Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent. Full Story

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#187391 Nov 26, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Baited breath?
You put a little squid or something on your breath?
Oh lol

It's bated, huh?

Oh well.

At least I can fix my own A/C.

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#187392 Nov 26, 2013
Tinkerbell Jesus:

The delusion that one's belief can change reality.

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#187393 Nov 26, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You ARE in that market.
A magic poof and random collisions created you and your thinking.
WTF ?

A fairy fay created the universe ?

Was his name Tinkerbell ?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#187394 Nov 26, 2013
http://old.richarddawkins.net/articles/125-wh...
http://old.richarddawkins.net/articles/124-wh...
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. meaty reads, thanks ..
.. in this thesis, Dawkins correctly points out, "Believe whatever your grown-ups tell you. Obey your parents, obey the tribal elders, especially when they adopt a solemn, minatory tone. Obey without question." ..
.. also, ".... a soldiers' slavish and unquestioning obedience to an order, however preposterous." WW II proves the accuracy of that statement ..
.. RR admits his thirst for an authority figure. That took courage and I commend him ..
.. yet here we are - you, me, an array of other posters - trying to find an answer to the unanswerable question: why do humans have a god need, a quest to solve cosmic mysteries ??..
The question may not be so unanswerable.

Dawkins makes a compelling argument that children who simply believe trusted authority figures have a survival advantage over those that have to learn about things like traffic the hard way, and that this behavior that has been adaptive over the ages may now be a liability in the face of organized religion.

Dawkins didn't mention the ability of people to mature beyond that childlike trusting stage if they can learn to think independently and critically, and how religion actively battles to subvert that maturation - to make childlike trust and obedience in adulthood seem like a virtue as the story about the soldiers marching to their death for lack of a halt order exemplified.

Religion survives by undermining critical thought, insulting human learning, calling blind trust a virtue, promoting magical thinking, and giving the initiate reasons to deny his sense of reason and moral truth - what is called his puny mind being manipulated by demons - and accept the absurd in its place.

By Dawkins reckoning, there is no god gene, just a subordination and obedience gene being fostered and exploited by the priesthood to its own benefit. As Dawkins notes when discussing the moths flying into the flame, we have to ask the right question, which is not what survival advantage suicidal behavior confers, but how an ancient instinct that does confer survival advantage can go wrong when the environment changes, as when things like light bulbs and organized religion appear after the behaviors have been selected for.

I think that is probably the best explanation.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#187395 Nov 26, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
.. both sides are vehement regarding their position and, based on the many adamant posts, it seems to tap into a primitive instinct. For example, when Bob decided to slap the theist label on me, he responded with blazing guns. Most posters, atheist and theist alike, seem to respond from an emotional core ..

.. what's that all about ??..
We also get into an us-versus-them mode rather easily, the basis of xenophobia, which is also likely an ancient tribal instinct with survival value in a world we no longer live in. It's the one that I believe that the people behind the American government are exploiting with this Republican-Democrat thing - two tribes being kept at war with stages battles between the parties that actually seem to agree on policy, and ignore the people.

And it's the one the church exploits when it vilifies the likes of Dawkins. I doubt that the church wants anybody reading that stuff I linked to without seething, or reading posts like this without negative thoughts about it.

Sound feasible?

We each need to think for ourselves or risk being exploited for failing to do so.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#187396 Nov 26, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
Once again RR shows that his religion is nothing but being a scumbag liar.
Don't hate me cuz I prove you wrong.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#187397 Nov 26, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No wonder I'm a bit short.
His figures are not adjusted for inflation-- they are a lie, in other words.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#187398 Nov 26, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I edited over 3 trillion facts, huh?
I must be good.
Obama added 4X debt of Bush, on a 4 year comparison.
But Bush is the deficit guy. Right?
You don't believe in numbers, do you?
You prefer bull shit. You are a moron, Blob.
A lying moron.
No--- you are patently TOO STUPID to do such a thing.

The "answer" you posted is a lie. Not adjusted for inflation, for one.

Does not factor in the increased gross national income for another.

The "answer" you gave? A big fat lie-- created by a conservitard just like YOU.

Too stupid for your own good.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#187399 Nov 26, 2013
LCNLin wrote:
Atheist 'mega-churches' undermine what atheism's supposed to be about A so-called godless church wants to establish more US congregations. These 'places of worship' come across as a joke
It's not easy being an atheist. Determined to show that those who believe in nothing are just as good as those who believe in something, the faithless are establishing a church of their own, and a mega-church at that. On the surface it seems like a rather brilliant idea. What's not to like about beating the faithful at their own game? Apart from the one small caveat that establishing a place of worship for the faithless, even a godless one, rather negates what atheism is supposed to be all about.
We really appreciate your interest in our problems and your sincere desire to help us. This is the Golden Rule at work, is it not - you trying to be good and kind to others as you would like to be treated yourself? Thanks for your concern.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php...

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#187400 Nov 26, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
They have. Studies using various scanners have long since established that emotional mental states are very real.
But I'm not surprised you would fail to comprehend these studies:
... they **are** scientific.
A subject you are 100% unfamiliar with.
I'm so sorry for your loss of sanity like that.
<quoted text>
.. this line of reasoning doesn't seem to be working ..
.. most humans experience the emotion of love and have hands therefore we know such things to be real or true ..
.. IAN has put forth an interesting topic well worth debating. Why do you think humans have a god need or seek the spiritual? Does your faith provide a solution to the cosmic mystery ??..
No. Because I have no faith that cannot be supported by actual facts.

And what, exactly is this bunkum you labeled "cosmic mystery"?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#187401 Nov 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I have evidence emotions exist.
No... by your own words? You don't.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I have evidence God exists.
Since you lied in your first statement?

You obviously lied here, too.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187402 Nov 26, 2013
Anon wrote:
<quoted text>

I wish I had a piece of that market...
...or a piece of anything. Right?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#187403 Nov 26, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is conflicting data from the same site, about.com , which reports that the national debt rose from $7.4 trillion at the end of fiscal year 2004 to $10.0 at the end of fiscal year 2008 for an increase of $2.6 trillion, and then rose to $16.1 trillion at the end of fiscal year 2012 for an increase of $6.1 trillion.
While the data supports your point that Obama has far outspent Bush, the numbers don't jive, which is undoubtedly related to how the deficit is calculated. Who can trust any of this, especially when you consider that the chart also points out that Obama continued Bush's policies including "Obama extended Bush tax cuts, combined with $900 billion in defense spending." And it's not clear who got the "credit" for the bailouts. Obama gets the stimulus spending.
However you look at this, there is really only one national policy being executed by both parties, and it appears to have nothing to do with the will of the American people, given how unhappy both conservative and liberal citizen are - how they both feel that they are not being represented.
And I think they're right. American government is no longer a function of the people's opinions, which is really the sine qua non of democracy.
Let me ask you this: If you were an alien dropped onto this planet with the job to report back to the Mother Ship which countries on Earth were democracies, how would you do it? I propose that it would not be merely by seeing if there were elections, which could be shams if both candidates were say corporatists with he same policies posing as your benefactors and representatives.
I say that you would have to survey the residents, canvass them for their opinions, and compare them with policy. Except where popular opinion was unconstitutional, those opinions should be reflected in national policy. What else is a democracy if not that?
If you found that this was not the case, should you not conclude that the people are not represented by their government even if their elected officials are called representatives?
Once again, I would admonish us all to transcend the Democrat versus Republican argument, which I believe is as much a part of the illusion of democracy as the elections that appear to be meaningless if both parties represent the same interests, and those interests are not ours.
See if Obamacare doesn't turn out to be a boondoggle for the insurance industry. If so, the debate about it between the parties is manufactured - more illusion. I keep hearing about people's insurance costs rising. Didn't you report that to us about yourself. Who benefits from that?
And if you were planning to raise everybody's rates by a sleight of hand, wouldn't this be the ideal cover for it - one party screaming "I told you so!" as if it weren't in on the ruse as well?
The "about" chart was bullshyt. They failed to factor in inflation. They failed to factor in the increased economic growth. They failed to factor in the increased gross national income.

Like all such lying sites? They lie in subtle ways-- too subtle for Buck's moronic, 100%/0% comprehension skills.
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#187404 Nov 26, 2013
JustSaying wrote:
<quoted text>
See. He convinced you.
Sorry, reason and logic combined with total lack of evidence convinced me.
Anon

Lakewood, OH

#187405 Nov 26, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You ARE in that market.
A magic poof and random collisions created you and your thinking.
What color is your aura, Dave?

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#187406 Nov 26, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
WTF ?
A fairy fay created the universe ?
Was his name Tinkerbell ?
BBT

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#187407 Nov 26, 2013
How to talk about Obamacare with your TeaParty relatives this Thanksgiving:

Teabagger: "Obam's getting between me and my doctor."

the facts: Obama's getting between you and your unscrupulous insurance companies. All new plans must cover 10 essential benefits like basic preventative care, maternity care and prescriptions. Now your insurance covers *actual* health care.

Teabagger: "Obamcare is canceling everyone's plans."

the facts: Actually, insurance companies are canceling plans, because they don't meet requirements for basic coverage - they're junk policies. Worse, the insurance companies are not informing customers about the affordable, quality insurance in the new available marketplace.

Teabagger: "Bureaucrats will decide who lives and who dies."

the facts: Before Obamacare, 25 million Americans with pre-existing conditions were uninsured. Now, insurance companies can't kick people off their plans just because they get sick. That's going to *save* lives, ont end them.

Teabagger: "Michelle Bachmann said this would happen."

the facts: Please. The website is being fixed. We can't go back to the dark days of insurance companies denying care or coverage and people going bankrupt to say healthy, just because of some temporarily glitchy website.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#187408 Nov 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't hate me cuz I prove you wrong.
You could not prove that the sky was blue on a cloudless day, silly!

This is because you reject any and all **science**-- and the **only** way to show **why** the sky appears blue, is with **science**.

I'm so sorry for your loss (of sanity).

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#187409 Nov 26, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
How does a person list one thing?
Do you know what a list is?
Geez.
LMAO!
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#187410 Nov 26, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
The point is, BartBuffoon, if the best guess of science on matters are proven wrong later, science was wrong at the time.
That being the case, science is likely wrong about some things they tell us now.
This would suggest it unwise to totally trust science.
Comprehension. Work on it.
Sorry once again that you fail to understand how the scientific method operates. You are still disappointed that science cannot see into the future and always be right. Probably best if you completely abandon any science whatsoever and consider casing bones and chanting for your answers, or do what Theists do, just make shit up, seems they are very comfortable with unsupported claims.

BTW, PLEASE stay the 9uck out of hospitals, that medical science gets it wrong all the time, consider finding a witch doctor for whatever ails you.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 32 min macumazahn 14,648
Christianity Created Hitler 4 hr Uncle Sam 213
Why Evil Disproves Atheism 5 hr Luke1981 7
Our world came from nothing? (Jul '14) 5 hr NoahLovesU 1,245
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 5 hr NoahLovesU 2,844
The Consequences of Atheism 6 hr ChristineM 77
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 14 hr Mikko 1,496
More from around the web