Theist or Atheist?

[Panoptes]

Face your death and embrace your remaining time amongst the living. So dogmatic!

You're thick, like most indoctrinated folk. I'm done here

[Rotwang]

You're thick, like most indoctrinated folk. I'm done here

Well, the important thing is that you kept it civil.

[radi6404]

Without wanting to cause a fight but I want to say that Rotwang does not seem dogmatic to me. He is barely even protecting the side of theists and when he claims something, he provides examples and evidence. In comparison to him I think I am more dogmatic.

[ptn]

 

Missionaries used to baptize non-believers and kill them before they renounce the faith. This was done so they can be "saved." Some of you fetishize about the end of times and actively aim to bring it about. Don't forget the witch hunts, those were fun.

 

I see You're having trip down the memory lane, so don't forget crusades too.

Lots of bad things was done in the name of science or reason, so religion doesn't have monopoly on this one. Religion is a philosophy with supernatural ingredient and, just like any other thing, can be used differently.

 

I heard nice sentence in an interview once, interviewee said she envies people having faith, because she doesn't have this privilege. I see the begining of having faith exactly like this, You can't learn it, either You have it inside or not.

 

Reading this topic I see lots of bashing religion and pushing religious people to a defense and calling religion crowd control or something for the weak minds. Well, there is/was that, but if it was only that, none of the greatest religions could end up with hundreds of years of what we have now. Just try to see through the priests, preachers and institutions itsef, You may see something great (but, as I wrote above, it could be tough without the privilege ).

[radi6404]

I wanted to add one thing in support for theists, which for me is a strong supporter for existance of a god. either that or my observations are not good enough. The point is, that the actions you are doing are reflecting on events that happen after. For example I have been noticing over many yers in the past, that when I do something bad to others or show off, soon after I get something negative back. This is the reason why I am very careful in my words and actions, but ofcourse also because I want to be a good person.

 

For example if I would say that my computer is impressive and incredibly fast and better than many other computers, if I seriously would do it, some part could fail shortly after so I would have to buy it again, and it is seriously like that.

 

Or if I would say to a person I know he is fat and has to loose weight, I would find myself shortly after gaining weight and having to reduce the consumed foot a lot in order to hold my weith.

 

 

these are just wo examples but during my life it has mostly been like that and it is a very strong supportive evidence that a higher force is observing the things I or others are doing.

[abasio]

Some would call that Karma, others coincidence.

It could also be your own conscience subconsciously punishing you for the wicked things you know you've done.

[radi6404]

Some would call that Karma, others coincidence.

It could also be your own conscience subconsciously punishing you for the wicked things you know you've done.

 

Hah, your eager tries to explain everything by logic really make me laugh. It is so funny how some people try to explain anything by logic and by things they know, are you affraid that it could be something else than you think? I can tell you one thing, it for sure is not my conciousness or subconciousness that is doing it, since it is outside factors that change, so how can my subconciousness control my computer or other things I have? It can be coincidense, I don`t deny it, tht is one option, but your suggestion with the conciousness is very silly.

 

I thought you are not an atheist, but it seems you are one, unfortunately. We most allow our mind to think about things that are not explainable with today´s sciense because you rknowledge of sciense is outdated anyway. Do you think you have the latest information about today´s sciense so you try to explain undefined events with outdated scientific knowledge? I can tell you, your scientific information is about 5 years in the past, the latest scientific experiments are not available for the wide public, so your attempt to try and explain such events with this logic is silly. You truly are an atheist, Abasio. I on the other hand are agnostic and leave unanswered questions unanswered with the chance, that they could be cause by god or other higher beings or anomalies.

 

People who try to explain strange things with defined scientific reallity and don`t allow for any other explanation can´t think clearly. A Vulcan would say they are illogical.

[ptn]

Howcome a two lines post giving suggestions and guesses produced such harsh reponse? This is straight road to another argument.

[radi6404]

Beucause I am tired of reading the same ignorant commends from people over many years, denying any explanation that differs from what they see as normal.

[Rotwang]

I can tell you one thing, it for sure is not my conciousness or subconciousness that is doing it, since it is outside factors that change, so how can my subconciousness control my computer or other things I have?

I don't think Abasio was suggesting that your subconciousness was controlling external events. But we're all vulnerable to confirmation bias: for example, when bad things happen to you when you've done something bad you remember it, but when similar bad things happen when you haven't done anything to "deserve it", or when you do something bad but receive no kind of Karmic retribution, you forget it. And the end result is that the correlation between doing bad things and receiving appropriate punishments seems a lot more statistically significant than it actually is, because you're looking at a skewed sample. I'm not saying that this is definitely what happened in your case, it's just something that you need to bear in mind.

 

I remember years ago, when the BBC used to broadcast Simpsons episodes every weekday, mostly repeats, I would often think of some particular joke or event from the show and then the episode in question would be shown within the next couple of days. I tried an experiment where I would write down every episode of The Simpsons that I thought of, and see if those episodes were more likely to be shown shortly after than would be expected by random chance. Then after trying to do that for a while, I was still seeing episodes that I'd thought of in the recent past - but I hadn't remembered to write them down when I'd thought of them. I concluded from this that I actually thought of Simpsons episodes a lot more often than I realised, and that I usually only remembered having done so when I was reminded of it by a subsequent coincidence. At least, that seems like a more plausible explanation than that I have the lamest X-men superpower ever.

[radi6404]

I don`t think like that Rotwang. I think we don`t have to try and explain everything with our brain because some people of us are fully aware what they are thinking and what they do not think. I am fully aware of what I am thinking for example. It can be coincidense, just random coincidense or a higher being controlling the reality.

 

Your other idea that explains how we percept the events differently and search for explanations is partly right for some people for sure, but not really for me. I noticed it almost every time when I did something wrong that I got a return to it and it always was so obvious that it is not my brain percepting things wrongly, it least not often. Sometimes the feedback of one wrong action was so severe that I really start to care about anything I say.

 

The bigest feedbacks I received were just when laughing or commenting on how people look or that they don`t look as nice, when I was smaller. One laugh about people´s appearance, one spot, lol.

 

Schoolmarks gave another big feedback as did talk about money or laughing about things others have. For example you say to someone that his headphones are crap and a few days later one of the speakers of your headphones will fail or the cable will break.

 

Ofcourse I want to be a good person and don`t only control what I say based on the feedback I recieve but knowing that I recieve feedback makes me watch out even more.

 

The only time I don`t recieve feedback is when someone says something bad to me first or makes something bad. When I do something bad, I often get a feedback that targets me where I really care. That is why I try not to show off at all for example. Can all of this be made up by my brain? So many coincidents?

[Rotwang]

I don`t think like that Rotwang. I think we don`t have to try and explain everything with our brain because some people of us are fully aware what they are thinking and what they do not think. I am fully aware of what I am thinking for example.

If you say so.

[radi6404]

If you say so.

 

What is that supposed to mean? Ofcourse i am fully aware of what I am thinking, just because I don`t know how to express myself sometimes in English doesn´t mean I am a dumb person. I am very good at observing things and judging other people for example, so your commend idoesn´t make sence.

[JISNEGRO]

Science with all its faults is the best tool we have to make sense of ourselves and the world around us. But you should know it is not omnipotent and there are things beyond its reach. And is there where most people fail to understand and start endless discussions like the ones on this thread. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive, in fact they can both co-exist as long as you don't mix them. Science is the realm of proofs, evidence,facts, logic and scientific inquiry. Religion/spirituality on the other hand is the realm of claims,dogmas, believes and faith.

 

You can't (and should not) explain natural phenomena with religion; that's what a charlatan do. For instance, hundreds of years ago people thought that demons and other otherworldly beings were responsible for things they were not able to understand like someone dying because of a little open cut or a person with strange visions and talking in other tongues. Today we know that bacteria and mental diseases like schizophrenia are a more reasonable explanation for these things. In the same train of though it is wrong to try to demonstrate things that are subjective, non repeatable and lack of any verifiable support. That is pseudoscience.

 

The sole idea of trying to demonstrate the existence of god with proofs and evidence is just wrong. Radi you are wrong not because you believe in higher beings and want to have other explanations, but because you are using the terms facts, supporting evidence and god in the same phrase.

 

"Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's"

[abasio]

 

I thought you are not an atheist, but it seems you are one, unfortunately.

 

Actually I'm not, not at all.

But why would it be unfortunate for you if I was? Don't you like atheists?

[Rotwang]

I am very good at observing things and judging other people

By whose estimation?

[radi6404]

 

Actually I'm not, not at all.

But why would it be unfortunate for you if I was? Don't you like atheists?

 

I have nothing against atheists but I have something against people who try to explain anything with rational explanations even when logic suggests otherwise. I think you know that the scientific knowledge of today is not everything there is to know about the universe and reality, so why are you unease and try to provide rational explanations to things that are not really explainable rationally. Ofcourse you can provide rational explanations but when you exclude any explanation that is not rational scientifically to you and you deny that, that is illogical and wrong. Logic is that someone allows for all possible answers and doesn´t exclude the ones that don`t seem rational.

 

So, I have nothing against atheists but I don´t like people who deny any explanation that is not rational to them.

 

@Rotwang

I was told by many people that, for example Feathers told it to me when we were discussiong the behaviour of some people we know.

[Rotwang]

I was told by many people that, for example Feathers

Ah, I see.

[abasio]

Radi, I gave you three different possibilities to your idea than what you thought.

I didn't say any of them of them were facts nor did I even try to support them over your own idea.

You saw a differing opinion to your own though and saw it as a personal attack.

I have never denied any opinion, I don't believe anything 100% so I am always open to other ideas and when it comes to existentialism I think reality is beyond anyone's comprehension, I have lots of theories, most full of holes but I cannot say any of them are facts.

Your reply seems to indicate that you believe in your belief a lot more strongly than I could, but I don't really know you so I cannot say for sure.

[radi6404]

Good then, glad to hear I was wrong. I do believe that there are overnatural beings or spiritual beings out there and about the specific theory I listed, anyone can try it to some extent and test how it works out for him, but don`t harm anyone seriously. I believe and hope that there is a go dout there but I don`t say this because I believe or something but because I experienced it many times.

[radi6404]

Ah, I see.

 

What do you see? While he had some strange ideas and did not behave appropriately he was a very intelligent man aswell, some of his ideas where very comprehensive.

[abasio]

I also believe in the supernatural, but I am more of the belief in an uncaring creator, or that there are supernatural beings out there but they are unlikely to be interested in us. Some might and it might account for your experiences: there could be some malevolent supernatural being watching you and punishing you when you do something shitty, but from experience I don't think it's the norm, you could just be lucky/unlucky to have such attention.

[Rotwang]

What do you see?

Nothing really. Ignore me, I'm just being bitchy.

[Padmapani]

Science with all its faults is the best tool we have to make sense of ourselves and the world around us. But you should know it is not omnipotent and there are things beyond its reach. And is there where most people fail to understand and start endless discussions like the ones on this thread. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive, in fact they can both co-exist as long as you don't mix them. Science is the realm of proofs, evidence,facts, logic and scientific inquiry. Religion/spirituality on the other hand is the realm of claims,dogmas, believes and faith.

 

You can't (and should not) explain natural phenomena with religion; that's what a charlatan do. For instance, hundreds of years ago people thought that demons and other otherworldly beings were responsible for things they were not able to understand like someone dying because of a little open cut or a person with strange visions and talking in other tongues. Today we know that bacteria and mental diseases like schizophrenia are a more reasonable explanation for these things. In the same train of though it is wrong to try to demonstrate things that are subjective, non repeatable and lack of any verifiable support. That is pseudoscience.

 

The sole idea of trying to demonstrate the existence of god with proofs and evidence is just wrong. Radi you are wrong not because you believe in higher beings and want to have other explanations, but because you are using the terms facts, supporting evidence and god in the same phrase.

 

"Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's"

excellent post. this deserves to be quoted for the new page.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have something against people who try to explain anything with rational explanations even when logic suggests otherwise

umm... what makes you think that logic and rational explanations are opposites? logic is basically the most important tool of rational thinking.

 

also why cite your explanation of karma as evidence for the existance of a god? it is one of the core principles in buddhism which essentially is an atheistic religion.

[radi6404]

Because someone must control the things to get the balance bad. There has to be some force to balance it out so that ithe level is even again. How does the bhuddism explain Karma? If it is not a person it must be a force that is respondant for karma.