I'm Becoming a Fabulous Atheist

The "gaps" probably shouldn't be plural; the whole thing seems to rest on one concept: quantum mechanics. Which seems an odd thing to base opposition on, given how little we know about it. Heck, you suggested yourself in that post that you simply expect that what appears to be "random" is really just too complex for us to understand at the moment, and I cetainly agree. And given that everything we've ever discovered about the universes inside us has followed this pattern, it seems to make for a pretty sensible assumption.

Regardless, even if this argument were considered in spite of all this, you'd still be left with an alleged "materialist" putting their faith in the scientific process on one hand, and with the other maintaining the existence of Free Will based on speculation on a topic that they admit we don't understand.

In other words, if a materialist applies the raw scientific process to the idea of choice, they must conclude that they have no solid evidence whatsoever that it actually exists, and a mountain suggesting that it doesn't. To reach this conclusion they need only apply a fraction of the scrutiny that they reserve for, say, religion.

Of course, an added irony is that even if it were proved that there were truly "random" quantum events occuring, they'd still be...well, random. Not the result of choice.

Then again, if you're merely suggesting that there's a lot we don't know and we could discover some sort of "choice molecule," well heck, anything's possible. But there isn't anything solid to rest an argument on, I don't think. Especially not for any individual who exalts the scientific process first and foremost.

Rufnek: For some atheists, some mind you not all, superiority tends to take the better of them. I'm going to try and stop/convince people because I have vastly superior knowledge to something they're unaware of. At least, in my experience I've found that to be the case. And I have also been guilty of that same reasoning.

Yoda: Just as an atheist cannot demonstrate that religion is detriment to a greater goal, theists can also not demonstrate that religion is crucial to a greater goal. Be it world peace, salvation, etc. Trying to argue against, or for it, just isn't possible. At least, not to the point of saying it's a logical necessity (whether it should be abolished or praised).

__________________
"This is that human freedom, which all boast that they possess, and which consists solely in the fact, that men are conscious of their own desire, but are ignorant of the causes whereby that desire has been determined." -Baruch Spinoza

I agree for the most part, and I wouldn't pretend that I could objectively prove that religion is a "logical necessity." Of course, the two sides (to over-simplify things for simplicity's sake) don't usually make the same promises. I know very few religious folks who think that the problems of the world will simply go away if everyone thought like them. I know quite a few atheists who think that embracing science and rationality will cure what ails us, however. Admittedly anecdotal, but I'll be surprised if others haven't had similar experiences.

Anyway, I think you can make the case that theism aids the greater goal of glorifying God and trying to emulate Him. Even so, I certainly admit that religion opens up certain behavioral pitfalls that don't exist with other worldviews, though I'd say that's true of any belief (or lack thereof). There's always going to be a two-steps-forward-one-step-back deal with any belief system, even the right one, given our annoyingly persistent human-ness.

I, also, would have to agree. At least in my experiences and my behavior in the past. I've also been guilty of that same reasoning you've just stated, and I'd be willing to bet that it's much more common as well.

Well of course, but why is that even important? I wouldn't see how it would make humans better or anything. There are a fair number or people out there that glorify God with religion and they're real sh!ts.

Agreed, once more. No matter how correct, or incorrect, a belief/worldview/or lack thereof they will still be subjected to that inherit human flaw. Regardless of politics, religion, or your favorite type of sandwich.

Not really. God doesn't have to be a person.

So your belief (in your self-proclaimed "vastly superior knowledge") has called you to go out of your way to convert others. Exactly how does that differ from someone preaching his belief in a supreme being? The only difference I see, John, is that the Supreme Being you believe in is you! You are a one-man religion based on faith in your own superiority.

Besides, your target for conversion may have read, heard, thought the same things as you, yet has no faith in them and has rejected them in favor of his own faith, whatever it is. Reason has absolutely nothing to do with faith, because the whole thing about faith is that one believes something without any proof. A real Christian (and many who only think they are) doesn't need or even consider proof, he just believes!

I dunno, I woke up the morning after I got dumped, felt atheist, decided in the shower that I was gonna be atheist from now on... I mean, this is after years and years of contemplation, study, listening to other atheists, reading articles, etc. etc.

The truth is, I'm actually back to being an agnostic again, but I still appreciate the atheist stance. Turbulance has moved. I've found a new man, thus I'm in revenge mode and I've taken said revenge to my new Twitter page, which is now the unofficial sequel to this thread. But anyways...

Well, I dunno. I know of a few good atheists and that's all.

One of my favorite atheists is James Randi, the paranormal debunker over at www.randi.org. Look at how sexy he is.



I just believe that a lot of crap put out there by religious people can do a lot of harm to people. The human brain can be a gullible, sensitive, overworked, overtaxed and lame machine sometimes. I think people can be protected by knowing that they can be free to do things that religions tell them not to. I think they can live their lives better.

It might not be bad to get the opposing messages (religion's) out there, but I think it's important to have other views, especially since in most cases I personally feel they're right and they're beneficial to human beings.

Safety reasons.

I hear you, Sexy Celebrity. Live your life to the fullest.

I know you are gay and everything but come on, that guy is like 70. How is he sexy? I mean look at him:



He's no hunk.

Oh boy, I can tell this thread is going to get violent.

Are you nuts? You must be secretly attracted to him because you used his picture TWICE in that post!

Just look at that furry white beard... ooooooh, think about all of the places it could rub against. And doesn't he look so very dominating and authoritative with those crossed arms, blue shirt and that bossy red tie?

No?



What about here? Look at those hands... c'mon! Doesn't he just look like Santa Claus' more scientifically skilled brother? The one who doesn't eat all of America's cookies all on one night?



He's even more smokin' hot and dominating here. Black suit and a funky gray & black tie... ooooh! Prince would be so impressed.



Sometimes Randi (whose name is very sexual, by the way) dresses up in costumes, such as here.



The sight of sexy James Randi is enough to make anyone's hair stand on end!

And this is something you just take on faith, right? No amount of "facts" presented by others can convince you otherwise? Good for you. You are a true believer, faithful to your religion of atheism or whatever you care to call it.

My religion is sexiness. I believe in it - I have seen it - and it has it own dark side too, its own hell, its own devil - it's called ugliness.

There are atheists who don't believe in such a thing as sexiness -- they think it doesn't exist or doesn't matter - but I believe that it's there! I believe that I am part of sexiness.

Until I die and decay, that is. Then I will no longer be sexy....

Although, even that's not totally true, for there are necrophiliacs out there who would probably still find me sexy....

Com'on, you can screw your dog on the church altar, and the cops will only arrest you for indecent behavior, not for busting any commandments. You want to work for human rights, go join the Democratic party like my gay cousin.


Just because I raised some questions about atheism? I guess it's not bashing if a gay does it, huh? Not willing to extend human rights--like the freedom of speech--to all humans? Well, whatever floats your boat, bubba, bring it on.

I'm leaving this thread until someone with an even bigger interest in the freedom of speech wants to discuss what James Randi looks like naked.

Is one outta two okay?

__________________

“The gladdest moment in human life, methinks, is a departure into unknown lands.” – Sir Richard Burton

No, you got it all wrong. The point I'm making is that someone who doesn't believe thinks they have the right answer. The whole point in trying to convert someone isn't for their sake, but for the person who's doing the converting. There's no real motive other than belittling the person, or getting some satisfaction in "being right." Both sides are, IMO, a bit arrogant when it comes to the whole argument (claiming to have the right answer). And no, I have no belief in "vastly superior knowledge."

And yet, there are plenty of people who believe because they see something as proof. In the same way some don't believe because they see something as proof. So the believer can't see why the non-believer doesn't agree with them when all the evidence is staring them in the face, and the non-believer can't see why in the vice verse. And sometimes their evidence is the exact same thing!

I have to disagree on this one. There are plenty of reasons and facts that can demonstrate religious harm, and non-religious harm too. Which is one reason why churches don't stone witches, permit slavery, etc. These are practices that have obvious evidence that demonstrate religious harm and no amount of "facts" can convince people otherwise. If a good case can be made I see no reason why some religious practices can't be considered harmful because let's be honest...some are/were.

...

I would like to comment, but I don't know if I can. You honestly think that old dude wearing diapers staring stupidly at some Asian guy (not to mention the one where he is dressed up like some Lord of the Rings fanatic with the people staring at him like WTF is wrong with you) is...... HOT!? I just commented... and it was not a good thought.

Moviegoer, please stop reposting those hot-as-hell pictures of James Randi. Callouses are beginning to form on my hands. I'm getting so hot that I'm breaking out the Tylenol and having to fill my bathtub with cold water & ice cubes just to bring my temperature down.



God, he is so dreamy. Eat your heart out, Tom Cruise. Look at that beautiful bald head. I just wanna put little lines on it with a magic marker for everytime he brings me to total satisfaction. *SIGH* Let's bring Michelangelo back to life so he can sculpt a naked statue of Randi ~ another masterpiece for the world to enjoy forever, for sure!

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0