Convince me that God exists

[WillMc88]

1. This is all good, but, When I see a Doctor, I pray that God will guide him if he doesn't have all the answers to what is wrong. After all, God gave him/her the inspiration to become a Doctor.

2. State has to maintain the Separation of Church and State, and cannot interfere with individuals rights to their Superstition/Religious ideas. Otherwise there will be a violation of Constitutional Rights.

1. Then you wouldn't quite fall under that example now would you? And I don't believe in any god's existence so, to me, that last part is completely moot.

2. As it should. However, individual's make up the voting population as well as the government itself. Religious/superstitious ideas can and do seep into the legislative process via the individuals who believe them, which is what I was talking about.

 

[wenchine-mahtapasikan]

I could call Paris Hilton a spoiled rich bitch who lives off her parents' fortune. But I'm not gonna pretend that's a compliment just because it's actually a good thing for her. The way you approached the 'privileged atheist' comment is what made it seem offensive.

But yes, there is a positive correlation between education and atheism. If you must know, I realized I was an atheist by doing my own independent investigation into my beliefs, not because of my divorced, lower-class father's money.

Again though, if someone doesn't care if their beliefs are true, OK then! I'm saying that it can have harmful effects, and have provided examples. You're saying that this doesn't apply to everyone who believes in a god or higher power, and that is true as well. The examples I provided do not apply to everyone.

I think we are almost done here. Yay us.

I was merely implying that a lens of privilege (falsely) implied by your viewpoints, demeanor, and argumentation style is not always the lens of the more religious demographics. I actually came to my agnostic views by a repulsion with the backwards religiosity prevalent in many parts of African-American culture, but I would still not liken my lens on the world completely to my more religious racial brethren.

By definition, it would seem people would want what they believe to be true. So it's not proven? Whatever. If someone wears their socks inside out as a good luck charm, is it really worth killing that placebo effect for the sake of finding truth? Not for me. They can believe that's true as long as it works for them and doesn't hurt anybody.

I feel like, when it comes down to the essence of things, in practical terms conviction of the existence of God matters just as much as the socks. If we stopped giving such a huge fuck about it, it wouldn't be such a big deal.

When you say "if someone doesn't care if their beliefs are true", that seems to hold a small air of condescension to me. It SOUNDS like you're saying "it's OK, as long as they KNOW it's stupid". To me it's not (always) stupid, and, even if it were, do they HAVE to know it is?

Uhh... I forgot what I was saying. Back to orgo.

Par on the path to (hopefully) mutual enlightenment.

 

[hanzosword]

Well the original poster may not read this since he said he's done but some people believe what they believe because of some personal experience that can't be explained by logic or science. For example I saw some sort of spirit once with my own 2 eyes while wide a wake and therefore nobody could ever tell me that spirits don't exist.

I personally do believe in what we call god, but I don't think it's a man or has all the negativity that the god in the bible has. But it doesn't matter what any of us believe, we can all still love each other and we will all get to see what is true and not true after we are dead for ourselves.

 

[wenchine-mahtapasikan]

Necessary is relative. But there's no arguing that it serves some people well.

Smartass, lol.

I still believe due to cultural pressures and some parts of the world, religious conformation is necessitated.

Also, once again, necessary is relative. Some people "need" psychotherapy, and religion tends to fill this void for many who cannot afford it. These are needs are not the bottom of Maslow's pyramid, so it is the stuff of more relative psychology to argue the validity of these needs.

In conclusion, you do NOT seem to agree with the continued (relative) necessity of religion as you think we are "beyond" it now.

 

[wenchine-mahtapasikan]

Well the original poster may not read this since he said he's done but some people believe what they believe because of some personal experience that can't be explained by logic or science. For example I saw some sort of spirit once with my own 2 eyes while wide a wake and therefore nobody could ever tell me that spirits don't exist.

I personally do believe in what we call god, but I don't think it's a man or has all the negativity that the god in the bible has. But it doesn't matter what any of us believe, we can all still love each other and we will all get to see what is true and not true after we are dead for ourselves.

Agreed. And he may read this. He said he was lurking around here. Hey woofy!

 

[WillMc88]

I think we are almost done here. Yay us.

I was merely implying that a lens of privilege (falsely) implied by your viewpoints, demeanor, and argumentation style is not always the lens of the more religious demographics. I actually came to my agnostic views by a repulsion with the backwards religiosity prevalent in many parts of African-American culture, but I would still not liken my lens on the world completely to my more religious racial brethren.

By definition, it would seem people would want what they believe to be true. So it's not proven? Whatever. If someone wears their socks inside out as a good luck charm, is it really worth killing that placebo effect for the sake of finding truth? Not for me. They can believe that's true as long as it works for them and doesn't hurt anybody.

I feel like, when it comes down to the essence of things, in practical terms conviction of the existence of God matters just as much as the socks. If we stopped giving such a huge fuck about it, it wouldn't be such a big deal.

When you say "if someone doesn't care if their beliefs are true", that seems to hold a small air of condescension to me. It SOUNDS like you're saying "it's OK, as long as they KNOW it's stupid". To me it's not (always) stupid, and, even if it were, do they HAVE to know it is?

Uhh... I forgot what I was saying. Back to orgo.

Par on the path to (hopefully) mutual enlightenment.

If I could make it sound less condescending, I'd be happy to do so. Primarily, I'm referring to people who don't examine their beliefs.

If you must know why it bothers me at all, it's really a response to militant theism and religion. I already said (probably multiple times even) that if everyone kept their personal beliefs to themselves, it would bother me MUCH less. It's not like I'm approaching people and calling them out to defend their convictions.

 

[WillMc88]

In conclusion, you do NOT seem to agree with the continued (relative) necessity of religion as you think we are "beyond" it now.

Correct. I don't believe religion is necessary at all in this era.

 

[bankside]

I see your point. I agree with many parts of it. Same as woofy's.

However, while these effects of faith may be placebo, we have no definitive way of affirming or defeating that claim. I don't believe in my lifetime, or anyone else's, we'll have a definitive answer either way.

I think the under-appreciated value in this anecdotal evidence is that something is real to THEM. I don't know about y'all, but I like to read all sides of a story before I close a book. (Except in English class, god I hate humanities. Why am I here?)

I think different strokes for different folks. I think even if this is placebo, there are multiple roots to that placebo.

What we have is definitively no reason to honour vanishingly improbably claims, even if this has the effect of undermining comforting falsehoods.

Reality is not real to me, or real to you, it is real. We're on a quest to figure out what real is, and comport ourselves accordingly. By the way, your earlier comments to willmc88 have been annoying me for at least a day. I have to respond. The only middle-class conceit is the idea that knowledge and understanding are some kind of middle class "privilege." Thought and reason are not luxuries, or inequities, or "relative ways of being" or "sociodemographic peculiarities" or anything else like that.

Academic jargon might make it harder for someone to follow an argument if they are not trained in that jargon, but it doesn't follow that they are unable to follow the argument itself, or that academic jargon is a wall that entitles people to live with separate world views on either side of that wall.

So

 

[altlover85]

I would say it's self-evident. Here are two examples:

1. When sick, it is better to seek real medical help rather than pray for a cure.

2. When creating legislation, it is better to make laws that provide real benefit to people as opposed to basing them on superstitious/religious ideas of what is wrong.

I mention these because I see them happening in this country far too often.

I don't see the first one happening all that often. I agree with your second point, but there are plenty of people that are religious and don't let their religion impact their politics in a way that would hurt the rights of others.

Psychotherapy!? No thank you, even if I could afford it. I have this terrible distrust of Psychologists, even the Christian ones.

All psychologists aren't bad. You might want to re-examine that belief.

 

[wenchine-mahtapasikan]

What we have is definitively no reason to honour vanishingly improbably claims, even if this has the effect of undermining comforting falsehoods.

Reality is not real to me, or real to you, it is real. [STRIKE]We're[/STRIKE] Me and my OBSCENELY NARCISSISTIC ilk on a quest to figure out what real is, and comport ourselves accordingly.

We also have no reason to call them falsehoods, they are at best unlikely-hoods.
Even if they were false, so the fuck what? That means you get to shit on the First Amendment? Go burn a fucking Koran why don't you, you big fucking hero. At the end of the day, science is best spent on medicine and shit, not exploring the possibility of some unfathomable being whose discovery itself changes nothing at the end of the day. If God exists, God always existed. If God doesn't exist, God never existed. This discovery will not change much outside of people's reaction to it.
I never said, or at least I didn't mean to say their reality is "Real" or what the absolute truth is. I meant to say "Why the fuck can't we piss off and let it be real to them?" People function perfectly in the rational real world even if they are "deluded" by a conviction of an scientifically unproven entity. Xtians are well represented in almost all walks of life. Many Xtians can interface with all aspects of reality save accepting non-existent proof that there surely is no God. And really, how much of reality is that?
Xtians work and serve just fine. If you are a relatively normal American, I'm sure at least 30% of what you own was made possible by Xtians. I'm sure at least 25% of the random nice acts done for you have been by Xtians. Can't you concede them a small pocket of reality that isn't practically THAT important? Are you that insecure in your beliefs that you can't let a single person believe otherwise?
You don't have to confirm these beliefs, support or agree with them, but if you actually think it is worth it to dedicate your life to scientifically undermining religious belief, your life is worthless.

By the way, your earlier comments to willmc88 have been annoying me for at least a day. I have to respond. The only middle-class conceit is the idea that knowledge and understanding are some kind of middle class "privilege." Thought and reason are not luxuries, or inequities, or "relative ways of being" or "sociodemographic peculiarities" or anything else like that.

Academic jargon might make it harder for someone to follow an argument if they are not trained in that jargon, but it doesn't follow that they are unable to follow the argument itself, or that academic jargon is a wall that entitles people to live with separate world views on either side of that wall.

So

So what explains the staggering inequity of distribution across race, class, and education of atheists? Newtonian physics is a field derived from heavy reasoning and thought, and much of it at it's core does not require lofty materials. However, there is an even more staggering disparity of even basic physics knowledge around these exact same parameters.

Are me and my poor undereducated, black relatives too stupid for your "reasoning" and "thought"? Is the only thing keeping us from this grand enlightment "jargon"?

You sound like a eugenics pusher... kinda like... i dunno HITLER!!

This is why I will never identify with the atheist community, so damn narcissistic, snobby and pushing your views as better and the only way. Do you know what y'all asses remind me of?

RELIGIOUS ASSES

That's right, you guys are just the opposite extreme.

*Disclaimer, rant is not directed at Will... unless he qualifies*

I've fought with stupid Xtians all my life, and y'all are beginning to make me like them better.

 

[wenchine-mahtapasikan]

If I could make it sound less condescending, I'd be happy to do so. Primarily, I'm referring to people who don't examine their beliefs.

If you must know why it bothers me at all, it's really a response to militant theism and religion. I already said (probably multiple times even) that if everyone kept their personal beliefs to themselves, it would bother me MUCH less. It's not like I'm approaching people and calling them out to defend their convictions.

OK, seems we've reached agreement here. Though, it feels like you're letting a couple (million, lol) bad theists ruin the bunch (billion? lol.)

I agree people need to examine their beliefs, but for ethical, not for scientific, reasons. If it works from a utilitarian and self-benefitting standpoint, good enough enough for me.

It annoys me when people talk about their faith too, but I realized that sometimes it's just me being an intolerant agnostic. Just like Xtians are too often intolerant of us. If they're just mentioning their faith in an earnest "this is what makes me happy" kinda way, I try to nod and muster a good for you. If they make shit of my lack of belief, I unleash my pent up rage against stupid Xtians.

 

[wenchine-mahtapasikan]

Correct. I don't believe religion is necessary at all in this era.

Agree to disagree I guess.

I think, even if it's not necessary, it's still (sometimes) helpful. You don't need JUB to live... but you're here.

Don't break down that analogy to the inevitable point where every analogy is false and look at it for what it is. I mean c'mon.

In closing, where it helps with minimal hurt, maybe you should keep lettin' it be. People have their pains and deal with them differently, if a smaaaaaaall (when you think about it) tweak in reality is all it takes for somebody to cope soooo much better...



Hey, your invisible unicorn or w/e COULD be real.

 

[wenchine-mahtapasikan]

Psychotherapy!? No thank you, even if I could afford it. I have this terrible distrust of Psychologists, even the Christian ones.

Umm... why?

 

[wenchine-mahtapasikan]

Does this mean I win? Lol.

Where are you bankside? Writing a speech about how the religious need to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps to the enlightenment of atheism? How blacks, Arabs, the poor and other largely religious demographics are too blind to see the light so easily beheld by liberal white academia?

Or are you fabricating scientific "proof" that there is 100% no chance of God?

OOOO OOO OOOO! I know!!! You're probably giving logic lectures to inner city children on Sunday mornings instead of letting them go to church, because, you know, logic helps you deal with the pain of being raped and losing loved ones.

The longer I spend with liberals, the more I realize they are just as closed minded as conservatives, if not more.

 

[altlover85]

Does this mean I win? Lol.

Where are you bankside? Writing a speech about how the religious need to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps to the enlightenment of atheism? How blacks, Arabs, the poor and other largely religious demographics are too blind to see the light so easily beheld by liberal white academia?

Or are you fabricating scientific "proof" that there is 100% no chance of God?

OOOO OOO OOOO! I know!!! You're probably giving logic lectures to inner city children on Sunday mornings instead of letting them go to church, because, you know, logic helps you deal with the pain of being raped and losing loved ones.

The longer I spend with liberals, the more I realize they are just as closed minded as conservatives, if not more.

I was with you until that last sentence.

 

[wenchine-mahtapasikan]

I was with you until that last sentence.

Lol, thanks. Yeah, I was angry at life, so I made a sweeping generalization. But there are a LOT of close minded liberals. They are just closed to the left.

You're still closed minded if the only people you will associated with are vegan, hemp wearing, music-snobbing, democrats. You are just closed to a different sphere.

I feel like some people here are too closed to an atheist sphere to appreciate the views of non-atheists.

But yeah... sorry if I offended you.

 

[altlover85]

It made more sense when you elaborated. I think that can be true about a lot of groups and I'm not going to lie and say that I'm not close-minded to certain groups at times.

We all have crappy days, so apology accepted.

 

[Jacquemar]

Does this mean I win? Lol.

Where are you bankside? Writing a speech about how the religious need to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps to the enlightenment of atheism? How blacks, Arabs, the poor and other largely religious demographics are too blind to see the light so easily beheld by liberal white academia?

Or are you fabricating scientific "proof" that there is 100% no chance of God?

OOOO OOO OOOO! I know!!! You're probably giving logic lectures to inner city children on Sunday mornings instead of letting them go to church, because, you know, logic helps you deal with the pain of being raped and losing loved ones.

The longer I spend with liberals, the more I realize they are just as closed minded as conservatives, if not more.

I haven't been following this argument... but still, there's no reason to get NASTY... Bankside often makes very good points.

 

[wenchine-mahtapasikan]

Sorry, I hate being condescended to. I should be used to it by now, but the "your comments have been annoying me" shit was... let's not go there.

As evidenced by my exchange with will, I am perfectly capable of civilized exchange with a disagreeing party. I hope the OP would say the same from our PMs.

However, while I do concede I was overreacting, that was not exactly a good start on his part.

Point taken.

 

[JFarm89]

God's an advanced alien probably, simulating our virtual world and lives... We are in "The Matrix."