atheist or just anti-THAT god
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-11-2012, 07:30 PM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god
(25-11-2012 06:34 PM)chandrashakti Wrote:  So if this is a matter of lack of belief rather than being sure that no god exists isnt that agnosticism rather than atheism?

Not necessarily. A strict agnosticism is usually a neutral or indifference. Since I would call myself an agnostic atheist, it means that I would side on the fact that you can't prove or disprove the existence of a god. However, since thus far things are explained just fine without one, the probability and necessity of one seems unlikely. Therefore, I do not believe one is necessary and do not believe in one. Again, with the least amount of assumptions logically, it would not be logical to insert a god if the probability is unlikely because then we enter even more questions such as: "where did said god come from? Why does said god exist? Is there a god for that god? Where did that one come from? Did things originate or did they come to be? Were they created or conceived, if so how?" and the questions go on and on. Thus far, we can explain the universe without having to dive into them, so the default stance makes more sense to leave it out of the equation, regardless if I cannot prove or disprove it.

(25-11-2012 06:34 PM)chandrashakti Wrote:  As to why I believe... I went through a period of agnosticism. Eventually in an unguarded moment I caught myself thinking of god. I realized that, for me, such belief works. I do not claim to have a truth that will work for anyone else however.
I am a Neopagan and have a very different view of the divine than the loudmouths among monotheists. I suppose the labels that fit me best are panentheist and henotheist. I think that everything that exists, everything we can imagine and more are part of god. All the gods and goddesses we can imagine are simply human attempts to approach that infinite reality. They only have power insofar as humans believe in their power.

So if I am understanding correctly, panentheism is basically no "god" as most people see one (a being, or entity of sorts), you feel that a god is defined as the universe itself? I suppose I can see people believing that, I just don't know why anyone calls it "god" and instead, just the universe. To each his own I suppose. At the same time, what exactly is this "power" you speak of? The power of ideas? Motivation? Emotion?


(25-11-2012 06:34 PM)chandrashakti Wrote:  I am familiar with Occams Razor. I am not in any way arguing against science. My point is that lack of current scientific proof is as often proof of not having the right tools to investigate the question at hand as it is proof of the non-existence of the thing. ...

Occam's razor does not necessarily require science. Occam's razor is simply choosing the rational and logical choice when presented with a problem. Logic doesn't require science to work. It just requires itself.

Science is a tool and a method to understand things. If we use it to understand them, and the end result can be explained, then any other pressumptions prior that are no longer valid need not be entertained. For instance, the big bang. People say "the universe was created by god" but we know the big bang is responsible, with a good mountain of empirical evidence for it. We could go round and round about the existence of the universe, or rather, quantum mechanics prior to it. But nothing so far points to the idea of a god being. So why entertain it? Aside from sheer coping mechanism or some sort of appeal to emotion because someone feels worthless without some supernatural entity giving them some sort of personal meaning, I don't see any.

On another example, someone tells you there is a ghost in the house and supernatural things are happening. Things randomly move and jiggle. You go there to see if it happens and sure enough, some books flutter and you hear noises at night. A logical and rational person might look for the causes. A person who wants to believe it would simply dismiss it as a supernatural occurrence. Upon inspection, the logical person looks for immediate things that intervene and finds that during the later part of the evening, when a window is open, wind blows through and is fluttering pages and causing the shutters to bang which sounds like foot steps or thumps. The window is closed, and the issue goes away just as mysteriously as it came. Both people had an explanation that may be believable to people upon arrival, both witnesses it happening. However, only one of the explanations actually made any logical sense and could be explained empirically.

This is the same way that I see people end up explaining "supernatural" things. We have a lot of people who have interesting first hand accounts of things happening that other people perhaps experience. For instance we know that upon having traumatic events before we die that sometimes parts of the brain are stimulated as a coping mechanism which often result in hallucinations or bright flashes. Several neuroscientists have largely said this may very well be what is responsible for people who "see the light" before they die, or perhaps see themselves "out of their body" - other people just black out.

So does this still mean that it is supernatural? Or should we side with the rational or logical thing which we now have a beginning explanation, or at least a better idea of? From our experiences and emotions from such profound experiences, someone may want very much not to believe that it's just your brain. Others might simply want to dismiss it because they think that their confirmation bias tells them that those guys just want to disprove something "magical" that was previously explained.

We also used to think the earth was flat, and that got explained away. Stars used to rotate around us, we sure were egotistical back then. We still are now, we still want to think we're special and there are these god beings or a god of some sort. We really want some sort of "god given purpose" (at least, a lot of people do).

But in my opinion, worrying about such things takes away from the beauty of reality itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply

Messages In This Thread
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - Vosur - 25-11-2012, 05:32 PM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - DLJ - 25-11-2012, 06:01 PM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - amyb - 25-11-2012, 06:12 PM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - amyb - 25-11-2012, 08:48 PM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - Vosur - 25-11-2012, 06:42 PM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - amyb - 25-11-2012, 06:42 PM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - Logisch - 25-11-2012 07:30 PM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - Julius - 25-11-2012, 08:07 PM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - Vosur - 28-11-2012, 08:02 AM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - Vosur - 28-11-2012, 02:35 PM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - Vosur - 28-11-2012, 03:14 PM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - Chas - 29-11-2012, 08:59 AM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - Vosur - 29-11-2012, 08:57 AM
RE: atheist or just anti-THAT god - Chas - 29-11-2012, 09:01 AM
Forum Jump: