What's the Difference?

Before I start, let it be known that I am an apatheist, I don't care if there is or was a god(s) or not and I don't for one minute believe any religious text of any kind. Landfill material if I ever saw any.

My religious friends tend to believe in places that exist in another realm, such as heaven and hell. Many scientists believe in extra dimensions, parallel universes, particles we can't see or particles we believe are there but can't find, etc. To a lesser extent we have people who believe in a hereafter with ghosts and other wispy manifestations and we have people who fervently believe that cryptozoology will eventually offer up a Sasquatch or Nessie.

What's the difference? Why should I care what other people think? Should I only worry if one of those groups threatens my existence? Or what? I hate religion but I love science. I don't believe in ghosts or mysterious monsters but I believe in science and where its going.

I'm not sure if a devoutly religious scientist can actually function at 100%. Just an opinion I've formed after many years on the planet. How is it then that people like myself chastise others for their beliefs? I mean its fun to logic and reason with them but I never seem to receive counter logic that supports destroying my own. What is the fundamental difference between a believer in science and any other belief?

I think it has something to do with proving your stance with known facts. Those facts must be physical to mean anything. Mathematics I would include. Reasoning and logic are based on facts so why do those who believe in things that have no physical proof insist on ignoring the facts to satisfy their belief?

Maybe this belongs in the philosophy section.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well, don't most people believe in love? Can anyone proof that "love" exists in anything but the mind? What facts are there to support love?

But it's still interesting: You "believe" in reason, logic and science. Yet you denigrate others who believe in other things? What's the difference?

And why, oh, why, can't you just let others believe whatever they want to believe without denigrating them or their beliefs? Does their belief somehow harm you? If so, how?

Baron Max

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Good one, Baron.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well I don't understand why people believe things to be true without any evidence. I find things like ghosts and UFO's very interesting and can understand why people WANT to believe that the dead are walking the Earth or Aliens are visiting our planet.

If someone had lived with a pack of wolves all their lives, and we met and introduced them to society and showed them a movie, they would think it is real life, but we would have to explain that they are actors filmed by cameras in a Hollywood studio and those are just special effects generated by computers. Things which seem mysterious and unreal, become explainable if you have been there and done that or have evidence to explain it.

 

Well beliefs can lead to wars or blowing people up... Most of these beliefs usually stem from a belief in God in one way or another.

 

Well, scientists haven't done so bad in that regard, either, have they? Wasn't it "scientists" who invented all the weapons of the world? How 'bout the "big bombs" and horrendously powerful ICBMs? How 'bout those missile submarines?

Or perhaps ye're saying that the scientists who invented those horrendous weapons of war were really highly religious men who sought death and destruction on believers of different faiths????

Baron Max

 

Do you believe in love? Compassion? Empathy? ...and any of hundreds of such feelings, sensations, of the mind?

Baron Max

 

Who uses the weapons?

People with God on their side, I bet...

 

Yes. And even then you should mind your own business.

How wise is it to hate something which you deem stupid ...

Because of your pride.

Well, there are many religious believers who don't think the meaning of their life, or at least an important task of their life, is to go around and bash other people, poke holes in other people's understanding and such.

There are, after all, better things to do in life than to walk around trying to destroy as many opposing belief systems as one can.

You just see this as their "insistence on ignoring the facts". The truth of the matter is that many people, like you, are deeply jealous and resentful that some other people have something that truly makes them happy. While you are left with your theories and your "facts", miserable and angry, eventually convincing yourself that true happiness is a myth and cannot be found, so those who seek it must be really stupid ...

 

We don't know whether God is on their side.

 

Hogwash. It is not possible to be happy without a belief in God or following one organized religion? Religious people don't seem that happy to me, always throthing at the mouth at the behavior of society. They make your rant seem contradictive.

 

I didn't make such generalizations as you are making them.

Some non-religious people / atheists are unhappy, some are happy.
Some religious people are unhappy, some are happy.

I don't think it is religious belief that makes the difference. And I think it is wrong to treat religious belief as the root of all problems, the way it is often done though.

 

Well it sounded as though you were making generalizations to me by calling "people like you" jealous, resentful, miserable and angry, think that happiness is a myth that cannot be found...

 

THE clue, i believe--which helps deeply explore your question--is understanding mythology, both religious and scientific.

not many scientists, especially materialistic scientists ('mscience'), will understand their ontological certainty based on positivistc science to be a myth, but it is.

for example. materialsim versus idealism. one side believes all is matter. the other side, all is spirit.

so we we got here? we see both ideologies regard spirit and matter as being separate. mscience even dismisses the very notion of spirit,and from that metaphysical assumption proceeds to explain reality. no wonder then it is at a loss to explain anomalous events, be they parnanormal experience, UFos, abductions, NDEs, OBEs, etc etc.

A human is both objective and subjective. you simply cannot pretend to be one-sided. well yu can, but doing so makes it difficult to explore reality in a deepening way

Yes, mscience can continue to acce;erate technology, and measure more precisley, but there are limits to measure. for if not you find yourself in another dualism, measure vs immeasureability

 

PsychoticEpisode

Nobody is forcing you to believe in anything. Right now I'm watching Pussycat Dolls with the song Stick With You, they look great together. I BELIEVE that I could not sleep with all of them together, because I will not sleep at all

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

, but they will, after my job is finished. If you know what I mean

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

love is a chemical reaction thats spured on by our minds, the arrows of cupid would have had no effect if thay had'nt been dipped in a chemical, such as oxytocin, phenylethylamine.

 

HAHA

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I do find the argument between spirutualism and materialism very funny.

 

And I think it is wrong to treat religious belief as the root of all problems, the way it is often done though.

I agree, religion is the root of most problems, not all of them.

 

You've done a great job at discovering that there is a fundamental problem and it's a tough problem to define. There is a better question to ask and I'll explain a little bit of the background before providing visibility into it as well as the answer.

'Belief' is a word whose meaning changes drastically based on the context for which it is used. In the religous context (i.e. 'religious belief'), the word is literally defined as "acceptance of assertions as truth without considering supportive or contradictory evidence". It is often used as a process to understand reality and the the criteria of 'belief' is most commonly emotional. If an idea is very attractive and / or evokes fear of a supreme authority, then the 'belief' process kicks in and the 'believer' accepts the idea as truth. An example would be 'God'. Now that's an attractive and fearful concept. Heck, I WANT IT TO BE TRUE... how cool would that be?

When we use the phrase "I believe in science"... what we have is a statement of trust (completely different contextual meaning as compared to 'religious belief'). The meaning is that "I trust that science is a good process used to understand reality".

Knowning this, we have to ask what is science doing that I am trusting? The answer is that science is asking reality questions, reality answers, and the results are self-evident (like the computer screen you're looking at right now). It's an EVIDENCE-based process to understand reality.

Now what I would like to do is re-state your original question now that the background is established. The question would be:

Q: What is the fundamental difference between a 'believer' and a 'non-believer'? (using the 'religious belief' contextual definition)

The answer is process. A 'believer' tends to use emotional criteria to determine if something is true. A 'non-believer' tends to use evidence. I say 'tends to' for both camps because there is plenty of cross-over; however, for fanatastic claims such as 'God', 'Telekensis', 'Telepathy', 'Ghosts', 'Demons', 'Unicorns', etc. the processes used is very polarized.

 

There is no difference. Just egotistical athiests who feel the need to cut people down because they believe in something that makes them happy. And on the flip-side their are religious people who take it too far and try to convert everyone around them when they don't want it. How about this, religious people believe what they want without trying to force feed it down everyone's throats. And the athiests can non-believe all they want without having to ridicule other people every chance they get.

Remember, the greatest mind is the open mind. :m: