Why it's hard for me to accept atheism...

[Cheung Mo]

I do not believe that any supreme being that would exist is capable of being analysed or understood by humanity and that any rational and scientific analysis I know of precludes the existence of one, but the idea that there is nothing beyond us scares the fuck out of me: To reject any sort of supreme being outright, to me at least, is to believe that we are nothing more than sum of our genetics, our environment (which is determined in large part by the genetics of those around us), and of the chemical reactions that occur inside of us. To believe that is to believe that these factors entirely control us, that choice cannot therefore truly exist, and that existence must consequently be meaningless.

Have any of you grappled with similar struggles?

How have you resolved them?

[Chrysalis]

How have you resolved them?
By seeing the argument as circular. The argument, btw, being circular is not necessarily a bad thing. Induction cannot avoid this. The premise you started with clearly presupposes, or is implicit in your starting point, that there is meaning in human existence. And then you proceeded to argue to prove it.

[Lord Testicles]

that we are nothing more than sum of our genetics, our environment (which is determined in large part by the genetics of those around us), and of the chemical reactions that occur inside of us

Yep that’s all there is to it, further more everything we are striving for is ultimately futile due to the fact that in a few billion years the universe will change radically, and that change doesn’t involve human life. :)


To believe that is to believe that these factors entirely control us, that choice cannot therefore truly exist

By realising that they control us, we can overcome them and therefore choice does exist.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Cheung Mo
We are nothing more than sum of our genetics, our environment (which is determined in large part by the genetics of those around us), and of the chemical reactions that occur inside of us. To believe that is to believe that these factors entirely control us, that choice cannot therefore truly exist, and that existence must consequently be meaningless.

From the standpoint of science, that's it!

But what is "scary" about it? Why are people so "upset" by this?

That's what I don't understand.

After all, we have the illusion of "free will"...we can still do whatever pleases us given whatever constraints might be placed on us by contingency, nature and whatever culture we live in. And if a constraint displeases us, we are free to attempt to remove it.

Cultivating a rational approach to reality gives us the best chance for changing the world according to our desires.

The fact that our desires are really the consequence of a long series of causes and effects -- most of which we are not conscious of -- hardly makes any difference, does it?

What's "meaningful" is the fulfillment of our desires.

Here on earth and as soon as possible! :D

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[LSD]

the idea that there is nothing beyond us scares the fuck out of me

I can certainly understand that, but what you need to realize is that whether you believe in it or not, the truth is still the truth.

Even if you manage to convince yourself that there is a "God" in the "heavens", the material reality will continue to be that there isn't. And deluding yourself with imaginary tales will only limit your ability to live your life.


To believe that is to believe that these factors entirely control us, that choice cannot therefore truly exist, and that existence must consequently be meaningless.

True enough, but that's only a negative if you let it be one.

"Meaning" does not have to be externalistic to be personaly valid. The fact that there is no "God" does not mean that you cannot still live a happy, fruitful life. After all, "God" has not actively interefered in your life yet and there is no indication that he ever will. "His" existance has been, thus far, entirely immaterial.

Remember, no matter what you "believe", you're the same person tomorow as you were today. If you were able to function with "faith", you'll be able to function without it. "Faith", after all, is merely the absense of rational enquiry. It has absolutely no distinct identity, nor does it serve any independent purpose.

Rationality and logic, on the other hand, are eminently useful, and, rather than being bleak or pessimistic, they are ultimately liberating.

As long as there is a "God" or "supreme being", no matter what your construe "him" to be, we are always limited by "his" will. Whether you believe in "sacred" texts, "holy prophets", or merely "feel a presence"; as long as you are constrained by superstition you can never reach your full potential or truly maximize your choices.

Once you recognize that there is no "devine plan", however, you realize that the future is of our own making and our own making alone.

Humanity has no master and it owes no "devotion" to anyone. I honestly can't concieve of a more optimistic statement than that. :)


Have any of you grappled with similar struggles?

How have you resolved them?

By realizing that, in the end, my opinions pale in comparison with the objective truth.

It doesn't matter what I "want" to believe, the evidence is overwhelming and I had better accept it or live a lie.

Frankly, I can't even understand coming to any other conclusion. Why people would want to abandon their freedom and subject themselves to the arbitrary dictates of "faith" is beyond me.

To me, religion, doesn't make sense. I want to live the best life I can and that means being as honest with myself as possible so that I can make rational and informed choices.

Anything else is a waste of time.

[Eleutherios]

Originally posted by Cheung [email protected] 7 2006, 06:23 PM
To reject any sort of supreme being outright, to me at least, is to believe that we are nothing more than sum of our genetics, our environment (which is determined in large part by the genetics of those around us), and of the chemical reactions that occur inside of us. To believe that is to believe that these factors entirely control us, that choice cannot therefore truly exist, and that existence must consequently be meaningless.
Like it or not, all your choices are dictated by purely physical things: your genetics, your brain structure, your previous experiences, any chemical drugs you might have ingested, etc. Is that a bad thing? I can't think of any other factors I would want to play a part in making my choices. What is "free will"? People like to think that there's some kind of invisible soul which is making decisions independent of these factors, but I can't for the life of me figure out what factors this "soul" would base its decisions on. Some kind of random number generator?

There is no instrinsic purpose to a rock, or an electron, or a supernova, or life itself, because purpose is a human construct. Purpose only exists in your head. But the fact that there is no intrinsic meaning in life is nothing to be upset about. Why would you want to have some kind of predetermined purpose to fulfill? Isn't it much better to have the freedom to define the purpose of your own life?

[Ol' Dirty]

In life, there are two types of realities; the material and the interperative. We, as animals, were granted the gift of evolutionary dominance through sentience (the ability to sense and change our enviroment) and sapience (the ability to question our enviroment). Through these traits, we have the capability of making tools, buildings, and even beautiful artwork. Also, we have the greatest gift of all: hapiness. We are the only creatures on the planet who can emote! We can feel emotions of all types; love, anger, fear, and sadness. We are special, for we are the only known creaturse that can really live, and I plan living life to its fucking fullest!

Bottom line; just do whatever feels good!

Drink up, man; it's the only life you've got.

[Disciple of Prometheus]

Originally posted by Cheung [email protected] 7 2006, 06:23 PM
I do not believe that any supreme being that would exist is capable of being analysed or understood by humanity and that any rational and scientific analysis I know of precludes the existence of one, but the idea that there is nothing beyond us scares the fuck out of me: To reject any sort of supreme being outright, to me at least, is to believe that we are nothing more than sum of our genetics, our environment (which is determined in large part by the genetics of those around us), and of the chemical reactions that occur inside of us. To believe that is to believe that these factors entirely control us, that choice cannot therefore truly exist, and that existence must consequently be meaningless.


Those a natural feelings when being approached with the truth, people feel like their life means nothing is there, and there is no hereafter or some god/ess watching down on them, but how often do you think about god? How often does the lay person even think about religious stuff at all? Truth is most of the populace doesn't think about stuff, they live there lives, so if god doesn't exist how would this change that? Why couldn't you live your life, for you and your loved one's, and enjoy life?

The common misconception is that no god equals no purpose, but our purpose is to live, thus is the same for all animals. Do animals think about some "supreme," being? No, do they live a meaningless lives, no. God is nothing more than the emotional crutch, and crying shoulder, of the populace.

Indulgence is the key to a happy life, love and hate, friends, and company, those are the true meanings, to life.

[Cult of Reason]

but the idea that there is nothing beyond us scares the fuck out of me

Are you a statist?

[rouchambeau]

Belief shouldn't be about what scares the fuck out of you. It should be about what you think is justified and true.

[RevMARKSman]

I think the negativity of having no purpose or no afterlife stems from humans' desire to know things. If one dies, and one no longer exists, no longer can sense, then there is nothing more to know, nothing more to find out. That idea scares most people. The idea of death in itself scares most people (including me)--they seem to grapple with the concept that someday they won't exist. What happens in the brain after it stops working? We seem to separate the concept of "self" from the things our brain feeds us that constitutes ourselves as living beings. We separate our brains from ourselves as a result of being afraid of death (brain death). It's just the concept of death without afterlife that is scary to most.
Religious beliefs give them hope that they will still be able to sense the world around them and investigate after death--or at least, sense SOMETHING.

[cenv]

I do not believe that any supreme being that would exist is capable of being analysed or understood by humanity and that any rational and scientific analysis I know of precludes the existence of one, but the idea that there is nothing beyond us scares the fuck out of me: To reject any sort of supreme being outright, to me at least, is to believe that we are nothing more than sum of our genetics, our environment (which is determined in large part by the genetics of those around us), and of the chemical reactions that occur inside of us. To believe that is to believe that these factors entirely control us, that choice cannot therefore truly exist, and that existence must consequently be meaningless.
Yeah. That's precisely why there are still so many theists around. At first, it really is quite scary to realize that we have one life, and once we die everything "just stops". People refuse to believe this, and turn to ideas that are supposed to defy logic yet be logical at the same time. Atheism seems "unnatural" to people precisely because what you're describing is scary, and theists use this to their advantage. Yes, it's very comforting to believe that we will exist eternally, that we are more than what science tells us we are, and that there's a jolly old man up in the clouds that actually cares about us, but is it logical at all?


Have any of you grappled with similar struggles?
As a matter of fact, yes. I was told there was a God and accepted this for many years. Then I started to think for myself about how logical theism really was. The conclusion I came to at first was disconcerting, because I was so used to the idea that there was a God and "life after life". I never really thought "hmm... what if there's nothing after we die?"


How have you resolved them?
It comes down to this: would you rather live your life under an enourmous illusion, or accept the facts no matter how uncomfortable they may seem at frist and live your life without the aforementioned illusion which will threaten your ability to think rationally? It definitely took some getting used to, but in the end I chose to go with logic and believe the latter.

[Phalanx]

This is kind of straying off topic, but...

One of the major reasons I became an atheist was when I heard that scientists are getting quite closer to figuring out what causes life. From what I understood, their hypothesis has something to do with basically the soil and the clay content of the soil. I forgot what happens exactly, but I think RNA forms out of this mixture.

That's my two cents.

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

I used to be scared when thinking about what is there after we die. But thats because it really hard for us to accept our own mortality. We want desperately for it not to be true, we cling to whatever says so even if its the case that we have to put our rationality on hold.

But, i think you should take comfort in the fact that you can do whatever you want and there is no chance of going to hell. You wont be aware of anything at all.

When faced with that or the chance that god doesnt like me enough to let me into heaven and sends me to hell, where you could spend an eternity of pain and torment and blah blah blah.

Its what religions say to keep you on the straight and norrow.

[RevMARKSman]

I think it's very hard for humans to grasp the idea that we will not be aware of anything at all. We want to keep investigating, finding things out, knowing. I think that's why people put so much faith in what seems to most an extremely illogical concept.

For me it's even harder because I feel that everyone is going to heaven (assuming there is a God) and to choose between believing that and assuming I won't be aware of anything is a really easy choice. I want hope.

[encephalon]

fuck hope. We've been running on hope for the past few millenia. Now's the time for truth, no matter how much of a bitter taste it leaves in your mouth.

[RedAnarchist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 10:32 AM
I used to be scared when thinking about what is there after we die. But thats because it really hard for us to accept our own mortality. We want desperately for it not to be true, we cling to whatever says so even if its the case that we have to put our rationality on hold.

But, i think you should take comfort in the fact that you can do whatever you want and there is no chance of going to hell. You wont be aware of anything at all.

When faced with that or the chance that god doesnt like me enough to let me into heaven and sends me to hell, where you could spend an eternity of pain and torment and blah blah blah.

Its what religions say to keep you on the straight and norrow.
If you think about it, Hell would probably be better than Heaven, beacuse what is considered Heaven is what the religious consider "heavenly" - no homosexuals, no non-believers (of their religion), no communists, no real freedom, no equality etc. And Hell would probably be a place of freedom to do whatever you want.


Personally, i would rate heaven and hell as being at the same level as telling a little kid to be good or there'll be no christmas presents.

[EwokUtopia]

There are certain factors that must be remembered:

-Humans, Humanity and everything we know is an infinately small portion of the universe, therefore we are extremely tiny in comparison to the universe, that is to say, the highest existance of reality that science can proove at this state

-Science is subjective to the times. Ptolemy was considered a great scientist in his day, but even the simplest person today knows much more of the universe than he did, therefore it is inevitable that the "science" of today will be disproven by other studies by smarter people in the future...if humanity has a future that is

-All people die. Identity is subjective to life. You had no identity before birth as who you are now, and the same goes from death.

-Time is something of an illusion...A way for the universe to play itself out. Before the universe was there, there was no time. Time sprang forth from the timeless. it is merely an illusion, all moments are current, we arent born yet, we live in the moment, and we are all already dead, the "present" is just a state of mind.

-All of the universe sprang forth from the same thing, therefore everything is made of the same stuff, and our existance is just one of many possibilities.

-"Intelligence" in humanity is not due to our brains, but rather our toungues and our thumbs. We create tools and make our lives easier, and talk with eachother. If nobody ever talked to you, you would know about as much about the world as any animal. You are an animal.

-There is existance after death in as much as there is existance before birth. I forget what this existance was like, but then again, I also forget what it was like to learn my first language, and therefore I forget what it feels like to be cast into the name, identity, language, and society of which i base my life around. This is not coincidental. The learning of the specifics of human life (Ie names, relations, languages, culture, etc) forces out the knowledge of the eternal existance we have, and our connection to everything else.

-Many religions in the past have tried to define this concept as an omnipotant, omnicient superbeing, and while they started out peacefully and on the right track, men and their egos and specifics corrupted this vision of the eternal into a superhero who will save everyone if they pray and follow the rules. The understanding of the eternal and ultimate reality has been corrupted by theology into stories about heavenly superheroes battling against hellish supervillains, and the connection everything has to the identity has been degrated to the concept that only humans have souls, and therefore are allowed to live their lives as who they are after they die.

-Atheism, being the other extreme, denies the existance of anything beyond ourselves, which seems rather unlikely, because reality and existance in general doesnt really make much sence. Why must everything exist the way it does? or even at all? Atheism leaves too many unanswerable questions to our limited understanding of science, as percieved through our senses. Both sense and language must be forgotten to understand anything besides our little existance on this rock.

Therefore, it is these reasons which have led me to adopt a Pantheistic approach to my understanding of everything, which of course I do not claim to have, but rather I have a feel for a clue for a limited understanding of anything. I believe that not only does everything stem from one place, but it is sustained by that force, and will eventually return to it. As to what that force is, you could say god, you could say brahma, you could say alot of words, but nothing really describes it, and naming it runs the danger of personification of it, which makes the concept of ultimate realities and alter-life existance into stories of superheroes to contain the masses. I do not profess it as a religion, nor do i have or want any prophet's, guru's, messiah's, disciples, followers, or anything that runs the risk of making my own personal understanding into a religion. Everyone needs to think to themselves and come up with their own understanding of everything (for lack of a better word), because it can not be taught in words.

[EwokUtopia]

There is my statement against religion and atheism

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

-Humans, Humanity and everything we know is an infinately small portion of the universe, therefore we are extremely tiny in comparison to the universe, that is to say, the highest existance of reality that science can proove at this state

And we know this thanks to science.


-Science is subjective to the times. Ptolemy was considered a great scientist in his day, but even the simplest person today knows much more of the universe than he did, therefore it is inevitable that the "science" of today will be disproven by other studies by smarter people in the future...if humanity has a future that is

Ptolemy was not a scientist. The scientific method had not been invented in his period. This is the same sort of silliness as saying Jesus was a communist.


-All people die. Identity is subjective to life. You had no identity before birth as who you are now, and the same goes from death.

Hence reincarnation = bunk.


-Time is something of an illusion...A way for the universe to play itself out. Before the universe was there, there was no time. Time sprang forth from the timeless. it is merely an illusion, all moments are current, we arent born yet, we live in the moment, and we are all already dead, the "present" is just a state of mind.

Babble. Time is a discrete dimension, entropy proves this.


-All of the universe sprang forth from the same thing, therefore everything is made of the same stuff, and our existance is just one of many possibilities.

A tautology. Matter comes in many different forms, from elements to compounds to even wierd things like neutron stars.


-"Intelligence" in humanity is not due to our brains, but rather our toungues and our thumbs. We create tools and make our lives easier, and talk with eachother. If nobody ever talked to you, you would know about as much about the world as any animal. You are an animal.

The first half of your statement is wrong - our brains evolved in combination with our hands and vocal systems, they are not independant from each other.
The second half is yet another statement of the obvious.


-There is existance after death in as much as there is existance before birth. I forget what this existance was like, but then again, I also forget what it was like to learn my first language, and therefore I forget what it feels like to be cast into the name, identity, language, and society of which i base my life around. This is not coincidental. The learning of the specifics of human life (Ie names, relations, languages, culture, etc) forces out the knowledge of the eternal existance we have, and our connection to everything else.

Define "existance" and then prove it.


-Atheism, being the other extreme, denies the existance of anything beyond ourselves, which seems rather unlikely, because reality and existance in general doesnt really make much sence. Why must everything exist the way it does? or even at all?

Atheism only denies the existance of deities. It does nothing more than this.

[EwokUtopia]

Great, I deny the existance of deities too. They are a fiction. I acknowledge the existance of something indescribable that i feel surrounding me and everything else, and I also acknowledge humanities lack of knowledge. Todays science will be tommorows hogwash, or do you really think we are at a point in history where humankind is infallible? I know ptolemy wasnt a scientist, but he was the archaic equivelent, science will be replaced eventually as well by something more accurate and knowing. Dont put too much faith in telescopes and microscopes. They all require uses of our sences, and things do not simply exist to be percieved. Indeed, many things exist that we cant percieve with our sences (but we can with technology that follows the same basic principals as our senses). Do you not think that there are things that even our greatest machines cant percieve? Discect a human brain for me, and find a memory. or find consciousness. Anyways, my point is a guess, theres something out there. I take inspiration from various different beliefs throughout history, especially Sufism, Hare Krishna, Buddhism, and Wicca, but ultimately, I hold my own unique beliefs. Label me if you must, but there are questions that neither you, nor anybody can truthfully answer, because our minds are very small in a very big universe. And yet, we are a part of that universe. If nothing else, i have come to fnd that the meaning of my life is to seek beauty and love in all things, as I believe humanities role in this is to be the eyes of the great existance to which everything is a part. These are my beliefs, I respect yours, all I ask is the same in return.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by EwokUtopia
These are my beliefs, I respect yours, all I ask is the same in return.

That sounds like a "fair deal"...but what if "my beliefs" (based on scientific knowledge) are actually true while "your beliefs" are obvious nonsense?

Am I or is anyone "required" to "respect" what is clearly worthy only of derision?

Lots of people believe lots of idiotic stuff; on what grounds do their idiotic beliefs "deserve respect"?

So we won't "hurt their feelings"??? :lol:

Some beliefs are fairly harmless; parents always believe their newborn infants look really great, for example. Who am I to disagree? :lol:

Other beliefs have been historically demonstrated to be extremely harmful...so much so that "respecting" such beliefs amounts to collaboration with some very evil shit. :o

A plea to "respect my beliefs" is empty without some kind of truth-judgment as to whether or not "my beliefs" are worthy of respect.

I am not aware of any superstitious beliefs that are worthy of respect. Every one I've ever run across has either been a self-evident howling absurdity or, far worse, an invitation to atrocity.

Pantheism is no exception.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/223.gif

[Publius]

My advice is to read Camus.

Absurdism/Existentialism allows a person to keep meaning (Whatever meaning he likes) and confront a meaningless universe.

Read up on Camus.

[emma_goldman]

I don't think there's necessarily nothing but I think that human beings aren't capable of saying exactly what there is. I reject religion because it is not based on fact but blind faith and dated scripture. Hard proof is needed. Maybe we will never know for sure. Maybe we won't know until we're dead. Overall, the religions of our day can not explain whatever will happen but just because we digress from them doesn't mean that we believe in nothing, such as a nihilist.