It's likely the utility of it. Something that lacks truth value can still be comforting, consoling, or inspirational, which I personally don't take issue with. It's the line where belief infringes upon the facts of our shared reality that raises my personal defenses. If you believe something that isn't demonstrably true, or worse yet, is demonstrably false, while the utility might still exist in your personal life, if you base your decisions in the public sphere on those beliefs rather than the truth of the matter you do us all a disservice.
^ What Delph said about motivation for belief is likely true for a lot of theists.
For me, the concept of faith in its purest form - i.e. belief without evidence, or in the face of evidence - is intellectually repugnant. We all employ varying levels of faith in things we can't objectively confirm, but not all are on the same level, because there's an underlying rationale behind them. Religious faith, largely, is entirely blind, and often celebrates that fact: "Blessed is he who does not see me, and yet believes..." (Bible verse, paraphrased), or the famous "Faith, Hope, and Love, and the greatest of these..." from Corinthians that we hear at every wedding.
And going back to something we talked about earlier, once you believe that all strength, all inspiration, all depression, all comfort, happiness, sadness, etc. comes from within, and not from a deity, it's an empowering belief that puts you in charge of how you experience reality, for good or ill. As such, there exists no moral obligation to believe nor social or personal benefit to belief.
Originally posted by -Pr-Not sure logical is the best word, tbh. To me, there's little logic in believing in a higher being, and yet I do. So I don't know what to say...
Got something else I don't think you'll have an easy answer for ...
😉
Originally posted by MF DELPH
It's likely the utility of it. Something that lacks truth value can still be comforting, consoling, or inspirational, which I personally don't take issue with. It's the line where belief infringes upon the facts of our shared reality that raises my personal defenses. If you believe something that isn't demonstrably true, or worse yet, is demonstrably false, while the utility might still exist in your personal life, if you base your decisions in the public sphere on those beliefs rather than the truth of the matter you do us all a disservice.
Was that a reply to me? I'm not sure how that relates to what I said. I may be misreading, so if I am, my bad.
Originally posted by bluewaterrider
Got something else I don't think you'll have an easy answer for ...😉
Those guys are awesome. I couldn't do any of the shit they do, nor do I have any idea how they achieve it bar insane conditioning.
Yes, it was to you. You said there was little logic to believing in a higher being, but you did anyway. I suggested it could be the utility of the belief. My sister has told me pointedly she believes because she just can't accept that things are this f*cked up on Earth for 'no reason' and this is all there is, so her belief serves the purpose of soothing her anguish over the reality of our world's suffering by giving it meaning, as well as hope for an afterlife due to fear of death. Whether that belief is true has no bearing on it's utility. Just like a kid who has an imaginary friend to keep them company when they are lonely or when it is dark. It serves a purpose despite lacking truth value.
Originally posted by MF DELPH
Yes, it was to you. You said there was little logic to believing in a higher being, but you did anyway. I suggested it could be the utility of the belief. My sister has told me pointedly she believes because she just can't accept that things are this f*cked up on Earth for 'no reason' and this is all there is, so her belief serves the purpose of soothing her anguish over the reality of our world's suffering by giving it meaning, as well as hope for an afterlife due to fear of death. Whether that belief is true has no bearing on it's utility. Just like a kid who has an imaginary friend to keep them company when they are lonely or when it is dark. It serves a purpose despite lacking truth value.
Oh, okay. I see what you mean. I'm not sure it applies to me personally, but I could see the argument being made.
At the end, did you mean true value? Because not sure truth is as accurate a word as you could use.
No, I meant truth value, not true value. Truth value as in capacity to be demonstrated as factually true, not qualitative value. As in the imaginary friend doesn't actually exist (no truth in it actually existing) but still has an influence on a child's life by helping them with their fear of the dark, so whether the friend actually exists has no bearing on it's utility.
Originally posted by MF DELPH
No, I meant truth value, not true value. Truth value as in capacity to be demonstrated as factually true, not qualitative value. As in the imaginary friend doesn't actually exist (no truth in it actually existing) but still has an influence on a child's life by helping them with their fear of the dark, so whether the friend actually exists has no bearing on it's utility.
Oh okay. Sorry, I just wanted to be sure. That's fair enough.
The more I read though, the more I feel like I'm the wrong kind of person to have this kind of conversation. I'm not someone that holds their belief above things like evolution, gravity and the like. I don't believe that the bible should be taken literally (and that's me being nice), nor do I think hurricanes are punishment for people being gay.
So I don't know, really. shrug
Nah, it's best to have all schools of thought in the conversation. It'll help to better define (and refine) where we all stand as individuals.
For example, while Digi and I are both, at least to a degree, in agreement with our position on the God proposition (we likely got there on different paths), beyond that common ground our positions are likely different on many topics (since Atheism only addresses one).
Originally posted by -Pr-
Oh okay. Sorry, I just wanted to be sure. That's fair enough.The more I read though, the more I feel like I'm the wrong kind of person to have this kind of conversation. I'm not someone that holds their belief above things like evolution, gravity and the like. I don't believe that the bible should be taken literally (and that's me being nice), nor do I think hurricanes are punishment for people being gay.
So I don't know, really. shrug
That just means you're one of the many reasonable theists who don't try to fight against what's right in front of them, while still maintaining their faith.
It's harder to really knock this kind of moderate theism, whereas it's much easier, though more frustrating, when theistic claims don't jive with reality (young Earth creationism, gay bashing, faith healers, etc.). Those are the boring conversations, though they're necessary ones.
Originally posted by MF DELPH
Nah, it's best to have all schools of thought in the conversation. It'll help to better define (and refine) where we all stand as individuals.For example, while Digi and I are both, at least to a degree, in agreement with our position on the God proposition (we likely got there on different paths), beyond that common ground our positions are likely different on many topics (since Atheism only addresses one).
Right. Like how I think all blacks are porch monkeys. We'll probably never see eye to eye on that one.
313
Originally posted by Digi
We all employ varying levels of faith in things we can't objectively confirm, but not all are on the same level, because there's an underlying rationale behind them. Religious faith, largely, is entirely blind, and often celebrates that fact: "Blessed is he who does not see me, and yet believes..." (Bible verse, paraphrased), or the famous "Faith, Hope, and Love, and the greatest of these..." from Corinthians that we hear at every wedding.
The counter-argument is in the argument, Corinthians does say faith shall pass and that without love it's pointless. If religious belief was actually employed for the good of everyone else, in a concept of love, most people would have no beef against it.
Originally posted by Bentley
The counter-argument is in the argument, Corinthians does say faith shall pass and that without love it's pointless. If religious belief was actually employed for the good of everyone else, in a concept of love, most people would have no beef against it.
...except for those who take issue for logical reasons more so than moral ones. Media coverage of bad stuff aside, a lot of religious belief is used for good, or is at least morally neutral.
The Bible verses were just examples though. In a practical sense, the idea of faith is a massive influence in modern theism, to the point of being a point of pride even in the face of overwhelming evidence, not just when there's a lack of evidence.
Originally posted by Digi
The Bible verses were just examples though. In a practical sense, the idea of faith is a massive influence in modern theism, to the point of being a point of pride even in the face of overwhelming evidence, not just when there's a lack of evidence.
That's not what I'd considern my "modern theism", but it's a cultural difference tha has been asserted as valid many times in these forums when I discuss with people from the US. It's actually hard for me to believe that people disguise their orthodoxies and paranoïas as faith.
OI!
I have a diatribe...
I am getting very tired of the idea of prayer doing anything at all. Prayer is not to ask God to do something supernatural. Prayer should be used as a tool to thank you Heavenly Father for all that He has given you AND TO ALSO ASK FOR THE SPIRITUAL STRENGTH TO MAKE THE RIGHT CHOICES AND DO THE RIGHT THINGS. You cannot ask God to mow your yard (which is the equivalent to what many people pray for). Maybe you can ask for the motivation and will-power to get up off your ass and mow the lawn but God ain't mowing your lawn.
This same idea holds true for almost anything you can think of with prayer. Praying to cure someone's cancer will not work. Praying to feed kids in Africa will not work. Praying that the homeless will get fed will not work. You know what will work? Going to college and then becoming a researcher to cure cancer will work. Feeding the homeless and helping them get back on their feet will work. And doing humanitarian activities in Africa will feed those starving children. Basically, my point boils down to: prayer is completely in your head/mind. God is completely in your head/mind. You should never operate under the assumption that God will do anything outside of that.
There is a common Mormon saying we have about acting in the service of God. "If God commands me to move a mountain, I'll get my shovel." The saying, to put it very bluntly, basically means to not expect God to wipe your ass and actually do something.
I strongly feel that Christopher Hitchens would agree with my sentiments. He may not agree with the added ingredient of God into it but he would agree with my thoughts about the abuse of prayer.
Originally posted by Bentley
That's not what I'd considern my "modern theism", but it's a cultural difference tha has been asserted as valid many times in these forums when I discuss with people from the US. It's actually hard for me to believe that people disguise their orthodoxies and paranoïas as faith.
Well, I wasn't talking about you specifically, was I? 😉
But eliminate the idea of faith as a virtue and the world would become secular overnight. There are those who are very religious on strictly rational grounds, but they're in such a minority as to be negligible.
And if your belief in a God of gods, and other supernatural phenomena, doesn't include an article of blind faith, I'd be genuinely curious how you continue to believe in it/them.
Originally posted by dadudemon
OI!I have a diatribe...
I am getting very tired of the idea of prayer doing anything at all. Prayer is not to ask God to do something supernatural. Prayer should be used as a tool to thank you Heavenly Father for all that He has given you AND TO ALSO ASK FOR THE SPIRITUAL STRENGTH TO MAKE THE RIGHT CHOICES AND DO THE RIGHT THINGS. You cannot ask God to mow your yard (which is the equivalent to what many people pray for). Maybe you can ask for the motivation and will-power to get up off your ass and mow the lawn but God ain't mowing your lawn.
This same idea holds true for almost anything you can think of with prayer. Praying to cure someone's cancer will not work. Praying to feed kids in Africa will not work. Praying that the homeless will get fed will not work. You know what will work? Going to college and then becoming a researcher to cure cancer will work. Feeding the homeless and helping them get back on their feet will work. And doing humanitarian activities in Africa will feed those starving children. Basically, my point boils down to: prayer is completely in your head/mind. God is completely in your head/mind. You should never operate under the assumption that God will do anything outside of that.
There is a common Mormon saying we have about acting in the service of God. "If God commands me to move a mountain, I'll get my shovel." The saying, to put it very bluntly, basically means to not expect God to wipe your ass and actually do something.
I strongly feel that Christopher Hitchens would agree with my sentiments. He may not agree with the added ingredient of God into it but he would agree with my thoughts about the abuse of prayer.
But one time Mary Sue prayed for her brother to get better and he did. Ergo God.
313
Several prominent studies back your diatribe here. I'd say it's safe to assume The Hitch would endorse this, or at least not actively opposed to it.
But yeah, prayer lists for diseases and such abound, and the "Power of Prayer" is as ubiquitous as "The Secret" in some circles (and more so in many, where they haven't heard of Oprah).
I'm a couple days early here, but I wanted everyone to be able to make their holidays plans...
MERRY HITCHMAS EVERYONE!!!
Yes, the reason for reason in the season, everyone's favorite holiday, Hitchmas. Where we pay tribute to the most lovingly antagonistic of the Four Horsemen, the sadly departed Christopher Hitchens.
Here's a web link for more:
http://www.hitchmas.com/
https://richarddawkins.net/2013/12/merry-hitchmas/
So treat yourself to some Youtube "Hitchslaps" and get blackout drunk on Johnny Walker Black Label. Cheers!