are inherently meaningless, and I'm not really interested in debating that on this thread.

So - just strong atheists who reckon they have a position which is facts-based, e.g based on direct personal experience. Do we have any strong atheists in the room? :-)

Phil

FACT, the only place science observes cognition is in biological evolution. FACT, humans have made up fictional sky heros only to have them scrapped for newer fictional sky heros. Which means human perceptions are notoriously flawed and lead humans to fill gaps with bullshit.

For the same reason humans no longer think an ocean god named Poseidon causes hurricanes, life and the universe does not need a non material, invisible cognition with super powers.

Stephen Hawkins "A God Is not required".

The bullshit tactic of "prove it isn't true" does not work. The real issue is that "God" of the gaps is not worth considering as an answer because it is rooted in mythology first off, it reflects human ignorance and has no basis in science.

"You don't know the future" is bullshit. If I claim "You cant prove snarfwidgets don't exist" how much time to you waste on a claim I make starting with a naked assertion?

If ifs and butts were candy and nuts we'd all have a party.

The concept of all god claims are merely human imaginations and a reflection of our own ignorance in needlessly fearing our own finite existence.

It is simple human psychology. The same conspiracy crap that causes people to make up gods and falsely believe in them is the same intellectual laziness and wishful thinking that causes someone to believe in rabbits feet or lucky socks. Selection bias and sample rate error.

Time after time in scientific history, we find what was once claimed to be of the divine is latter explained through natural science.

Bottom line, there has never been and never will be an invisible sky hero. There is only human superstition and the unwillingness to face reality.

OK this does seem to operate from the same given as a previous post - namely, that scientific truth claims and religious truth claims are necessarily mutually exclusive.

Sometimes they are (I fully take your point about the human mind filling in the gaps with bullshit) but I am skeptical that they always are. Sometimes I think it's more reasonable to see them just as different perspectives on the same underlying reality.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 02:30 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-ba
Reltzik:

Thanks for all those points, I agree with all of that.

I guess what I tend to do is to look at religious claims through a lens of psychology, e.g. attempt to relativise the claims against the nature of mind that produced the claims.

From that perspective, I think "gods" or even a monotheistic "god" can often be described psychologically as psychological conceptual projections.

In a sense, that makes religious claims about the world to be "unreal" but then from another perspective, the claims are descriptive of things that are actually existent as fact inside the person who is projecting them into the his experience of the cosmos. That person is real, and is an aspect of the world, so through a translation function, the claims do have meaning, even if it's indirect meaning.

Some religions even take this into account. Buddhism has deities, they are taught to pre-rational people as actual, but if a rational buddhist teacher talks to a rational person, they seem quite happy to say that the deities are just symbolic.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 02:39 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-ba
(17-08-2014 09:39 AM)Adrianime Wrote:  Not to mention that god claims generally directly contradict our current understanding of reality (physics, especially).

I would account for our own perspective here. Eg I'd state the above as our understanding of other people's god claims generally directly contradict our current understanding of reality

It's important to be aware that written text does not contain truth that's somehow independent of perspective. There's the writer's perspective, but also the reader's perspective.

For a really extreme example of this, try reading a book in a language (e.g. linguistic perspective) that's completely foreign to you.

It's more subtle if you can understand the language the book was written in, but nevertheless the issue of perspective undermines your direct knowing of the writer's writing on his own terms (unless you make very great efforts to understand it!)

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 02:53 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-ba
(17-08-2014 11:34 AM)One Above All Wrote:  I defined a being that, if it existed, would be perfect.

That's a bold truth claim! Are you sure it would have been perfect in an absolute sense, rather than just perfect in your relative perspective?


Quote:Gnosticism refers to knowledge. Therefore, a gnostic atheist is someone who knows (is sure) that there is/are no god(s).

Ah ok, my dictionary defines gnostic as: "relating to knowledge, especially esoteric mystical knowledge."

Do these people really have "esoteric mystical knowledge" of god's non-existence? Or is it that their usage of this term does not really fit with the common understanding of the term? Tongue

Well as long as I know how they are using the term, I'm happy with it.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 03:01 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(17-08-2014 02:53 PM)phil.a Wrote:  That's a bold truth claim! Are you sure it would have been perfect in an absolute sense, rather than just perfect in your relative perspective?

I'm pretty sure it's be perfect by anyone's (honest) definition of the term. Everyone defines a perfect being as one that is incapable of error, as well as one that is good (even if their personal view of "good" doesn't match most others'). Regardless, there's no such thing as "perfect in an absolute sense", unless you define "absolute sense" in this situation as being what everyone agrees on.

(17-08-2014 02:53 PM)phil.a Wrote:  Ah ok, my dictionary defines gnostic as: "relating to knowledge, especially esoteric mystical knowledge."

Do these people really have "esoteric mystical knowledge" of god's non-existence? Or is it that their usage of this term does not really fit with the common understanding of the term? Tongue

Well as long as I know how they are using the term, I'm happy with it.

"Especially" is not the same as "specifically". And you can replace "these people" with "you", since I'm one of them, like I said.

The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 03:17 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-ba
(17-08-2014 01:24 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(17-08-2014 12:56 PM)phil.a Wrote:  OK and this pre-supposes that scientific truth claims and religious truth claims are necessarily mutually exclusive from an absolute perspective.

Is that what you think?

I don't know what that means.

What is an absolute perspective?

An absolute perspective is a perspective which does not have an opposite in reality to contradict it.

Most human perspectives are relative perspectives, relative perspectives are based on givens, and the givens appear projected into reality as "opposites" that are usually perceived as "wrong".

E.g. left and right wing political perspectives. Anyone who is stuck inside one or other of these as a relative perspective will see the opposite perspective as "wrong" or "bad".

But actually - it's just simple fact that human reality does contain both of these political perspectives, and it's also true that in terms of numbers, the supporters of each political perspective are split pretty much down the middle. There's a reason for that, they create each other.

The absolute perspective is that both left and right wing political perspectives contain truth.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 04:06 PM
Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(17-08-2014 02:13 PM)phil.a Wrote:  Very good question. I'm less interested in defining it, and more interested in understanding other people's definitions of it on their terms.

One thing is for sure - it does seem to mean extremely different things to different people.
I thought you were interested in an answer to the original question in your original post. That would require that YOU define "God". How else do you expect people to be able to answer? Consider Yes, it does mean different things to different people which is why it would be nice to know which variation YOU were asking about. Without a definition, your original question is simply meaningless and unanswerable.

I am not accountable to any God. I am accountable to myself - and not because I think I am God as some theists would try to assert - but because, no matter what actions I take, thoughts I think, or words I utter, I have to be able to live with myself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Impulse's post
17-08-2014, 04:22 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(17-08-2014 03:17 PM)phil.a Wrote:  E.g. left and right wing political perspectives. Anyone who is stuck inside one or other of these as a relative perspective will see the opposite perspective as "wrong" or "bad".

But actually - it's just simple fact that human reality does contain both of these political perspectives, and it's also true that in terms of numbers, the supporters of each political perspective are split pretty much down the middle. There's a reason for that, they create each other.

The absolute perspective is that both left and right wing political perspectives contain truth.

No, that's a golden mean fallacy.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-08-2014, 07:40 PM
Re: RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is f
(17-08-2014 02:53 PM)phil.a Wrote:  
(17-08-2014 11:34 AM)One Above All Wrote:  I defined a being that, if it existed, would be perfect.

That's a bold truth claim! Are you sure it would have been perfect in an absolute sense, rather than just perfect in your relative perspective?


Quote:Gnosticism refers to knowledge. Therefore, a gnostic atheist is someone who knows (is sure) that there is/are no god(s).

Ah ok, my dictionary defines gnostic as: "relating to knowledge, especially esoteric mystical knowledge."

Do these people really have "esoteric mystical knowledge" of god's non-existence? Or is it that their usage of this term does not really fit with the common understanding of the term? Tongue

Well as long as I know how they are using the term, I'm happy with it.

Phil

Why are you heavily relying on the multiple uses of dictionaries? It's a bad habit ingrained poorly by some educators. Even if still using dictionary styles, You should look up more uses and specific phrase gnostic-atheist to talk about gnostic-atheists. Not solely the words alone then mash them.

The mystic phrase is only in there because of the early Christian gnostic movement are considered to have held mystic beliefs. That's why they applied the term because of their concept of experience with knowing Jesus. It's an archaic aspect of the term, just like atheist is in some dictionaries where it says, immoral.

"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
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
17-08-2014, 08:24 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
Phil, I am the only being that I know exists. As far as I'm concerned, everyone else only exists in my mind.

Therefore there are no gods.

I believe that contains facts and personal experience. There ya go. You're welcome.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Rahn127's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: