Atheism : Love it or Leave it? - Part 2

[SuperFerret]

That is true.

It also adds nothing to the discussion and is missing my point entirely.

 

[DBryan]

What is your point, exactly?

 

[DBryan]

Here's the fun thing about the word "all", just one exception disproves your statement.

Here's the one exception, many religious people (such as myself) do not base their beliefs on blind faith, but rather our observations of the world around us.

Give an example.

 

[Vile]

Here's the fun thing about the word "all", just one exception disproves your statement.

Here's the one exception, many religious people (such as myself) do not base their beliefs on blind faith, but rather our observations of the world around us.

Your observations are based on Blind Faith.

 

[SuperFerret]

Your observations are based on Blind Faith.

Are they? You're able to tell this without knowing what they are?

Let me give you an example: It is a sort of universal law that matter and energy cannot be destroyed, only changed. It is also apparent that a great many things in nature are cyclical, such as a myriad of life and death cycles in the animal kingdom, the water cycle, weather patterns, the phases of the moon, etc. So, with that information, I feel that a belief in reincarnation makes sense to me, as the "soul" (or whatever energy that drives life) cannot be destroyed, only changed, and could potentially be recycled in another lifeform (or lifeforms).

 

[DBryan]

If that is true, what accounts for all the new souls?

What accounts for the billions more people there is today, than what there was a thousand years ago?

 

[DBryan]

You're also assuming that there is a soul, or an "energy" within life, and that this thing is physical.

Consciousness is not physical. Or at least, science is yet to prove it to be physical.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Are they? You're able to tell this without knowing what they are?

Let me give you an example: It is a sort of universal law that matter and energy cannot be destroyed, only changed. It is also apparent that a great many things in nature are cyclical, such as a myriad of life and death cycles in the animal kingdom, the water cycle, weather patterns, the phases of the moon, etc. So, with that information, I feel that a belief in reincarnation makes sense to me, as the "soul" (or whatever energy that drives life) cannot be destroyed, only changed, and could potentially be recycled in another lifeform (or lifeforms).

Souls= fiction AFAEK.
Mind= creation of brain.
Neither are physical objects.


All life came from one life form. When that first lifeform underwent mitosis, where did the new energy come from.

 

[SuperFerret]

You're also assuming that there is a soul, or an "energy" within life, and that this thing is physical.

Consciousness is not physical. Or at least, science is yet to prove it to be physical.

Yet, consciousness exists. Energy isn't all that physical either.

Also, while energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can be changed.

 

[Manic]

Souls= fiction AFAEK.
Mind= creation of brain.
Neither are physical objects.


All life came from one life form. When that first lifeform underwent mitosis, where did the new energy come from.

Are you denying the existence of the mind? Because that has less to do with religion and more to do with psychology, which is arguably a scientific study. Just because it's an abstract concept, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

As for where the new energy comes from, look up the Law of Conservation of Energy. The energy was always around in some other form.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Are they? You're able to tell this without knowing what they are?

Let me give you an example: It is a sort of universal law that matter and energy cannot be destroyed, only changed. It is also apparent that a great many things in nature are cyclical, such as a myriad of life and death cycles in the animal kingdom, the water cycle, weather patterns, the phases of the moon, etc. So, with that information, I feel that a belief in reincarnation makes sense to me, as the "soul" (or whatever energy that drives life) cannot be destroyed, only changed, and could potentially be recycled in another lifeform (or lifeforms).

First explanation for a religious belief that I can actually respect. Kudos.

I have no problem with people coming to belief based on conclusions like this. At least it shows some thought has gone into it, some logic has been applie.

I used to believe similar things myself. I believed in 'energies'. It's a word I used to throw around for things like the sensations you feel when your meditating and 'drawing energy' from the earth. Or when you think you can feel a 'bad feeling' in a room full of pissed off people. Or when you feel you have an instinct about something.

But what I have grown to realise is that EVERYTHING like that can be explained with science. Brain chemistry, physical sensations, body language picked up subconsciously, emotional memories etc etc.

When I feel myself going off into the world of intangible forces like souls and energies, I just have to keep reminding myself of that. Grounding myself in the fact that while it can seem tempting for me to think of things like that as real, it is just an easier and less complicated way of explaining things without actually trying to understand them.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Are you denying the existence of the mind? Because that has less to do with religion and more to do with psychology, which is arguably a scientific study. Just because it's an abstract concept, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

As for where the new energy comes from, look up the Law of Conservation of Energy. The energy was always around in some other form.

The mind is not a physical object. It cannot be governed by the laws of physics any more than an idea can.

And the concept of reincarnation is the idea that all souls a recycled. There needs to be a death beforehand before a reincarnation. The number can never rise, there can still only ever be one living organism on the planet.

 

[Manic]

The mind is not a physical object. It cannot be governed by the laws of physics any more than an idea can.

So... you're agreeing with me? Because I sure as hell didn't say the mind was a physical object. In fact, calling it an abstract concept means just the opposite.

And the concept of reincarnation is the idea that all souls a recycled. There needs to be a death beforehand before a reincarnation. The number can never rise, there can still only ever be one living organism on the planet.

We're not talking about a ghost that jumps from body to body. We're talking about just another form of energy present in the universe.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

So... you're agreeing with me? Because I sure as hell didn't say the mind was a physical object. In fact, calling it an abstract concept means just the opposite.

It is real as you experience it. But it is not real as it doesn't exist within reality, it is a creation of the mind. Is sort of what I originally meant.

We're not talking about a ghost that jumps from body to body. We're talking about just another form of energy present in the universe.

Then that is not reincarnation. Just incarnating.

 

[SuperFerret]

What is your point, exactly?

Missed this one.

My point is, that while all criticism towards the Bible seems leveled directly at it being translated as literal history, many seem to miss that the book contains a great deal of valuable lessons within those stories, regardless of the truth behind them.

 

[Manic]

It is real as you experience it. But it is not real as it doesn't exist within reality, it is a creation of the mind. Is sort of what I originally meant.

So... the mind is a creation of the mind?

Then that is not reincarnation. Just incarnating.

Now you're just arguing semantics. First reincarnation doesn't exist. Suddenly it exists (if only for the sake of argument), but it should be called something else.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

I hate iPhones with a fiery passion.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

The mind is a blanket term for all of the functions of our brain.

It encompasses memories, emotional responses, thought processes and personality characteristics. The combination of all those things going on at once, feels to us like a consciousness.

What it is not, is something in and of itself, a consciousness that does not rely on the organ of the brain to function.

When people speak of a soul, that is basically what they are saying.

That they believe in a consciousness that is not formed by the functions of the brain, even though some see it as being able to carrying with it memories, and personality traits.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

So... the mind is a creation of the mind?

I meant to say brain. Must have been a slip of the mind .

Now you're just arguing semantics. First reincarnation doesn't exist. Suddenly it exists (if only for the sake of argument), but it should be called something else.

No I'm not. recycle, repeat, revise. The prefix re means it is an action that has ocurred more than once. Which means there can be no true biogenesis, no beginning to life, and no change to the amount of "souls" in the world. Much like the Steady State theory of the universe, which too, is absurd and not true.

 

[Manic]

No I'm not. recycle, repeat, revise. The prefix re means it is an action that has ocurred more than once. Which means there can be no true biogenesis, no beginning to life, and no change to the amount of "souls" in the world.

Think of it this way:
1. We know the Law of Conservation of Energy. Energy cannot be created or destroyed, but only transformed.
2. When you create a machine that runs on electricity, the electricity comes from the energy already present in the universe, transformed to an electric state and used to power that machine.
3. Think of the soul as yet another transformed state of energy, and living beings as the machines that run on them.
4. When someone dies, the energy passes through them and onto the next living being.
5. When the amount of living beings increases, more energy of the universe is transformed into a "soul" state. It's like creating more machines and generating more electricity. More people, more souls are generated.

 

[Citizenbot]

No loving, understanding God or gods would create a person who could not be "saved" in their lifetime. Christians and Muslims and Jews generally have a hard time thinking about all the people who their monotheistic religions had not touched for 1500 years or more.

If heaven -- and, therefore, a loving God -- exists, you get in there by not being an *******. It's as simple as that.

Those are my views on religion and God (or gods). I'm not going to ostracize or criticize anyone for believing differently; to paraphrase a Martin Luther King, Jr. quote, people should be judged by the content of their character.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Think of it this way:
1. We know the Law of Conservation of Energy. Energy cannot be created or destroyed, but only transformed.
2. When you create a machine that runs on electricity, the electricity comes from the energy already present in the universe, transformed to an electric state and used to power that machine.
3. Think of the soul as yet another transformed state of energy, and living beings as the machines that run on them.
4. When someone dies, the energy passes through them and onto the next living being.
5. When the amount of living beings increases, more energy of the universe is transformed into a "soul" state. It's like creating more machines and generating more electricity. More people, more souls are generated.

If a soul is generated, it is new. And therefore, not reused, and therefore not reincarnation. Reincarnation is the process of a soul leaving a body and joining with a new organism that has yet to be born.

 

[Oddzball]

Once again, if atheism is the default setting on human beings then religion would have never been invented. We would have no imaginations. Our minds would solely be wired for logical and rational thinking.

But for some reason we as humans are wired to have an imagination and hope. We have these things because it is beneficial to our species and it is an evolved trait. It's scientifically proven that people in a hospital have greater recovery rates if they are given hope. If you tell a cancer patient that they are going to die because there is no hope then they likely won't live as long as a comparable patient who is told that there is hope. So what's the first thing that man hopes for as a human being? That there is more to life than what we see in front of us.

So no, I don't think it is a dumb thing to say that atheism is the default setting when man automatically reverts to it. If you want to continue with that line of thinking then that means that religion is an adapted trait and would therefore make that theist a better survivor than the atheist as you have even mentioned that belief in something more is beneficial. So wouldn't it be logical for you to be a theist?

No, there would be charismatic crazies and con men to come along Ugk the neanderthal cannot disprove thunder and lightning aren't supernatural phenomena.

 

[Manic]

If a soul is generated, it is new. And therefore, not reused, and therefore not reincarnation. Reincarnation is the process of a soul leaving a body and joining with a new organism that has yet to be born.

Well, that's what happens to the souls that have already been generated.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

So new souls are born and old souls just stick around? It's far more rational to believe that souls are just generated, as the levels of souls within organisms goes up as well as down.