I do not believe in God. But God works.: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Philosophy of Religion » I do not believe in God. But God works. » I do not believe in God. But God works.

I do not believe in God. But God works.
Why arguments for belief can be irrelevant

I do not believe in God. But God works.

coolazice
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 05, 2006
Total Topics: 16
Total Posts: 200

1 of 1 people found this post helpful Posted 07/17/07 - 01:58 AM: Subject: I do not believe in God. But God works.	#1
Consider a person who says: "I believe in this shovel." "What on earth do you mean?" you might ask them. Somehow this sentence seems confused - a person can believe in the utility of a shovel, surely, but belief in the shovel itself? If one already uses the shovel well, and has demonstrated to themselves the repeated use of it, why any need to believe? Similarly, we might consider the question 'Do you believe in Astrology?' to be misleading. 'Do you find that Astrology works?' is a more relevant question. Now consider the situation we have on this very forum. Plague after plague of threads have been sent upon us, all of which address the question of whether the great shovel in the sky (God) exists or not. What I would like to know is what exactly these threads accomplish in terms of understanding. A person finds that a concept or practice works for them. Is there any sense in trying to convince them of the opposite? A person finds that a concept or practice doesn't work for them. Is there any sense in trying to convince them of the opposite? Of course, if either of these people went further than making any claims about pragmatism, and made claims about the nature of reality, they would be open to philosophical attack. But why would they need to make such claims? Why would they need to believe or not believe in the shovel? I went to a Buddhist meditation course last week. After my return, some asked me whether I believed in all the Buddhist stuff that was presented to me. Of course not, I replied. Why would I need to? The course was a good one if it offered me any tangible benefits, and it did. Why did it matter whether I accepted the theory behind it? During the course I spoke to a man who had been engaged in Native American spiritual practices for some years. He described how the spirit body is smaller than the physical body, and can rise up out of the physical one, and encounter various demons and shamans in the spirit world. Did I laugh at him? Did I get angry? Did I attack his 'arguments' philosophically? No. I asked him if he had personally experienced what he spoke about, and if so, whether he had liked it. Of course, the answer to both questions was yes. Why did it matter whether he believed in it or not? He wasn't being dogmatic - he was sharing his experience with other people. What was wrong with the practices if they offered him tangible benefits? So why so much animosity in the world, from the theists towards the atheists and the atheists towards the theists? The answer is simple. Human beings have a very limited comprehension of the world, and they do not like to be reminded of this. If somebody offers the opposite viewpoint to what the ego comprehends, the ego rebels, and immediately finds out things that are wrong with what that person says. Rare is the person who can let the subjective experience of the other contradict their own without feeling anger or resentment. And yet everybody wants to convince us that they are perfectly rational! Send your arguments here, and I promise not to resent them.
_____________________ One of the greatest weaknesses in human nature is to be dogmatic about issues of which we are ignorant. "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio/Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

Deracinating
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 29, 2008
Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 3

Posted 05/02/08 - 09:12 PM:	#2
Basic instincts and emotions lead to this. Self-esteem and the like; people don't like to be proven wrong, and many people have the opinion that if you encounter opposing views and don't offer argument agaisnt said views, then they've been in some way defeated. Also, I think belief has a lot to do with experiences. It isn't always beneficial to commit yourself to total belief in a philosophy; simply take what you need out of it as you said. But it isn't as irrelevant a question as you put it off to be, you've just offered less than effective examples. It is counter-productive to 'believe' in an object such as a shovel, because there is little to be disputed about it. It digs, no one in their right mind would argue with that, but when it comes to things such as a religious or philosophical view, belief has a different meaning. It suggests that people accept all the principles behind this view, even going so far as to believe what they haven't learned about it. In this sense, wondering about someone's belief has much more meaning. Perhaps it could stand to be a little less ambiguous a term though.

Dunamis
Darchism

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 16, 2004
Total Topics: 62
Total Posts: 2531

Posted 05/02/08 - 10:41 PM:	#3
coolazice wrote: A person finds that a concept or practice works for them. Is there any sense in trying to convince them of the opposite? A person finds that a concept or practice doesn't work for them. Is there any sense in trying to convince them of the opposite? There was a time when it "worked for" a majority or people in the United States, that blacks were inferior to whites. And it did not "work for" a minority of others, this very same idea. When you understand the social context of ideas, arguments, justifications, "works for them" has legs. So why so much animosity in the world, from the theists towards the atheists and the atheists towards the theists? The answer is simple. Human beings have a very limited comprehension of the world, and they do not like to be reminded of this. That is a nice, non-world specific thought. Unfortunately it does not take into consideration the history and effect accomplished in the name of theist beliefs, institutionalized and justified through argument, or from another perspective, from non-thiest beliefs, institutionalized and justified through argument. The essentializing of the self in the context of God or God's non-existence, is a question beyond the fragility of a limited comprehension, but one that goes to the core of our self-conception and our conception of others.
_____________________ Tractatus theologico-politicus [is a] work forged in Hell by a renegade Jew and the Devil and issued with the knowledge of Mynheer Jan de Witt. - Church Council of Amsterdam If no man ever thinks alone, then we might say that to know really is to think ever less by oneself - Balibar

itry2brational
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 01, 2008
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 17

Posted 05/08/08 - 10:14 PM:	#4
I will defer to Bertrand Russell for one comment: "If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do." I think Dunamis touches on a point I would like to make, and that is that beliefs are not purely subjective. That is, they have influence outside of the individual because the individual is not living in a bubble. Many would contend that there are many religious beliefs which there are 'no good reasons' to believe in. We see negative results from having some of these beliefs. I think this is what non-theists take issue with. But theists like to make the same argument, especially with regard to atheists. They like to claim that their LACK of belief was the source, impetus or motivation for irrational behavior. Personally, I do not see how a lack of something can be the motivation or cause for action. We are social creatures and beliefs can have tangible effects on us as a whole. When some beliefs have no perceived tangible effect we think, 'no big deal'. When they do, people get up in arms. I think the ongoing argument between theists and non-theists is over those perceived tangible beliefs.

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.