Philosophy Code of the Strong Atheist

[Kinsao]

Just for the record, I'm not an atheist.
Err... I'm afraid that my brain isn't engaged enough to respond to this thread as yet (severe sleep deficit)........... *tiptoes out*... :gomen:

 

[Mikawa Ossan]

We don't need a "code" - just take life as it is. We'd all get along much better if we all did!

I don't have anything more to contribute here because this quote sums up my opinion on the matter. Thank you, Sensuikan San!

Maciamo, I'm starting to doubt some of my opinions about you. Reading your posts on this thread alone have made me wonder how open-minded you really are. :bluush:

 

[kumo]

If you believe that the Big Bang was indeed the beginning of the universe (what Christians call the "Creation"). It has been suggested that there had been many Big Bangs at different places in the universe, as some galaxies were shown to evolve in directions opposite to our Big Bang, and others were older than our Big Bang. I personally believe that neither time nor the universe were created. I see the universe as eternal in the past and future, because it doesn't make sense otherwise (nothing can appear out of nothing; and everything cannot disappear into nothing).

This is certainly true for the macroscopic level, but not so for the atomic one. Quantum physics shows us that things can appear out of nothing through totally random processes. If the primeval universe was compressed to a very small size (the size of an atom), these processes would have been important on a cosmic scale, so it's not that absurd to consider that the universe just popped into existence.

Besides, considering time to not have a beginning creates a serious problem. Given an infinite amount of time, any physical process that is likely to occur with a non-zero probability, must necessarily occur, with probability one. That means that by now, all possible physical processes should have already happened, and our universe should have reached some sort of final state where nothing new ever happens, which is surely not the case.

 

[Maciamo]

Reading your posts on this thread alone have made me wonder how open-minded you really are. :bluush:

Let me put it this way. If someone had to be called "open-minded" for admitting facts that were proven to be false, would it be a good thing or a bad thing ? For instance, what would you think of someone who regards the statement "the earth is round" and "the earth is flat" as both acceptable for the sake of "open-mindedness", and maybe go as far as to say that they are not in a position to judge because they haven't been to space and seen the earth from there, so they can't be 100% sure. Personally, I am not tolerant toward this kind of people. Therefore I cannot be tolerant toward people who believe what is written in the Bible.

But I am far from being a fundamentalist atheist, as Index said. If I were, I would want to exterminate all the people who were not atheist, or torture them until they change they abandon their religious faith. Regardless of the poor morals of such way of thinking, this is a rational absurdity as one can only become a strong atheist by accumulating knowledge about religions and understanding some principles of philosophy and/or neuro-psychology. You cannot force someone to become a strong atheist.

You cannot become a strong atheist just by believing or not believing. It's not a matter of faith or opinion, it's a matter of understanding how the human mind works, how religion are all obviously man-made from their patterns and deficiencies matching the knowledge of humans at the time of their creation, and understanding the way Nature (the Universe) works. The last one is of course only in its infancy, but our current knowledge is more than enough to disprove divine words of the Bible or Koran (e.g. we know that miracles are impossible, that the world was not made in 7 days, and that humans and other species evolved and still evolve with time...).

Because we cannot prove or disprove for sure that the universe is eternal and infinite (although it is the only logically valid possibility for me), and therefore cannot prove for sure the existence of a creator, it is acceptable to believe in some kind of supreme (impersonal) power outside the universe (generally called "god"), like the Deists. I am also tolerant of the idea that the whole universe is god (Pantheism), because it is mostly a matter of personal feelings and definition.

Believing in god is ok, as long as it is impersonal and does not intervene in human affairs. I can't accept that such a god give particular care to the biochemical reactions that life is. Even less to humans who have only existed for 3 million years if we count our primitive ancestors as humans, and about 100,000 years in their current form. What's more, in the immensity of the universe, there is bound to be countless other life-supporting planets (out of reach for us), and maybe life beings much more advance that us. After humans disappear, the universe will go on, and other intelligent species will evolve, as they constantly do in various parts of the universe.

I can't believe in heaven/hell because I am quite certain from my learning in neurosciences, psychology and biochemistry that life is nothing more than a biochemical process, and life beings don't have an eternal, immaterial soul. There is no need for it as memory, emotions, personality and conscience can all be explained in neurosciences (if you don't think so, study more, as I have). They can even be altered by electric impulses, injections of chemicals (hormones, neurotransmitters...) or brain operations (lobotomy, neuron implant, etc.).

That is why it is perfectly alright to be a Deist, and not believe in the soul or heaven.

What I cannot accept is not the believe in god, but the believe in religions, i.e. what's in the big bad book (Koran, Bible...), and their organisations, as their aims is to get money, political and moral power from people's ignorance. On some people, religion has perverse effects, such as torture or massacre of "infidels" (a concept unknown to atheists, as their is no faith involved), or even (suicidal) terrorism.

All in all, I think that everything that is good in religions, from the moral teachings to helping others (upportive communities, charities, volunteer work...) can be achieved equally well without religion. Any Atheist or Deist could have the same moral values and the same benvolent behaviour as the most religious person, as it is not imcompatible with not being religious.

In conclusion, if people want to do good, they can do it, regardless of their religious faith (or absence of thereof). It is people themselves who become what they want to become. Religions are just tools of manipulation. Take what you want in the moral teaching of any religion, but beware of the metaphysical ideas of religion. It can be comforting to believe in heaven, but believing won't make it truer.

 

[Maciamo]

Besides, considering time to not have a beginning creates a serious problem. Given an infinite amount of time, any physical process that is likely to occur with a non-zero probability, must necessarily occur, with probability one. That means that by now, all possible physical processes should have already happened, and our universe should have reached some sort of final state where nothing new ever happens, which is surely not the case.

I do believe that an eternal universe means that things happen again and again for an infinite number of times. This means that nothing new can happen, and every action/event and the slightest variant have happened and will happen an infinity of times in an infinity of places. That's a pretty comforting idea, also it sounds like our lives are futile (and they are, in the absolute, like everything else - well at least from our limited mind's point of view).

 

[kumo]

I do believe that an eternal universe means that things happen again and again for an infinite number of times. This means that nothing new can happen, and every action/event and the slightest variant have happened and will happen an infinity of times in an infinity of places. That's a pretty comforting idea, also it sounds like our lives are futile (and they are, in the absolute, like everything else - well at least from our limited mind's point of view).

Do you mean that everything that will happen from now on has already happened sometime in the past in the exact same way? I guess that if this were to be true, we would have at least some kind of evidence of these events, which again I don't think is the case. I can think of many possible outcomes for any occurrence that can be proven to not have happened (< I think I just murdered the English language :? )

 

[Maciamo]

Do you mean that everything that will happen from now on has already happened sometime in the past in the exact same way? I guess that if this were to be true, we would have at least some kind of evidence of these events, which again I don't think is the case. I can think of many possible outcomes for any occurrence that can be proven to not have happened (< I think I just murdered the English language :? )

Yes, I mean that everything has already happened. Not once, twice, or a million times but an infinity of times.

We are much much too small to see any evidence. What's more the last time the same situation as now could have happened, might be billions of light years from here, and 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years ago. That's still as tiny a number as a fraction of nano second, as we compared it to eternity. In matters of "infinite" 1 nanometre is hardly smaller than 1000000000000000000000000000000000 light years. Just a point on an infinite line.

 

[Revenant]

Don't you think that refusing to consider the idea that the writers of the bible actually intended a literal interpretation is closed minded too? Maybe they wrote such obvious myths because they simply didn't know any better.

I agree. We have seen that human societies have improved a lot over the centuries (with a few backwards step in medieval Europe). So how could people living 2000, 3000 or 4000 years ago have been more enlightened than us now ? If the writers of the OT were so "intelligent" as to write in riddles on which meaning billions of Christians over centuries have not yet agreed, how comes they lived in what we would now call "slums", and were so technologically and scientifically backwards ? (even for their time, compared to the Greeks and Romans, whose homeland wasn't much bigger).

Karen Armstrong in this article explains how some of the Jewish writers intentionally implemented myths into their writing.

 

[Maciamo]

Karen Armstrong in this article explains how some of the Jewish writers intentionally implemented myths into their writing.

Did that make them cleverer or more knowledgeable ? Don't forget that the diet of the Ancient world did not allow for as great intelligence as nowadays. Both IQ and life expectancy have been shown to increase thanks to better nutrition. Lexico had posted an interesting article about the Flynn Effect in this regard. For comparison, the life expectancy 2000 years ago was about 28 years old (let alone 4000 years ago). Therefore, ancient people could not have competed with modern people in developed countries. Add to this the tremendous progress in sciences and technologies, and you will have an idea of why I don't believe the so-called "experts" (theologists ?) that claim that the myths or metaphors were inserted intentionally. Well it could have been intentional, but with the aim of confusing, not to reveal a greater message.

Did you know that the Japanese had trouble understanding many English metaphors (and hardly ever use metaphors themselves) ? How common were metaphors in ancient Semitic languages ?

 

[Revenant]

I don't think it makes them cleverer or more knowledgable than us, but that still doesn't mean that they couldn't have implemented myths intentionally. Myths were ideal for bringing hope, as the philospopher Plato, who came just a couple centuries after the Yahwist writer noted.

The Japanese don't use English metaphors much, or Japanese metaphors much?

 

[Tsuyoiko]

If you cannot stand the fact that there is a lot unknown that we will never know through science, then do not even bother talking about. It shows that you are a closed-minded, loud-mouthed, hypocritical bastard in the end.

I hate disagreeing with you Doc, but I have to on this one :sorry: My understanding of science (and I have come under fire for it before) is that science is the method through which we understand the Universe. So although science hasn't revealed everything yet, there is nothing that will not be understood eventually through science - given an infinite timescale. That's just my opinion though.

 

[Tsuyoiko]

But Jesus did call himself the son of god (if he ever existed, at least). He also told people that his Father was the only god, that his laws were the only laws, and to spread his word throughout the world.

As Revenant has said, there is some debate about that. But even if we do accept that Jesus said those things, it doesn't mean we have to demonise him. We can still find some good in what he said, like the stuff Mike has pointed out. I disagree with some of what you say, but I still respect you, and prefer to concentrate on the the things I agree with! Even if someone starts a horrible religion in your name.

 

[Doc]

I hate disagreeing with you Doc, but I have to on this one :sorry: My understanding of science (and I have come under fire for it before) is that science is the method through which we understand the Universe. So although science hasn't revealed everything yet, there is nothing that will not be understood eventually through science - given an infinite timescale. That's just my opinion though.

What should you be sorry for? Not agreeing with me on a subject? Do not be so silly! As far as I am concerned as long as you do not start running around telling me that science has all the answers, and that if I do not believe in that, that I will be doomed I really do not mind what you have to say. We are all titled to our beliefs and opinions. You are a level-headed and fair individual who does not let your beliefs cloud your judgment, and I for one am greatful for it. As for my stance on science I do believe that most answers will come from it. That is the key word right there. I honestly believe that there are some things science is not meant to answer, or cannot answer no matter how advanced and universal it may become. Yet that is my personal belief and your personal belief is different from that. However, we do not let our beliefs cloud our judement and respect for one another. Therefore, do not worry about not agreeing with me on the matter. You are a fair and balanced person and that is what is important to me.

Doc :wave:

 

[belle74311]

So where do you think you guys came from?

What do you believe will happen after death?

Do Athiest believe that people have souls?

 

[Tsuyoiko]

So where do you think you guys came from?

What do you believe will happen after death?

Do Athiest believe that people have souls?

Hi Belle! For answers to those questions check out this thread

 

[Mars Man]

HI guys !!!! Just wanted to let you know I'm following along, but haven't really had much to put down in words, perhaps since I fall into the agnostic zone, for the most part. I have seem some good posts here, and it seems to be a good volley of points. I'm just hanging around, that's all.

Perhaps I will just respond to the question of where I came from : I'm quite certain I came from my parents genes, along with some degree of history (passage of time through a certain environment and experience).

Keep up the good debate, and I may stop by later....See you !!!!:wave:

 

[belle74311]

I checked out the thread but is everyone there Athiest...i mean other than me?

 

[Revenant]

There are actually three others in that thread that believe in a God. Pararousia, Doc, and one other to whose name I cannot remember.

 

[Kinsao]

*raises hand* I'm not an atheist. :yeahh:

 

[Tsuyoiko]

I checked out the thread but is everyone there Athiest...i mean other than me?

Not everyone, but a lot of atheists give their opinion there - check out what Maciamo, Kirei (I think?), Sensuikan-San, Mycernius, Lastmagi (I think?) and I have said.