Atheism

Originally posted by inimalist
I don't think there is a possibility he was right at all.

So are people lying when they claim their newfound religion is responsible for them beating alcoholism?

damn straight its like when ppl give credit to got for winning a football game and grammy

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
damn straight its like when ppl give credit to got for winning a football game and grammy

Um...not quite the same.

If they weren't active in the local church/mosque, they'd still be slanging dope on the streets. That's different from thanking god for winning a sports game.

really... so its either church/religion or streets?

what about volunteer work or further education?

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
really... so its either church/religion or streets?

what about volunteer work or further education?

Yeah, that's another possibility.

But churches do a lot of volunteer work, and higher education is expensive and just because you apply, it doesn't mean you'll get in. Also, a good number of potheads can be found on most university campuses. When I sold weed in the 90's, college kids made up a good a portion of my clientele. Active church-goers? ...not so much.

Sv_ec6y7TXM&feature=related

Originally posted by inimalist
but, not all people who are religious feel such compulsions toward "guilt" and "sin". There are religious people for whom eternal justice is not a primary concern (though I'll give you that there are fewer religious than atheist people for whom this would be true) and there are atheists who feel guilt and have moral expectations of eachother.

I guess I tend to put the cart a little bit before the horse. I tend to think that people with the disposition toward needing certainty or other such qualities will seek out the things that affirm those beliefs, and people motivated the other way will similarly find other paths. I'm not suggesting there are natural differences between theists or atheists, because I totally believe people of any tolorance for ambiguity or whatever could fall into either camp.

I do see where you are coming from, and I guess I agree, but would also question if you would extend such skepticism to other governmental and social institutions? We indoctrinate our children in so many ways without religion, and sure we can debate severity, but how would we create a society in which we don't impress moral values on people? [save having a society in which people are no longer motivated by their more unsocial instincts]

Not all who are religious feel compulsion toward guilt and sin, true. Same with atheists who experience moral guilt. But, and here's the point, the religious guilt is only going to add to the negativity of the person. Maybe it's that their religion instilled in them the need for some sort of guilt. Or maybe it's vice-versa, and some people are normally inclined toward moral guilt and so they gravitate toward that aspect of religion. I'm not interested in which of those it is (though that could make an interesting discussion as well, and is part of the cart/horse you've mentioned). What I'm interested is the tangible affect it has on people, and I don't see anything positive with creating more psychological punishment for our actions than we are naturally inclined to.

So my original point was simply that religious guilt based on morality is a net negative. I don't see religious moral codes as being needed to be a moral person or society. And actions that aren't intrinsically bad, that create no suffering in the world, can still inspire guilt because of a divine edict. Where, then, is the benefit?

Originally posted by inimalist
I've got to admit, I don't have the paitence for that anymore.

I'll admit to a devilish thrill when a devoutly religious person finds out I'm an atheist. To most, the very possibility of it is inconceivable, so there's a huge amount of shock value. Some people avoid labeling themselves atheist to avoid the shock it engenders. And while I don't go looking to upset others, I tend to embrace and enjoy it when it happens. So I guess I don't really expect the conversation to go anywhere, it's just a novelty.

But there are those in my life who are religious whom I can have serious discussions with, and I do. I also like coming here to KMC. Far from insulating myself by talking with only other atheists, even though this particular thread is somewhat lopsided, I can and have interacted with those of numerous faiths here.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
So are people lying when they claim their newfound religion is responsible for them beating alcoholism?

from the same post you quoted:

Originally posted by inimalist

[QUOTE=12798440]Originally posted by Shakyamunison
[B] Is it possible that some people know they need boundaries to keep them for doing wrong?

see, this is a totally different issue though. I've always thought that if I ended up in jail I would probably adopt a religon, for no other reason that having that kind of structure, and something to occupy your mind and time with, would probably be something I'd want if my life were out of control (to me, prison is a good measure of this).

The story of Malcolm X is really illustrative in this way. He turned from a pimp hustler into a strict Muslim, and became a world renown intellectual because he was able to channel himself into something productive.

I don't think this quality is something unique to religions or political affiliation or whatever, it is just that more secular and rational institutions don't really exist for this type of thing, yet [hopefully].[/B][/QUOTE]

and one soon after:

Originally posted by inimalist

[QUOTE=12798527]Originally posted by Shakyamunison
[B]So, in this case theism had a positive outcome that helped Malcolm X realize his true potential?

no, but only because I don't believe in "true potential", I would say it allowed him to motivate himself toward a goal that was motivated by a drive for self improvement rather than crime. However, I think it is the institutional qualities of religion, rather than philosophical theism, that have the ability to motivate and channel people's energies in this way. Theism may help motivate self-improvement though, that is an interesting thesis...[/B][/QUOTE]

but to be specific, no, of course not, for several reasons:

- even if we suppose his religion had nothing to do with him beating alcohol addiction, I still wouldn't say the person was lying. certainly to them religion would have had a significant impact, even if it were possible to eliminate it as a cause.

-I am readily willing to admit that structure, which religion provides, in a person's life is almost necessary for beating addiction. being involved in new activities, away from old triggers of addiction is one of the best strategies, so clearly someone joining a new religious group could assist them in beating something like an addiction. In respect to the selective quote you took, no, however, I don't think it would prevent psychopathic murder.

-I've even admitted that there might be an aspect of religious belief that promotes self-improvement through concern with salvation and attonement. It might prime ideas of betterment in material ways, like you said, getting off the street.

Originally posted by Digi
Not all who are religious feel compulsion toward guilt and sin, true. Same with atheists who experience moral guilt. But, and here's the point, the religious guilt is only going to add to the negativity of the person. Maybe it's that their religion instilled in them the need for some sort of guilt. Or maybe it's vice-versa, and some people are normally inclined toward moral guilt and so they gravitate toward that aspect of religion. I'm not interested in which of those it is (though that could make an interesting discussion as well, and is part of the cart/horse you've mentioned). What I'm interested is the tangible affect it has on people, and I don't see anything positive with creating more psychological punishment for our actions than we are naturally inclined to.

So my original point was simply that religious guilt based on morality is a net negative. I don't see religious moral codes as being needed to be a moral person or society. And actions that aren't intrinsically bad, that create no suffering in the world, can still inspire guilt because of a divine edict. Where, then, is the benefit?

alright, I get what you are saying. Religion certainly exploits people's predispositions toward paranoia and guilt.

Actually, I've always thought it weird that religious behaviour can't be seen as evidence of mental health problems, even though, as you just said, it totally makes issues of anxiety much worse, and invents things for people to ruminate about. I've tended to think certain religious practices might be able to trigger latent psychological issues, but I suppose from what you are saying we could at least say it might be an agonist for mood disorders and the like.

Originally posted by Digi
I'll admit to a devilish thrill when a devoutly religious person finds out I'm an atheist. To most, the very possibility of it is inconceivable, so there's a huge amount of shock value. Some people avoid labeling themselves atheist to avoid the shock it engenders. And while I don't go looking to upset others, I tend to embrace and enjoy it when it happens. So I guess I don't really expect the conversation to go anywhere, it's just a novelty.

I guess, when it comes down to it, I'm really just not that interested in the specific arguement over God's existence. Religions interest me as social and psychological phenomenon, but I don't ever really think about the more "spiritual" aspects in a serious manner any more. There were times, even more recently, where it definatly mattered more to me, but ya, to sound cynical, I can't be bothered to try and defend a position that isn't really personally significant to me with regard to a question that I think is irrelevant to begin with.

maybe like philosophical attrition? lol

Originally posted by Digi
But there are those in my life who are religious whom I can have serious discussions with, and I do. I also like coming here to KMC. Far from insulating myself by talking with only other atheists, even though this particular thread is somewhat lopsided, I can and have interacted with those of numerous faiths here.

I do like it. We have had some good members at times. Even the more radical christians are interesting for perspective. I find the crowd here to be on the intellectual side in general, though, I miss GMG.

Part of my opinion on guilt stems from this: As a side-affect of my deterministic beliefs, I can't hold to the opinion that anyone is 'wrong' for their actions. All actions are inevitable and perfectly logical, given the causes that preceded them, much as we might not enjoy some of them. So the idea of guilt or culpability doesn't enter into my worldview at all. I can reflect on an action in order to change a future one, if I didn't like action or its outcome. But I can't bring myself to feel guilty about it. Or rather, I can't from a philosophical standpoint...in reality, we naturally feel guilty sometimes, whether we "believe" in it or not.

I could also make the same argument, except substitute "determinism" with "relative morality." I can't see how something has an intrinsic goodness or badness. At the risk of sounding needlessly existential, reality just is. Such a stance (objective morality), I would think, would require a God-figure to establish. My approach to morality, then, is a functional one, not a philosophical one: In our lives, happiness is awesome, and suffering sucks. Why not try to promote the former, and avoid the latter? Simple and obvious, imo, requiring neither God nor an objective sense of morality.

...that last paragraph was a semi-bait for you, btw, in. I'm still not quite sure how you hold the beliefs you do and yet believe in objective morality (or maybe I'm confusing it with objective reality, which is another matter entirely).

Originally posted by inimalist

but to be specific, no, of course not, for several reasons:

- even if we suppose his religion had nothing to do with him beating alcohol addiction, I still wouldn't say the person was lying. certainly to them religion would have had a significant impact, even if it were possible to eliminate it as a cause.

-I am readily willing to admit that structure, which religion provides, in a person's life is almost necessary for beating addiction. being involved in new activities, away from old triggers of addiction is one of the best strategies, so clearly someone joining a new religious group could assist them in beating something like an addiction. In respect to the selective quote you took, no, however, I don't think it would prevent psychopathic murder.

-I've even admitted that there might be an aspect of religious belief that promotes self-improvement through concern with salvation and attonement. It might prime ideas of betterment in material ways, like you said, getting off the street.

Well, it depends on what you mean by "structure". Take for example: functional alcoholics. They get shit-faced everyday, but are still able to hold down a nine-to-five. But a functional alcoholic couldn't be devout a Muslim or Mormon, wouldn't you agree? Certain jobs screen workers for illegal drugs; booze and gambling are perfectly legal, but banned in many religions.

You don't think it would prevent psychopathic murder? I'll be completely honest: I can recall at least two occasions in my lifetime when I seriously entertained a violent fantasy against someone I didn't like (ie: going through it in my head step-by-step etc). What stayed my hand was my belief in god. It wasn't the strong arm of the law or other's opinions of me (I could give a shit about either one of those), but faith that prevented me from carrying it out.

So religion provides a structure for it's believer's life that work, school, the law (or any other institution) simply can't.

Originally posted by inimalist
As arrogantly as that might have been put, I sort of come at belief from a psychology perspective, so I don't really ever think the "advantage" of atheism was a part of it to me. The narratives I had were not congruent with those of religion or the supernatural, so I don't believe in them...

That's exactly what I'd say. Atheism isn't inherently superior, it doesn't necessarily make your life better, perhaps in some cases it's even worse. But it is correct. It is the only thing that makes sense if you agree to some basic principles of logic and science. There are a lot of things we do, to lie to ourselves to make us feel better, and I am not necessarily against that, if you are a fine person but like to believe in a God, as long as you don't base your moral understandings on old inhumane rituals, that's fine with me, but it's just not the right thing to believe.

If you share the same foundational beliefs, then the true conclusion can only be "I very much doubt there is a God, there is no evidence for it".

Similarly however, having this one understanding that I hold as true, doesn't make you a good or smart person, you can be a giant idiot in a thousand other ways.

This somewhat touches on what I mean:

XOmniverse - Atheists are Stupid

YouTube video

And this awesome website has a lot of examples of things we do to feel better about ourselves, even though it can be irrational:

http://youarenotsosmart.com/

Originally posted by Digi
The internet is good for that.

Originally posted by Digi
It's not even finding a muse, per se. It's like, existence is awesome. There's meaning. Be happy, there's a reason. Make others happy, there's another. It's so mind-numbingly easy to have meaning without religion, but it is unfortunately sometimes impossible for religious folk to imagine that.

So why they're mystified, I couldn't really tell you. All I know is, I get asked "How do you find meaning?" an awful lot (or some similar variation), as though I shouldn't be able to find it. "I make my own meaning rather than it being given to me," is usually my response. It doesn't work for them, but meh.

That's a good reply to those people. My uncle is very religious, borderline fundamentalist. When we were in high school he'd tell me and my cousins to keep that "thing" in our pants, or just preach to us. We'd respond by saying "I'm not done sinning yet".

To those who talked about their earlier religious upbringing: was the "strictness" / blind faith / etc, peculiar to your family, or pervasive, like throughout your religious community?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Well, it depends on what you mean by "structure". Take for example: functional alcoholics. They get shit-faced everyday, but are still able to hold down a nine-to-five. But a functional alcoholic couldn't be devout a Muslim or Mormon, wouldn't you agree? Certain jobs screen workers for illegal drugs; booze and gambling are perfectly legal, but banned in many religions.

unfortunatly, I don't see what you are trying to get at, or how it impacts anything I have said...

religion would obviously interact with thousands of other personal and contextual variables and would have a more or less effective role in combatting addiction in different people...

lol, if you want I can answer you as if this were a proper thesis defense in human behaviour, but I'm being brief in describing things to make it easier to communicate my point. obviously I loose some nuance in describing every possible scenario as a result.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
You don't think it would prevent psychopathic murder? I'll be completely honest: I can recall at least two occasions in my lifetime when I seriously entertained a violent fantasy against someone I didn't like (ie: going through it in my head step-by-step etc). What stayed my hand was my belief in god. It wasn't the strong arm of the law or other's opinions of me (I could give a shit about either one of those), but faith that prevented me from carrying it out.

you want me to argue with you about formative moments in your life regarding psychological decisions I have no context for?

needles to say, I obviouly don't think individuals are the best judge of their own motives, but it would be a practice in futility and of exceptionally poor psychology to even offer an opinion on what motivated you in any particular situation.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
So religion provides a structure for it's believer's life that work, school, the law (or any other institution) simply can't.

and you base this solely upon your own personal interpretations of your own actions or?

Most debates between atheists become a battle of semantics, but even more so, disputes between atheists and believers tend to become a showcase of contradiction. Apparently, 95% of people are unknowing hypocrites, so... I'm gonna go ahead and extrapolate, and presume that most of you have no idea what you're even talking about. 😉

Seeking truth is the only valid outlook.

"95% of people are unknowing hypocrites"

hysterical Let me guess, you place yourself in the 5%? 😂

Originally posted by RichardBrittain
Most debates between atheists become a battle of semantics, but even more so, disputes between atheists and believers tend to become a showcase of contradiction. Apparently, 95% of people are unknowing hypocrites, so... I'm gonna go ahead and extrapolate, and presume that most of you have no idea what you're even talking about. 😉

Seeking truth is the only valid outlook.

lol, can I be a truth seeker so that I can think like you do? you have totally moved past the prejudices of bias, and I need to open my mind, tell me how?

Originally posted by RichardBrittain
Most debates between atheists become a battle of semantics, but even more so, disputes between atheists and believers tend to become a showcase of contradiction. Apparently, 95% of people are unknowing hypocrites, so... I'm gonna go ahead and extrapolate, and presume that most of you have no idea what you're even talking about. 😉

Seeking truth is the only valid outlook.

So...this is bashing and completely non-constructive. Make a point or gtfo.