If everyone was atheist...

[Cianyx]

Food for thought. Consider our present time as a 0 on a number line. If we look to the positive and negative of the spectrum, we would see an endless amount of possibilities. Perhaps our existence is constructed in such a fashion?

 
Actually, the Maxin chap sounds quite interesting

[Eriny]

Eriny, a lot of your post needs to be corrected.

I'm going to change the topic a little. A number of pages ago, someone asked if you can be atheist and spiritual. I would say yes, certainly, though I don't think that I'm spiritual as such.

Incoherent statement, I have no idea what you mean when you say the word 'spiritual'.

I think enwiabe's points about uncertainty are very good, but you also have to keep in mind that many atheists are certain about how the world works. It started with the big bang, it's comprised of atoms and energy and such. When you die there is nothing.

Flat out incorrect. By definition, an atheist is merely one who is not persuaded by the claims of theism, nowhere does this view assert certainty, nowhere does it make claims about the big bang, atoms or the possibility of an afterlife. The postulation that 'it all started with the big bang, it's all comprised of atoms, etc" has nothing to do with atheism. nothing.

While I disagree with the way religion gives certainty to the universe, I also disagree that we can speculate what happens after we die. And further, while I definitely believes in the findings of science, I don't think it gives us a full illustration of the world.
Although I don't identify myself as a spiritual person, I am interested in the intangible. In ideas, in metaphysics, I'm interested in things that aren't directly observable.

Terribly weak minded thoughts here, you clearly don't understand the nature of science discovery, things don't need to be directly observable or 'tangible', and ideas are not equivalent to 'metaphysics', ideas may be falsifiable, while metaphysical postulations are by definition unfalsifiable.

God could be one of those things, but I personally believe that the idea of God is much more important then his or her literal existence.

White noise statement, typical of a muddled mind.

What character, (in one form or another or many) boasts quite so much influence over human civilisation? We can see God everywhere in churches and synagogues and mosques,

yes..the interaction between the neuroscience of our infantile desert cult ancestors and their environment produced this (and still does), this is not a mystery, the validity of an immaterial deity is not strengthen by this observation.

but God gets to the heart of our laws, our beliefs, our idea of what's right and wrong. God is in the Declaration of Human Rights as much as he is in the church. Even those who don't believe in God are so deeply influenced by the idea of God, because this idea has so much to do with out culture. Putting on my anthropologist hat here, many of our ideas, particularly pertaining to morality, are based on Judeo-Christian sentiment. God is very real (maybe not literally though).

rather vile babble, 'Judeo-Christian' 'values' where largely plagiarized from ancient, even more arcane peasant religions, they are not the basis of our society or culture or moral system. Humans brains are evolved organs and it follows that our morals are evolved mechanisms, we nee-dent appeal to immaterial or 'spiritual' systems to construct a moral framework.

But anyway, I think that my interest in the humanities, in philosophy, in art, etc. means that I don't see the world in a reductionist kind of way. There's more to the world than its physical/biological/chemical nature.

Pardon? this demarcation between 'humanities' and 'hard sciences' is entirely the product of your own confused little mind, the obvious fact that we are made of material, i.e. the materialist viewpoint, does not necessitate that we cannot appreciate art or literature.
The irony of course is the science you dismiss as 'insuffienct' can explain exactly why you believe that 'there's something more to life than its chemical nature'.

There's beauty and power and emotions and lots of over abstract stuff. For me, this abstract level of intellectual inquiry replaces spirituality for me. That's why I actually identify myself as a Secular Humanist before I see myself as an atheist. I think that there is more to the world than what we can observe, but I don't think that necessarily means that there is a literal God out there who created us and watches over us.

Please don't confuse abstract inquiry with incoherent wishful thinking. Of course there's more to the universe that humans can observe, by our very nature we are imperfectly evolved animals, we are made of, and governed by, atoms, there is no mystery if you do not make one.

I never said that atheism made claims to truth. Many atheists do though. Besides, I think scientific knowledge is crucial, I just think hat there is more to life/the world than that. Meanwhile, while you are of course entitled to disagree with me, you have no right to insult me, particularly since you didn't seem to read my post. How about you clearly elucidate your view rather than simply dismiss mine as 'incoherent' or 'nonsense' without ever offering a good reason as to why? You certainly aren't winning anyone over with that dogmatic, condescending attitude.

[QuantumJG]

Food for thought. Consider our present time as a 0 on a number line. If we look to the positive and negative of the spectrum, we would see an endless amount of possibilities. Perhaps our existence is constructed in such a fashion?

 
Actually, the Maxin chap sounds quite interesting

This reminds me of a question I asked myself.

"Why did we pick year 0 to be where it was?"

Anyway if you look at it, year 0 is supposed to be when Jesus was born. But according to some sources, Jesus wasn't born till 4 AD (Having said that, I don't know how accurately you can age someone who was around 2000 years ago).

Where you put year 0 is arbitrary, our dates are just relative to this date. Having said that, there must be a true year 0 (I.e. The start of our universe). Religious people say this is the time when god 'created' the universe. String theorists say that violent collisions between membranes in higher dimensions are producing several universes at a time. To "me" both sound a bit "out-there". Both are plausible considering who you target as your audience. Can either be proven to show "beyond any doubt" that they are true? No.

Ok so a few of you are probably saying: "An atheist believes Jesus existed?". I'm pretty sure I pointed this out in the first few pages that I believe Jesus is as real as Plato, Galileo or Archimedes. Do I believe he is the son of god? No (well if I don't believe in god, how can I believe "he" has a son?). Do I believe Jesus was a normal human being? Yes.

[happycat]

I consider myself atheist, is that bad?

[Kotza]

^ lol wtf no

[QuantumJG]

"I long for the day when men will turn away from invisible monsters and once more embrace a more rational view of the world. But these new religions are so convenient - and promise such terrible punishment should one reject them - I worry that fear shall keep us stuck to what is surely the greatest lie ever told." Assassins Creed II

I seriously couldn't say this any better.

[Russ]

Made by a multicultural team of diverse faiths and beliefs

[Kotza]

Kotza, I take offence to your avatar/picture-thingy.

If I was to post something anti-Semite on the forum and question the authenticity of their religion, I would be thrown off the forum, so you should be thrown off. I haven't read this thread but your picture is anti-Christianity and is not respecting everybody's right to a religion.  

I really couldnt give a shit less. I am expressing my belief in the form of my avatar (which is awesome). It isnt Jesus for a specific reason, it is merely convenient as he is the most known thing in the Western World. If you are so sensitive about 18 year old's avatars on forums, crawl up in a ball, listen to Anberlin and live inside the confessional booth in a Church.

Also to Quantum's post, i dont remember that quote, that is insanely awesome.

[QuantumJG]

The quote comes from the codex pages in the game. I'm pretty sure the codex pages are from Altäir talking about what life in the 1100's in the middle east is like.

[Spreadbury]

Kotza, I take offence to your avatar/picture-thingy.

If I was to post something anti-Semite on the forum and question the authenticity of their religion, I would be thrown off the forum, so you should be thrown off. I haven't read this thread but your picture is anti-Christianity and is not respecting everybody's right to a religion.   

I really couldnt give a shit less. I am expressing my belief in the form of my avatar (which is awesome). It isnt Jesus for a specific reason, it is merely convenient as he is the most known thing in the Western World. If you are so sensitive about 18 year old's avatars on forums, crawl up in a ball, listen to Anberlin and live inside the confessional booth in a Church.

+1

[bluehorizon]

i appreciate the modesty.

Well it is met which such skepticism because that is the way in which i see it.

The perfect response to that comment however is this:
"Faith is not wanting to know what is true." - Nietzsche. Obviously not the most reliable source considering the guy was as much of a pessimist as one can be, but still reflects my views.

And i understand you completely, i was once as religious as any person could be (and believed that theory), but in the words of Martin Luther, "I did not leave the Church, the Church left me." So i get where you are coming from. However, i would rather trust highly intelligent scientists who went to Harvard or whatever and conducted strenuous tests on the origins of the universe based on fact than believing a bunch of animal-sacrificing primitives who lived ~2000 years ago.

Whilst many "factual" theories have been discredited over the ages, at least they are founded with at least a modicum of rationalization and logic (e.g. Aristotle believing the world to be the center of the universe based on the apparentness of the planets rotating around earth and that the world is stable and not moving.)

While that is essentially crap, at least there was some logic involved. This is where religion fails, it has such a lack of proof, "just because a book says so" is perhaps a weak argument.

 

logic is overrated. highly intelligent scientists are overrated. indeed theres no logic in trusting science and doubting religion. at least doubt both, or at least trust both. if you think about the most intelligent ant in the world, how close would its IQ be to a human? And then what are humans to god?

[brenden]

Please check the date of the last post before you make a reply, when it's so far back it's good not to reawaken the thread
If you feel your contribution is quite important, you're always free to make a new topic =]

[pi]

solidnecro/10 mate



NEW USERS: Forum Necromancy. (Revival of Dead Threads) MUST READ

Cheers.