Atheism

[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]mooghead wrote:[/b]

"Yet for all intents and purposes, unicorns and god do exist in someone's reality"

So if God exists only in the mind of man does that mean he is real?

In which case I have a seat reserved for the tooth fairy, santa and Thor.

I saw Spiderman and Wolverine, they are in films FFS!!!![/QUOTE]

When a million people believe in God, does it mean a bearded guy suddenly pops into existence on a cloud? No, it certainly doesn't. Does it mean god exists in the same way morality or arachnophobia exists? I would argue it does. They are mental concepts, that exist solely because people believe in them. They don't exist outside our minds, and they are not tangible. Still, I do think they exert influence on the actual world - if everyone suddenly stopped believing in morality, or everyone stopped being afraid of spiders, that would definitely change our lives, be it in major or minor ways.
[/QUOTE]

They don’t exist outside our minds – this is true. And yet they are given life and power and, as you said, Thomas, ‘exert influence on the actual world’ – and force some to exert influence on others which only perpetuates the illusion (or belief – depending on one’s position) and increases the power.

I bought a t-shirt for a friend whose wife constantly corrects him (and she’s usually correct in doing so, lol). I love both of them, but his t-shirt read – “If a man speaks in the woods and there’s no woman there to hear him, is he still wrong?”
Maybe the answer depends on one’s level of 'freedom' from the power of some intangible thing.

Power, yes. Life, no. They are not independent entities, at least we have no basis to assume that they are. If you wish to belief so, that is all right by me, but that's what it remains: belief. I am not suggesting there is reason to assume the existence of a transcendental entity that you might call god, but rather a collective way of thinking, a mental concept.

I see Santa Claus in the same way - Christmas would be a very different thing, and people would behave in a very different way, if they were not familiar with the concept of Santa Claus - most people who celebrate Christmas take on traits from the collectively shared 'archetype' (not exactly the right term here, but it'll do) Santa Claus (see the "Yes, Virginia" letter, again) for the season, and in that sense he exists, but the more childlike concept of an actual person living on the North Pole with elves working in workshops, that is a folk tale.

As I see it, this idea (lower case 'i') is equally applicable to religion.

True - it's not actual life, and yet the very concept alters the state of living for so many that, in a way, it does take on a 'life' of its own. If that makes sense. Though, like you said, it's actually the behavior that's affected, it's the concept that forces powerful emotions, thoughts and actions. It makes people do irrational things (I'm speaking of religious extremists here) and it acts as a guide or a leash for others. I don't know. Even though I do see what you're saying, and agree on a technical level, I still feel the power of it makes it a nearly tangible thing. Like the child who so excitedly rushes to bed on Christmas Eve, eager to be asleep when 'Santa' comes. That emotion is palpable. It has energy that lingers. Maybe since I see all of us as energy that is never fully extinguished, it makes sense I'd still see this as 'life' as well.

[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]mooghead wrote:[/b]

"Yet for all intents and purposes, unicorns and god do exist in someone's reality"

So if God exists only in the mind of man does that mean he is real?

In which case I have a seat reserved for the tooth fairy, santa and Thor.

I saw Spiderman and Wolverine, they are in films FFS!!!![/QUOTE]

When a million people believe in God, does it mean a bearded guy suddenly pops into existence on a cloud? No, it certainly doesn't. Does it mean god exists in the same way morality or arachnophobia exists? I would argue it does. They are mental concepts, that exist solely because people believe in them. They don't exist outside our minds, and they are not tangible. Still, I do think they exert influence on the actual world - if everyone suddenly stopped believing in morality, or everyone stopped being afraid of spiders, that would definitely change our lives, be it in major or minor ways.

That is the power of belief, which is an entirely different thing to religion all together, something religious fundamentalists and hardcore atheists both have a hard time understanding. Belief is a very powerful psychological capability, but when millions of people believe that every word of the bible is literally true, that doesn't mean it suddenly becomes so.

So why can belief make a thing like morality (or 'god') real, but can it not cause the bible to suddenly become absolutely true? It's the difference between the abstract and the concrete - abstract concepts exist in the mind (and according to Platonic philosophy also in a metaphysical world that is entirely separate from the universe), but concrete things are inherently bound to the physical world in some way.[/QUOTE]

Yes, that's it. If you believe it exists, then you behave as if it does, and the belief has real effects, regardless of the issue of whether there is any substance underpinning it.

I know I can think of a time when my boss in my new job had a go at me when I was on probation and I lived "mentally" under the threat of this recurring and being sacked for about a year. Little did I know that my boss was actually being performance managed for most of that time because of similar treatment to another staff member. It simply wasn't going to happen, yet I felt and acted for about a year as if it was.

[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]

When a million people believe in God, does it mean a bearded guy suddenly pops into existence on a cloud? No, it certainly doesn't. Does it mean god exists in the same way morality or arachnophobia exists? I would argue it does. They are mental concepts, that exist solely because people believe in them. They don't exist outside our minds, and they are not tangible. Still, I do think they exert influence on the actual world - if everyone suddenly stopped believing in morality, or everyone stopped being afraid of spiders, that would definitely change our lives, be it in major or minor ways.

That is the power of belief, which is an entirely different thing to religion all together, something religious fundamentalists and hardcore atheists both have a hard time understanding. Belief is a very powerful psychological capability, but when millions of people believe that every word of the bible is literally true, that doesn't mean it suddenly becomes so.

So why can belief make a thing like morality (or 'god') real, but can it not cause the bible to suddenly become absolutely true? It's the difference between the abstract and the concrete - abstract concepts exist in the mind (and according to Platonic philosophy also in a metaphysical world that is entirely separate from the universe), but concrete things are inherently bound to the physical world in some way.[/QUOTE]

Once again, you say in three paragraphs what I need several pages to say.

Kind of like Muse vs Tales From Topographic Oceans..

[QUOTE] [b]magicalfreddiemercury wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b] This is far more complex and layered than two simple binary options. Instead of a coin, let's liken these various styles of thought to an ocean - agnostics swim in the ocean, atheists sit on the beach suntanning, and religious people have taken a cup of the water and walked away with it, content to never see an ocean again, and believe that swimming is hazardous to your health.
[/QUOTE]
===

I'm traveling so I can't reply as thoroughly as I would like, but I saw this and had to say I think it is brilliant.[/QUOTE]

Yay :-)

Some of you people are giving my concussion it's own concussion! I'll deal with you tomorrow. Possibly the next day. :P

"Does it mean god exists in the same way morality or arachnophobia exists? I would argue it does. They are mental concepts, that exist solely because people believe in them"

Sorry but this is silly, God exists because arachnophobia does? I am convinced by evidence that arachnophobia and morality exist, I myself have a little bit one one and lots (I think anyway) of the other. Its easy for a conversation like this to go off on tangents but the argument is very, very simple and comes down to proof. Offer any sort of proof in the existence of god and my world (which evolved :-) will turn completely on its head.

twitter = @GSpellchecker (not me)

Hi Mooghead
Arachnophobia is obviously an emotional reaction to a certain stimulus ie a spider. So something physical triggers the emotional reaction ie arachnophobia. Whereas people don't necessarily have an emotional reaction to a thing called god in the same way because they haven't seen one.

However arachnophobia and morality still don't exist in the physical world any more than a guy called god is hanging out there on a cloud somewhere. They are just chemical signals that occur inside peoples' heads. Yet all can have real effects in the world because people respond to what's going on inside their heads.

"However arachnophobia and morality still don't exist in the physical world any more than a guy called god is hanging out there on a cloud somewhere."

Agree. I am compelled by evidence that the first two are very real. That is all I am after. There are no 'layers' to this argument. To me it is black and white. Something has to exist in the real world to exist? Have you ever been in love? To the poster who said Christmas would be different without Santa... how do you know? Santa is part of Christmas because that is how we have been conditioned since we were babies. To me Christmas is just a 'thanksgiving' for the world. Families get together, love is spread, people are (generally) happy.

The religion part of it is, to most people, utterly irrelevant and unnecessary.

https://o.twimg.com/1/proxy.jpg?t=FQQVBBgpaHR0cHM6Ly90d2l0cGljLmNvbS9zaG93L2xhcmdlL2MwamlraS5qcGcUAhYAEgA&s=csuNp3RNJTBRVrUSqcOk3z1qgWgEEuy6sqhSWF30yr4

Hi Mooghead
"There are no 'layers' to this argument. To me it is black and white. Something has to exist in the real world to exist?"

That's the 50 billion dollar question. Does God need to exist in the real world? Western religions take the view that God is a super being or entity that is external to us and doesn't need to occupy this plane of existence, at least as we know it.

Whereas much of the Eastern thought, which I like from what I know of it, seems to say that we are moving from a state of unconsiousness or low level of awareness, behaving and thinking to a higher one.

I think they would its say life itself that is the "spiritual" thing, so things like integrity and morality actually matter and make a difference to ourselves and to others. And the more people that understand that and stop acting just from base self interest, the more we change the place for the better.

So there's no need for anything or anyone that's external to us and the real world to be or do anything in that view. I really like that because its pragmatic and you don't even need to define what "spiritual" is or even use the term for that matter.

You could just say that morality and integrity make a positive difference in the world and are making a bigger difference the more we incorporate those things into our lives over time.

Those Eastern religions do go on a lot further than that of course and talk about reincarnation and stuff like that, but there's just no need to go that far.

[QUOTE] [b]Heavenite wrote:[/b]

I think they would its say life itself that is the "spiritual" thing, so things like integrity and morality actually matter and make a difference to ourselves and to others. And the more people that understand that and stop acting just from base self interest, the more we change the place for the better.

So there's no need for anything or anyone that's external to us and the real world to be or do anything in that view.

[/QUOTE]

I'm working with a hard deadline so I shouldn't even be here, but I saw this and wanted to applaud it. (I really must unsubscribe to these threads...)

Organized religion merely divides us, while common decency (morality and integrity) - expressed without coercion (the promise of a seat in paradise vs. the threat of a spot in hell), would indeed make this life better for all of us, without the concerns of whose god is the 'true' god, or if a god even exists.

Typing fast, hope that made sense...

Thanks for that MFM
I think organised religion has both positive and negative aspects to it. On the one hand, it can be a place where people mostly learn ethics and morality, with a few exceptions like their treatment of women and gays. On the other hand it is used by the people that run it, those in power as well as extremists as a social control tool to make people behave in the ways they want them to behave. Nothing spiritual or holy in that, although some of the rules might have helped in the past.

I mean not eating pork was often a good rule years ago when the special treatments they use today weren't available. And no sex before marriage probably saved a lot of unwanted pregnancies, allbeit at the expense of considerable frustration. Problem is times and technology have changed, but these rules have become ingrained as part of the dogma and now cause more guilt and harm than any good. The religions are therefore stuck in the past and not always serving those people they profess to serve. And that's why they are becoming increasingly irrelevant.

[QUOTE] [b]Heavenite wrote:[/b]

Problem is times and technology have changed, but these rules have become ingrained as part of the dogma and now cause more guilt and harm than any good. The religions are therefore stuck in the past and not always serving those people they profess to serve. And that's why they are becoming increasingly irrelevant. [/QUOTE]

It's absolutely true, times and technology (and attitudes) have changed, yet I hold the very strong opinions that religion has not become irrelevant quickly enough, and that the guilt and harm it causes is nothing new but rather an integral (and IMO, intentional) part of it.

Of course 'good' can be found in nearly everything. The 'good' side of it is the sense of community and charity. However, religion itself is not the impetus to those things. And so, I am still of the opinion that simple common decency, not kowtowing to a supposed higher power, is what will improve the quality of life for nearly everyone. (I say nearly because some, I have learned, thrive on the guilt.)

I do like the way you think, though. It's insightful and open-minded.