The psychology of atheists and theists

[Xelasnave.1947]

what I'm saying.

I try and understand what you have said over the course of many posts...and I am not really sure what I have learnt from you about you or God.
You place value in scripture and believe there is a God that you believe exists and you have a soul and support the approach of that guy you referrenced.
I think I have some little grasp on things.
However an eternal universe just seems like the most probable option. The two opitions we select both require something eternal either an eternal god or an eternal universe.
Do you listen to what I say?
You seem to assume that you must be right so perhaps you dont stop to think how the erternal universe is most likey of the two options.
Anyways have I learnt much

It would be nice if you could lift that veil, as it really only serves as self-justification of your world

That veil you think I am wearing...You are seeing thru the one you are wearing☺
I know you think I am missing out on something and you care but I will be ok

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I stuffed up the last post and I hope you can see what I said mixed in after what you said...sorry I cant seem to fix it and I have to go..plus I just realised I missed your last post..will catch up latter.
Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Do you think it would be okay for some of the few remaining males to rape and/or murder a very small amount of these females?
Could that ever become a good thing?

I find it odd that you find such a senerio as the first thing to consider given the facts you present.
The solution would seem to be each man must mate with a thousand females.
No need for killing.

you seem to think that moral decency comes from humans, or that morals are subjectiv

Morals come from humans Jan.
Even with the good book in your hand it is you who build a moral code ... you select from it what you will follow and what you will not and so it is finally the human who constructs the morals...I say this on the positive assumption you dont kill folk for working on the sabath.

There is no logic that can reasonably show that God doesn't exist.

I like the logic for an eternal universe and it is hard to fit a god in it.

My approach seems as logical as yours.

I look at the size of the universe and although beyond comprehension I think I get a feel for its vastness..the numbers..billions of galaxies and billions of stars (and presumably planets) out there and we cant see all of our universe..it may be called infinite...and it all that there are these little humans for all it was created for...
I cant see how that makes sense...what would make sense is we are probably but one of the many varied perhaps more advanced species around...nothing particularly special I venture.

Rather simple and fits the observations or rather does not stand against them...

The choice is an eternal universe with no creator or an eternal God who spent forever in eternity but at a point 6000 or 13.5 billion years ago came out to create our universe and etc.

My mind cant accept the notion of a creator as believers accept...thats the way it is...but I am not a bad person..I think.
I do my best.

There is need of a creator, otherwise how are you here.

If everything has in some form always been there is no need for a creator.
The big bang does not preclude something before the evolution of the universe as we understand it...
The concept of an eyernal god is so much harder to accept than an eternal universe that just has always been.

So at what point in time did man stop being guided by superstition, and who were the peopl

Well they havent...look around.

Compare that to nowadays where people sacrifice people for virtually no good reason at all.

A study of history shows things are perhaps better to a small degree these days but I understand what you say.
And it is this propensity of humans and yheir cruelty that I find supports the notion of no god or at the very least a god who is lacking ability to manage the human development better.
I know free will etc but really that is a lame excuse which should not be presented to a claim God does not really care...think it through..heck any of us if God would fix a few problems better dont you think.

There is nothing to show that God doesn't exist.

I could provide you with evidence of no God but you would just reject it..you are a theist for you God exists
so you wont listen to my evidence..in fact there is plenty of evidence on the net ... all you have to do is goggle☺

I understand that in ancient times men would go out to a particular territory to fight their wars, and the women, children, and elderly didn't end up as collateral damage.

Unfortunately Jan history shows mostly that all were were put to the sword or kept or sold as slaves.
But again you could think that a god could create a better personality for humans not to be so nasty.

Nowadays wars kill anything that moves.

If only God could have hard wired humans not to kill...at least not kill other humans..but not killing animals as well could be managed.
I often think how it could be on other planets..if there could be civilizations out there who respect their planet and dont kill are not greedy or stupid.

Maybe ancient sacrifices weren't based on superstition

I think we can observe superstition was regularly a prime motivator.

In early groups it could be a good way to get rid of tribe members who were a burnen to the groups survival...practical considerations often will be hidden behind supetstition and customs.

What is the evidence of superstition and it's importance for early humans?

Type that in your search engine and I promise you wont be disappointed.

Have a pleasant evening with your guests.

Thank you.
Alex

 

[Beer w/Straw]

Don't worry, I don't think you ever would, but I ask because you seem to think that moral decency comes from humans, or that morals are subjective as opposed to objective.

I believe Darwin thought a barbaric survival of the fittest could lead to an abhorrent society... Then comes along a concept of Super Ego which can explain why it isn't so.

No God there it seems. Just ideas built upon over a century ago.

 

[Write4U]

Again Jan I thank you for posting here such that you demonstrate routinely the fact that religion is nothing more than superstition and fable.

It's the bad side of a double-edged sword called "abstract (hallucinatory) thought".

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

It's the bad side of a double-edged sword called "abstract (hallucinatory) thought".

Well its an ill wind that cant be sailed.
I have learnt much of the religions the history of various civilizations the wars ... there is a lot and you can never learn it all...perhaps shown a greater interest in the role of superstition and the need to manage a society...you fight well with a god on your side ...it means you are right to do what you do...been reading lots of stuff ... the posibility of earlier civilations who could have been interpreted as gods....
But it all came from astronomy ..I look up and can understand how they would have used the sky as a calender and thinking they were interpreting the gods.
Alex

 

[iceaura]

Our belief in God, only serve to better ourselves spiritually, so we can develop our knowledge, and come to the platform of God consciousness.

But you and your fellow travelers behave so badly here - dishonest and bad faith posting, misrepresentations and rhetorical bs, continual slanders and personal attacks - that it is impossible to grant credence to claims of spiritual benefit from any beliefs you hold.

 

[Jan Ardena]

I find it odd that you find such a senerio as the first thing to consider given the facts you present.
The solution would seem to be each man must mate with a thousand females.
No need for killing.

There would be no need for killing if that were the case.
But what if it wasn't the case. What if the case was some, or, all men thought it was good, because they could let off all their negative emotions on non-selected females, thereby being more balanced husbands and fathers. And let's say statistics showed that the family structure is thriving healthily, the children are healthy, intelligent, and well brought up, thereby passing positive genes.
Despite the positive development of society and off-spring, could it ever be right?

Morals come from humans Jan.
Even with the good book in your hand it is you who build a moral code ... you select from it what you will follow and what you will not and so it is finally the human who constructs the morals...I say this on the positive assumption you dont kill folk for working on the sabath.

My mistake. You're right, morals do come from humans, but it was not developed by humans. By morals, I mean objective moral principles. The example I put to you, followed by the question, is an example of an objective moral principle. Even if there were people who thought that based on the scenario given, there was nothing wrong with the abuse to non-selected females, on account that there are not enough men, to pass their genes on to, and so are basically of no evolutionary purpose, it would still be wrong.

I like the logic for an eternal universe and it is hard to fit a god in it.

There has to be something, and you simply replace God, with the universe. That is what I mean by denial, and rejection.

I look at the size of the universe and although beyond comprehension I think I get a feel for its vastness..the numbers..billions of galaxies and billions of stars (and presumably planets) out there and we cant see all of our universe..it may be called infinite...and it all that there are these little humans for all it was created for...

Well, you don't know that it's not. In vast scheme of things, why couldn't it be.
Nothing at all what you say, remotely leads, even to the possibility, of God not existing.
But you have to believe in something, you know that, and you simply prefer to believe in the universe over God.

My mind cant accept the notion of a creator as believers accept...thats the way it is...but I am not a bad person..I think.
I do my best.

That inability to accept, is your atheism. That's why you, or any atheist cannot accept God.

If everything has in some form always been there is no need for a creator.

Human beings haven't always been here, according to both scripture, and scientifically. So you came to being some how.
Did the universe create human beings, and give them the means to build civilisations?
How did the universe do that? Why did the universe do that? I assume the universe itself is not a conscious agent, or being.

The big bang does not preclude something before the evolution of the universe as we understand it...

But the expansion does. So how do you account for that in your worldview?

The concept of an eyernal god is so much harder to accept than an eternal universe that just has always been.

If in your mind you are convinced there is no God, then obviously that would be the case.
Just as if you hypnotise somebody into believing there are no number sevens. Under that state they will not accept the no.7.

Well they havent...look around.

So why equate it with ancient peoples?

I could provide you with evidence of no God but you would just reject it..you are a theist for you God exists
so you wont listen to my evidence..in fact there is plenty of evidence on the net ... all you have to do is goggle☺

I've looked Alex. There's none. Only preferences.
To me, this world smacks of design, purpose, intention, and intelligibility.
What do you think?

I know free will etc but really that is a lame excuse which should not be presented to a claim God does not really care...think it through..heck any of us if God would fix a few problems better dont you think.

I believe we do have a free will.
I know we can play mind games, where we can't know that our perceptions are based in actual reality.
But those are simply games. Ultimately we have to accept that what we perceive is based in reality. Otherwise what is the alternative? You have to start from your position, so you have to accept your position as real.

If only God could have hard wired humans not to kill...at least not kill other humans..but not killing animals as well could be managed.

All creatures kill, or are killed.
Even humans who would not intentionally kill, kill.
And most humans kill everyday, probably every moment.
If you make a robot that can walk. The robot can just as easily kill.

If you believe the universe is responsible for our being here, why do think it is wrong to kill, when killing is all around us?
I mean you eat meat. Why? If you're dead set against killing, why do eat slaughtered animals?
Is it that you have a preference as to what is to be killed, over what isn't to be killed?

jan.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

There would be no need for killing if that were the case.
But what if it wasn't the case. What if the case was some, or, all men thought it was good, because they could let off all their negative emotions on non-selected females, thereby being more balanced husbands and fathers. And let's say statistics showed that the family structure is thriving healthily, the children are healthy, intelligent, and well brought up, thereby passing positive genes.
Despite the positive development of society and off-spring, could it ever be right?

Forget the fictitious, what are God's views on masturbation?



Some Christian theologians reason that

Masturbation usually involves sexual fantasy

According to Matthew 5:27-28, Yeshua of Nazareth (Jesus Christ) stated that sexual fantasy equals adultery .

Adultery is a very serious sin.
Thus masturbation is generally a very serious sin.


http://www.religioustolerance.org/masturba5.htm

 

[Write4U]

There has to be something, and you simply replace God, with the universe. That is what I mean by denial, and rejection

I'm sorry Jan, it is you who is replacing the universe (a perfectly suitable and agreed upon term with a clear definition) with a new (old) and totally undefined entity which you have named God.

You have taking a clear "understanding" of a pattern and made into an "unknowable" pattern of mystery.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Forget the fictitious, what are God's views on masturbation?



Some Christian theologians reason that

Masturbation usually involves sexual fantasy

According to Matthew 5:27-28, Yeshua of Nazareth (Jesus Christ) stated that sexual fantasy equals adultery .

Adultery is a very serious sin.
Thus masturbation is generally a very serious sin.


http://www.religioustolerance.org/masturba5.htm

The is not about masturbation. Jesus seems to be implying that simply looking at a woman with lust in the heart, is committing adultery.

I think it means that the act of committing adultery is the result of the lust that is already in your heart. Without lust there is no adultery.

I think masturbation is simply another act based on lust.

Jan.

 

[Musika]

I believe Darwin thought a barbaric survival of the fittest could lead to an abhorrent society... Then comes along a concept of Super Ego which can explain why it isn't so.

No God there it seems. Just ideas built upon over a century ago.

What would an abhorrent society held in check by the Super Ego look like?

 

[Beer w/Straw]

What would an abhorrent society held in check by the Super Ego look like?

Make one up.

I was addressing whether morals are subjective or objective.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

The is not about masturbation. Jesus seems to be implying that simply looking at a woman with lust in the heart, is committing adultery.

I think it means that the act of committing adultery is the result of the lust that is already in your heart. Without lust there is no adultery.

I think masturbation is simply another act based on lust.

So you don't know.

But you know God just is.

 

[Write4U]

I think masturbation is simply another act based on lust.
Jan.

Without lust there is no procreation.

Try to control any animal that gets the scent of a female "in heat". Epic battles are fought over "receptive" females by "lustful" male suitors.

 

[Write4U]

What would an abhorrent society held in check by the Super Ego look like?

Are you suggesting that God is doing a better job in keeping an abhorrent society in check?

At the rate we are going, we'll have one mass shooting for every day of the year in the US alone. I wonder how many of those abhorrent acts are committed by theists?

Musika, what you don't seem to understand is that what you see today IS the result of centuries theistic inculcation. It's time we tried the NO GOD deal. Who knows, it might just work if we know that for every action there is an equal reaction and prayer ain't gonna absolve religious zealots from the abhorrent crimes they commit in the name of God.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

There has to be something,

Why?
If the universe is eternal as seems almost certain that means it has no creator as it always has been.
Introducing a creator has no value other than pushing your desire that there be one.

That is what I mean by denial, and rejection.

Well in an eternal universe there is no creator to deny or reject...there is no creator.

Well, you don't know that it's not.

And you dont know that it is created for humans.
It seems improbable not probable...and "dont know" is all you have really.

Nothing at all what you say, remotely leads, even to the possibility, of God not existing.

Of course it does.
The eternal universe has no point of creation ... so no creator...there is no alternative...no start means there is no starter.
To suggest there is an eternal god who comes out of infinity to create a finite universe needs evidence.
We have two propositions one requires an eternal god the other does not...I dont think you can entertain that an eternal universe is most likely ... but it really makes the most sense... requires no one sitting around forever to pop out at some point to create something...its always been around in some form and cycles thru universe after universe ...
Cycles like the season...seasons are real and evidence of the cycle system..... no eternal creator needed just an eternal universe...if you have evidence for a creator however present it but in the absence of evidence to the contrary an eternal universe is the most plausible.

How did the universe do that?

Short answer...evolution and chemistry.
I certainly dont buy the idea that god modelled the first human from clay which is clearly a made up attempt of no credibility.

Just as if you hypnotise somebody into believing there are no number sevens. Under that state they will

Well may I suggest you consider that it is probably you who has been hypnotised ... brain washed to believe so many things that you can only believe using faith that the story is true.
Your thing is very short on evidence...you fail to acknowledge faults which is a clear sign you are somewhat hypnotised to "see" something that does not exist in an eternal universe.

So why equate it with ancient peoples?

Because they were highly superstitious and it is from their times that we are infected today.

To me, this world smacks of design, purpose, intention, and intelligibility.

In the human expression yes however the idea of a designer for the universe is not needed as it is clearly eternal and therefore required no design.
Presumably humans required no design if there is a creator given humans were created in his image☺

All creatures kill, or are killed.

Why? Why does a creator need killing?

Is it that you have a preference as to what is to be killed, over what isn't to be killed?

So there is no other way a god could do it?
I think not.
Just program the model so as to have no killing...is that beyond the capability of an intelligent designer or is he not in control of the program such that he could make whatever he planned.
Is there a reason to include killing and suffering and all that we dont need or want other yhan gods inventors must fit an imperfect world into a perfect plan...the imperfections strongly suggest an omperfect plan but moreover the absense of a plan.
Your view is based on unsupported wishful thinking... If God is an ideal thats ok...it is useful..like relying on a fictional character..say Billbo..now if Billbo was faced with this situation what would he do.
Christians use JC as his teachings are handy but he is a mythical character as far as we know.
I do think if the Romans had news of someone who could come bavk from the dead they would have grabbed him and plaved him in their games and we would read about it in many writtings left by the Romans...news of a man coming back from the dead would be world news even back then.
In any event god as an ideal is ok but the good books need a tidy to fit that approach.
I think the big question would be ...why could not god make his message clear and that it appear in a reliable consistent to fact text such that folk dont have to sort thru and cherry pick their morality.
Its all too mystical and superstitious for thinkers to take seriously whilst their patience for sifting thru made up stuff is tested to breaking point.

Have a nice day Jan.

Alex

 

[Musika]

Make one up.

I was addressing whether morals are subjective or objective.

It's a strange request to "make one up,"
Arguing for majority subjectivity as the means of setting the objective bar doesn't seem to raise the bar very high.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

It's a strange request to "make one up,"
Arguing for majority subjectivity as the means of setting the objective bar doesn't seem to raise the bar very high.

Does your morality (or just in some part) exist outside of your brain?

 

[Musika]

Are you suggesting that God is doing a better job in keeping an abhorrent society in check?

Better than who or what exactly?
Or are you once again blurring the distinction between God, religion, religious institutions and people who identify as religious?

At the rate we are going, we'll have one mass shooting for every day of the year in the US alone. I wonder how many of those abhorrent acts are committed by theists?

I wonder how on earth you view the phenomenon of mass shootings in the US as a problem caused by religious adherence.
It just makes it look like you are drawing the shortest route to a strawman at the expense of logic.

Musika, what you don't seem to understand is that what you see today IS the result of centuries theistic inculcation.

I would agree that we are conditioned by the social contexts we appear in. I think its strange, once again at the apparent expense of logic for railroading an express route to a strawman, that one would think that our current state of affairs is determined solely and wholly from theistic issues.

It's time we tried the NO GOD deal.

Well, to ignore the example of communism, you will have to do better than saying something better than "Yay! No God!", everytime someone kills a couple (or a couple million) people.

Who knows, it might just work if we know that for every action there is an equal reaction and prayer ain't gonna absolve religious zealots from the abhorrent crimes they commit in the name of God.

And there's the pinch .... simply saying "there is no God" does not empower the deconstructkon of greed, lust, wrath, etc, which are the very things that empower a willful ignorance of action and subsequent reaction.