Response to skepticscott (Reply #38)
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 05:45 PM
Flabbergasted (7,826 posts)
44. "Atheists...do not have a position that needs either "support" or "faith"? Another way of saying
Last edited Wed Jan 2, 2013, 01:57 AM - Edit history (4)
this it is self evident that god does not exist, and no evidence exists that "it" does.
Atheism is a belief that is supported by contentions that its own preconceived notions about god are fictitious.
Further I dispute that atheism is self-supported and in fact contend that it is irrational. Nothing in atheism would suggest that an abundance of matter should contain life, should be expected to contain life, or would actually have a mechanism that would evolve this life much less formulate the conditions to make this life occur. Lets step even farther. "If" you believe in the Big Bang Theory, where did this matter and energy originate and where did the spark of life come from. A swirling super-heated mass of immensely pressurized matter would not contain life so why would it be assumed that life would pop up at all, much less formulate into incredibly complex biological systems. Evolution is frankly not a very satisfying answer including natural selection. (Not to suggest I don't believe in evolution. I do) The process to evolve must be premeditated in some way. Assuming, or taking for granted, that single celled organisms would form in the first place, why would you therefore conclude that they "evolve" at all. To maintain their own species? Where does the "program" or mechanism to evolve the species originate? Why would there be a mechanism at all? If natural selection is the vehicle, where did natural selection come from? To an atheist a pile of rocks is a pile of rocks; why would anything self formulate from a pile of rocks? Where does intelligence come from? Why would a single celled organism evolve into an incredibly complex system capable of questioning its own existence? Expand further: this universe goes forever in all directions, an incredible collection of immensely complex systems that we have not even begun to understand.
I dispute your contention that most atheists do no believe that science supports their position. Historically science and atheism have been bedfellows contradicting church teachings for centuries. Refer to this article...
I'm glad you have framed your argument in this way because it was exactly the point I was trying to make: The tyranny of belief.
Additionally the remainder of your argument points out the existence of preconceived notions.
Presupposing that a belief in theism automatically precedes from a belief in a religious text or pantheon is a fiction, although widespread. The point you missed from my reply is: "dogma will not survive intact." From this statement you would draw the conclusion: theism at it's essence does not need to arise from the descriptions of God, and the gods of the pantheon, as described in any religious or historical text. Simple theism, as I am defining it, rejects all anthropomorphism as an attempt to describe the indescribable and most of what is included in religious and historical texts is lack of understanding, historical revision, and outdated belief systems.
There is no solid irrefutable indication that god influences us in any judgmental way. This is a preconceived notion that God is other or separate. There are those in the Christian faith who insist that events in their life are directed by god. I don't think it explains all available data and I don't believe in the cliches "god works in mysterious ways, and god has a plan".
I actually have a lot of misgivings about using the word at all. This word has been used for centuries to describe anything from idols, to a force. I am unable to use this word in an analytic way without a preconception by others as to what the word would mean and my context for using it hence your belief that I must be describing what must amount a man in the sky.
The real question at this point is what is god then? It's a really challenging question to answer. I think of god as being both the source, creation and force. On the other hand understanding these concepts with the mind is impossible because they are beyond dualism. But really beyond all that god is experienced.
I offer up this analogy: An alien space ship is found on planet earth and a group of atheists and dogmatic theists are sent to provide explanations. The atheists study the ship and conclude that the ship just happens to be here. The dogmatic theists conclude that a massive humanoid being put the space ship here.
Thanks for your reply.
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
|Liberal Jesus Freak||Dec 2012||#4|
|Voice for Peace||Dec 2012||#11|
|Liberal Jesus Freak||Dec 2012||#15|
"Atheists...do not have a position that needs either "support" or "faith"? Another way of saying
|Buzz Clik||Dec 2012||#27|
|Voice for Peace||Dec 2012||#9|
|Voice for Peace||Dec 2012||#12|
|Thats my opinion||Jan 2013||#64|
|Voice for Peace||Dec 2012||#8|
|Buzz Clik||Dec 2012||#26|
|mr blur||Dec 2012||#29|
|Buzz Clik||Dec 2012||#30|
|Speck Tater||Dec 2012||#31|
|Thats my opinion||Jan 2013||#39|
|mr blur||Jan 2013||#52|
Please login to view edit histories.