Does Religion Have a Place in the Future of Humankind?

What you call "religion" is really a particular kind of metaphorical thinking. In that sense, religious belief is an expression of how part of the brain processes certain kinds of information. If we didn't have it, we couldn't watch plays: all we'd see would be people walking around pretending to be someone else, a visit to the loony bin. We put value judgments on this experience in an attempt to differentiate one part of it from another (art "good"; religion "bad"; or vice versa). I notice from his various posts, for example, that Eryemil is very drawn to metaphoric thinking and so I would guess he has many religious thoughts which he keeps at bay by pretending to be an "agnostic." The roots of that word should make him think. We can't escape religious thought and our brain believes in it even if we don't.....

0 Replies

Botd,

are you substituting religion for spirituaity?

0 Replies

confusing religion with spirituality?
What is religion if not the accretion of spirituality? I don't think I'm confusing the two. I'm saying that belief is one form a certain way of thinking takes and that if we couldn't think that way we'd be brain damaged. I'm the sort of atheist who believes that religious constructs are attempts of making metaphoric sense of life, the same way that novels do. I think it's interesting that no one thinks of God as a painter, and the world his painting. [Toad]

0 Replies

brain, Welcome to a2k. I found your idea about brain very interesting; to relate it to metaphorical thinking that includes our ability to make sense out of plays. I'll have to think about god's painting. Wink

0 Replies

I feel you BOTD,
Plus your last statement really struck a nerve. Often, while in the act of girl watching, and commenting, a nearby female may turn her nose up and criticise me. My standard comeback, "Why is it that if I was in a musuem, appreciating and comment ing on art, I'm cultured, but when I'm appreciating my favorite artist God, you call me shallow or uncouth? And I'm dead serious. Cool

0 Replies

To just add another thought: if we were immortal, religion would become art to us, a merging of all the arts into one profound aesthetic experience. In that situation, being a Catholic or a Calvinist or a Buddhist, etc., would be like attending a Mahler symphony on one night and going to an exhibition of Matisse the next day. It's death that takes all the fun out of religion. I know, "fun" is a little flip, but it certainly does spoil it for me. I can no more stand to read the book "How We Die" which presents a horrifyingly literal account of human death as to think about it from a religious perspective: is there life after death, etc.. Both seem to me to be just banging your head against the wall in front of an implacable event.

0 Replies

Re: confusing religion with spirituality?

brainofthetoad wrote:

What is religion if not the accretion of spirituality? I don't think I'm confusing the two. I'm saying that belief is one form a certain way of thinking takes and that if we couldn't think that way we'd be brain damaged. I'm the sort of atheist who believes that religious constructs are attempts of making metaphoric sense of life, the same way that novels do. I think it's interesting that no one thinks of God as a painter, and the world his painting. [Toad]

Yeah...you atheists like your mirror counterparts, the theists, do that kind of believing. I guess it makes things simple for you all...and then you don't have to deal with acknowledging that you do not know the many things you "believe."

My guess: "believing" (whether performed by theists or atheists) is a complex issue...and probably has a lot more to do with ego and fear than many of the things theists and atheists guess about their "beliefs."

0 Replies

Quote:

Yeah...you atheists like your mirror counterparts, the theists, do that kind of believing. I guess it makes things simple for you all...and then you don't have to deal with acknowledging that you do not know the many things you "believe."

"You atheists like your mirror counterparts, the theists"? Why mirror counterparts? For atheists, there is no higher power. For theists, there is. That would be like me saying "You worshippers of God and your mirror counterparts, the worshippers of the devil." A rather large, dismissive, and ultimately rhetorical gesture.

"You don't have to deal with acknowledging that you do not know the many things you 'believe'"? The only sense this sentence makes is grammatical, especially since the whole point of what I wrote is that none of us, religious or not, can hope to know the many things we believe. Don't bore me.

0 Replies

brainofthetoad wrote:

Quote:
Yeah...you atheists like your mirror counterparts, the theists, do that kind of believing. I guess it makes things simple for you all...and then you don't have to deal with acknowledging that you do not know the many things you "believe."

"You atheists like your mirror counterparts, the theists"? Why mirror counterparts? For atheists, there is no higher power. For theists, there is. That would be like me saying "You worshippers of God and your mirror counterparts, the worshippers of the devil." A rather large, dismissive, and ultimately rhetorical gesture.

"You don't have to deal with acknowledging that you do not know the many things you 'believe'"? The only sense this sentence makes is grammatical, especially since the whole point of what I wrote is that none of us, religious or not, can hope to know the many things we believe. Don't bore me.

My intentions are not to bore you, boy.

If possible, I'd like to help you wake up.

Theists talk about the things they "believe."

Atheists talk about the things they "believe."

They just happen to "believe" different things.

And if all you can see is grammatical sense in what I said in the cited sentence...I suggest you are in over your head.

0 Replies

Of course, I'm in over my head. What's the point of learning to swim, otherwise. But you, my friend, are paddling on your rubber duck in the shallow part of the pool. "Believe" is a slippery word but that doesn't mean that it possesses all of its meanings at the same time. "I believe the Beatles are the best pop sound to come out of England" isn't the same as saying "I believe that there is one God, Allah, and that Mohammad is His prophet." As an atheist, I don't "believe" there is no God. Instead, I try to make sense of world in which I apprehend no presence of God. How you plan to help me think about this from anything you've so far said will be, I think, obvious to no one. You are merely brushing me away. But from what? Your own hard won beliefs? I have no intention of stealing them from you.

0 Replies

Quote, "As an atheist, I don't "believe" there is no God. Instead, I try to make sense of world in which I apprehend no presence of God." Well stated. Wink

0 Replies

brainofthetoad wrote:

Of course, I'm in over my head.

Good. We agree on something.

Quote:

What's the point of learning to swim, otherwise.

That was a pathetic follow-up to your acknowledgement.

Quote:

But you, my friend, are paddling on your rubber duck in the shallow part of the pool. "Believe" is a slippery word but that doesn't mean that it possesses all of its meanings at the same time.

Oh really.

And just what did it mean when you wrote: "I'm the sort of atheist who believes that religious constructs are attempts of making metaphoric sense of life, the same way that novels do?"

Quote:

"I believe the Beatles are the best pop sound to come out of England" isn't the same as saying "I believe that there is one God, Allah, and that Mohammad is His prophet."

Save that pap for when you talk to yourself.

I don't need the likes of you to explain the obvious.

And I'm really not interested in pretending that you are actually explaining yourself...when it is fairly obvious you are merely trying recover from your previous bullshyt.

Quote:

As an atheist, I don't "believe" there is no God.

The words non sequitur apply to that sentence....and in any case, I am not particularly interested in how you rationalize your silly atheism.
I commented on something you did mention you "believed."

Deal with that.

Quote:

Instead, I try to make sense of world in which I apprehend no presence of God.

I see. And then you start that "I believe" crap.

Quote:

How you plan to help me think about this from anything you've so far said will be, I think, obvious to no one.

I doubt you actually do much thinking...but it is interesting that you suppose that is what you are doing.

Quote:

You are merely brushing me away.

You are a newcomer who has apparently decided to "brush away" most of the people in this forum. You sound like a phony to me...so I'm treating you like one.

Quote:

But from what? Your own hard won beliefs?

I have no beliefs, jerk.

Quote:

I have no intention of stealing them from you.

As I said...I have none. But if I had, you don't sound like you are man enough to steal anything from me.

Now...if the pissing contest can finish...perhaps you have something to say that can be countered...and to which counter you will respond.

Okay?

0 Replies

Quote:

"You are a newcomer who has apparently decided to "brush away" most of the people in this forum. You sound like a phony to me...so I'm treating you like one."

Perhaps this forum needs someone who is unimpressed with your rancorous bullying. And allow me to point out that there never was a pissing contest until you came along and started voiding on what I posted, which no one but you has found offensive -- if you bother to read the responses, you'll see it's rather the opposite. If I'm a jerk, you're the town drunk, and I wish you would go and breathe hard on someone else.

0 Replies

Look, everyone, perhaps I don't belong in this forum and I'm happy to leave. I certainly didn't start posting with the hope of armwrestling Frank Apisa. I don't think anyone in any forum should be submitted to his kind of verbal abuse, and I also think that interesting conversations can come about when everyone has a reasonable sense of what the other person is talking about. Pushing someone up against the wall and making them define everything they say is not my idea of what forum participation is all about. If having to explain myself to Frank is a requirement for belonging to this forum, I'm happy to pass. Essentially, my interest is thinking about atheism as something more than the reductive statement "I don't believe in God." And, probably, this isn't the right place to pursue those thoughts. If anyone here would like to join me in a forum that is expressly about that, please email me [email protected], and we'll start one up! (And if someone has figured out what Frank is trying to ask me and wants to post it themselves, I'll respond. Just not to him.)

0 Replies

BOTT: I find this statement:

Quote:

As an atheist, I don't "believe" there is no God. Instead, I try to make sense of world in which I apprehend no presence of God.

Self-contradictory. You say in one part that you don't "'believe' there is no god", yet in the next sentence, you say that you don't perceive a God.

Logistically, I see no difference. "Not perceiving" a God leads you to the conclusion that there is no God...which is a belief. It's not the same as a theist's "belief"...but it's still a belief. I think that was the crux of Frank's remarks.

Then, his sentence: "You don't have to deal with acknowledging that you do not know the many things you 'believe'" has to do with that: he's saying that you're treating your belief that there is no God as fact, even though you have no proof of this.

In my experience(theist turned atheist for years, now recently agnostic), lack of evidence that there is a God does not equal evidence that there isn't a God...it just means there's insufficient evidence to decide.

I think it would be a shame if anyone decided to leave over these kinds of things, and wish we could all get over it somehow. I really wish both of you would/could communicate with out the use of inflammatory phrases.

Frank: I just started a topic about the word "belief", incidentally after re-reading some of our old debates. It's about your remark that the word is the cause of most of the world's problems, and is under Philosophy and Debate if you'd like to chime in. Until next time...

0 Replies

Yeah, lighten up Frank. I thought brain offered some interesting perspectives to this forum, and I for one appreciate what he brings. We all know how strongly you feel about this topic, but brain wasn't here to challenge you, and there's no need to belittle what he has to say.

0 Replies

Quote:

Self-contradictory. You say in one part that you don't "'believe' there is no god", yet in the next sentence, you say that you don't perceive a God. Logistically, I see no difference. "Not perceiving" a God leads you to the conclusion that there is no God...which is a belief. It's not the same as a theist's "belief"...but it's still a belief. I think that was the crux of Frank's remarks.

Let me put this another way, because I think we might be saying the same thing. Suppose I was color blind. All around me I find people who say they see color, there are books in the library purporting to explain color, and people obviously use color as a way of making sense of and of appreciating their world. In that situation, I would think the making the statement "I don't believe in color" would be a nonsensical act. Saying it doesn't help me explain the world any better: in fact in some ways it makes it harder for me to explain the world, because it suggests that most of the other people in the world are nuts or liars or both.

Now, let's apply to this to my own situation. I'm God blind. All around me I find people who say that they experience God's presence (forget "belief"!), feel guided by God, see God's will as manifested in many ways. Now, in the same way, I think the statement "I don't believe in God" is essentially nonsensical. What does it explain? As you yourself say, "lack of evidence that there is a God does not equal evidence that there isn't a God." That's true. But what I do have is evidence that I live in a world that is difference from that of the people for whom God is real. I'm not interested in thinking about whether God is real or whether God exists but about how to make my way in a world where I have no sense of the presence of God... just as I would if I were color blind, and had no sense of the reality of color. Is this any clearer? Is it really self-contradictory?

0 Replies

BOTT: Okay, we're making progress, but I'm still not sure I understand what this statement means:

Quote:

That's true. But what I do have is evidence that I live in a world that is difference from that of the people for whom God is real.

What "evidence" are you talking about? If you mean that 'their world' including God is different than yours, then you are taking a stance on the God issue, which contradicts this:

Quote:

I'm not interested in thinking about whether God is real or whether God exists but about how to make my way in a world where I have no sense of the presence of God... just as I would if I were color blind, and had no sense of the reality of color. Is this any clearer? Is it really self-contradictory?

Please explain further, because I think we're getting somewhere good here. Thanks.

0 Replies

Quote:

What "evidence" are you talking about? If you mean that 'their world' including God is different than yours, then you are taking a stance on the God issue

I'm talking about the same evidence that I would have if I were color blind: the fact that people show evidence that their lives are affected by and influenced by something that has no effect on me. I don't see how it follows that by observing this I'm "taking a stance" on the God issue, any more than the fact that I notice that other people are affected by color means I'm taking a stance on the Color issue. What you call "the God issue" is really a confrontational thing, in that "I don't believe in God" is a statement that only takes on meaning when dealing (abstractly or immediately) with people who do believe in God, and the meaning it takes on is mostly "**** off and leave me alone" -- not let's analyze this statement for its cogency. No?

0 Replies

BOTT: Okay, so your stance is that it(the question of God) just doesn't matter? I'm just not getting the point you're trying to communicate. Are you atheist? Agnostic? Theist? What's your position?

0 Replies

Does Religion Have a Place in the Future of Humankind?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know