religion and atheism from a psychological perspective

[Asguard]

well this will offend everyone equally but nither senario has any evidence behind it. In fact from a psychological perspective they are exactly the same.

Basically there are 3 possable senarios we know about (all others are just combinations of these)

1) there is nothing after death
2) there is something good after death
3) there is something bad after death

Now as we are all afraid of death we are atracted to the choice which best alays our fears. For athiests its the first, not many people pick door number 3 so most thiests pick door number 2 (for themselves anyway)

So in reality none of you who post here are doing anything other than making up fantasies to quite your fears of what hapens next

The only people who move past this are the apathetic agnostics who just dont give a shit what happens next and concentrate on what happens NOW.

[spidergoat]

No, from a psychological perspective, the death of the brain is the end of the thing that makes you distinctly you. This can be tested empirically. There is also another choice: there is no such thing as death.

[Asguard]

spidergoat

actually no, science doesnt answer the question AT ALL. all it will state as FACT is that your body goes strangly quite and you have a tendancy to get very smelly

And the psychology i was refering to was a debate between a behavioral psychologist and a chirstan as to why people hold belifes be them of something behond or NOTHING behond

[Simon Anders]

well this will offend everyone equally but nither senario has any evidence behind it. In fact from a psychological perspective they are exactly the same.

Basically there are 3 possable senarios we know about (all others are just combinations of these)

1) there is nothing after death
2) there is something good after death
3) there is something bad after death

Now as we are all afraid of death we are atracted to the choice which best alays our fears. For athiests its the first, not many people pick door number 3 so most thiests pick door number 2 (for themselves anyway)

So in reality none of you who post here are doing anything other than making up fantasies to quite your fears of what hapens next

The only people who move past this are the apathetic agnostics who just dont give a shit what happens next and concentrate on what happens NOW.
Interesting approach. Sorry to add a quibble.

Reincarnation can offer merely more of the same: IOW neither good nor bad.

I think you are going to have to work hard to show that atheists choice of door number one is psychologically appealing to them. How so?

[spidergoat]

What about alpha waves? The brain's activity is detectable, and is certainly the center of personality and consciousness. Even people who's bodies are kept alive may be considered already dead if their brains are not functioning.

[Asguard]

SA, im trying to find the actual artical. It was quite an interesting debate and was mainly focused at the "belivers crowd". Its ovious to someone who spends time around here that the same can easerly be aplied to the anti-belivers (like Q) as oposed to someone like myself who "just doesnt give a shit".

The most facinating thing about it was that it was from a psychological perspective rather than a theological or dawkins one

[Simon Anders]

SA, im trying to find the actual artical. It was quite an interesting debate and was mainly focused at the "belivers crowd". Its ovious to someone who spends time around here that the same can easerly be aplied to the anti-belivers (like Q) as oposed to someone like myself who "just doesnt give a shit".

The most facinating thing about it was that it was from a psychological perspective rather than a theological or dawkins one
sounds interesting. I hope you find it. I do think there are psychological reasons why we choose beliefs and these can also be involved in atheism. The trick is to show why a belief that includes a final end is preferable. Or perhaps why it might be psychologically appealing to limit knowledge and ways of gaining knowledge to empiricism. Could be done, but to convince atheists you would probably need more than theory: you would need some sort of empirical study of atheists.

And after that you are bound to hear the phrase....

soft science.

But if you get a link, let us know.

[Anti-Flag]

well this will offend everyone equally but nither senario has any evidence behind it. In fact from a psychological perspective they are exactly the same.

Basically there are 3 possable senarios we know about (all others are just combinations of these)

1) there is nothing after death
2) there is something good after death
3) there is something bad after death

Now as we are all afraid of death we are atracted to the choice which best alays our fears. For athiests its the first, not many people pick door number 3 so most thiests pick door number 2 (for themselves anyway)

Just a few points:
The first problem with this idea is that it's a chicken and egg scenario. Do people get attracted to the choice which best fits their religious beliefs, or does their religion partly depend upon which choice they believe in?

The second problem would be proving that a belief in nothing after death would make everyone fearful. If there is nothing after death then what is there to fear?

The third problem would be those who WANT to believe in something good after death but don't. That displays they are not 'attracted' to a belief on the basis that it dispels their fears.

I'd be interested in reading the article though if you find it.

[Asguard]

Anti-Flag

why would it depend on proving that a belife in nothing after death causes everyone fear?

I LOVE spiders, doesnt mean arachaphobia isnt real, just means i dont suffer from it (i would have used snakes in that example but i dont know what a phobia of snakes is caused)

Your right that it could me more complex than that and there could be people who want there to be nothing but who belive there is something or vise versa but it doesnt invalidate the psychological argument

for people who want to try to find this artical (because im having zero luck) i BELIVE one of the people involved in the debate was Patricia Row. The other was something or other Atkins (god only knows if thats spelled right, at the time i was driving and trying to scribble there names down from what i briefly herd)

[swarm]

If shit is still happening, you aren't really very dead.

[PsychoticEpisode]

Death is bad for an atheist. Two reasons....the first is that it is all over, oblivion, nothing more, done, finished. Secondly what if the theists are right, it's off to hell we go.

In fairness, the first reason is what an atheist expects so it should come as no surprise , and we can't even say 'I told you so'. But should death become part of the theist-atheist debate?

There is a 4th scenario. It is unknown. Actually all off us should accept this scenario for there isn't a person alive that can tell you what happens when you die, no one. God is irrelevant, atheism, theism or anything associated with religion as well. All we can do is guess. In the meantime it would be nice if the world could agree that there is nothing wrong with believing in anything as long as we don't preach it as gospel.

As long as we're talking psychology then it all comes down to human nature. All atheism is concerned with is whether there is a god or not. Life after death is more or less another belief. How atheism became associated with there being no life after death is beyond me.

[Nasor]

Basically there are 3 possable senarios we know about (all others are just combinations of these)

1) there is nothing after death
2) there is something good after death
3) there is something bad after death

Now as we are all afraid of death we are atracted to the choice which best alays our fears. For athiests its the first, not many people pick door number 3 so most thiests pick door number 2 (for themselves anyway)

So in reality none of you who post here are doing anything other than making up fantasies to quite your fears of what hapens next
I disagree. Atheists believe that we cease to exist when we die, but in general that does nothing to allay fears of death. I am an atheist, and I most certainly do not want to cease to exist when I die. I would absolutely love to get to continue to exist in a supernatural paradise after I die, as described by christianity. But I realize that just because I really really want something doesn't mean that it's actually possible or real. The theist world view is definitely much more pleasant than the atheist world view. Sadly, I can't make myself believe something that seems absurd to me simply because it's pleasant.

[Enmos]

I disagree. Atheists believe that we cease to exist when we die, but in general that does nothing to allay fears of death. I am an atheist, and I most certainly do not want to cease to exist when I die. I would absolutely love to get to continue to exist in a supernatural paradise after I die, as described by christianity. But I realize that just because I really really want something doesn't mean that it's actually possible or real. The theist world view is definitely much more pleasant than the atheist world view. Sadly, I can't make myself believe something that seems absurd to me simply because it's pleasant.

Seconded.

[Anti-Flag]

Anti-Flag

why would it depend on proving that a belife in nothing after death causes everyone fear?
In the case of 1) it requires proof because of the original statement:
Now as we are all afraid of death we are atracted to the choice which best alays our fears
This implies everyone fears death(this alone requires proof), especially in terms of those with a belief in "nothing after death"; you would have to give reason as to why they are fearful.
If the statement is that nobody wants to die then it is understandable, but that doesn't mean everyone fears death.

[lightgigantic]

well this will offend everyone equally but nither senario has any evidence behind it. In fact from a psychological perspective they are exactly the same.

Basically there are 3 possable senarios we know about (all others are just combinations of these)

1) there is nothing after death
2) there is something good after death
3) there is something bad after death

Now as we are all afraid of death we are atracted to the choice which best alays our fears.
there is however the suggestion that theism, properly applied, allows one to transcend what are commonly held as the limitations of corporeal existence ... IOW its not all fear driven

For athiests its the first, not many people pick door number 3 so most thiests pick door number 2 (for themselves anyway)

So in reality none of you who post here are doing anything other than making up fantasies to quite your fears of what hapens next
there is however the issue "how do you know that nothing can be known about what happens after death"
:D

The only people who move past this are the apathetic agnostics who just dont give a shit what happens next and concentrate on what happens NOW.
the problem is what happens NOW determines what happens after death ....

[Simon Anders]

there is however the issue "how do you know that nothing can be known about what happens after death"

I've tried to point out this kind of thing before also. That this is a claim to knowledge.

When one claims there is a god or an afterlife, atheists will see this as a fantastic claim requiring evidence.

When one claims that if there is an afterlife, no one could no what it is like?

or if there is a God, no one could communicate with herm?

etc.

no back up necessary. It is somehow obvious what is possible.

[swarm]

Death is bad for an atheist.

No it isn't.

Two reasons....the first is that it is all over, oblivion, nothing more, done, finished.

And this is bad how?

Secondly what if the theists are right, it's off to hell we go.

No, it just means that something happens after death. Being right about that doesn't mean they got anything else right and in particular, do you really think gods are as stupid, mean, petty, jealous and down right evil as the theists make them out to be?

And which theists in particular would be the right ones?

If there is anything after death the one thing you can know for sure is the theists got it dead wrong.

[PsychoticEpisode]

No, it just means that something happens after death. Being right about that doesn't mean they got anything else right and in particular, do you really think gods are as stupid, mean, petty, jealous and down right evil as the theists make them out to be?

And which theists in particular would be the right ones?

If there is anything after death the one thing you can know for sure is the theists got it dead wrong.

I'm not really worried about death, but I wouldn't mind sticking around.

I quite sure not one theist has ever known what happens after you die. Personally I don't think I'll continue anywhere and if I do it will be a surprise.

Again, atheism is about an absence of belief in God and I can't see why afterlife is a concern.

[Lori_7]

i'm not afraid of death.

[Lori_7]

wait a minute...what you're saying here doesn't make any sense. how can buying into a theory, when you know that's what you're doing, and you don't have proof, calm a fear?

[lightgigantic]

I'm not really worried about death, but I wouldn't mind sticking around.
Probably a few job vacancies in the democratic republic of congo whenever you are ready ...

I quite sure not one theist has ever known what happens after you die.
I presume your surety is simply your ideas of knowledge following your values/opinions

Personally I don't think I'll continue anywhere and if I do it will be a surprise.
Personally I think it would be a great surprise to be able to give a car a wheel alignment too
(.... mainly because, personally, I am not a mechanic)

Again, atheism is about an absence of belief in God and I can't see why afterlife is a concern.
I think the concern lies more in what preempts the next life - Death.

[lightgigantic]

swarm

Originally Posted by PsychoticEpisode
Death is bad for an atheist.
”
No it isn't.
you don't think the sudden nearness of death could seriously derail your stability in life?
:confused:

“
Two reasons....the first is that it is all over, oblivion, nothing more, done, finished.
”
And this is bad how?
I guess he was assuming that you lead a somewhat normal life with friends, relationships, material earnings, etc and weren't living a life like a Trappist monk

“
Secondly what if the theists are right, it's off to hell we go.
”
No, it just means that something happens after death. Being right about that doesn't mean they got anything else right and in particular, do you really think gods are as stupid, mean, petty, jealous and down right evil as the theists make them out to be?
IOW any personality that has the audacity to discipline you is stupid, mean, petty, etc?

And which theists in particular would be the right ones?
I don't know what religious discipline you have in mind that suggest that the next life exists independent of how one acts in this life ....

If there is anything after death the one thing you can know for sure is the theists got it dead wrong.
why?
Even atheists who carve out a career in religious studies don't suggest that the inter-connection between theistic claims is without any common grounds.
:shrug:

[James R]

Asguard:

Basically there are 3 possable senarios we know about (all others are just combinations of these)

1) there is nothing after death
2) there is something good after death
3) there is something bad after death

Now as we are all afraid of death we are atracted to the choice which best alays our fears.

Many people, theists and atheists, would argue that they are attracted to the choice that they believe is correct, and not just the choice that best allays their fears.

I don't think you can present any evidence for your claim about psychology.

[scorpius]

Now as we are all afraid of death.
see thats where youre wrong...Im not afraid of death. :p

[greenberg]

Again, atheism is about an absence of belief in God and I can't see why afterlife is a concern.

Simple: If God exists, then there is more to life than just that which we usually perceive through our senses. All major religious traditions discuss those issues that are beyond that which we usually perceive through our senses.
That "more to life" including concerns about what happens before birth and after death, how planet Earth came to being, why the Sun shines and why it rains ... what true happiness is, why living beings suffer ... what sort of person to marry, what career path to take ... whether to eat meat or drink alcohol or not ...


So anyone wondering about God will also wonder about those things in life that are more than just that which we usually perceive through our senses.
Unless they have received their notions about theism in strictly philosophical Western circles focused on the "God of the gaps".

[StrangerInAStrangeLa]

I am not afraid of death the least little bit.
I don't choose to believe or not to believe. It's not a choice.
IF there are gods, that doesn't mean there's life after death. IF there's life after death, that doesn't mean there are gods.

I disagree. Atheists believe that we cease to exist when we die, but in general that does nothing to allay fears of death. I am an atheist, and I most certainly do not want to cease to exist when I die. I would absolutely love to get to continue to exist in a supernatural paradise after I die, as described by christianity. But I realize that just because I really really want something doesn't mean that it's actually possible or real. The theist world view is definitely much more pleasant than the atheist world view. Sadly, I can't make myself believe something that seems absurd to me simply because it's pleasant.

I am an atheist & I don't believe we cease to exist.
The christian view is extremely unpleasant. The vast majority suffer horribly for eternity while few enjoy "paradise".
1111

[swarm]

There is no paradise which can make up for hell.

[greenberg]

IF there are gods, that doesn't mean there's life after death.

IF there's life after death, that doesn't mean there are gods.

Do justify each point.

[swarm]

swarm you don't think the sudden nearness of death could seriously derail your stability in life?

Death is never more than a heartbeat away. It doesn't derail my stability.

I guess he was assuming that you lead a somewhat normal life with friends, relationships, material earnings, etc

I do. What about it?

IOW any personality that has the audacity to discipline you is stupid, mean, petty, etc?

Being damned to hell for eternity is not being “disciplined.” It is the action of a petty evil being which only petty evil beings would bother to worship.

I don't know what religious discipline you have in mind that suggest that the next life exists independent of how one acts in this life ....

You should broaden your horizons. Since you are a xtian, start with the universalists. Where you see hell, they see universal salvation, yes even Hilter. Tell me Abraham. Would you really sacrifice your child to an evil god?

why?

Because you are wrong.

[Leo Volont]

So much FAILURE of imagination.

Consider that Religious 'Eternity' consists of the LAST MOMENT OF REFLECTION before the mind quits. Subjectively, for the person experiencing this LAST MOMENT, does it END, or does that LAST MOMENT hang in suspension, hang in TIME?

This is not just a philosophical congesture. Talk to people about Documented Near Death Experiences. Clearly, Death is not nothing. Something is happening. And these are NEAR DEATH. the BIG PERMANENT DEATHs might be a leap even beyond that.

well this will offend everyone equally but nither senario has any evidence behind it. In fact from a psychological perspective they are exactly the same.

Basically there are 3 possable senarios we know about (all others are just combinations of these)

1) there is nothing after death
2) there is something good after death
3) there is something bad after death

Now as we are all afraid of death we are atracted to the choice which best alays our fears. For athiests its the first, not many people pick door number 3 so most thiests pick door number 2 (for themselves anyway)

So in reality none of you who post here are doing anything other than making up fantasies to quite your fears of what hapens next

The only people who move past this are the apathetic agnostics who just dont give a shit what happens next and concentrate on what happens NOW.

[greenberg]

Since you are a xtian

Holy smokes! :eek:

:rolleyes:

[StrangerInAStrangeLa]

“ Originally Posted by StrangerInAStrangeLa
IF there are gods, that doesn't mean there's life after death.

IF there's life after death, that doesn't mean there are gods.

Do justify each point.

WTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There's no justifying to it.
Those who assume existence of gods to automatically mean there's life after death & vice versa are the 1s who should justify it. They can't.
I'm NOT making assumptions. I'm pointing them out.
1111

[alexb123]

The Psychology of religion is about as simple as it gets.

Religious people are prone to making Type two errors!

[lightgigantic]

swarm

Originally Posted by lightgigantic
swarm you don't think the sudden nearness of death could seriously derail your stability in life?
”
Death is never more than a heartbeat away. It doesn't derail my stability.
You like watching movies I take it ...

“
I guess he was assuming that you lead a somewhat normal life with friends, relationships, material earnings, etc
”
I do. What about it?
by your own admission, its all fro nothing

“
IOW any personality that has the audacity to discipline you is stupid, mean, petty, etc?
”
Being damned to hell for eternity is not being “disciplined.”
hence the suggestion that hell is not eternal .... merely an unpleasant place to visit temporarily

It is the action of a petty evil being which only petty evil beings would bother to worship.
actually I would agree with that, if one was working with the assumption that hell is eternal

“
I don't know what religious discipline you have in mind that suggest that the next life exists independent of how one acts in this life ....
”
You should broaden your horizons. Since you are a xtian, start with the universalists. Where you see hell, they see universal salvation, yes even Hilter. Tell me Abraham. Would you really sacrifice your child to an evil god?
I'm a christian?
:confused:

“
why?
”
Because you are wrong.
you should really broaden your horizons and perhaps for a moment operate out of theistic paradigms that aren't christian .... might lend a bit of credibility to your endeavours to tar theists with the same big brush

[swarm]

You like watching movies I take it ...

I rarely watch movies and don't watch broadcast or cable tv. What of it?

If you were making a subtle cultural reference I indubitably missed it.

by your own admission, its all fro nothing

I made no such admission.

hence the suggestion that hell is not eternal .... merely an unpleasant place to visit temporarily

Why bother imagining such fantasies at all?

you should really broaden your horizons and perhaps for a moment operate out of theistic paradigms that aren't christian .... might lend a bit of credibility to your endeavours to tar theists with the same big brush

If you aren't a xtian that's fine by me. It doesn't make your position as a theist less ridiculous though.

[lightgigantic]

swarm

Originally Posted by lightgigantic
You like watching movies I take it ...
”
I rarely watch movies and don't watch broadcast or cable tv. What of it?

If you were making a subtle cultural reference I indubitably missed it.
your proclamation about being bold in the face of death rings of a person who's experience of near death experiences is made up by hollywood.


“
by your own admission, its all fro nothing
”
I made no such admission.

Two reasons....the first is that it is all over, oblivion, nothing more, done, finished.
”
And this is bad how?
you don't anticipate any distress at the inevitable demise of friends, family, society, etc etc

“
hence the suggestion that hell is not eternal .... merely an unpleasant place to visit temporarily
”
Why bother imagining such fantasies at all?
I place the same suggestion to you

“
you should really broaden your horizons and perhaps for a moment operate out of theistic paradigms that aren't christian .... might lend a bit of credibility to your endeavours to tar theists with the same big brush
”
If you aren't a xtian that's fine by me. It doesn't make your position as a theist less ridiculous though.
As an atheist, I am sure you are not phased about being diametrically opposed to theists.

What makes me wonder, however, is why you expect that a theist has concerns about being diametrically opposed to an atheist ....
:o

[swarm]

swarm

your proclamation about being bold in the face of death rings of a person who's experience of near death experiences is made up by hollywood.

Sorry I came by it the old fashioned way.

you don't anticipate any distress at the inevitable demise of friends, family, society, etc etc

I'm not unfamiliar with the actual demise of friends, family, etc.

I lost a best friend to cancer a while back. My mom just died in September. My sweety's aunt is dying of advanced cirhosis of the liver (as in months to live) and my brother-in-law was just in a distillery explosion with 3rd degree burns over 45% of his body. I'm sympathis for each of their personal tragedies and am there for them and their families to the extent I can be. I grieve for my loss and continue to live my life. Life has both sorrow and joy. Did you miss the memo?

Anticipitory distress is BS. I see no reason for it and don't bother about it.

I place the same suggestion to you

I don't bother imagining them and recommend the same to you.

As an atheist, I am sure you are not phased about being diametrically opposed to theists.

I'm no more an atheist than I'm an a-unicornist. I'm not diametrically opposed to theists. I simply refuse to allow that you can create gods by fiat.

[lightgigantic]

swarm


your proclamation about being bold in the face of death rings of a person who's experience of near death experiences is made up by hollywood.
”
Sorry I came by it the old fashioned way.
assuming that you are still living, I can't fathom what you mean

“
you don't anticipate any distress at the inevitable demise of friends, family, society, etc etc
”
I'm not unfamiliar with the actual demise of friends, family, etc.
who isn't?
death visits everyone equally

I lost a best friend to cancer a while back. My mom just died in September. My sweety's aunt is dying of advanced cirhosis of the liver (as in months to live) and my brother-in-law was just in a distillery explosion with 3rd degree burns over 45% of his body. I'm sympathis for each of their personal tragedies and am there for them and their families to the extent I can be. I grieve for my loss and continue to live my life. Life has both sorrow and joy. Did you miss the memo?

Anticipitory distress is BS. I see no reason for it and don't bother about it.
Anticipating distress is intelligence ... kind of like the old addage "if you don't plan you are planning for failure"

“
I place the same suggestion to you
”
I don't bother imagining them and recommend the same to you.

welcome to diametrical opposition
“
As an atheist, I am sure you are not phased about being diametrically opposed to theists.
”
I'm no more an atheist than I'm an a-unicornist. I'm not diametrically opposed to theists. I simply refuse to allow that you can create gods by fiat.
yet you still remain diametrically opposed ....
:shrug:

[swarm]

assuming that you are still living, I can't fathom what you mean

It not that mysterious. I've faced death a few times.

Anticipating distress is intelligence

No, it is merely wasted time needlessly suffering over nothing.

yet you still remain diametrically opposed ....

Your mindlessly chanting it does not make it so.

[lightgigantic]

swarm

Originally Posted by lightgigantic
assuming that you are still living, I can't fathom what you mean
”
It not that mysterious. I've faced death a few times.
yet you still chose life?
how uncanny ....

“
Anticipating distress is intelligence
”
No, it is merely wasted time needlessly suffering over nothing.
so its more a belief that there is no solution?

“
yet you still remain diametrically opposed ....
”
Your mindlessly chanting it does not make it so.
your schismatic disagreement in one post and blindness to recognize the schism in the next makes me wonder whats exactly in your mind ....

[(Q)]

So in reality none of you who post here are doing anything other than making up fantasies to quite your fears of what hapens next

The only people who move past this are the apathetic agnostics who just dont give a shit what happens next and concentrate on what happens NOW.

Not really, "apathetic agnostics" are essentially 'fence sitters' - the problem is that they give equal credibility to theists claims for gods as they do for atheists who don't accept those claims.

We should be sending them a dime so they can go out and buy themselves a spine.

[swarm]

Actually not caring is the better of the positions. The theist's delusions aren't really that important.

[swarm]

yet you still chose life?
how uncanny ....

So? Not every one does you know. I still fail to see what point you are trying to make.

so its more a belief that there is no solution?

No it is the realization that anticipating distress is simply needless self flagellation and all you need to do to resolve it is stop doing it.

your schismatic disagreement in one post and blindness to recognize the schism in the next makes me wonder whats exactly in your mind ....

I've been perfectly straight forward about it. I'm not diametrically opposed to theists.

[(Q)]

Actually not caring is the better of the positions. The theist's delusions aren't really that important.

Agreed, but if we don't care about their delusions having an influence over our lives, then we deserve everything their delusions will affect.

[PsychoticEpisode]

Simple: If God exists, then there is more to life than just that which we usually perceive through our senses.

If God exists He might not want you to know it. You can philosophise, speculate and guess all you want and you'll never know the truth. It just isn't worth the time & effort. Great brain exercise maybe but not beneficial to anyone else.

As for more to life than what we perceive....hardly. There is nothing you can perceive that I can't. You and me, we're not special and we're equally equipped with sensory devices. Right now life is whatever you think it is. For me, more to life means discovering exactly what it is.

[lightgigantic]

swarm

Originally Posted by lightgigantic
yet you still chose life?
how uncanny ....
”
So? Not every one does you know. I still fail to see what point you are trying to make.
death catalyzes a change of perspective (unless one is a fool)

“
so its more a belief that there is no solution?
”
No it is the realization that anticipating distress is simply needless self flagellation and all you need to do to resolve it is stop doing it.
once again, anticipating distress is what distinguishes an intelligent person from a hopeless fool

“
your schismatic disagreement in one post and blindness to recognize the schism in the next makes me wonder whats exactly in your mind ....
”
I've been perfectly straight forward about it. I'm not diametrically opposed to theists.
... yet you retort in opposition to practically all of their claims
:scratchin:

[lightgigantic]

Psychotic Episode
“
Originally Posted by greenberg
Simple: If God exists, then there is more to life than just that which we usually perceive through our senses.
”
If God exists He might not want you to know it. You can philosophise, speculate and guess all you want and you'll never know the truth.
until of course one decides to take the plunge and venture on to application, yes


It just isn't worth the time & effort. Great brain exercise maybe but not beneficial to anyone else.
great actions require great ideas
:o

As for more to life than what we perceive....hardly. There is nothing you can perceive that I can't.
the claim to being a physicist is not so much of having a unique eyeball ... its more akin to having unique training. Spiritual life is much the same

You and me, we're not special and we're equally equipped with sensory devices. Right now life is whatever you think it is. For me, more to life means discovering exactly what it is.
differences ensue when one party advocates that the discovery lies in how the consciousness drives the senses and the other advocates that it is simply all about the senses

[PsychoticEpisode]

until of course one decides to take the plunge and venture on to application, yes

While ignoring the obvious

great actions require great ideas

As in God killing people en masse?

the claim to being a physicist is not so much of having a unique eyeball ... its more akin to having unique training. Spiritual life is much the same

I think that in order to be a spiritual trainer a unique eyeball is a prerequisite:rolleyes:

differences ensue when one party advocates that the discovery lies in how the consciousness drives the senses and the other advocates that it is simply all about the senses

My senses tell me that you don't know what you're talking about. OK, I won't be so harsh.... my senses tell me you think you know what you're talking about.

[Asguard]

q i think you need to look up the word APATHETIC again:p
Basically agnostic means either has no opinion, belives they could be wrong ect (your right, fence sitters) however when you add apathetic onto the state it means they just dont give a shit about the debate either way.

Basically i would much rather spend my time debating morality and politics and influancing people that way than worry about wether or not they belive in god

[swarm]

death catalyzes a change of perspective (unless one is a fool)

You are the fool if you let your fear of death control your life.

once again, anticipating distress is what distinguishes an intelligent person from a hopeless fool

I have better things to do than sit around worrying about things which don't exist. You may foolishly concern yourself with as many phantoms as you care to.

yet you retort in opposition to practically all of their claims

That is because you have offered nothing of substance yet.

[lightgigantic]

swarm
“ Originally Posted by lightgigantic
death catalyzes a change of perspective (unless one is a fool) ”

You are the fool if you let your fear of death control your life.
looking both ways before crossing the road does seem to offer benefits ....


“ once again, anticipating distress is what distinguishes an intelligent person from a hopeless fool ”

I have better things to do than sit around worrying about things which don't exist.
so do I

You may foolishly concern yourself with as many phantoms as you care to.
meanwhile languish in the medium of unavoidable attachment to things that will shortly not exist while your molars rot ... I certainly hope you strike up enough relationships with permissive pharmacists to make your brief life free from anxiety ...


“ yet you retort in opposition to practically all of their claims ”

That is because you have offered nothing of substance yet.
sitting on your laurels and retorting "that's a load of BS" is substantial?

[lightgigantic]

psychotic episode

“ Originally Posted by lightgigantic
until of course one decides to take the plunge and venture on to application, yes ”

While ignoring the obvious
which is?


“ great actions require great ideas ”

As in God killing people en masse?
If you had eternal existence in a material state you would beg for death


“ the claim to being a physicist is not so much of having a unique eyeball ... its more akin to having unique training. Spiritual life is much the same ”

I think that in order to be a spiritual trainer a unique eyeball is a prerequisite
a remarkably similar retort to what a high school drop out could make in regard to a physics teacher .....


“ differences ensue when one party advocates that the discovery lies in how the consciousness drives the senses and the other advocates that it is simply all about the senses ”

My senses tell me that you don't know what you're talking about. OK, I won't be so harsh.... my senses tell me you think you know what you're talking about.
Ironically, the sense you talk about is not empirically defined, unless you indicate the genes and chemicals that dictate such a state of being
:o

[PsychoticEpisode]

Originally Posted by lightgigantic
until of course one decides to take the plunge and venture on to application, yes ”

While ignoring the obvious

which is?

The real world, the truth, your deluded mind.

If you had eternal existence in a material state you would beg for death

That would be illogical. I would enjoy every minute of it. I've heard Xian theists say that God had originally intended us to be immortal in the material state. I wish you guys would unify with one another.

I think that in order to be a spiritual trainer a unique eyeball is a prerequisite
a remarkably similar retort to what a high school drop out could make in regard to a physics teacher .....

You're putting yourself on a pedestal again. All this bantering is really some kind of class issue with you isn't it. You're a John Cleese fan, didn't you just love the part in the movie 'Monty Python & The Holy Grail' when King Arthur comes across two peasants working in the field who by their words exhibit a far superior intellect than his. You're so off base that you are barely clinging to that pedestal your on.

Ironically, the sense you talk about is not empirically defined, unless you indicate the genes and chemicals that dictate such a state of being
Ok, my intuitive nature. Sense seems to be a word you've taken to heart, so I use it. I'm no biochemist, I'm nothing special like some people here;), I'm animated matter capable of thought . Thought that allows me to have a chance to survive in the only existence we all know and have proof of.

[lightgigantic]

Psychotic Episode



While ignoring the obvious
”
“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
which is?
”
The real world, the truth, your deluded mind.
its slightly embarrassing the way you turn a discussion on "what is the nature of truth, etc" on premises like these ....

“
[QUOTE] If you had eternal existence in a material state you would beg for death
”
That would be illogical. I would enjoy every minute of it.
old age and disease sound groovy to you?

I've heard Xian theists say that God had originally intended us to be immortal in the material state. I wish you guys would unify with one another.
There is no scope for unification in the minds of persons who insist on a shallow investigation of theistic claims.

“
I think that in order to be a spiritual trainer a unique eyeball is a prerequisite
”
“
a remarkably similar retort to what a high school drop out could make in regard to a physics teacher .....
”
You're putting yourself on a pedestal again.
Its not a pedestal.
Its a fact of knowledge

"Experience dictates the knowable"

Schools work on this principle.
University works on this principle.
Even on the job training works on this principle.

It helps us distinguish between a doctor and a carpenter in our dire hours of need.

All this bantering is really some kind of class issue with you isn't it. You're a John Cleese fan, didn't you just love the part in the movie 'Monty Python & The Holy Grail' when King Arthur comes across two peasants working in the field who by their words exhibit a far superior intellect than his. You're so off base that you are barely clinging to that pedestal your on.
I think its a sign of the times that cleese has a different focus now
;)

“
Ironically, the sense you talk about is not empirically defined, unless you indicate the genes and chemicals that dictate such a state of being
”
Ok, my intuitive nature. Sense seems to be a word you've taken to heart, so I use it. I'm no biochemist, I'm nothing special like some people here, I'm animated matter capable of thought . Thought that allows me to have a chance to survive in the only existence we all know and have proof of.
but that sense of thought is not empiricially definable. When you respond to a claim "consciousness is not an empirically definable object", you shoot yourself in the foot when mention "I have a sense that you are talking BS"
:D

[PsychoticEpisode]

but that sense of thought is not empiricially definable. When you respond to a claim "consciousness is not an empirically definable object", you shoot yourself in the foot when mention "I have a sense that you are talking BS"
:D

I read this somewhere once but I think it bears mentioning. Although the very use of it somewhat weakens the point I'm about to make.

Empirical evidence is basically indisputable whereas all of your arguments rest on hearsay(my previous paragraph's point), testimonial, revelatory, spectral and emotional evidence....not one of which is reliable.

Yours are primarily of the revelatory or revealed to you by some deity and of the emotional, evidence gathered by your subjective thoughts or feelings. Those two are hard to argue for or against.

Yawn. I think everyone who reads this stuff is getting pretty bored by now. I know I am. Nothing changes, the pattern of point-counterpoint is intertwined with subtle & blatant sniping with the occasional sprinkle of sarcasm and irony. Insults, condescending attitudes, and outright character assassinations are making PE a dull boy. I don't consider this a good use of my mind & I don't know why I'm even bothering.

I think I'll take my empiric brain and use it for something more purposeful. Religion is dulling my intellect, I feel like I'm wasting time discussing nothing. I need to sharpen up and getting away from this garbage is one way. Religion is so unimportant. I call religious people delusional but I'm guilty of being delusional myself if I think I can sway a mind that's already gone. Thanks for the inspiration LG, I'm on sabbatical.

[Asguard]

Q i thought of an example to show you what i mean

American "football"

Team x is in first place and has a 10 game lead over Team Y who are in last place and are 3 games behind everyone else. Its the last game before the finals (if US football HAS finals but if it doesnt pretend it does)

Surporter of team x and team y both say to me they are going to make the finals. Of course the only way team y would get in is if pandemic flu came around and killed off all the team members of the other teams.

Now if i gave a shit team i would have to agree that the surporter of team y was seriously misslead but as i dont give 2 craps either way i dont say anything and just walk away compleatly uncaring and focus on something important.

This is no different from the way an apathetic person would view religion

[swarm]

looking both ways before crossing the road does seem to offer benefits ....

There is no need to fear death to use your eyes.

so do I

Yet you expect me to do so...

I certainly hope you strike up enough relationships with permissive pharmacists to make your brief life free from anxiety ...

My life has already not been brief and it already is free from anxiety.

sitting on your laurels and retorting "that's a load of BS" is substantial?

When that is what you offer it seems the appropriate response.

[lightgigantic]

I read this somewhere once but I think it bears mentioning. Although the very use of it somewhat weakens the point I'm about to make.

Empirical evidence is basically indisputable
for those who are sufficiently trained to either confirm or dispute it, yes. Certainly explains why forensic scientists are called in to evidence certain claims instead of a janitor, even though both might be in the employ of the same organization

whereas all of your arguments rest on hearsay(my previous paragraph's point), testimonial, revelatory, spectral and emotional evidence....not one of which is reliable.
actually the claim rests upon application. For some reason you have not been able to understand this simple point even though I practically repeat it in every post. Instead you insist on it being ultimately philosophical, emotional, etc etc.
Perhaps during your sabbatical you could clean your ears out and improve your empirical sense of hearing.

:D

[lightgigantic]

swarm

Originally Posted by lightgigantic
looking both ways before crossing the road does seem to offer benefits ....
”
There is no need to fear death to use your eyes.
there is a need if one anticipates distress however

“
so do I
”
Yet you expect me to do so...
what?
change your values?
I'm afraid you are going to have to do your own dirty work ....

“
I certainly hope you strike up enough relationships with permissive pharmacists to make your brief life free from anxiety ...
”
My life has already not been brief and it already is free from anxiety.
hehe

“
sitting on your laurels and retorting "that's a load of BS" is substantial?
”
When that is what you offer it seems the appropriate response.
:D