Can the Religious Be Trusted?

[Wizard22]

Wizard22, if there’s no such thing as observable, verifiable facts, how are we communicating right now? The fact that you’re reading this and responding requires countless observable, verifiable processes—language, technology, even the electricity powering your device. Denying facts while relying on them seems, at best, contradictory.

You are simply trying to elevate your personal beliefs, which you call "observable verifiable facts", as above the validity of "religious beliefs", as-if your beliefs were "not religious".

But they are; you're just not aware of it. This is almost a universal coping method throughout the "Secular" identity...this false belief that your beliefs are "greater than" or "more rational" that of the "religious".

[BigMike]

Wizard22, if there’s no such thing as observable, verifiable facts, how are we communicating right now? The fact that you’re reading this and responding requires countless observable, verifiable processes—language, technology, even the electricity powering your device. Denying facts while relying on them seems, at best, contradictory.

You are simply trying to elevate your personal beliefs, which you call "observable verifiable facts", as above the validity of "religious beliefs", as-if your beliefs were "not religious".

But they are; you're just not aware of it. This is almost a universal coping method throughout the "Secular" identity...this false belief that your beliefs are "greater than" or "more rational" that of the "religious".

Wizard22, are you serious? Observable, verifiable facts aren’t "personal beliefs." They’re the foundation of everything allowing us to even have this conversation—physics, chemistry, technology, all the tangible systems you’re relying on right now. Calling those "religious beliefs" is absurd. This isn’t about elevating anything; it’s about recognizing the reality we can all test, replicate, and observe.

If you want to equate evidence-based understanding with religious belief, then maybe you’d like to explain how electricity or the internet runs on faith and not hard science. Because unless you’re communicating through divine intervention, your argument crumbles under the very facts you refuse to acknowledge.

[Wizard22]

Wizard22, are you serious? Observable, verifiable facts aren’t "personal beliefs."

They 1000% are.

[Atla]

Not forgetting determinism at all—quite the opposite. The average human’s potential, like anyone’s, is entirely determined by their genetics, environment, and experiences. Change that environment—provide better education, opportunities, and conditions—and you change the outcomes. That’s determinism in action, not denial.

Just not enough. That's determinism for you.

Exactly, Atla—that’s determinism. The outcomes are limited by the constraints of genetics, environment, and opportunity. But acknowledging that isn’t resignation; it’s a call to action. Change the conditions, and you shift the outcomes within those deterministic limits. It's not everything, but it’s something—and that matters.

Depends on who you ask. If overall we are determined to fail no matter how hard we try (unless a miracle happens), then some could say that it's better to just forget about reality and go with religion.

[BigMike]

Just not enough. That's determinism for you.

Exactly, Atla—that’s determinism. The outcomes are limited by the constraints of genetics, environment, and opportunity. But acknowledging that isn’t resignation; it’s a call to action. Change the conditions, and you shift the outcomes within those deterministic limits. It's not everything, but it’s something—and that matters.

Depends on who you ask. If overall we are determined to fail no matter how hard we try (unless a miracle happens), then some could say that it's better to just forget about reality and go with religion.

Atla, sure, you could argue that if we're determined to fail, then embracing comforting illusions might seem appealing. But let’s be honest—turning to religion because reality feels hard doesn’t change reality. It doesn’t erase the deterministic factors shaping our world or our actions. It just covers them up with wishful thinking.

If determinism shows us anything, it’s that progress—however incremental—is possible when we understand the forces at play. Acknowledging reality might not guarantee success, but it gives us the tools to make meaningful changes. Retreating into illusion may feel easier, but it’s a surrender, not a solution.

[Belinda]

Just not enough. That's determinism for you.

Exactly, Atla—that’s determinism. The outcomes are limited by the constraints of genetics, environment, and opportunity. But acknowledging that isn’t resignation; it’s a call to action. Change the conditions, and you shift the outcomes within those deterministic limits. It's not everything, but it’s something—and that matters.

Depends on who you ask. If overall we are determined to fail no matter how hard we try (unless a miracle happens), then some could say that it's better to just forget about reality and go with religion.

FATALISM: the future is closed to possibilities.

DETERMINISM: events do not exist until and if they materialise.

[Atla]

Exactly, Atla—that’s determinism. The outcomes are limited by the constraints of genetics, environment, and opportunity. But acknowledging that isn’t resignation; it’s a call to action. Change the conditions, and you shift the outcomes within those deterministic limits. It's not everything, but it’s something—and that matters.

Depends on who you ask. If overall we are determined to fail no matter how hard we try (unless a miracle happens), then some could say that it's better to just forget about reality and go with religion.

FATALISM: the future is closed to possibilities.

DETERMINISM: events do not exist until and if they materialise.

Word salad

[Atla]

Exactly, Atla—that’s determinism. The outcomes are limited by the constraints of genetics, environment, and opportunity. But acknowledging that isn’t resignation; it’s a call to action. Change the conditions, and you shift the outcomes within those deterministic limits. It's not everything, but it’s something—and that matters.

Depends on who you ask. If overall we are determined to fail no matter how hard we try (unless a miracle happens), then some could say that it's better to just forget about reality and go with religion.

Atla, sure, you could argue that if we're determined to fail, then embracing comforting illusions might seem appealing. But let’s be honest—turning to religion because reality feels hard doesn’t change reality. It doesn’t erase the deterministic factors shaping our world or our actions. It just covers them up with wishful thinking.

If determinism shows us anything, it’s that progress—however incremental—is possible when we understand the forces at play. Acknowledging reality might not guarantee success, but it gives us the tools to make meaningful changes. Retreating into illusion may feel easier, but it’s a surrender, not a solution.

That's not determinism. That's the belief that the past was deterministic, but the future can step outside the deterministic constrains of the past.

[Belinda]

Depends on who you ask. If overall we are determined to fail no matter how hard we try (unless a miracle happens), then some could say that it's better to just forget about reality and go with religion.

FATALISM: the future is closed to possibilities.

DETERMINISM: events do not exist until and if they materialise.

Word salad

The passive voice as in "we are determined" implies agency . We are in fact agents relative to such freedom as knowing the causes of past events makes possible for us. Nobody knows what possibilities exist. Possibility is an unmarked tablet, the cinema screen before the show has begun. What we do have to make us relatively free to choose is probability, extrapolations from knowing causes of past events.

[BigMike]

Depends on who you ask. If overall we are determined to fail no matter how hard we try (unless a miracle happens), then some could say that it's better to just forget about reality and go with religion.

Atla, sure, you could argue that if we're determined to fail, then embracing comforting illusions might seem appealing. But let’s be honest—turning to religion because reality feels hard doesn’t change reality. It doesn’t erase the deterministic factors shaping our world or our actions. It just covers them up with wishful thinking.

If determinism shows us anything, it’s that progress—however incremental—is possible when we understand the forces at play. Acknowledging reality might not guarantee success, but it gives us the tools to make meaningful changes. Retreating into illusion may feel easier, but it’s a surrender, not a solution.

That's not determinism. That's the belief that the past was deterministic, but the future can step outside the deterministic constrains of the past.

Atla, that's a misunderstanding of determinism. The future doesn’t step outside the deterministic constraints of the past—every future event is entirely shaped by prior causes. Acknowledging reality and working to make changes doesn’t mean defying determinism; it means being a part of it. When we act, our actions are determined by our current understanding, our environment, and our prior experiences—all of which are products of the same deterministic framework.

Progress isn’t stepping outside determinism; it’s recognizing how the deterministic forces at play can be leveraged to produce better outcomes. Denial or retreat into illusions doesn’t remove determinism—it just blinds us to it. Reality marches on, whether we engage with it or not.

[Atla]

Atla, sure, you could argue that if we're determined to fail, then embracing comforting illusions might seem appealing. But let’s be honest—turning to religion because reality feels hard doesn’t change reality. It doesn’t erase the deterministic factors shaping our world or our actions. It just covers them up with wishful thinking.

If determinism shows us anything, it’s that progress—however incremental—is possible when we understand the forces at play. Acknowledging reality might not guarantee success, but it gives us the tools to make meaningful changes. Retreating into illusion may feel easier, but it’s a surrender, not a solution.

That's not determinism. That's the belief that the past was deterministic, but the future can step outside the deterministic constrains of the past.

Atla, that's a misunderstanding of determinism. The future doesn’t step outside the deterministic constraints of the past—every future event is entirely shaped by prior causes. Acknowledging reality and working to make changes doesn’t mean defying determinism; it means being a part of it. When we act, our actions are determined by our current understanding, our environment, and our prior experiences—all of which are products of the same deterministic framework.

Progress isn’t stepping outside determinism; it’s recognizing how the deterministic forces at play can be leveraged to produce better outcomes. Denial or retreat into illusions doesn’t remove determinism—it just blinds us to it. Reality marches on, whether we engage with it or not.

Yet you imagine that "If determinism shows us anything, it’s that progress—however incremental—is possible when we understand the forces at play". No, sometimes progress is possible, sometimes it isn't. And it's fairly clear that humanity is heading for collapse, overall we seem to be on an unalterable course (unless a miracle happens).

[BigMike]

That's not determinism. That's the belief that the past was deterministic, but the future can step outside the deterministic constrains of the past.

Atla, that's a misunderstanding of determinism. The future doesn’t step outside the deterministic constraints of the past—every future event is entirely shaped by prior causes. Acknowledging reality and working to make changes doesn’t mean defying determinism; it means being a part of it. When we act, our actions are determined by our current understanding, our environment, and our prior experiences—all of which are products of the same deterministic framework.

Progress isn’t stepping outside determinism; it’s recognizing how the deterministic forces at play can be leveraged to produce better outcomes. Denial or retreat into illusions doesn’t remove determinism—it just blinds us to it. Reality marches on, whether we engage with it or not.

Yet you imagine that "If determinism shows us anything, it’s that progress—however incremental—is possible when we understand the forces at play". No, sometimes progress is possible, sometimes it isn't. And it's fairly clear that humanity is heading for collapse, overall we seem to be on an unalterable course (unless a miracle happens).

Atla, I don't disagree that determinism includes the possibility of collapse as much as it includes the possibility of progress. If humanity is heading for collapse, then yes, that's the deterministic trajectory based on countless prior causes—our actions, systems, and decisions stacking up like dominos. But acknowledging that doesn’t negate the value of understanding those forces or trying to change them.

If progress sometimes isn’t possible, it’s not because we’ve escaped determinism—it’s because the conditions deterministically lead to failure. The same is true of success: if progress happens, it’s because the right deterministic factors aligned to make it happen. Recognizing that is part of facing reality, not hoping for miracles but understanding that what we do now—within deterministic constraints—still shapes the outcome. Collapse might feel inevitable, but so, too, would progress if the right conditions were created. That’s determinism: no miracles, just cause and effect.

[Atla]

Atla, that's a misunderstanding of determinism. The future doesn’t step outside the deterministic constraints of the past—every future event is entirely shaped by prior causes. Acknowledging reality and working to make changes doesn’t mean defying determinism; it means being a part of it. When we act, our actions are determined by our current understanding, our environment, and our prior experiences—all of which are products of the same deterministic framework.

Progress isn’t stepping outside determinism; it’s recognizing how the deterministic forces at play can be leveraged to produce better outcomes. Denial or retreat into illusions doesn’t remove determinism—it just blinds us to it. Reality marches on, whether we engage with it or not.

Yet you imagine that "If determinism shows us anything, it’s that progress—however incremental—is possible when we understand the forces at play". No, sometimes progress is possible, sometimes it isn't. And it's fairly clear that humanity is heading for collapse, overall we seem to be on an unalterable course (unless a miracle happens).

Atla, I don't disagree that determinism includes the possibility of collapse as much as it includes the possibility of progress. If humanity is heading for collapse, then yes, that's the deterministic trajectory based on countless prior causes—our actions, systems, and decisions stacking up like dominos. But acknowledging that doesn’t negate the value of understanding those forces or trying to change them.

If progress sometimes isn’t possible, it’s not because we’ve escaped determinism—it’s because the conditions deterministically lead to failure. The same is true of success: if progress happens, it’s because the right deterministic factors aligned to make it happen. Recognizing that is part of facing reality, not hoping for miracles but understanding that what we do now—within deterministic constraints—still shapes the outcome. Collapse might feel inevitable, but so, too, would progress if the right conditions were created. That’s determinism: no miracles, just cause and effect.

I don't know why you feel the need to keep repeating the meaning of determinism when everything I said was based on it.

[BigMike]

Yet you imagine that "If determinism shows us anything, it’s that progress—however incremental—is possible when we understand the forces at play". No, sometimes progress is possible, sometimes it isn't. And it's fairly clear that humanity is heading for collapse, overall we seem to be on an unalterable course (unless a miracle happens).

Atla, I don't disagree that determinism includes the possibility of collapse as much as it includes the possibility of progress. If humanity is heading for collapse, then yes, that's the deterministic trajectory based on countless prior causes—our actions, systems, and decisions stacking up like dominos. But acknowledging that doesn’t negate the value of understanding those forces or trying to change them.

If progress sometimes isn’t possible, it’s not because we’ve escaped determinism—it’s because the conditions deterministically lead to failure. The same is true of success: if progress happens, it’s because the right deterministic factors aligned to make it happen. Recognizing that is part of facing reality, not hoping for miracles but understanding that what we do now—within deterministic constraints—still shapes the outcome. Collapse might feel inevitable, but so, too, would progress if the right conditions were created. That’s determinism: no miracles, just cause and effect.

I don't know why you feel the need to keep repeating the meaning of determinism when everything I said was based on it.

Atla, fair enough—point taken. But if your argument is already rooted in determinism, then we’re not really in disagreement. My point wasn’t to reiterate the definition but to emphasize that even within a deterministic framework, understanding and influencing conditions matters. Whether the trajectory leads to collapse or progress, it’s all deterministic, yes—but the key is recognizing that how we act now is part of that causal chain, not separate from it. If we’re doomed, then that’s the result of our deterministic past, but the same framework allows for the possibility—however slim—of steering things differently if conditions align. It’s all still on the table, no miracles needed.

[henry quirk]

Jeez, guy, make up your mind...are you goin' or stayin'?

Anywho, back to it...

That’s the critical difference you keep overlooking.

If this...

Here’s the brutal truth: your brain is a deterministic machine, operating under the same unyielding physical laws as a rock rolling downhill. You don’t control your thoughts, your desires, or your decisions. You are driven by a cascade of external inputs, biological processes, and environmental stimuli—all of which you neither initiated nor directed.

...is true, then it's a difference that doesn't matter. Whatever we do -- write philosophy, debate ideas, contemplate trustworthiness, etc. -- is utterly beyond our control. All of that, and us, are part of a pattern'd motion, begun almost 14 billion years ago. Our accomplishments, our crimes, and everything in-between, all of it causally inevitable. This back & forth between us was always going to happen and always going to happen exactly as it is happening. You, the acolyte of deterministic forces; me, the knuckle-dragger: nuthin' of either us is ours. We are links in a causal chain, points of transmission for blind forces, organic matrices suffused with electricity. Meat machines. We accept inputs, we out put. We're noise-to-signal-to-noise convertors. We're just elements in the biggest heat exchange, ever. We're momentarily stable aggregates of particles.

Who we are, what we think and do, all overwhelmed by what we are, which is, rock-bottom, nuthin' at all.

Now, I don't believe a word of any of that, but you supposedly do, or should, cuz if this...

your brain is a deterministic machine, operating under the same unyielding physical laws as a rock rolling downhill. You don’t control your thoughts, your desires, or your decisions. You are driven by a cascade of external inputs, biological processes, and environmental stimuli—all of which you neither initiated nor directed.

...is true, then all that is true.

(can) faith-based reasoning can reliably lead to truth

Depends on the faith and the faith-holder.

Certainly, we know non-faith-based rationality is no reliable compass. I mean, look at you: your sterile thinkin' has you seein' us all as meat machines, which may, somehow, be of comfort to you, but most certainly is not the truth of us.