PDA

View Full Version : Welcome To This World



Ferre
18-07-2010, 12:32 PM
1Rwioe1SGkQ

ewomack
18-07-2010, 05:07 PM
Yes, it's a wonderful bit of stuff we've set up here, alright!

Atom
18-07-2010, 05:17 PM
Yes, isn't god great?

Atom
18-07-2010, 05:21 PM
I think one of the laws of physics is if you can't prove it then shut the hell up isn't it, Ferre?
lol

Atom
18-07-2010, 05:36 PM
That's why I switched.

Hey anyone remember that Tareyton cigarette commercial whose logo was "I'd rather fight than switch" and showed a guy or girl with a black eye? It was the first cig with a charcoal filter as I recall, one of TV's lame-est ads ever.

Atom
18-07-2010, 08:59 PM
There has to be a creator, we need something to blame.

Cryren8972
19-07-2010, 04:33 AM
The ideas expressed here are a bit skewed. Sensationalism at it's finest.....

Ferre
19-07-2010, 04:46 AM
I think one of the laws of physics is if you can't prove it then shut the hell up isn't it, Ferre?
lol

If something is real it can be proven. :sqwink:

Strong
19-07-2010, 06:18 AM
There has to be a creator, we need something to blame.

Part of growing up is accepting responsibility for our own actions. I see nothing wrong in blaming ourselves as a people and as individuals. Knowing our frailties can make us better people.

Atom
19-07-2010, 06:21 AM
Part of growing up is accepting responsibility for our own actions. I see nothing wrong in blaming ourselves as a people and as individuals. Knowing our frailties can make us better people.People are not things. I said that "we need something to blame".

Strong
19-07-2010, 06:25 AM
1Rwioe1SGkQ

A thought provoking piece!

So Ferre, how would you explain life and the Universe to your new born if you were to make such a video? I ask because the thought has crossed my mind but I have no answer, I wouldn't know what to include.

Strong
19-07-2010, 06:27 AM
People are not things. I said that "we need something to blame".

No?

I stand by my previous statement.

Atom
19-07-2010, 06:29 AM
No?

I stand by my previous statement.





The idea of god is merely something. A person is not merely something.

Atom
19-07-2010, 06:33 AM
There has to be a creator, we need something to blame.









...

Atom
19-07-2010, 06:39 AM
Let me put it to you this way, Strongy..

I know that we have ourselves to blame for many things, but what people need is something to blame besides themselves. Get it now?

Atom
19-07-2010, 06:45 AM
It was sarcasm.

:sqwink:

Zap
19-07-2010, 06:58 AM
Part of growing up is accepting responsibility for our own actions. I see nothing wrong in blaming ourselves as a people and as individuals. Knowing our frailties can make us better people.

Ditto that.
If we started looking inward for the root causes of our problems, we might actually have a shot at solving some of them.

Atom
19-07-2010, 07:01 AM
Ditto that.
If we started looking inward for the root causes of our problems, we might actually have a shot at solving some of them.Who says that we're not doing that now?

Zap
19-07-2010, 07:08 AM
Who says that we're not doing that now?

Human Rights
Basic Standard Of Living
World Peace
World Poverty
World Hunger
Personal Security

Have any of these things gotten better over the past 10 years? 20 Years? 50 years?

Sure, we've got some nifty gadgets that help us in some ways, but we've done nothing for the bigger problems that face us but make them worse.

So... I guess the answer to your question is... Me.

Atom
19-07-2010, 07:20 AM
Human Rights
Basic Standard Of Living
World Peace
World Poverty
World Hunger
Personal Security

Have any of these things gotten better over the past 10 years? 20 Years? 50 years?

Sure, we've got some nifty gadgets that help us in some ways, but we've done nothing for the bigger problems that face us but make them worse.

So... I guess the answer to your question is... Me.You? Very well then.

Anyone else think that we as human beings haven't started looking inward for the root causes of our problems?


Ditto that.
If we started looking inward for the root causes of our problems, we might actually have a shot at solving some of them.

Atom
19-07-2010, 07:26 AM
It is my belief that religion, at least in this country, is steadily decreasing.

Strong
19-07-2010, 07:27 AM
You? Very well then.

Anyone else think that we as human beings haven't started looking inward for the root causes of our problems?


Oh we look, but too many of us prefer to get on our knees and pray for a solution instead of apportioning the blame where it should rest.

Take the catholic church and the spread of aids in Africa. That was eminently manageable until some smart arse Pope said people should simply abstain and using condoms was a sin against God. Yeah, that helped! (Is that sarcasm, I'm not sure I used it right!)

Atom
19-07-2010, 07:33 AM
Oh we look, but too many of us prefer to get on our knees and pray for a solution instead of apportioning the blame where it should rest.

Take the catholic church and the spread of aids in Africa. That was eminently manageable until some smart arse Pope said people should simply abstain and using condoms was a sin against God. Yeah, that helped! (Is that sarcasm, I'm not sure I used it right!)It is my opinion that Catholicism has been decreasing, at least in this country and probably the world as well. Do you disagree?

Atom
19-07-2010, 08:18 AM
I foresee a future virtually void of religion due to scientific advancement. How long that will take is anybody's guess, it seems to me that it's already started happening and rather suddenly I might add. Is anyone else noticing this or maybe it's just me?

Atom
19-07-2010, 09:08 AM
Oh we look, but too many of us prefer to get on our knees and pray for a solution instead of apportioning the blame where it should rest. (...)I understand that, but when all else fails, we need something to blame, I think that's just human nature, what better thing to blame than some idea we've given a name? An idea can't snap back at us and say 'wait a minute, don't blame me for your existence'. This "god" seems appropriate for humans.

Ferre
19-07-2010, 09:14 AM
A thought provoking piece!

So Ferre, how would you explain life and the Universe to your new born if you were to make such a video? I ask because the thought has crossed my mind but I have no answer, I wouldn't know what to include.

For one, I know from experience that even the slightest attempt to explain life and the universe to a new born is a rather time-wasting event, new-borne s are more interested in issues like when their nappy is changed or when they are fed. :sqwink:

As for making a video which explains life and the Universe, that is of course very subjective to the time in which that video would be made. Every day new discoveries are made by science that provide a little more insight in the enormous chain of events that created this life and universe and although humanity has discovered enough to paint a rather accurate picture, science has not found all the pieces of this chain yet to paint "the perfect picture". To come back at that video, I happen to be a parent and when a teenager, old enough to understand at least some basics of this matter, asks me this question I direct them to video's like these, as Carl Sagan has already done that for us;

wupToqz1e2g
6O9cYTZXekA
-522726029201501667

Ferre
19-07-2010, 09:18 AM
I understand that, but when all else fails, we need something to blame, I think that's just human nature, what better thing to blame than some idea we've given a name? An idea can't snap back at us and say 'wait a minute, don't blame me for your existence'. This "god" seems appropriate for humans.

Best scape-goat-ever, the perfect way to make people feel detached from their own actions, guys like Bush come to mind, or guys like Ted haggard who are the personification of this concept. :sqwink:

Muddy
19-07-2010, 10:58 AM
This concept of "heaven" and "hell" as it is commonly promoted is horseshit. Just another lie conjured up by the religious leaders to control people.

Atom
19-07-2010, 11:15 AM
That's what it seems like to me as well, the concepts are not logical in my view. I love to have fun with them though, they are logical for that. lol

Atom
19-07-2010, 11:21 AM
I believe that all must burn in hell, I don't care what the bible says.






; )

Strong
19-07-2010, 12:03 PM
It is my opinion that Catholicism has been decreasing, at least in this country and probably the world as well. Do you disagree?

Catholics perhaps but not that evangelical strain, and certainly not in Africa. But of course Christianity is not the only religion, Islam is definitely on the rise and in Western nations such as yours and mine.


I understand that, but when all else fails, we need something to blame, I think that's just human nature, what better thing to blame than some idea we've given a name? An idea can't snap back at us and say 'wait a minute, don't blame me for your existence'. This "god" seems appropriate for humans.

Yes it is human nature, but I don't let myself or any one else off the hook that lightly. I seek to be better than my nature by understanding my nature and going beyond it, as I would hope any right thinking human would once they have had their eyes opened to the atrocities carried out in the name of humanity and human civilisation. That's what really annoys me about the climate change deniers for instance, they should know better.

Atom
19-07-2010, 01:11 PM
(...)Yes it is human nature, but I don't let myself or any one else off the hook that lightly. (...)It's sort of like the parents of a dead child killed by an accident of nature for example, I think it's human nature for them to look for something or someone to blame providing that they realize that they are actually not to blame. You can say that no one is to blame, but you can't say that nothing is to blame, I personally feel that it's perfectly acceptable to blame something unknown that may be responsible for their existence and their entire genetic line right down to the origin, where ever it may lie. Not letting someone off the hook that lightly for that doesn't make sense to me, especially considering that humankind does not even know the origin of some fundamental laws of physics, for example. It's just the way it is, it's just human nature. And this is not to say that it can't or doesn't change, it's just the way it is now.

Halo
20-07-2010, 12:16 AM
I foresee a future virtually void of religion due to scientific advancement....

Me too, unless the scientists rip a hole in the fabric of time and space, through to another world and let in the alien spiders that want to eat our brains. Then religion might go up quick smart.
I watched The Mist the other night. Definitely worth a watch.
LhCKXJNGzN8




... how would you explain life and the Universe to your new born if you were to make such a video? I ask because the thought has crossed my mind but I have no answer, I wouldn't know what to include.
Strong, your question wasn't directed at me, but I think the advice from another film 'Broken Flowers' offers some good advice:

The Kid: So, as just a guy who gave another guy a sandwich, you have any philosophical tips or anything, for a guy on a-kind of- road trip?
Don Johnston: You asking me?
The Kid: Yeah.
Don Johnston: Well, the past is gone, I know that. The future isn't here yet, whatever it's going to be. So, all there is, is this. The present. That's it.
:3smile:

jgfA-eD7LaQ

Strong
20-07-2010, 08:34 AM
It's sort of like the parents of a dead child killed by an accident of nature for example, I think it's human nature for them to look for something or someone to blame providing that they realize that they are actually not to blame. You can say that no one is to blame, but you can't say that nothing is to blame, I personally feel that it's perfectly acceptable to blame something unknown that may be responsible for their existence and their entire genetic line right down to the origin, where ever it may lie. Not letting someone off the hook that lightly for that doesn't make sense to me, especially considering that humankind does not even know the origin of some fundamental laws of physics, for example. It's just the way it is, it's just human nature. And this is not to say that it can't or doesn't change, it's just the way it is now.

It's delusional thinking, it's your parents pretending the tooth fairy exists and giving you a dollar to make the first loss of a tooth more bearable. Sure it makes you feel better for a time, and that's OK for a time, but there is a time to grow up and face facts. There ain't no God gonna make me feel better, ain't no God gonna save my soul; all there is are the 6.8 billion others on this planet and me, we either save ourselves and make it work or we die. It ain't an easy message, it ain't comforting, it ain't gonna make you sleep soundly at night, but it might make you stop and think what you are doing and perhaps step more lightly on your path to the future.

(Sorry! Got a little carried away there, but sometimes it takes funny language to make a point.)

Atom
20-07-2010, 08:56 AM
It's delusional thinking, (...)What is delusional thinking, human nature? Please clarify.

Atom
20-07-2010, 10:23 AM
Strongy, I hope you're not writing a speech, I'm trying to form a meaningful debate here.

If the answer is yes then I agree, it certainly seems irrational to want to blame something that can not even be proven to exist, so I suspect that human nature is flawed.

Atom
20-07-2010, 10:37 AM
Nevertheless, it exists and it seems to be rather dominant in us, I believe it is quite common that the blame game pops up in every situation like I described as admitted by the parents themselves.

Atom
20-07-2010, 10:46 AM
I really don't think it's wrong for anyone to question how humans got here until the matter has really been solved. I don't feel that this is something to be held against anyone whether they purport to know the answer or not.

Atom
20-07-2010, 11:02 AM
I personally feel that all religion is wrong, but that doesn't make it true until we find out how in fact our species originated. To be honest, both extremes, creator/no creator, are flawed in my view, we need answers. I was intrigued by Ferre's post about the answer to this question being revealed soon, I'll need to go back and read that again, I was going to ask him to elaborate but didn't for some reason.

Sorry about the third person thing, Ferre. lol

Atom
20-07-2010, 11:38 AM
Holy crap, I must be losing my mind, I just went back and couldn't find that reference, unless it was in a different thread, which of course would also indicate that I may be losing my mind. lol

Atom
20-07-2010, 11:45 AM
I knew I shouldn't have chased that fish sandwich with a Sanka.

Ferre
20-07-2010, 03:22 PM
Study shows Christian fundamentalists more likely to commit domestic abuse (http://ww.examiner.com/x-10853-Portland-Humanist-Examiner~y2010m7d19-Study-shows-Christian-fundamentalists-more-likely-to-commit-domestic-abuse)

Nuff said.

Atom
20-07-2010, 04:11 PM
"(...)The survey illustrates the danger of any sort of religious fundamentalism,(...)"

I'm thinking that some of the eastern religious fundamentalists are even worse because it's accepted. At least we try to combat it over here in the west, I think half the dang Cops episodes are domestic disputes, they don't let many of them off either, right to jail with them both if necessary, but it's usually just the guy.







.

Ferre
20-07-2010, 04:40 PM
Point is Atom that much of that batship-crazy-nazi-shit is actually "word-of-GOD" and "law-of-GOD", what we call fundamentalists are actually true believers; people who do interpret those scriptures as they are meant to be interpreted.

Point is that all those so called moderate believers are in fact disobeying their god's laws and word and are according to this same god's laws and words not worthy of living.

How's that for irony? :sqlaugh:

Atom
20-07-2010, 04:57 PM
Thank god my plane went down when I was headed to that Jim Jones seminar.

Strong
21-07-2010, 06:56 AM
What is delusional thinking, human nature? Please clarify.

Fooling yourself with the purpose of making you feel better about a shitty situation.


Strongy, I hope you're not writing a speech, I'm trying to form a meaningful debate here.

If the answer is yes then I agree, it certainly seems irrational to want to blame something that can not even be proven to exist, so I suspect that human nature is flawed.

If Sarah Palin gets to make speeches I sure as hell get to as well! :sqwink:

There is nothing irrational about it. It is a known behaviour, it is how we protect our minds and inner selves from the pain.

My point is, we can't remain in that cocoon of comforting marshmallow forever, we have to face the world and the truth at some point. Living your whole life believing a lie and perpetuating that lie through the generations is a great handicap. It stops us from seeing the real problems. And if we refuse to face the real problems, how are we to even begin to solve them?

Don't forget to brush and floss, the tooth fairy don't pay for grown up teeth.

Atom
21-07-2010, 01:48 PM
Excellent post, Strongy.


I suppose if hope truly exists then it is only the result of accumulated brain data.

Atom
21-07-2010, 02:14 PM
Random question:

Is it foolish to have hope for the future?

Ferre
21-07-2010, 04:28 PM
I don't think so. I have hope for the future myself, always. So I know from experience that hope for the future, a vision of a better world for my children to grow old in, is not religion-related and doesn't have to be either, neither is it foolish.

In fact, we-the-people do all sorts of things with the hope that it will make some difference in the future every day and I think it is just a natural mechanism and part of a larger mechanism we call survival instinct.

Muddy
21-07-2010, 04:36 PM
Closely tied to artificial selection.

Strong
22-07-2010, 08:24 AM
Random question:

Is it foolish to have hope for the future?

Hope based on what? A delusion? That would be akin to blind faith. Gives me no comfort. Hope based on some evidence, that's another thing entirely.

I believe/hope we will live longer, healthier lives in the future. But that is based on historical evidence, 200 years of which has lead from an average life expectancy for men of 35 years to now approaching 80 years in some developed countries.

Atom
22-07-2010, 11:37 AM
Hope based on what? A delusion?(...)No, hope based on past and present. Don't you think it's a bit foolish to have hope for something that doesn't even exist i.e. the future?

Atom
22-07-2010, 11:41 AM
I think that Ferre addressed that question nicely.

Atom
22-07-2010, 11:56 AM
He basically said; no, because it's part of the survival mechanism.

Strong
22-07-2010, 11:57 AM
Doesn't exist, can't exist, or could never exist? The Future? Hmmm, airy fairy thinking, bring it down to Earth a little, way too broad to think about.

I could hope to wake up with an enormous dick tomorrow, that is foolish, ain't gonna happen. I could hope to wake up tomorrow with the winning lottery ticket tomorrow, that could happen although highly unlikely. The chances are neither will ever happen, but it would be foolish to hope for the first, while the second ... You can hope/dream.

Hoping God is going to come down tomorrow and save us all from ourselves is worthless, because the whole world could go to shit while you are waiting. Better to get up off your arse and do something to make it better and hope that your efforts amount to something. If God doesn't exist, you have lost nothing and done what you could, if he does exist, what is he going to say? You have to live your life like God doesn't exist, it is the only safe option for the future.

Atom
22-07-2010, 12:20 PM
Doesn't exist, can't exist, or could never exist? The Future? Hmmm, airy fairy thinking, bring it down to Earth a little, way too broad to think about.

I could hope to wake up with an enormous dick tomorrow, that is foolish, ain't gonna happen. I could hope to wake up tomorrow with the winning lottery ticket tomorrow, that could happen although highly unlikely. The chances are neither will ever happen, but it would be foolish to hope for the first, while the second ... You can hope/dream.

Hoping God is going to come down tomorrow and save us all from ourselves is worthless, because the whole world could go to shit while you are waiting. Better to get up off your arse and do something to make it better and hope that your efforts amount to something. If God doesn't exist, you have lost nothing and done what you could, if he does exist, what is he going to say? You have to live your life like God doesn't exist, it is the only safe option for the future.Yeah, sorry about those hard simple questions, but I can't think of any easy complicated ones at the moment, so I'll ask another hard simple one.

Could the ultimate definition of hope be life itself?









.

Ferre
22-07-2010, 04:39 PM
Could the ultimate definition of hope be life itself?


The continuation of life, maybe. Good question anyway, got to ponder that one for a while.

Btw, check this out...

mbef07aQtB8

Atom
22-07-2010, 05:27 PM
That's interesting. Well I've always thought that women should get a shot at running the country, might as well give atheists one too, can't hurt.

Cryren8972
22-07-2010, 06:08 PM
There are so many misconceptions in this thread that I don't know where to begin really.
I'm not sure what hope for the future is being referred to here, but if you're talking about hope for life after death...then all I can say on the matter is I'd rather be wrong and in my shoes, than wrong and in a disbeliever's shoes.
There is NOTHING in the bible that says "Don't take care of your planet because God is coming any moment to save you all".
As for staunch believers being somehow violent...I'm not getting the point there at all. Or moderate believers somehow going against the word of God.
What I CAN say for certainty is there is definitely a lack of true knowledge on the subject here shown by everyone.

Atom
22-07-2010, 06:31 PM
The ideas expressed here are a bit skewed. (...)Can you point out a few?

Atom
22-07-2010, 06:34 PM
There are so many misconceptions in this thread that I don't know where to begin really.
I'm not sure what hope for the future is being referred to here, but if you're talking about hope for life after death...then all I can say on the matter is (...)Nope, that's not what I was referring to, Cry.

Atom
22-07-2010, 06:40 PM
But please continue, I actually went too deep too fast with that question, I think it should more rightly be approached a little more gradually.

Cryren8972
22-07-2010, 06:50 PM
What hope were you referring to then? Hope for a better world? Better life? I'm not following. I'd be happy to dig deeper, but would like to know in which direction to dig. =)

Ferre
22-07-2010, 06:58 PM
Where's 4chang when you need them? :sqlaugh:

Atom
22-07-2010, 07:05 PM
What hope were you referring to then? Hope for a better world? Better life? I'm not following. I'd be happy to dig deeper, but would like to know in which direction to dig. =)Actually, I was questioning the need for hope. What true atheist would have any use for it at all? Isn't hope just stupid human nature?

Atom
22-07-2010, 07:28 PM
I can hope all the way to the market and back that I don't get a flat tire, but that doesn't seem to do any good at all.

For many Christians, for example, God is hope.

Atom
22-07-2010, 07:31 PM
The belief that God exists is their hope. Atheists should have no use for hope at all that I can see.

Atom
22-07-2010, 07:35 PM
Hope should be just plain stupid to a true atheist, I would think, whether it involved god or not.

Cryren8972
22-07-2010, 07:38 PM
Well, I can see hope for a better future...either for current generations or the ones following. No one wants to see this planet turn into the vast wasteland it's quickly turning into.
Hope for happiness is also something I can see anyone aspiring to. I can also see your point that if death is the only thing you ultimately have coming, then what is hope really?
You can't look at it that way though.
Whether you believe in God or not, ultimately, your happiness here is up to you.

Cryren8972
22-07-2010, 07:43 PM
I can hope all the way to the market and back that I don't get a flat tire, but that doesn't seem to do any good at all.

For many Christians, for example, God is hope.

Not only Christians believe in God....a true Christian puts their hope and faith in Jesus. But that's a theological question that I could go on for days about.
Someone believing in God though is seeking more than just hope. You don't "hope" you go to heaven for example.
You don't "hope" there's a God.
For a true Christian, God is so many more things than just hope. Although hope is part of the equation in a much different way than hoping you don't have a flat tire. Hope is only part of what brings peace...and peace is what most people are seeking when they pray or have faith.

Atom
22-07-2010, 07:43 PM
(...)Whether you believe in God or not, ultimately, your happiness here is up to you.Yes but why are you now confusing happiness with hope?

Cryren8972
22-07-2010, 07:53 PM
Yes but why are you now confusing happiness with hope?

Isn't it part and parcel?
Hope: To wish for something with expectation of its fulfillment.
Fulfilled: To measure up to; satisfy
Satisfy: Pleasure or contentment derived from such gratification

Pleasure, contentment, satisfaction, aren't they all part of happiness? So if you're hoping for something, you're wanting something to satisfy you...to make you happy. Happiness is the ultimate reward for hope...isn't it?

Cryren8972
22-07-2010, 07:55 PM
Otherwise, what are you hoping for? Unhappiness? Misery?

Atom
22-07-2010, 07:56 PM
I can hope all the way to the market and back that I don't get a flat tire, but that doesn't seem to do any good at all.

For many Christians, for example, God is hope.Not only Christians believe in God....a true Christian puts their hope and faith in Jesus. But that's a theological question that I could go on for days about.
Someone believing in God though is seeking more than just hope. You don't "hope" you go to heaven for example.
You don't "hope" there's a God.
For a true Christian, God is so many more things than just hope. Although hope is part of the equation in a much different way than hoping you don't have a flat tire. Hope is only part of what brings peace...and peace is what most people are seeking when they pray or have faith.uh, yeah I know all that, I was just trying to let you know why I had presented the hope questions. I think sometimes I get way ahead of everyone and then they misinterpret me. Ferre didn't though, he knew exactly what I was getting at with that question, he's a seasoned pro. We've had many such debates in the past in a different forum. : )

Cryren8972
22-07-2010, 07:57 PM
I could actually make the point that a Christian would pray they didn't have a flat tire, and an atheist would hope they wouldn't. :sqlaugh:

Atom
22-07-2010, 08:03 PM
Otherwise, what are you hoping for? Unhappiness? Misery?Well I suppose that depends on whether you're a masochist.
lol

j/k. Post #'s 72 and 73 are interesting and I'll need to think on them a bit after I make a cup of coffee.

Atom
22-07-2010, 08:06 PM
I could actually make the point that a Christian would pray they didn't have a flat tire, and an atheist would hope they wouldn't. :sqlaugh:Yes but then you'd be confusing praying with hoping, which is probably something else I need to think about as well. lol

Cryren8972
22-07-2010, 08:06 PM
uh, yeah I know all that, I was just trying to let you know why I had presented the hope questions. I think sometimes I get way ahead of everyone and then they misinterpret me. Ferre didn't though, he knew exactly what I was getting at with that question, he's a seasoned pro. We've had many such debates in the past in a different forum. : )

Not so much that I misinterpreted (I could have I suppose, I was confused at first)...but that I decided to hit it from a different angle than what you were expecting. Keeps things interesting. :sqwink:

Cryren8972
22-07-2010, 08:07 PM
Yes but then you'd be confusing praying with hoping. lol

Isn't that what atheists do all the time? :sqcool:

Atom
22-07-2010, 08:10 PM
Isn't that what atheists do all the time? :sqcool:I think so but am not sure, I need to think about it after I've been artificially inseminated with caffeine..
lol

Atom
22-07-2010, 09:21 PM
Isn't it part and parcel?
Hope: To wish for something with expectation of its fulfillment.
Fulfilled: To measure up to; satisfy
Satisfy: Pleasure or contentment derived from such gratification

Pleasure, contentment, satisfaction, aren't they all part of happiness? So if you're hoping for something, you're wanting something to satisfy you...to make you happy. Happiness is the ultimate reward for hope...isn't it?Well I'm not sure, some might argue that hope has no reward, and is simply a human character defect inherent in human nature by the simple process of survival and part of the survival instinct.

Atom
22-07-2010, 09:40 PM
Isn't hope in any capacity simply an illusion to a true atheist, and absolutely nothing more? I'm not talking about hoping for anything, I'm talking about simply hoping.

Atom
22-07-2010, 09:43 PM
I moved from hoping for, in my first question, to hoping in my second.

Atom
22-07-2010, 09:50 PM
Random question:

Is it foolish to have hope for the future?Post #48


Yeah, sorry about those hard simple questions, but I can't think of any easy complicated ones at the moment, so I'll ask another hard simple one.

Could the ultimate definition of hope be life itself?Post #56

Atom
22-07-2010, 09:58 PM
Hoping seems useless, but I personally feel that hoping, simply in itself, has great power in some people's lives. Sounds ridiculous, I know, but that's the way I feel about it.

Atom
22-07-2010, 10:35 PM
Atheists might argue that hope at least needs a reason, but I will argue that it doesn't. I will argue that hope is a given in some people, as if it's something that they're born with, and maybe it's something we are all born with but only certain people retain it and to different degrees throughout the knowledge building process. Knowledge eventually tells us that this seemingly blind hope is an illusion, and we generally refer to that as growing up.

Atom
22-07-2010, 10:39 PM
There's nothing cuter than the hope in a stupid child's eyes, eh?

Atom
22-07-2010, 10:50 PM
http://3t9.com/Atom/672955.jpg

Atom
22-07-2010, 11:02 PM
Ok, Joe, send in the clowns..

Halo
22-07-2010, 11:21 PM
I believe/hope we will live longer, healthier lives in the future. But that is based on historical evidence, 200 years of which has lead from an average life expectancy for men of 35 years to now approaching 80 years in some developed countries.
We are the only species that has become more prosperous as it has become more populous (in the words of author Matt Ridley (http://btwimho.com/showthread.php?t=2822)).



I could hope to wake up with an enormous dick tomorrow...
:3shocked: I had no idea that your bread was buttered on both sides Strong! :P




Could the ultimate definition of hope be life itself?

Nope. The meaning of life is 42. Hope would then be 42 too.




...then all I can say on the matter is I'd rather be wrong and in my shoes, than wrong and in a disbeliever's shoes.
What about the many disbelievers who act in a more Christ-like fashion than those who profess to be Christians? One of the reasons my faith evaporated was in the daily interactions with Christians who went to the same church.



Hope should be just plain stupid to a true atheist, I would think, whether it involved god or not.
I've always like Daredevil's nickname: The Man Without Fear (http://dosomedamage.blogspot.com/2010/04/man-without-fear.html).
It is written in the DD comics a man without hope is a man without fear.



Whether you believe in God or not, ultimately, your happiness here is up to you.
Sometimes life throws curveballs that make happiness very difficult, illness, chemical imbalances, corruption etc. but saying that I heard about a case of a man who came out of prison after a long stretch (can't think for the life of me exactly where now) and was asked how it was. He responded that it was a glorious experience. Maybe it was a TED talk it was mentioned in?

Atom
22-07-2010, 11:25 PM
1) But hope couldn't possibly be present before sensory input.

2) Why the hell not?

1) uh .. because hope is something conjured up in the mind.

2) Oh, ok thanks.

Atom
22-07-2010, 11:53 PM
I actually see no reason for plants to exist, not to mention every other living thing on this planet. No reason at all.

Atom
22-07-2010, 11:59 PM
1) Plants grow because of a. b, c and d, and sometimes y.

2) Those are not reasons why they should grow, those are reasons that they do grow!

1) uh.. yeah I guess you're right.

Atom
23-07-2010, 12:34 AM
1) SAVE THE PLANET!

2) What for?

1) Because dummies like you keep polluting it with more kids.

1) oh that's right, n/m.

Atom
23-07-2010, 12:49 AM
Just think, if we would just let our species die out, the planet wouldn't need saving. Everyone is always thinking of themselves, I think we should all just stop thinking about ourselves and start thinking about the planet.

Atom
23-07-2010, 12:56 AM
1) Can we do that please? Is that too much to ask?
Now c'mon, just cut it out. Stop it. Stop.

2) ok. sorry.

Atom
23-07-2010, 12:58 AM
Honey? I'm not home.
How was your day dear?
Get back I tell you, bacck.
Whatever you say dear, here lemme take your coat.

Halo
23-07-2010, 03:49 AM
Just think, if we would just let our species die out, the planet wouldn't need saving. Everyone is always thinking of themselves, I think we should all just stop thinking about ourselves and start thinking about the planet.

The planet is doing fine. :3wink:

arbpu1xKAow

Atom
23-07-2010, 03:57 AM
That must be pre global warming. lol

Cryren8972
23-07-2010, 04:07 AM
Halo, I have little to offer in explaination of the Christians that don't act very Christ like except to say that they are people too. No one is perfect...but I agree that sometimes in church, you have the folks that are "holier than thou"
The way I deal with that is to work on myself. After all, I'm the only person I can really control, right?
Sure, circumstances can sap your happiness...but being happy comes from within. I've seen people that have every right in the world to be bitter...but they're not.

Atom
23-07-2010, 04:50 AM
I think somebody put kief in my ground coffee.

I've been up for twenty and a half hours, growing weak, can't, breath, need, oxygen, hallucinations, imminent, beam me up, Scotty..

Ferre
23-07-2010, 06:56 AM
Yes but then you'd be confusing praying with hoping, which is probably something else I need to think about as well. lol


Isn't that what atheists do all the time? :sqcool:

No, it is not.


The "hope" of an atheist is based on an expectation based upon real time data and a calculation of probability.

The prayers of a believer are a call to an imaginary friend to influence certain events for the one who is praying's own interest.

One is based on a probability calculation and the other is based on imaginary interference in real life of imaginary entities by request.

For example, the atheist hopes there is no glass on the road to puncture his tires while the believer asks their god (in a way) to make sure there is no glass on the road.

In practical terms; the believer puts their "faith" in the capability of this imaginary friend to clean up roads, while the atheist puts his faith in the capability of road workers to clean up occasional mess.

Ferre
23-07-2010, 07:17 AM
Prayers are a waste of time anyway, it does not work.

Power of prayer flunks an unusual test - Health - Heart health - msnbc.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12082681/)
Prayer: does it work? (http://lava.net/~hcssc/prayer.html)


The study looked for any complications within 30 days of the surgery. Results showed no effect of prayer on complication-free recovery. But 59 percent of the patients who knew they were being prayed for developed a complication, versus 52 percent of those who were told it was just a possibility.

QF88nB1SRCM

http://www.ethanwiner.com/atheist.gif

Of course, it is not such a laughing matter, prayers actually kill people in some cases where people rely on it instead of on science and reason;

Jeffrey, Marci Beagley found guilty in Oregon City faith-healing trial | OregonLive.com (http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/index.ssf/2010/02/beagley_verdict_comes_in_from.html) (includes video)


OREGON CITY -- A Clackamas County jury sent a clear signal Tuesday that parents who rely solely on faith healing to treat their children face prison if a child dies.

Jeffrey and Marci Beagley were found guilty Tuesday of criminally negligent homicide in the death of their 16-year-old son, Neil. The boy died in June 2008 of complications from an undiagnosed congenital urinary blockage after his parents attempted to heal him with prayer, anointing with oil and laying on of hands.


Stupidity kills, and sadly enough the biblical scriptures advocate stupidity and ignorance.

DarleneO
23-07-2010, 11:21 AM
To comment on the original video of the thread.. just makes you wanna crawl right back into the womb, doesn't it??

Ferre
23-07-2010, 11:35 AM
To comment on the original video of the thread.. just makes you wanna crawl right back into the womb, doesn't it??

Well, it made me feel sorry for all those people who were born in religious families, I can't even begin to imagine the amount of trauma, deception, distorted view on reality etc. children from religious folks are subject off, as a child from atheist parents myself.

All I can say is that I'm glad to have not been subjected to such craziness, and looking around me at how religious folks manage their own lives and this world I hope those religions will just disappear one day in the far future, they only create mishaps and people with a distorted sense of reality.

And yes, also the moderates are bat shit crazy, there is nothing moderate at having an imaginary friend as an adult person, that's just crazy.

Atom
23-07-2010, 11:50 AM
Albert Einstein believed in god, but his god differed from the one commonly associated to believers, it was science and physics, the very workings of the universe.

Atom
23-07-2010, 12:54 PM
He didn't believe in a personal god.

Atom
23-07-2010, 01:05 PM
From what I can tell it seems that Einstein was closest to an agnostic.

Cryren8972
23-07-2010, 06:25 PM
No, it is not.


The "hope" of an atheist is based on an expectation based upon real time data and a calculation of probability.

The prayers of a believer are a call to an imaginary friend to influence certain events for the one who is praying's own interest.

One is based on a probability calculation and the other is based on imaginary interference in real life of imaginary entities by request.

For example, the atheist hopes there is no glass on the road to puncture his tires while the believer asks their god (in a way) to make sure there is no glass on the road.

In practical terms; the believer puts their "faith" in the capability of this imaginary friend to clean up roads, while the atheist puts his faith in the capability of road workers to clean up occasional mess.

I was actually making a joke. :sqbiggrin: What I meant was...atheists think that all of our praying amounts to little more than hoping.
Thanks for the in depth analysis though. :sqlaugh:

Cryren8972
23-07-2010, 06:27 PM
When I pray...it's never for my personal desires...whether that be no glass in the road or a family member to get better.
I always pray that I walk the right path daily...that I do what I should be doing at all times. If I pray for a family member, I pray that they, and their loved ones, are offered peace ...I never question God's judgement...if that person is meant to die, then my praying for life is futile.
However, I can HOPE that they survive.

ewomack
23-07-2010, 07:53 PM
I will worship your underknees if you ask nice...

Atom
24-07-2010, 06:47 AM
Did you hear that, Ferre? I think somebody wants to join the church. :sqwink:

Atom
25-07-2010, 07:09 PM
Ok, let's all just resign ourselves to the fact that mother nature has 100% of all the intelligence in the universe, can we do that? All the while keeping in mind of course that zero intelligence is just as plausible.

What if there indeed were an external intelligence source responsible for this mysterious programing in DNA? Actually, I don't really see a way that there wouldn't be.


I took and posted this ^ in the wrong thread I think, so I'm re-posting it here.

Ferre
26-07-2010, 05:38 AM
What if there indeed were an external intelligence source responsible for this mysterious programing in DNA? Actually, I don't really see a way that there wouldn't be.


The programming in dna is not mysterious for micro biologists Atom, it's only mysterious for non-scientists because indeed it is a very complex matter to understand without an aunderstanding of the vast amount of research that has been done in this field over the past 30 years.

Scientists who do understand the underlying mechanisms do not even consider the "need" for an intellectual designer because they understand the mechanism called "evolution" or "natural selection" that is responsible for the creation.

Fact is that it was not "an event" that designed DNA Atom, it was a very slow series of events over a period of millions of years that created DNA and the way it works today.

Atom
26-07-2010, 06:07 AM
The programming in dna is not mysterious for micro biologists Atom, it's only mysterious for non-scientists because indeed it is a very complex matter to understand without an aunderstanding of the vast amount of research that has been done in this field over the past 30 years (...)With all due respect, Ferre, you are mistaken on this matter. There isn't a scientist in the world that would agree with you.

Atom
26-07-2010, 06:23 AM
To say that there is no mystery in DNA is one of the more erroneous things I've ever heard you say.

Atom
26-07-2010, 07:14 AM
Why you are wanting to branch off to the intellectual designer argument is beyond me except that you want to stray from the original argument, which is

"The programming in dna is not mysterious for micro biologists Atom (...)".

Please do not infer that this is a "designer" argument, it isn't. The first seven words in your very first sentence are incorrect. To pass to the designer argument from this error is not possible, you'll first need to show me just one scientist that has claimed to have solved the mystery of "the instructions" aspect of DNA. But you can save yourself some time and just admit that there isn't one, and we can go from there.

Ferre
26-07-2010, 10:09 AM
Let's put is this way; sure, there are still a bunch of open questions on the issue in exactly what sequence dna came to existence within the evolutionary processes, call those "mystery" if you wish, but there are not enough open questions left, call them mysteries if you like, for the scientific community and their existing knowledge so far to make it in any way probable that there could have been any sort of external intelligence at work to add the "instructions" to this dna, and no, the string theories or quantum dynamics do not change any of that view, although it is a popular used argument by people who do believe some sort of intelligent force from "outside our dimension" could have been at work.

Every new discovery, and those happen very frequently nowadays, reduces the probability factor of such an external force more and more, this while the probability factor was already practically zero.

Then there is also the factor in what sort of field of "the sciences" as humanity knows them the probability of such a force is considered, this is actually only done in a field called philosophy an by its nature philosophy does not exclude any possibility ever, but can not always be translated into the real world and the reality of every day life or even natural laws. I've noticed that in the discussion on evolution, as soon as "external intelligent forces" are brought up those are always and can not be otherwise be brought into a discussion then as a philosophical argument and the probem I have with that is that in those discussions misinterpretation and misuse of words like string theory and quantum theory and a whole lot of endless philosophy is used and that's just silly and holds no base in the real matter of those evolutionary processes anyway, those processes are biological, not philosophical, those processes happened in real life and real time here and not in some other dimension. That we (science/humanity) know by now.

Atom
26-07-2010, 01:01 PM
Let's put is this way; sure, there are still a bunch of open questions on the issue in exactly what sequence dna came to existence within the evolutionary processes, call those "mystery" if you wish, but there are not enough open questions left, call them mysteries if you like, for the scientific community and their existing knowledge so far to make it in any way probable that there could have been any sort of external intelligence at work to add the "instructions" to this dna, and no, the string theories or quantum dynamics do not change any of that view, although it is a popular used argument by people who do believe some sort of intelligent force from "outside our dimension" could have been at work.

Every new discovery, and those happen very frequently nowadays, reduces the probability factor of such an external force more and more, this while the probability factor was already practically zero.

Then there is also the factor in what sort of field of "the sciences" as humanity knows them the probability of such a force is considered, this is actually only done in a field called philosophy an by its nature philosophy does not exclude any possibility ever, but can not always be translated into the real world and the reality of every day life or even natural laws. I've noticed that in the discussion on evolution, as soon as "external intelligent forces" are brought up those are always and can not be otherwise be brought into a discussion then as a philosophical argument and the probem I have with that is that in those discussions misinterpretation and misuse of words like string theory and quantum theory and a whole lot of endless philosophy is used and that's just silly and holds no base in the real matter of those evolutionary processes anyway, those processes are biological, not philosophical, those processes happened in real life and real time here and not in some other dimension. That we (science/humanity) know by now.Ok, good. Now that we agree on that let's move on to the probability factor.

"Every new discovery, and those happen very frequently nowadays, reduces the probability factor of such an external force more and more, (...)"

Can you give me an example of one of these discoveries?

Atom
26-07-2010, 01:22 PM
Just to clarify for anyone that may be confused at this point, there is a specific on/off switching sequence that occurs to determine the outcome of what is produced by cell growth, it may have somehow appeared naturally or it may have been introduced by some outside influence such as a highly advanced alien geneticist that just happened to be passing by earth some gazillion years ago.

Ferre
26-07-2010, 02:47 PM
Well, there is a theory floating around that life on earth could have started with more-advanced-than-those-at-that-time-on-earth elements brought here with the impact of meteors. This theory has both no consensus in the world of evolution science nor do those supposed elements represent a form of highly advanced alien geneticist, it is just a theory that the building blocks that could have started "life" could also have been brought in by meteors, this theory has roots in the fact that this "theoretically" in the philosophical sense, is a possibility one has to take into account.

However, there is no evidence yet that this could be the case and more of a philosophical theory than a theory based on biological findings.

Atom
26-07-2010, 02:59 PM
I like my alien theory.

Here's a bit of interesting news that just popped up in the News sub forum;

Nasa Discoveries Spark Hopes Of Alien Life - BTWIMHO Chat Forums (http://www.btwimho.com/showthread.php?t=2857)

Atom
26-07-2010, 03:21 PM
You don't suppose that Jesus was actually sent by a far away alien civilization do you?

Atom
26-07-2010, 03:28 PM
Aliens may be responsible for religion.

Atom
26-07-2010, 03:41 PM
Biology on this planet may not be of alien origin, but I don't find the possibility of humans being of alien origin all that remote actually.

Atom
26-07-2010, 04:03 PM
We humans may in fact be alien animals.

Atom
26-07-2010, 04:06 PM
I'm wondering how long it will be before we have the technology to genetically produce our own humans using apes.

Atom
26-07-2010, 04:10 PM
And your avatar isn't helping.
lol!

Atom
26-07-2010, 04:16 PM
Well I suppose that I could use a good exorcism at this point but I'll settle for a cup of coffee as I've heard that exorcists are becoming rare and rather expensive these days. lol

Ferre
26-07-2010, 07:09 PM
And I hear they are bad for health. :sqlaugh:

Cryren8972
26-07-2010, 07:28 PM
Only if you hold the hot pea soup in your mouth for a long period of time...

Atom
26-07-2010, 10:55 PM
Ferre, are you still unable to get to this site?

Profile | Arguing God from Design? (William Dembski) | Closer to Truth (http://www.closertotruth.com/video-profile/Arguing-God-from-Design-William-Dembski-/413)

Ferre
27-07-2010, 06:24 AM
Ferre, are you still unable to get to this site?

Profile | Arguing God from Design? (William Dembski) | Closer to Truth (http://www.closertotruth.com/video-profile/Arguing-God-from-Design-William-Dembski-/413)

I have seen that a long time ago. I'm sorry Atom but William Dembski is another variety of "snake oil salesman", the man is a philosopher and theologian and went on a search to find the (very rare) few people in science who subscribe to the intelligent design dogma and make a documentary to make it look as if the probability is higher than it actually is.

Again, notice that this whole question is approached from a philosophical point of view and angle.

To me, and most other people who do understand the sciences, this movie of his is on par with Ben Stein's movie, and just as intellectually dishonest as Ben Stein's movie too.

People who are prominently advocating "anti-evolution" and proud "anti-evolutionists" can not, I repeat, can NOT be taken seriously in these matters, those people deny knowledge and twist facts to suit their own agenda. They are like politicians, not scientists, they use rhetoric instead of facts and real science to back up their arguments.

Atom, don't fall for snake oil salesman bro, those are despicable creatures. The AntiEvolutionists: William A. Dembski (http://antievolution.org/people/dembski_wa/wadembski.html)

Ferre
27-07-2010, 06:27 AM
Here is a list of critiques and reviews of that dude's work, have fun;

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/science/creationism/dembski.html

If any, read this; http://philosophy.wisc.edu/sober/dembski.pdf


In what
follows, we will show that Dembski’s account of design inference is deeply flawed. Sometimes he
is too hard on hypotheses of intelligent design; at other times he is too lenient. Neither
creationists nor evolutionists nor people who are trying to detect design in nontheological
contexts should adopt Dembski’s framework.

:sqlaugh:

Ferre
27-07-2010, 06:41 AM
I just did a search on scienceblogs on Good ol' Bill Dembski, he gets ripped to pieces by a large number of science authors there;

William Dembski - Google Search (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=017254414699180528062%3Auyrcvn__yd0&q=William+Dembski&sa.x=5&sa.y=3&sa=search)

I always enjoy reading those kind of articles, it's like reading MAD magazine without the cartoonishness.

:sqlaugh:

Atom
27-07-2010, 09:43 AM
I have seen that a long time ago. I'm sorry Atom but William Dembski is another variety of "snake oil salesman", the man is a philosopher and theologian and went on a search to find the (very rare) few people in science who subscribe to the intelligent design dogma and make a documentary to make it look as if the probability is higher than it actually is.

Again, notice that this whole question is approached from a philosophical point of view and angle.

To me, and most other people who do understand the sciences, this movie of his is on par with Ben Stein's movie, and just as intellectually dishonest as Ben Stein's movie too.

People who are prominently advocating "anti-evolution" and proud "anti-evolutionists" can not, I repeat, can NOT be taken seriously in these matters, those people deny knowledge and twist facts to suit their own agenda. They are like politicians, not scientists, they use rhetoric instead of facts and real science to back up their arguments.

Atom, don't fall for snake oil salesman bro, those are despicable creatures. The AntiEvolutionists: William A. Dembski (http://antievolution.org/people/dembski_wa/wadembski.html)Yeah I think you've told me this before regarding that guy, I'm still wondering if you're still blocked and unable to get to that site though. Seems I recall that you said it was blocked, I can't remember if that is the site or not.

Ferre
27-07-2010, 10:06 AM
I could easily access that site, and now you made me think of what side it was I was blocked from before,..can't remember actually.

Atom
27-07-2010, 10:21 AM
Not PBS I hope.

Ferre
27-07-2010, 10:32 AM
I really don't remember but it often happens nowadays that I get those messages that video's cannot be accessed on "my location". Pure censorship if you ask me but it's under the pretext of "copyrights" and apparently that's when discrimination and censorship are legally allowed in some parts of the world. Not in my parts though, down here we find it rather insultive.

Atom
27-07-2010, 10:38 AM
Well whatever site it was, I think Strongy said he was getting the same message, I think you guys aren't too far away from each other, maybe he'll remember.

Yeah it sucks.. and we complain about censorship in China lol.

Ferre
27-07-2010, 11:53 AM
Funny you mention China. You know my average surfing habits right? Check my own sites regularly, surf all sorts of dissident sites and all and when I stayed in China for a while some years ago I could access anything I wanted to surf to from any Chinese internet cafe, not once did I notice any problems with access to anything.

I heard about that infamous Chinese internet wall but did not encounter it when I was there so I really wonder what Chinese people are blocked from, nothing I am interested in that's for sure.

:sqlaugh:

Atom
27-07-2010, 12:07 PM
I've never encountered it either. I heard it was really long. lol



.
http://3t9.com/Atom/censorshipsucks.jpg

Ferre
28-07-2010, 02:20 PM
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4093/4826055496_c531424f6d_b.jpg

ewomack
28-07-2010, 07:18 PM
I don't really see any misconceptions in this thread, but I do see differences of opinion that wouldn't really go anywhere in a debate.

Pascal's wager was alluded to. Yes, that's a seductive one. If you're right, you get heaven, if you're wrong then you've lost nothing. The other perspective of this is that, if you're wrong then you've wasted a lot of time hoping and ritualizing the one life you have towards a big nothing. I'm not saying that that "nothing" does or doesn't exist, I'm just saying that I don't find Pascal's wager a good argument for belief or action, or really anything. It's seductive but rather shallow.

As for an afterlife, maybe one exists. Who knows? Who can know? We can believe in one, but that doesn't really get us anywhere. How is my life better if I believe that I'm going "somewhere else" when I expire? Will I have a memory of this world? Will people I love go to Hell while I writhe in eternal bliss (I'm sure I'm not destined for Heaven)? An afterlife raises so many conundrums that it falls apart pretty quick. I'm not saying there isn't one (I have no idea), but I don't see any reason to believe in one, either.

As for "hope" without God - the world is full of atheists who have meaningful lives, arguably more meaningful than believers. Many shades of Buddhism and Daoism believe in no afterlife, no God, nothing but worm food at the end. Nonetheless, they find harmony in their present lives and in teaching others how they find contentment (I didn't say happiness; a life spent in nothing but happiness would be unidimensional and meaningless). We don't need anything external to ourselves to have hope in ourselves or our future. Really what we need for hope at this juncture is brute realism that we've completely messed up our living quarters and need to get to serious work to salvage what we can. God or no God, that's a brute fact.

Sorry, I rambled... :3unsure:

Atom
28-07-2010, 09:21 PM
I think that there are still some residual effects but primarily science has brought me to reason from this terrible nightmare called religion.

Atom
28-07-2010, 09:40 PM
I view all religion in a much different light now. Defects in human character complicate things even more. If I had to come up with one word to describe any and all religion I think it would be insidious.