NationStates Jolt Archive

yo dudes!

so, some of you may have noticed i'm an atheist. the rest of you, that's how i'd classify myself. but today, just now, i prayed to some supernatural (i assume) entity that my flatmate would do well in her exam. whether it be 'fate' or some actual thing i'm not sure, i just wished very hard with some 'direction' that she'd do better than she thinks she's capable of. she so deserves to do well that it would kill me almost as much as her if she doesn't. so anyway, am i now not an atheist? i've always been a bit superstitious againtst my personal instincts, but now it's just come to a head where i feel i have to appeal to someoone cuz my flatmate was so lacking confindence that i thought she needed some support, and appart from general encouragement, i didn't know what else i could do.

so there we have it. an atheist, without direction. :confused:

what do you think?

ps i'm a bit drunk so that might have *something* to do with it

Ah well. You're only human.:(

yeh, that's it. but i always thought i was a human that had the state of mind to be resistant to that sort of crap.

actually, i'm probably the sort of human that drops all their self imposed inhibitions when alcohol is introduced into the mix. i'm also an ardent ant-violence sort of person and yet i seem to have the irrepresible urge to provoke people into violence when i'm drunk. occasionally. sometimes. okay, often. whatever. :p

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being religious. It fills a void that we humans need to have filled. Faith and hope are necessary for us to function properly. Having a personal God can assist you in achieving happiness. So don't see religion as a bad thing. Ask yourself what you value more, certainty facts and truth, or happiness. Most people would say happiness. If you are the type of person who's only goal in life is happiness, then you should do everything humanly possible to achieve your goal. Religion can help you get there, so remain open to it.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being religious. It fills a void that we humans need to have filled. Faith and hope are necessary for us to function properly. Having a personal God can assist you in achieving happiness. So don't see religion as a bad thing. Ask yourself what you value more, certainty facts and truth, or happiness. Most people would say happiness. If you are the type of person who's only goal in life is happiness, then you should do everything humanly possible to achieve your goal. Religion can help you get there, so remain open to it.

hey, that's a good attitude! i like it! and i'd never even thought of that before. i've always been against dichotomies but i guess i'd never applied that thought process to this before.

hey, that's a good attitude! i like it! and i'd never even thought of that before. i've always been against dichotomies but i guess i'd never applied that thought process to this before.


Glad I could offer some help. :fluffle:

Glad I could offer some help. :fluffle:

:D :fluffle: cheers dude ;)

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being religious. It fills a void that we humans need to have filled. Faith and hope are necessary for us to function properly. Having a personal God can assist you in achieving happiness. So don't see religion as a bad thing. Ask yourself what you value more, certainty facts and truth, or happiness. Most people would say happiness. If you are the type of person who's only goal in life is happiness, then you should do everything humanly possible to achieve your goal. Religion can help you get there, so remain open to it.

False dichotomy. I value both the facts and happiness, and I have both; there by no means has to be a decision between both.

False dichotomy. I value both the facts and happiness, and I have both; there by no means has to be a decision between both.

well there is a dichotomy between anti-spiritualism and spiritualism. no-matter how ardently i have felt for the best part of 6 yrs against spiritualism i have frequently felt that mere facts offer little satisfaction. nor does uncertainty. it is nice and comfortable to have a personal god to look to as a personification of your own hopes and dreams. it does no harm as long as you keep it to your self. i still have a deep distrust of organised religion.

well there is a dichotomy between anti-spiritualism and spiritualism. no-matter how ardently i have felt for the best part of 6 yrs against spiritualism i have frequently felt that mere facts offer little satisfaction. nor does uncertainty. it is nice and comfortable to have a personal god to look to as a personification of your own hopes and dreams. it does no harm as long as you keep it to your self. i still have a deep distrust of organised religion.

Fair enough. I was just challenging what the previous poster was suggesting; that it is a choice between happiness and facts neccessarily.

I think that when discussing religion we should accept that, as with any large organisations good and bad has been done. Which you think is winning out is a matter of opinion. We should also not just concentrate on how it makes you feel as drugs and prostitusion can make people feel good. The question is, is it true?, and then, do you care? Many have said ignorance is bliss, but ignorance can easily be abused.

Fair enough. I was just challenging what the previous poster was suggesting; that it is a choice between happiness and facts neccessarily.

ah well, i'm not sure cc was actually suggesting a dichotomy between facts and spirituality. more of a complimentary idea that helps you through the bits that facts can't satisfy. at least, that's how i interpreted it.

What ever makes you sleep at night.

As long as you realise if a "God" existed praying would do nothing and nope he can't control Gas prices either I think you'll pass for being fine :p

I think that when discussing religion we should accept that, as with any large organisations good and bad has been done. Which you think is winning out is a matter of opinion. We should also not just concentrate on how it makes you feel as drugs and prostitusion can make people feel good. The question is, is it true?, and then, do you care? Many have said ignorance is bliss, but ignorance can easily be abused.

I like Aristotle's view. Nothings better than some good old interlectual stimulation and anyone seeking constant pleasure is no better than the animals (unfulfilled)

I think that when discussing religion we should accept that, as with any large organisations good and bad has been done. Which you think is winning out is a matter of opinion. We should also not just concentrate on how it makes you feel as drugs and prostitusion can make people feel good. The question is, is it true?, and then, do you care? Many have said ignorance is bliss, but ignorance can easily be abused.

ignorance might be bliss for some. but people will be ignorant with facts as well as faith in my experience. for me, truth is what you make it. right now, my truth seems to be nothing of this whole one patriarchal figure as god nor anything that can be demonstrated empirically, but more of something that my weak emotional self can invent to fall on when the going gets tough. which it has, incidentally.

and, never fear, i'm not about to start praying for the lowering of fuel duty. that's just moronic.

False dichotomy. I value both the facts and happiness, and I have both; there by no means has to be a decision between both.

No it's not. It would be a false dichotomy if I were making a general statement, but I wasn't. I chose my words to specifically suit the personality of the thread creater, which I judged by the first post, and was making the point solely for him. It appeared from the first post that he was the type of person that liked fact, but then at the same time the facts were a little too real, and were getting him down a bit. So for him it is not a false dichotomy.

ignorance might be bliss for some. but people will be ignorant with facts as well as faith in my experience. for me, truth is what you make it. right now, my truth seems to be nothing of this whole one patriarchal figure as god nor anything that can be demonstrated empirically, but more of something that my weak emotional self can invent to fall on when the going gets tough. which it has, incidentally.



I'm afraid as a scientist I have trouble when people talk about different truths I get a little edgy. We may not know the actual truth and there may be competing theories which cannot be completely proved but there is only one truth. I know people use the word to mean something else but it's kinda frustrating sometimes.................don't mind me I trying to edit my 10000 word thesis in time to start revision and its driving me crazy!

also I know some people need an emotional crutch sometimes and I do understand. Its just I was brought up very christian and came to my own conclusion as to its falasies, but I do still falter every now and again

I'm afraid as a scientist I have trouble when people talk about different truths I get a little edgy. We may not know the actual truth and there may be competing theories which cannot be completely proved but there is only one truth. I know people use the word to mean something else but it's kinda frustrating sometimes.................don't mind me I trying to edit my 10000 word thesis in time to start revision and its driving me crazy!

What's your thesis on?

How can one believe in something just because it would make one feel better if it was true?

How can one believe in something just because it would make one feel better if it was true?

It's called hope. It happens to all of us.

It's called hope. It happens to all of us.
Don't get his hopes up.

Don't get his hopes up.

Ah ha! Ah ha! Ah ha!:D

Quite.

What's your thesis on?

Physics, Analysing heart rates with statistical physics methods. It was a big project but it was a few really difficult programs and experiments instead of lots of easier ones so there's less to write about! grrrr

Don't get his hopes up.

:D

Anyway, maybe I've misunderstood the concept "hope", but when I hope for stuff to be true, that doesn't necessarily mean I believe them to be.

Ah ha! Ah ha! Ah ha!:D

Quite.
What what!

:D

Anyway, maybe I've misunderstood the concept "hope", but when I hope for stuff to be true, that doesn't necessarily mean I believe them to be.
Have a little faith.

:D

Anyway, maybe I've misunderstood the concept "hope", but when I hope for stuff to be true, that doesn't necessarily mean I believe them to be.

When you hope for something to be true for long enough you start believing that it is true.

Just because you're an atheist doesn't mean you can't talk to yourself and pretend it will help someone.

It also doesn't mean you can't believe in positive, directed thinking. Basically, thinking happy thoughts for someone will cause something to go right for them.

It coudl also be that you're trashed.

(1) desire and (2) fear are the two necessities of praying before the fact, whereas giving thanks, for example, is praying after the fact.

Praying before the fact is a last resort (used first by religionists) when one is (3) unable to cope with, (4) do not know how to change, or (5) are unable to change something. In other words, praying before the fact is an act of desperation, to the degree of fanaticism in the one who prays.

Despite the fact that I myself am an atheist, I am of the opinion that the human mind is yet to evolve to a state where it can accept itself as being the highest form of life. Humanity requires Gods and so forth, having incorporated them in every day life for the last, say, ten thousand years atleast. No matter how 'devout' (For want of a better term) an atheist you are, in moments of extreme mental and emotional pressure, it is infact natural for you to reach out for a deific figure, something above us that can direct and control us and our fates.

Naturally, of course, no such being exists. However as I said, humanity needs a scape goat- a God.

-Phil.

i think it sounds like you've come to realise that there is more to life than just the physical and mental. acknowledging your spirituality doesnt have to be a bad thing... the argument that modern science disproves the need for spirituality is flawed. the way i see it, science is a belief system that is admittedly very popular, and does provide some answers but it cannot do so for everything. the belief that science disproves God etc. implies that science provides all the answers, but really it is just hypotheses... many of them are true, but they cannot answer the deepes soul searching questions about who we are and why we exist. people throughout history have looked to the supernatural to explain existence, just because in the past few 100 years the belief system in science and 'fact' is the most commonly held belief shouldnt mean that 1000s of years of culture and history are irrelevant. just because you cannot prove something doesnt mean it isnt true, and the fact that you prayed the other day shows that you recognised the existence or possibility of the existence of the spiritual/supernatural. don't be ashamed of this, explore it. if it turns out to be true then i pray that you will find the truth and it will set you free!
just to warn you, if you believe nothing you may end up believing anything... so be careful what you pray for and to... because if God is there, then so is the Devil... so be careful what you invite into your life, because it will come if you ask it to.

xxx LaMondia xxx

There's certainly nothing wrong with wishing your flamate would do well in her exams :)

As long as you're fully aware that adressing an imaginary entity is just a pointless waste of time and won't do *anything at all*, you can still call yourself an atheist.

When you hope for something to be true for long enough you start believing that it is true.
Doesn't make it true.

Despite the fact that I myself am an atheist, I am of the opinion that the human mind is yet to evolve to a state where it can accept itself as being the highest form of life. Humanity requires Gods and so forth, having incorporated them in every day life for the last, say, ten thousand years atleast. No matter how 'devout' (For want of a better term) an atheist you are, in moments of extreme mental and emotional pressure, it is infact natural for you to reach out for a deific figure, something above us that can direct and control us and our fates.

Naturally, of course, no such being exists. However as I said, humanity needs a scape goat- a God.

-Phil.

Since when were humans the highest form of life?

Doesn't make it true.

I know that. Your point is?:confused:

Care to show me a higher one Kiwi-Kiwi? *grins*

To LaMondia,

Yes God exists; in the sense that God is a word the conveys something incomprehensible to the human mind. Is God some kind of actual being that watches over us? Nonesense.

It should set your mind at ease that there is no God, for similarly, there is no 'devil'. Sin away children, sin away.

-Phil.

Yes God exists; in the sense that God is a word the conveys something incomprehensible to the human mind. Is God some kind of actual being that watches over us? Nonesense.

So, and stop me if I've got this wrong, God exists only when we stretch the word "God" far and away beyond it's original meaning?

Care to show me a higher one Kiwi-Kiwi? *grins*

What exactly is 'higher' supposed to mean anyway? It's not like there's some sort of evolutionary ladder leading up to one point on which humans have reached the highest rung.

Well if you consider the fact language is merely the expression of thought, and that when people refer to God, they often refer to something that is beyond ones ability to comprehend( hence the reason we can never see proof of its existence), then by saying God you are infact refering to a thought of some incomprehensible existence.

In the sense that humanity is the dominant, most aware and intelligent creature we have discovered. Currently, as far as we can prove, nothing is more aware nor intelligent than humanity as a whole.

In the sense that humanity is the dominant, most aware and intelligent creature we have discovered. Currently, as far as we can prove, nothing is more aware nor intelligent than humanity as a whole.

Well, the dominant part could probably be debated, but I'll agree on the other parts. However, I still don't see how this makes humans the 'highest form of life'.

Tell me your definition of what a higher form of life is, then I will warp it to fit my statement. :)

Curious as to how the dominant part could be questioned. Where humanity goes, all other animals are dealt with according to human whim, culled, farmed or simply chased off. If we consider that dominant means to seize territory and run off competing animals, then humankind is indeed the most dominant of animals.

Tell me your definition of what a higher form of life is, then I will warp it to fit my statement. :)

Curious as to how the dominant part could be questioned. Where humanity goes, all other animals are dealt with according to human whim, culled, farmed or simply chased off. If we consider that dominant means to seize territory and run off competing animals, then humankind is indeed the most dominant of animals.

I have no definition of higher life form, as I don't believe that any lifeform can said to be 'higher' than anything else.

Certain insects still seem to give us a run for our money. And breaking out of Animalia, bacteria seem to be doing pretty well. I think I remember something about there being more bacterial cells in a human body than there are human cells...

It could be argued that humanity itself is a bacteria, harmful to the planet. As for insects, humanity could, in theory, eradicate every kind of insect. It would, however, mean removing all food sources for insects, which wouldn't be the smartest thing to do.

In truth, I don't think humanity can be classed as an animal, it isn't sane enough.

Well, the dominant part could probably be debated, but I'll agree on the other parts. However, I still don't see how this makes humans the 'highest form of life'.

According to the philosopher Peter Wessel Zapffe, our intelligence is in fact a handicap, because our ability to reflect beyond "need food, want sex, fear pain" means we will try to search for a meaning behind it all, a sort of universal justice or somesuch. We need to be more than just lumps of atoms. This quest is, of course, all in vain, as we are striving to be more than we are. I think even sworn materialists behave like this, according to Zapffe. They just force themselves, consciously or unconsciously, not to actually think about it like that. The point is still that humans have an overdeveloped sense of "self" which is actually detrimental, strictly biologically speaking.

Anyway, when this guy Zapffe wasn't philosophizing, he was writing humourous short stories.

It could be argued that humanity itself is a bacteria, harmful to the planet. As for insects, humanity could, in theory, eradicate every kind of insect. It would, however, mean removing all food sources for insects, which wouldn't be the smartest thing to do.

In truth, I don't think humanity can be classed as an animal, it isn't sane enough.

I take great offense at your claim that bacteria are inherently harmful. There are plenty of bacteria that get by without doing any harm.

Despite the fact that I myself am an atheist, I am of the opinion that the human mind is yet to evolve to a state where it can accept itself as being the highest form of life. Humanity requires Gods and so forth, having incorporated them in every day life for the last, say, ten thousand years atleast. No matter how 'devout' (For want of a better term) an atheist you are, in moments of extreme mental and emotional pressure, it is infact natural for you to reach out for a deific figure, something above us that can direct and control us and our fates.

Naturally, of course, no such being exists. However as I said, humanity needs a scape goat- a God.

-Phil.

We are not the highest form of life. That doesn't mean I'm going to go around praying to the mice, though.

It could be argued that humanity itself is a bacteria, harmful to the planet. As for insects, humanity could, in theory, eradicate every kind of insect. It would, however, mean removing all food sources for insects, which wouldn't be the smartest thing to do.

In truth, I don't think humanity can be classed as an animal, it isn't sane enough.

From a biological standpoint it cannot be argued that humanity is a bacterium. In fact, I don't really think you could argue that humanity is behaviourally like bacteria either. You could maybe make an argument for humanity being a bit like a virus, but even that's pushing it.

As well, I doubt every kind of insect could be wiped out without destroying the planet Earth. A feat I don't think humans are capable of as of yet.

And what does sanity have to do with what kingdom an organism is considered?

yo dudes!

so, some of you may have noticed i'm an atheist. the rest of you, that's how i'd classify myself. but today, just now, i prayed to some supernatural (i assume) entity that my flatmate would do well in her exam. whether it be 'fate' or some actual thing i'm not sure, i just wished very hard with some 'direction' that she'd do better than she thinks she's capable of. she so deserves to do well that it would kill me almost as much as her if she doesn't. so anyway, am i now not an atheist? i've always been a bit superstitious againtst my personal instincts, but now it's just come to a head where i feel i have to appeal to someoone cuz my flatmate was so lacking confindence that i thought she needed some support, and appart from general encouragement, i didn't know what else i could do.

so there we have it. an atheist, without direction. :confused:

what do you think?

Ach, I am an athiest, and I do things that are totally based on superstition, even though I know them to be rediculous. It doesnt matter if you prayed even though your athiest. What matters is do you believe there is a god to pray to ? You could even believe their is a creature/being to pray to while being an athiest. They just cant be a god.

Ach, and humans are the "highest" life form on this planet. Not the most successful (though we are very successful), or perfect, but we are the "highest".

Ok, better be more cautious about that. as far as we know we are the highest form of life on the planet.

so i'm now sobre (or at least less drunk) and i'm back to being a committed, unconflicted atheist, even if i do act slightly superstitious sometimes.

incidentally, my flatmate had a horrible exam, o well. she was quite philosophical about it tho and not nearly as panicky as before she went so maybe i helped her to relax about it. *shrugs*

Kiwi, I was implying that in order to remove insects we would be destroying the Earth, hence my statement it wouldn't be the smartest thing to do.

As for the sanity aspect, humanity is unlike any animal as it is inherently genocidal, seemingly on a path of self-destruction.

Working on the point we are a harmful bacteria; humanity moves into an area, spreads, absorbs all resources and then either moves on to a new area, leaving the previous area ruined, or else moves further outward to harvest. Humanity is very much a disease that has afflicted the planet.

As I said before, would someone care to point out a form of life higher than humanity?

Kevlanakia: I never said bacteria is inherently harmful. I said that humanity is -like- a bacteria, and -is- harmful, thus suggesting humanity to be a harmful bacteria.

Thanks for that Peveski.