Atheism

[Flannel Jesus]

I don't know how you can know that unless we can know things like there is a God or not.

It's independent of that question. It has to do with the fact that mutually exclusive belief systems both have adherents that by all accounts went through this type of process.

Sure, but what does that entail?

It just means that, if I get a positive result from the test, it's more likely to be a false positive than a true one. I'd be looking for a more reliable test

[Gary Childress]

I don't know about you guys, but for me, logical arguments for the existence or non existence of gods always seem immensely unsatisfying. Like, I've never read a logical argument either direction and been satisfied by it.

I've read logical arguments about the non existence of specific gods and thought they were maybe a little reasonable, at best, but never gods in general. To me, I suppose it seems like more of an empirical question than a logical one. What should we expect to see if there was a god or god's? What should we expect to see if there wasn't? What do we in fact see?

I would try to approach it as a Bayesian. There's little bits of evidence in both directions, and some people interpret some of that evidence strongly in one direction while other people think it shouldn't be considered that strong of evidence.

But regardless of the disagreements we might have about what each piece of evidence means, I think the bayesian approach seems ultimately more fruitful and satisfying.

It seems to me that the only arguments for the existence of God come from there being religious texts. It is their existence that is the supposed evidence, rather than their content. Without them, the inexplicable things some people seem to encounter during the course of their lives could be explained by any number of imaginative theories. All religious texts were written by human beings, and we know how fallible, biased and dishonest human beings can be, so, if you must have a story, why not just write your own?

I agree 100% with what you say above, Harbal. That's the most rational approach to religion of any kind that I'm aware of. If I'm wrong and there is a particular "God" out there, then perhaps I'm fucked. But I can't obey every mandate of everyone's God in order to cover all the possibilities of who that specific "God" is or what sort of conduct that "God" wants from me. Fuck it! I'll strike out on my own.

[Dontaskme]

I know you're depressed, Gary. I believe you.

So why do I persist in talking to you about God? Because no matter how dark your situation looks, it's not hopeless. What you need may well be beyond human capacity to afford, or even beyond your own capacity to change -- but nothing is beyond God.

Being angry with Him makes no sense, really.

What you need, Gary, according to everything you've told me, is a wholesale transformation, not cosmetic changes. It takes nothing less than an act of God to do such a thing.

So my counsel would be this: you already know that there's no help for you in man -- nothing in ordinary science or in the medical system to fix what you're dealing with -- and if you get to the point when you truly realize you're also powerless to fix what's wrong with your life, then maybe you'll consider the one option you've been refusing so steadfastly...to resort to God Himself.

And I'm confident there's an answer for you there.

All I'm trying to do here is point in the right direction, so you don't imagine you've tried everything yet, or that there isn't another chance.

What I don't want is for you to think there's no hope. In spite of all, there is.

[Dontaskme]

I agree 100% with what you say above, Harbal. That's the most rational approach to religion of any kind that I'm aware of. If I'm wrong and there is a particular "God" out there, then perhaps I'm fucked. But I can't obey every mandate of everyone's God in order to cover all the possibilities of who that specific "God" is or what sort of conduct that "God" wants from me. Fuck it! I'll strike out on my own.

[Dontaskme]

Being angry with Him makes no sense, really. He's the only One capable of getting behind all that's eating you up and getting you out of it. What you need, Gary, according to everything you've told me, is a wholesale transformation, not cosmetic changes.

I prayed for you too IC, blessed be my child.

[Dontaskme]

Get a room.

[Dontaskme]

“If there were no God, there would be no atheists.”

He is insulting his own intelligence.
If there is no God, there would be no theists [i.e. no humans created, no atheists].

The above is based on the arrogance and delusion that God exists as a default and being ignorant that it is impossible for a God to exists as real.

impossible for a God to exists as real
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704

[Gary Childress]

I agree 100% with what you say above, Harbal. That's the most rational approach to religion of any kind that I'm aware of. If I'm wrong and there is a particular "God" out there, then perhaps I'm fucked. But I can't obey every mandate of everyone's God in order to cover all the possibilities of who that specific "God" is or what sort of conduct that "God" wants from me. Fuck it! I'll strike out on my own.

As far as I can tell, there's no God who says anything, including the "F word" or otherwise. There are only human beings, some trying their best to do one thing and others trying their best to do others. In the end, a god requires devotion to the point that one must sacrifice some autonomy in order to bend oneself to fit the specific needs of another being. I've already sacrificed all I'm going to sacrifice to one woman who now seems to have distanced herself from me. Perhaps whatever forces affecting life have propelled us in different directions. There's not much I can do about that. If God wants to return the two of us together, it's up to that "God" or whatever. I would love to be back with her, however, it seems like she's more interested in moving on and perhaps it's even better for her and her daughter if she does so than to take on the extra burden of my baggage. Such is fate, I guess.

If happiness isn't possible except at the expense of someone I love, then the world's a pit. I don't care anymore.

[Harbal]

If I'm wrong and there is a particular "God" out there, then perhaps I'm fucked. But I can't obey every mandate of everyone's God in order to cover all the possibilities of who that specific "God" is or what sort of conduct that "God" wants from me.

If there were some kind of conscious intention behind the creation of all existence,or at least the part of it that we are aware of, I couldn't even begin to speculate about its source, except to say that no accurate description is going to be found in anybody's religious texts, or scriptures. Neither do I think that such a creative power would have any interest in us as individuals, so I wouldn't worry too much about your conduct on that score. If you can live your life without hurting anyone else, there is no reason to feel guilty about anything.

[Alexis Jacobi]

If I'm wrong and there is a particular "God" out there, then perhaps I'm fucked. But I can't obey every mandate of everyone's God in order to cover all the possibilities of who that specific "God" is or what sort of conduct that "God" wants from me.

If there were some kind of conscious intention behind the creation of all existence,or at least the part of it that we are aware of, I couldn't even begin to speculate about its source, except to say that no accurate description is going to be found in anybody's religious texts, or scriptures. Neither do I think that such a creative power would have any interest in us as individuals, so I wouldn't worry too much about your conduct on that score. If you can live your life without hurting anyone else, there is no reason to feel guilty about anything.

This idea was pretty thoroughly developed by Lucretius and the Epicurean school a long long while ago.

“All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher.”

“It's easier to avoid the snares of love than to escape once you are in that net whose cords and knots are strong; but even so, enmeshed, entangled, you can still get out unless, poor fool, you stand in your own way.”

“...nothing is more blissful than to occupy the heights effectively fortified by the teaching of the wise, tranquil sanctuaries from which you can look down upon others and see them wandering everywhere in their random search for the way of life, competing for intellectual eminence, disputing about rank, and striving night and day with prodigious effort to scale the summit of wealth and to secure power. O minds of mortals, blighted by your blindness! Amid what deep darkness and daunting dangers life’s little day is passed! To think that you should fail to see that nature importantly demands only that the body may be rid of pain, and that the mind, divorced from anxiety and fear, may enjoy a feeling of contentment!”

Lucretius recognized Nature (the Goddess or Aphrodite) as the god of the world, but really as another name for Eros and the power driving nature, but saw the gods as being — if they existed — remote and unconcerned.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Why are you in woe, AJ? Please share. I hope it wasn't something I said. If it was, then feel free to explain how my words have given you woe?

It is a Yiddish expression with a range of meanings!

I am often amazed by you because I see you as dedicated, with your whole being, to the most pathetic and disempowering *philosophy* that I can conceive of. You are a man totally without power. You are a totally unmanly man. You constantly invest in your weakness; you nourish and cultivate it. And then -- how disgusting this is -- you actually include in a post on a forum like this a reference to your addiction to jacking yourself off -- because this is the one pleasure you conceive yourself as having I guess.

Oy veh ist mir!

One problem that I myself notice is that you are locked into a sort of conceptual battle with Immanuel who, for you, represents 'the religious possibility'. Meaning that you have no point of comparison. But religiosity, spirituality and also mysticism and mystic relationship, all of these point to domains of experience about which Immanuel knows nothing. He cannot refer to a wider field which is part of human experience and understanding because of his obsessive, fanatic concerns and his investment.

You seem locked into either accepting all of his terms, or of rejecting them completely -- though I do recognize that you back up to a position of agnosticism. But with you this has all the force and power of a fart into a bus seat.

A disempowered man like yourself, who invests in a pathetic self, requires a far more demanding and exigent personal philosophy and indeed a religion.

I have recently been thinking about *pits* because this is a word that Iambiguous used, a term to define where he sees himself: in a pit. He cannot get out but seems to demand that someone come along to try to get him out. But since no argument that is ever presented, or could be presented, will be accepted (his art is that of 'shooting down') he seems to desire to present his existence in a pit as unalterable.

Similarly, you have the most pathetic personal philosophy of anyone I think I have ever encountered. You live in the pit you invest in. No one can get you out, though you seem to ask for *help*, and each encounter with you is a rehearsal whereby you make it plain that you will not come out.

This is why I said that you have a 'racket' (riffing off your tennis photo). You are a con-artist with a pathetic personal tale.

Why not give up women and become a faggot? Then you'd have someone to jack off with. A win-win situation, no?

[Harbal]

This idea was pretty thoroughly developed by Lucretius and the Epicurean school a long long while ago.

I often think I was born too late.

“All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher.”

I can go along with that.

[Gary Childress]

Why are you in woe, AJ? Please share. I hope it wasn't something I said. If it was, then feel free to explain how my words have given you woe?

It is a Yiddish expression with a range of meanings!

I am often amazed by you because I see you as dedicated, with your whole being, to the most pathetic and disempowering *philosophy* that I can conceive of. You are a man totally without power. You are a totally unmanly man. You constantly invest in your weakness; you nourish and cultivate it. And then -- how disgusting this is -- you actually include in a post on a forum like this a reference to your addiction to jacking yourself off -- because this is the one pleasure you conceive yourself as having I guess.

Oy veh ist mir!

One problem that I myself notice is that you are locked into a sort of conceptual battle with Immanuel who, for you, represents 'the religious possibility'. Meaning that you have no point of comparison. But religiosity, spirituality and also mysticism and mystic relationship, all of these point to domains of experience about which Immanuel knows nothing. He cannot refer to a wider field which is part of human experience and understanding because of his obsessive, fanatic concerns and his investment.

You seem locked into either accepting all of his terms, or of rejecting them completely -- though I do recognize that you back up to a position of agnosticism. But with you this has all the force and power of a fart into a bus seat.

A disempowered man like yourself, who invests in a pathetic self, requires a far more demanding and exigent personal philosophy and indeed a religion.

I have recently been thinking about *pits* because this is a word that Iambiguous used, a term to define where he sees himself: in a pit. He cannot get out but seems to demand that someone come along to try to get him out. But since no argument that is ever presented, or could be presented, will be accepted (his art is that of 'shooting down') he seems to desire to present his existence in a pit as unalterable.

Similarly, you have the most pathetic personal philosophy of anyone I think I have ever encountered. You live in the pit you invest in. No one can get you out, though you seem to ask for *help*, and each encounter with you is a rehearsal whereby you make it plain that you will not come out.

This is why I said that you have a 'racket' (riffing off your tennis photo). You are a con-artist with a pathetic personal tale.

Why not give up women and become a faggot? Then you'd have someone to jack off with. A win-win situation, no?

If you want to understand me better, you'll have to do a lot more digging. However, I would question your sanity over wanting to know more about some guy who left the US "defense" industry early in life and now monetarily feeds the pharmaceutical industry out of seeming necesity. But if it entertains you to try to understand me, then devote whatever resources you want to it. Just don't bother me too much, because it becomes very annoying to me at times to deal with you. Or continue to be annoying to me. Perhaps that's your Godly mission in life. I won't rule out that possibility either. As I've clearly stated, I'm agnostic, if you've got a better approach to life that I should follow, then you'll need to convince me of it. I suggest not wasting your time trying to. There are other people out there for such projects, maybe some of them you might help, depending on how they end up or how the world around them is affected by their conduct. But I'll leave all that to your discretion.

[Gary Childress]

Oh, and AJ, I'm sorry for you that you didn't want to see my comments about my sex life. I hate to break this to you but your dad and mom probably did something nasty to get you here, unless you believe you were brought here by the stork. And if you really want to believe that, perhaps you could build a system of apologetics for such a belief?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Alexis Jacobi]

I don't want to understand you, Gary, and I do want you to know I have no ill-will toward you, but this is a philosophy forum and if we are not decided that we will be hard, harsh, direct and intolerant of fallacious ideas, we must in my view welcome the most strenuous assaults on our *cherished notions*. I refrain from offering advice. I simply describe what I see, and express my own views.

There are far more empowering personal philosophies and religious modes. And I can think of one where turning off the energy-leak valve of obsessive masturbation would be Step One.

then you'll need to convince me

Fuck off! But I do not say that with negative animus. Get yourself a faggot-pal so at least you'll have company in your jerk-off sessions. Masturbate, then complain, then masturbate some more.

I will not ever condescend to *convince* you of anything as if you are a puppy needing training.

Oh, and AJ, I'm sorry for you that you didn't want to see my comments about my sex life.

You certainly do not need to offer me any explanations or justifications, Gary. Carry on as you wish. On all levels!