Here's a map covering belief in god in Europe. I expected more people in France to believe in god. However, I didn't expect Romania to have such strong belief.
I seriously think it's incredibly odd that anyone would need a guide to being an atheist. It's sad that often many athiest are the same. I could understand those of religious faith having similiar beliefs, because that's part of their religion and/or a matter of their cohesion. But it's odd that people whom don't believe, often believe the same thing or follow their pack. Well, whatever...not everyone is that way...luckily.
Haha. Lack of religious belief. Skepticism. It is what we are. There is no 'belief' in lack of belief, there is only common sense. What is is what. I am pained by insipid attempts to equate common sense with 'belief' in an obviously superstious harking. Reality is what is, religion is a feeble attempt to reconcile simple thought.
Sure, but you provide nary an example.. You have a simplistic view that is not backed up. I will slay your ass when it comes to reason. Your attempts to paint a reality based outlook as just a belief are simplistic, and untenable. There is no 'magic man in the sky', and it is futile to claim a god as being benevolent, given the terrible amount of suffering in the world. How can you claim an omniscient being that bellies such cruelty?
Furthermore, where did god come from?????? It is the principle of first causes, and any attempt to argur what god may or may not be is a red herring. Tell me, where in the fuck did god come from? Who created god in the first place?? http://www.carm.org/atheism.htm I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.--Stephen F. Roberts http://skepdic.com/atheism.html There is no rational argument for the existence of a 'magic man in the sky'. Period.
Haha...I knew you would say that. My proof is the duplicity of such occurences. LOL. And obviously I don't think everyone of a particular belief...thinks or behaves the same. I've noted this in my former post. Wow, arrogance and predictability. 2/3. Who said I was religious....lmao. You assume so much. This yet another thing I almost always expect from some atheist. I've had atleast 3 people on this board do the same thing. 3/3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism ^^^^^ I'm closest to that, but I have a deep respect for Christ (and his general morals). Bertrand Russell said it correctly, In other words, I think it's odd that anyone come-up with a fixed position on religion or 'god'...for it or against it. I see the need to scrutinize behaviours or certain beliefs (that lead to action), but not the mere belief in a god. I think that's neligible.
Wow, you're so predictable. I came from an objectivist background (atleast philosophically). I'm not sure if you're familiar with it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand) Very libertarian views. What I noticed is that the lingo that's used is very common among those that read it. Now, obviously there's not a particular study on this...but many people have asserted that follower of Ayn Rand's philosophy are cultish, etc, etc. Given the inner perspective,...both within groups of thought such as that,...libertarians and athiest as well...I'd have to say that there's safety in pattern and homogeneous behaviour. People tend have the same process of thought, and often aren't as indepedent as they think. My opinion is that they seek far too much consul from one interpetation of 'truth', therefore they get stuck in it. Much like these kids in islamic extremism, only a more tame version. That's why I tend to look at multiple perspectives. Democratunderground, freerepublic, and even stormfront. One liberal, one conservative, and one racist. None of these forum exist on pure lies. None of them. They take what they get, and form an opinion based on their slant or biases.
Haha...I knew you would say that. My proof is the duplicity of such occurences. LOL. What proof? You give no examples. As far as Ayn Rand, she is a Logical positivist, and i liked atlas shrugged, except for her cardboard characterisations. So predictable.... How so? I think you know not, for make a prediction if you are so insightful. "libertarians and athiest as well...I'd have to say that there's safety in pattern and homogeneous behaviour. People tend have the same process of thought, and often aren't as indepedent as they think" Shut up, or provide examples. again, you fail to provide any backup to your claims:My opinion is that they seek far too much consul from one interpetation of 'truth', therefore they get stuck in it. Much like these kids in islamic extremism, only a more tame version. That's why I tend to look at multiple perspectives. You have nothing to offer. I doubt you say anything. Let's try cause and effect. How about telling me your purpose? I have mine, it is very well developed, and it is not easily categorized. nAll your points rely on simple stereotypes, yet lack substance. Start by explaining your assertion: My opinion is that they seek far too much consul from one interpetation of 'truth', therefore they get stuck in it. Much like these kids in islamic extremism, only a more tame version. That's why I tend to look at multiple perspectives. Hey?
Oh yeah, "where does god come from?" is predictable, yet unanswered. You use lousy tactics, called 'paint brushing', in other words, you label my arguments, but you give no reason. That is so lame. Put your money where your reason is.
Quote: I will slay your ass when it comes to reason. Wow, arrogance and predictability. 2/3. I stand unrebuked. I coudln't care less whether I am arrogant, I am right. Prove otherwise, huh? BTW, where did god come from?
What made god? Who? Man, needless of reason but seeking simplicity, a childish view. I have better evidence for Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. Fuck God, the idea is sick, for why does such suffering happen? "Wow, you're so predictable. I came from an objectivist background (atleast philosophically). I'm not sure if you're familiar with it." BTW I knew you would say that. Yes, i am an expert on logical positivism. Bertrand Russel etc
I'm not interested in the theory of what god came from. I'm not a believer, so you are wasting your time with that question... Get that through your mind. Please.
Why do care so much about this god whom you think doesn't exist? Why think about him at all, if he's non-existant? Do you think of other things that are non-existant as much? I have no interest in the debate of whether or not he/it exists. Suffering, joy, etc., all emotions that contribute to the subjective experience of man. Their significance to an athiest should be confined to their actual reality ie if there is no god, there is no moral reality. There's only consequences. If morality has no divine presence, it's only present in the mind's man.
there are assholes on both sides, how you see/dont see god is of deep importance to everybody and people will defend it vermently, therefore assholes defend it in an assholey way.
I'm not interested in the theory of what god came from. I'm not a believer, so you are wasting your time with that question... Get that through your mind. Please See what I mean? I am not interested in bullshit. Where do you propose god came from? That IS THE QUESTION, my man.
Well, it's simple. A person will live in a particular setting. Say it's Canada for example. Now Canada of today is not like the Canada of yesterday....meaning technology and the structure of society has changed. You can log-in on the internet, women aren't as domestic, etc, etc. Prior to the industrial revolution families were the subset of cultural influence...that along with religion. People were isolated to their community, family, and religion. Thus their view of the world was often isolated to those views or 'truths'. Now in modern society we have many more avenues. All offering different beliefs and/or coarse of actions. In the world of the non-believer (atleast in my case), the world behaviours and actions are a matter of direction/availability. Nothing in my belief is better, unless it's connected to a standard. A man could live in a forest and eat berries all day. Doesn't make his life any better or worse, unless I infringe a standard of what is 'better' or 'worse'. Notice I but slight emphasis on 'my beliefs'. While your belief in reason is sound, it's not absolute. I'm not insulting that mode of thought, I'm saying we haven't yet attained a level of knowledge through reason to say it's the only thing. This isn't a mystical assertions, it's a fact that we don't know everything, so we can't claim one mode of thought or one truth...without ascribe a particular ladder of standards upon that reality. As far as I know, that's all science is...an integration of knowledge within certain standards. A mighty good tool...but even science debates on the methods. If we learned that the universe had multiple dimension tommrow...ie multiple me's and you's...our view of existence would change in a flash. Morality would be shifted all over the place. It would change the individual interpetation of our paradigm. I avoid ascribing to one particular view (completely), because I don't want to be trapped by it. It's fine to have a belief out of what you think is right, but I don't believe anyone here is 'godlike' in their view.
to an athiest should be confined to their actual reality ie if there is no god, there is no moral reality eah, so you say, but do not understand. This is another very tired argumeny, Where did god come from? Who creatred god? Ever heard of empathy? Well explained but for a lack of understanding, huh? What is it that you need a magic man? What is your problem with reality?