Why are you an atheist?: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Philosophy of Religion » Why are you an atheist? » Why are you an atheist?

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Why are you an atheist?

OpokepianistO
Student

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 22, 2007
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 52

Posted 08/22/07 - 09:23 AM:	#1
God has not proved its existence to me, and if an "emotional epiphany" happened to me, I would take it for what it was, rather than accrediting [insert all-powerful deity here]. Besides, those kind of things are for the emotionally flimsy. However, that's not a reason to disbelieve, either. I'm not quite Hermione (Deathly Hallows), but definitely not Luna.

CypressMoon
growth

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 16, 2007
Location: in between you and me
Total Topics: 69
Total Posts: 760

Posted 08/22/07 - 09:35 AM:	#2
These are all thoughts from previous posts essentially justifying my atheism. I hope it gets the thread rollin'. The Real is empirical evidence/ sensory data that actually corresponds to an isolated/simplified concept, insofar as when carried out/engineered/practiced, the hypothesized correspondence actually works. This working, however, does not necessarily prove that the a-priori concept is actually inherent in an independent real. A fact is an "essential" ingredient (e.g. an a-priori concept) supposedly inherent within the real. Hence, a fact is a negation of certain phenomena of the real for the purpose of devising a system for the real. In such a system, the essentials of the real are the only aspects of the system. The non-essential incarnates of the real are ignored/negated out of necessity. Essentials are the components of systems. God is a "manifestation" of the problems perpetuated by language, (e.g. imprecise, inaccurate, intransitory; not capable of elucidating the essence of identity) and the metapsychological apparatus' themselves (i.e. id, ego, supergo) "designed" to preserve existence, negating/denying/repressing/supressing certain aspects essential to an essence, thus creating an idealized desire based upon insufficient evidence. From what I've gathered in this thread, the "devine" (as elucidated upon in this thread) is not real (e.g. no a-priori concept corresponds to the "devine") As 180 pointed out, it is inexplicable. I find that it is inexplicable precisely because it is not real (as defined above). The limits of our language prevent us from explicating upon the "devine" because it is not within our vocabulary. The "devine", epistemologically speaking, is an impossibility. In other words, the devine is incompatable with epistemic limits. It is beyond the limits of knowledge, hence it is unknowable. Must we ask an impossible question? I agree with Dunamis on this one. Without the faith in pure conceptual reasoning itself, perpetuated by the fact that the correspondence between the independent concepts and the real is actual, in that they work, there would be no ideologies (e.g. political/religious/sociological/psychological). Further, without this faith, truth would not even be a peripheral glint transcending wittgenstiens "divide." The "divine" is synonomous with the unknown. It is absolutely impossible to know the divine. A commitment to such an impossibility can be explained in psychological terms, as a defect. It commits us to absolute absurdity; pacifying our existence; restricting our behaviors, and thoughts; establishing a moral code; dissolving questions. among other things.
"We stand before the world, not in it." - Rilke "MAD, adj. Affected with a high degree of intellectual independence; not conforming to standards of thought, speech and action derived by the conformants from study of themselves; at odds with the majority; in short, unusual." - Ambrose Bierce (The Devil's Dictionary) If you have a small child, gently pull the mask over them first, and pull at the ends to tighten the straps.

Matt C
banned

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Nov 03, 2006
Location: Austin, Texas
Total Topics: 26
Total Posts: 150

Posted 08/22/07 - 10:20 AM:	#3
Every once in a while I will take a look at the philosophy of religion category and see if I can help those who have accepted religion. Here I think that I can offer some help. I am atheist because nothing supernatural has been proven or ever will be. For believers in Jesus, Virgin Mary was most likely impregnated by pre-cum, from having a penis that was rubbed on her vagina. There is no "God(s)" to do such a thing. Religion has been used by ineffective/imperfect/ridiculous, or what have you, rulers to rule their population. Supernatural beliefs exist, they are unproductive and unacceptable. I think that by knowing more about the universe we can eliminate them from our beliefs. Matt

Wosret
Yuri ga daisuki desu!

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Mar 29, 2007
Location: New Brunswich Canada
Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 1904

Posted 08/22/07 - 10:27 AM:	#4
Because there are no logical or rational reasons to accept the god hypothesis and numerous reasons to reject it. Simple as that.
"I am Horo the Wise." - Horo the Wise.

OpokepianistO
Student

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 22, 2007
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 52

Posted 08/22/07 - 11:09 AM: Subject: Really?	#5
Wosret: What reasons disprove a deity's existance? Anti-proof is harder to come by than proof, so if you stumbled upon a universal revelation, then I'd like to know about it.

180 Proof
cult deprogrammer

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 27, 2003
Location: reason's raggedy edge
Total Topics: 74
Total Posts: 4029

Posted 08/22/07 - 02:36 PM: Subject: I am an Atheist because:	#6
I am not afraid to die. One life -- this life -- is enough ... Raised / schooled by Xtians, I find the Bible simply too absurd (on its own terms): Mankind has been absolved of inherited guilt for Adam and Eve's disobedience of god via god allowing Himself to be crucified by Men (i.e. "the children of Cain")?! I also find that there is no non-arbitrary way to decide which god, or gods, to believe in; or which religious tradition / "revelation" to obey to the exclusion of (all) others. As a civilized person I find any vestige of "tribalism" (i.e. totems, fetishes, martyr-rites, occult agency, etc of zerosum / group- thinking) to be barbaric. I've also learned from my own life, by observing the lives of others, and from broad study of history, that Courage (i.e. truth-seeking), not Hope (i.e. faith), masters Fear (i.e. ignorance / uncertainty / anxiety). And "theism" is too facile and self-consoling in so far as it does not require (of itself) reasons. Lastly, I can't rationally shake these three thoughts: 1. If god is Transcendent of the universe, then god does not exist within the universe, and thus does not exist in any factual or meaningful sense; 2. If god is Absolute, then nonbelief / disbelief in god must be impossible, but since I / many others do not believe in any god(s), there cannot be "an absolute god". 3. If god is Inexplicable, then the god-hypothesis (e.g. "first cause", "unmoved mover", "creatio ex nihilo" etc) cannot explain any facts (i.e. physical regularities / states-of-affairs) or principles (e.g. logical entailment; moral integrity; uniformity of nature; etc ...) or, by definition, itself (e.g. "sui generis"). Edited by 180 Proof on 09/01/07 - 02:41 PM. Reason: hmmmmmm?
If faith is irrational, then it is rational to dismiss "faith-based claims" out of hand. If faith is rational, then "faith-based claims" must be testable and/or sound -- but they are neither. If faith is a-rational, then "faith-based claims" are inexplicable and thus cannot explain anything.

OpokepianistO
Student

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 22, 2007
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 52

Posted 08/22/07 - 04:42 PM:	#7
Sometimes, 180 Proof, meanings of words such as omnipotent, are meant to fit specifically in certain terms - namely, logic. You're nitpicking on the exact meaning of certain words, which don't disprove God in general, they simply disprove versions of God. Just because it has limits, does not mean it doesn't exist.

Paul
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Mar 10, 2002
Location: Sacramentoish
Total Topics: 451
Total Posts: 11795

Last Blog: Blog welcomes giant check in Happy Dry Spot

Posted 08/22/07 - 08:58 PM:	#8
I'm an atheist because I'm patiently waiting for one of the following: A) A prophet who brings us information that appears to come from a more advanced power -- for example, if the quaran had listed the composition of the atmosphere of Mars or the equation for gravity it would be evidence for a non-human origin. Might be dropped off by an alien intelligence, but it would at least make authorship by a god more likely than otherwise. B) A miracle, or something supernatural -- anything that can win the Randi prize is good enough. C) Anything in the universe which looks clearly designed -- like a billboard in space, maybe a pattern of nebulas that has all the characteristics of language. God's signature on his artwork, in other words. I'm not an agnostic because I have no expectation that any of the conditions might be satisfied, though I could be wrong. MatthewbCurry wrote: For believers in Jesus, Virgin Mary was most likely impregnated by pre-cum, from having a penis that was rubbed on her vagina. Erm, isn't that a bit of an unlikely explanation predicated on accepting the bible as a literal record of events from long before it was written? It's far more reasonable to speculate that she was likely impregnated via sex, like most people... Edited by Paul on 08/22/07 - 09:03 PM

Mike H
Student

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 05, 2007
Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 80

Posted 08/22/07 - 09:14 PM:	#9
I'm an atheist because I was not brainwashed. (and that's not an ad hominem against theists, but an empirical claim). That religious people are brainwashed is simply obvious from the atheistic viewpoint, because the arbitrariness of religious claims is startlingly apparant. People don't arrive at claims like "Jesus was conceived by a virgin Mother" through any rational method involving evidence. Rather, they are exposed to it over and over again from birth - as well as the worldview it is contained in - until the child can't seriously imagine it being any other way. Once you have stepped out of this worldview, as I have, it is obvious that from a rational standpoint, religious claims are interchangable. Why would I have any more reason to believe that "Jesus was conceived by a virgin Mother," rather than "Athena sprang from the mind of Zeus"? Religion offers no rational method to decide between these competing claims, or any other competing religious claims. It comes down to "faith," which in practice just means choosing to believe what you've been told to believe since birth. Thus, it is apparent that we could substitute any religious doctrine for any other, and by the "method" of faith, religious people would choose it as long as they were raised in the appropriate environment. This hypothesis is confirmed by the observation that people overwhelmingly adopt their parent's religion. Given the multitude of religions, which from an outside standpoint look equally (im)plausible, we would expect religious truth seekers to be all over the place - Christians converting to Buddhism, Hindus converting to Scientology, etc. But they are not truth seekers, for they have no method for seeking the truth. No, I'm sorry to say that religious people are just brainwashed. I was lucky enough to be raised in a household that is nearly completely ambivalent on the topic of religion. Thus, I avoided brainwashing. It would be interesting to see an actual empirical study on the relation between the religious beliefs of parents and children. I think my hypothesis would be further confirmed if a large majority of children raised in ambivalent households gravitated towards atheism, though of course we'd have to control for other variables.

andepans
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 22, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 8

1 of 1 people found this post helpful Posted 08/22/07 - 11:26 PM:	#10
MatthewbCurry wrote: Supernatural beliefs exist, they are unproductive and unacceptable. I think that by knowing more about the universe we can eliminate them from our beliefs. The current understanding of the laws that govern our universe proves that we cannot know everything about the universe. A leading theory about our universe is that not only is there an enormous black hole about which the rest of the universe rotates, the combined mass-volume of the universe indicates that our universe is itself a black hole. Since the gravity of a black hole is so strong that not even light can escape it would be impossible to send any information back through a black hole. Accepting that our universe is indeed a black hole itself, our universe is relatively an infinitesimally small dot in another universe. We can never go to that universe, it is hard to comprehend even, but remember relativity: our entire universe [7E22 stars] is contained within a single point. Nor can we learn from the countless millions of black holes (read entire universes containing infinitely more black holes) Of course things like relativity are just theories, but realistically, how far will you stretch the limits of science before you become a motivational poster (DO ANYTHING BE ANYTHING)? I'm not saying we have reached the pinnacle of science; this is mankinds highest peak. But realize the inherent hurdles in knowing about the universe and teaching others. Your religion can tell you that Jesus Christ rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. Your religion can tell you that an evil leprechaun wants you to burn coffee tables. But until your personal atheistic beliefs can tell you why or how you exist, then maybe you should consider your options: Either you can say 1: I do not exist. 2: An evil leprechaun burned a coffee table and the universe emerged from the ashes 3: Christianity (et al) are more than the opiate for the masses. Sorry this is really long, if anything, some of you will have a laugh at this dumb SOB Catholic brainwashed boy, and that makes it worth it for me. HA (burn burn coffee table) edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole#What_make... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy_jBXKEGmY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Da2byMoEG30&mode=r... Edited by andepans on 08/22/07 - 11:33 PM

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.