Atheists, smarter than religious people

real life wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:
real life wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
While I don't mind the distinction of one who is without god, but who at the same time doesn't haggle over the possibility of a god, I don't see it that way at all. They invented god from the imagination, simply because their emotions, or reasoning, told them there has to be one. An assertion without foundation. I don't need evidence to reject such a fiction totally.

I can accept that you don't need evidence for your rejection. However, do you have evidence of the rest of your claim? Specifically that God was invented from the imagination of emotional people without reason?

Do you have evidence it wasn't?

I tried for several years to find belief within myself. Lived and breathed church and Bible until many folks expected I would become a minister and were surprised years later, when I did not. I simply could not dupe myself.

It was your claim.....not mine. I take that as a no. You cannot provide evidence of what you are claiming.

The evidence is particularly in the religious inability to produce evidence, even with thousands of years to do so.

So, an argument from silence? That's it?

Again, I ask , what kind of evidence are you referring to?

Do you not think it absurd to expect 'natural' evidence of the 'supernatural'?

I expect more than your word for it.

That's a reasonable response.

There's probably nobody's word you would take for it, is there?

So it is left to you.

Since it is obvious that you won't likely find 'natural' proof of 'supernatural' or 'spiritual' things, you'll have to take a different approach.

I suggest that you test for yourself.

Prayer is an excellent way to do this.

For instance, if you want to know if the God of the Bible answers prayer, there is a simple (though not necessarily easy) way to find out.

1. Investigate and find under what condition(s) the God of the Bible says He will answer prayer.

2. Be certain that you are meeting said condition(s).

3. Pray (talk, listen and ask) specifically and regularly to God about your matter.

4. Do not add additional restrictions, conditions, etc to your prayer (or the answer that you are asking for), that are not found in the Bible.

While not strictly scientific (since the conditions will not be able to be duplicated and re-tested), the result should be enough to provide a satisfactory result.

0 Replies

Oh, yes he does,

and a nice old fashioned Chianti.

0 Replies

Re: Atheists, smarter than religious people

real life wrote:

hephzibah wrote:
real life wrote:
hephzibah wrote:
Cyracuz wrote:
Danish scientist Helmuth Nyborg concludes that this is indeed the case after a survey he conducted recently.

Now, this is also a guy who has stated that he's an atheist, and not neutral about religion, but hostile to it. Still, I figured this might make for some heated discussions

I was unable to provide a link in english. If I find one I'll let you know.

Well really... how smart can you be if you are willing to buy into a theory about some fairy tale "God" sitting on the edge of his "throne" waiting to hear your every call and answer your every prayer just because you are "special"? Religious people don't think for themselves. They let others tell them what they should think, what they should say, how they should act, and so on. You don't have to be smart at all to do that. Shoot... my dog is probably smarter than that even.................

.............Though I do tend to think now that religion can have a bit more of a "dumbing up" effect than atheism, simply because of the brainwashing involved.

Really?

So how smart must one be to follow your example by taking cheap potshots at others, and comparing them with dogs, calling them 'brainwashed' etc.?

You must be brilliant. What stunning intellect.

Heh... apparently your intellect isn't too far from mine... eh real life?

However, had you actually taken the time to read the my next post instead of jumping on your wanna be high horse you would have seen that I did not intend what I was saying as a potshot towards anyone in particular.

Once again religious defensiveness rears it's ugly head... further proving my point.

Thanks real life.

Yes, I read it. (Did you not notice I quoted from it?)

Even while claiming in the second post 'I really didn't mean to demean....' you couldn't resist adding the 'brainwashing' accusation to the dog comparison in the first post.

My question was, how does taking potshots (which they were , even if you claim they weren't aimed at any particular individual) give any credence to your claim that 'religious folks don't think for themselves' while you are parroting trash talking points?

How does pulling others down lift you up in any way?

Well... real life... I wasn't pulling anyone down. I was stating my opinion. This is a forum, people are allowed to do that. Right? The statements I made were not intended toward you, however it almost seems as though you are offended and feel it was some sort of indirect slight on my part. Never the less, to answer your question pulling others down does not lift me up. Actually, to be totally honest here it does nothing for me either way. What I said doesn't make me feel bad either. I don't regret what I said. I am speaking based out of what I have experienced through christianity. What I saw and lived and watched others live for 17 years of my life.

Simply put that is the majority putting on a plastic smile every sunday as if it were part of their wardrobe, walking around with a bunch of pat answers to the things they don't understand or know, and believing every word that is said by that most holy man behind the pulpit, simply because he said it. The icing on the cake is that when sunday is over so is the plastic smile. They go back to life as it was, unchanged, take every opportunity they get to tell someone they are going to hell for not believing in "god", or how they "ought to be" living their life, then pat each other on the back the next sunday at how many people they "witnessed" to that week.

Are all "christians" like this? Absolutely not. I've met some very sincere, kind, compassionate, gentle "christians".There's even a few here. Yet the majority are not. They are self-serving, self-righteous, hypocrites whose main concern in life seems to be how to get "god" to bless them more. Guess what real life. I was one of those "christians" too. For quite a while actually. I'm not stating anything that I haven't seen myself having fault in as well. We're all human after all. Trying to find our way through this maze of life.

However, that does not excuse in any way the things that "christians" are doing in the name of their "god". The lies. The double standards. The hypocrisy they practice while being in total denial that THEY could ever do anything hypocritical... I could keep going... but I'll stop there. So, no real life "pot shots" don't give credence to what I say. The nice thing is though, they don't have to. Anyone who has eyes and is standing outside of "christianity" doesn't need to hear what I have to say. They can see it for themselves. The only ones who can't are the very ones I'm calling brainwashed.

Go figure...

0 Replies

Hi hephzibah,
How y'all been? Commercial's over, back to South Park!

0 Replies

Cyracuz,

I congratulate you on your music analogy.

Agnosticism as coined by Huxley is widely seen as an attempt to remain neural in the science versus religion raging after Darwin. This dispute has been modified by the nondualistic principles involved in modern physics the casuality being the epistemology of naive realism. Because modern physics is intellectually challenging it is little wonder that some cannot appreciate this move, eventhough they are content to utilise the fruits of modern physics such as computers on this thread.

0 Replies

Remain neural in science versus religion......thoughtful!
Computers are fruits......apple?

I'm just teasing ya!

0 Replies

Cyracus wrote:

Quote:

Non-dualism is not a belief. It is a perspective. The belief is that viewing the world soley as a non-dualistic unity results in a more harmonic existene.

Read what you wrote here againand try to realize how much you are torturing logic and the language to avoid acknowledging that non-dualism IS A BELIEF SYSTEM. Fact is, considering what you call "its perspective"how can it be anything else but a belief system?

In any caselike the atheists who believe there are no gods but who refuse to recognize that their atheism is merely another belief systemI laugh at the notion that it is anything elseand despair that there are otherwise intelligent people who are so intentionally blind.

Quote:

Judging from the personalities of those who follow this practice and those who don't I am inclined to say that this is indeed so.

Yeah! And a very appropriate sentiment to be expressed in a thread devoted to an atheist asserting that atheists are more intelligent than other people!

Is there no end to the denial????

0 Replies

Ossobucco wrote:

Quote:

Oh, yes he does,

Oh no he doesn't!

I have explained why I say that many timesand will do so again here.

In my opinion, in a religious/philosophical discussion context, a "belief" is merely a guess about something unknowndisguised with the word "belief" so that it does not have to be acknowledged as a guess.

I often guess about unknown things (if I feel I have sufficient evidence upon which to base a meaningful guessor occasionally where I want to make a non-meaningful guess)BUT I ALWAYS IDENTIFY OR OTHERWISE ACKNOWLEDGE IT AS A GUESS AND NEVER TRY TO GIVE IT GREATER GRAVITY BY DESIGNATING IT A BELIEF.

I do not do believing!

Quote:

and a nice old fashioned Chianti

You folks ought to be concerned with what wine to serve with "crow"and then put the information to use.

0 Replies

My last reponse to rl may have been too hard to find in the last post I made. It was an a2k glitch. But, this really is my final post here, at least for the time being. This was what I wrote:

I tried for several years to find belief within myself. Lived and breathed church and Bible until many folks expected I would become a minister and were surprised years later, when I did not. I simply could not dupe myself.

So, rl's suggestion only works on those predisposed to belief without anything real to go on.

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

My last reponse to rl may have been too hard to find in the last post I made. It was an a2k glitch. But, this really is my final post here, at least for the time being. This was what I wrote:

I tried for several years to find belief within myself. Lived and breathed church and Bible until many folks expected I would become a minister and were surprised years later, when I did not. I simply could not dupe myself.

So, rl's suggestion only works on those predisposed to belief without anything real to go on.

What you seem unable to fathom, Edgar, is that "belief" is not a one-way street. You obviously are "predisposed to belief"...because you "believe" there are no gods involved in the REALITY of existence.

When is that finally going to penetrate? Take a look at your signature line...and reflect on it.

0 Replies

Frank

I am curious; what, would you say, is not a belief system?

I can agree that what we say we will accomplish by practicing non-dualism is a belief, in a very weird sense of the word. We believe it will grant us a more harmonic existence and fewer illusions.

But when I say that "up" and "down" are dualistic notions, and non-dualism is all about realizing that, how can you argue that this is belief?

Are you saying that we believe that there is no up and down in objective reality? That this claim is impossible to prove?

This claim is in no way similar to the belief that there is a god or that there isn't. Right and left, as you well know, are only meaningful terms when a location is given from where right and left should be defined, and the same is true of up and down.
To see this doen't require belief, nor does it require proof. It is a perspective, not at all like saying "there is no god" which is an opinion, and would require proof.
Do you see the difference? Theism and atheism offers opinions. Non-dualism offers considerations.
It is not a belief that it is we who assign meaning to the concepts we invent. That is a fact.

0 Replies

That's your spin, Frank, to fit your own preconceived notions. To which I reply, respectfully, you are full of ****.

0 Replies

Oh crap! You say toMAYto, and I say toMAHto. I don't think that anyone really knows, one way or the other. And what's more, I don't give a ****.

I would suspect though, that the more intellectual amongst us, who has given this entire brouhaha some thought, would tend to be smarter than those who accept any belief system, be it religious or political, wholesale.

I think that people who believe everything that is written in a newspaper, or pontificated by a reporter on TV, and does not question, are not terribly bright. The main thing, IMO is to question everything that you hear, see, or read, if it is of any importance to you.

Whatever the conclusions that each person has come up with, so be it. It really does not matter to me. As long as no one is burning crosses on my lawn, blowing themselves up in front of me, or being obnoxious to me because of my beliefs, it is fine with me.

0 Replies

Cyracuz wrote:

Quote:

I am curious; what, would you say, is not a belief system?

Don't mean to get to "Eastern" on you, Cyracuzbut those things that are not belief systemsare not belief systems.

An apple qualifiesas does French toastand nylon stockings also.

Quote:

I can agree that what we say we will accomplish by practicing non-dualism is a belief, in a very weird sense of the word. We believe it will grant us a more harmonic existence and fewer illusions.

But when I say that "up" and "down" are dualistic notions, and non-dualism is all about realizing that, how can you argue that this is belief?

I am not arguing that individual pieces of the non-dualistic belief system are beliefsany more than I am arguing that the parts of Christianity that talk about a place called Rome are beliefs.

When you finally open your eyes to the fact that non-dualism is a belief system, Cyracuzthe question will answer itself. If you do not open your eyes to itnothing I say will ever make a difference.

Quote:

Are you saying that we believe that there is no up and down in objective reality? That this claim is impossible to prove?

No.

Quote:

This claim is in no way similar to the belief that there is a god or that there isn't.

Correct. Now if you can grok that it also has no impact on whether or not non-dualism is a belief systemyou will be on your way to a great revelation.

Quote:

Right and left, as you well know, are only meaningful terms when a location is given from where right and left should be defined, and the same is true of up and down.
To see this doen't require belief, nor does it require proof. It is a perspective, not at all like saying "there is no god" which is an opinion, and would require proof.

I agree. And please see my comment above re the relevance of this information.

Quote:

Do you see the difference?

Yes!

Quote:

Theism and atheism offers opinions. Non-dualism offers considerations.

Horseshyt! All three are belief systems. Please note Edgar's reply to my comment that his brand of atheism is a belief system. Do you see how he cannot acknowledge that it is? That, my guess, is easy for you to seeunless you see some advantage in pretending that you don't, which I also guess you will not do.

You are stonewalling in the same way.

For some reasonanyone outside the theistic belief system really does not want to acknowledge that his/her belief system is a belief system.

Quote:

It is not a belief that it is we who assign meaning to the concepts we invent. That is a fact.

The concepts you invent ARE the belief system. That is a fact. Please get it, Cyracuz. Please!

0 Replies

Quote:

The concepts you invent ARE the belief system. That is a fact. Please get it, Cyracuz. Please!

That I can understand. But ALL concepts are invented. Not just the ones about non-dualism. Even such a concept as "car" is an invented concept, and a car consists of other invented conceps, such as wheels, axels and many other things.

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Oh crap! You say toMAYto, and I say toMAHto. I don't think that anyone really knows, one way or the other. And what's more, I don't give a ****.

I would suspect though, that the more intellectual amongst us, who has given this entire brouhaha some thought, would tend to be smarter than those who accept any belief system, be it religious or political, wholesale.

I think that people who believe everything that is written in a newspaper, or pontificated by a reporter on TV, and does not question, are not terribly bright. The main thing, IMO is to question everything that you hear, see, or read, if it is of any importance to you.

Whatever the conclusions that each person has come up with, so be it. It really does not matter to me. As long as no one is burning crosses on my lawn, blowing themselves up in front of me, or being obnoxious to me because of my beliefs, it is fine with me.

Phoenix

this is NOT an exercise in "I am right; you are wrong"without much more complex, and exceedingly important, implications.

Damn near all of the non-theistic community realizes that the excesses of theism have got to be containedand that the theistic community has absolutely no idea of how to accomplish that. Fact is, it is becoming more and more apparent that that goal will never proceed from theism reining in its radicals.

It is my contention that the fight cannot successfully be won by proceeding against Islam, for instancewithout also waging battle against Christianity, as another for instance. And in fact, proceeding against theism will never achieve successwithout waging battle against all other forms of so-called "beliefs."

In any case, a war against one set of beliefs by groups espousing other "beliefs" is a joke.

The non-theistic community has got to divorce itself from "beliefs" altogether.or give up the battle.

Insofar as atheism indulges in "beliefs" that there are no godsno afterlifeno souland all the other things that form the core of much of the atheistic belief systemit has to be fought. Insofar as some atheists are trying to sell the snake oil that their atheism stops with "I lack a belief in gods" so I qualify as an atheistit is necessary to see that nonsense for what it iseither a flat out lieor abject hypocrisyboth necessitated by a desire to gain a debating advantage and nothing more.

The "I lack a belief in gods" position simply is better expressed as "agnosticism" or "non-theism." To make it the atheistic position is to do a disservice to the position; to the word "atheism"; and to the fight to contain the excesses of theism radicalism.

There's much more to the lecturebut I'll stop here for now.

0 Replies

Cyracuz wrote:

Quote:
The concepts you invent ARE the belief system. That is a fact. Please get it, Cyracuz. Please!

That I can understand. But ALL concepts are invented. Not just the ones about non-dualism. Even such a concept as "car" is an invented concept, and a car consists of other invented conceps, such as wheels, axels and many other things.

To me this sounds like a Christian saying: "Because God wants us to have free will" or "Faith is the ingredient you are missing."

Get it, Cyracuz. You are so close!

0 Replies

Est autem fides credere quod nondum vides; cuius fidei merces est videre quod credis. Sententia nova
Faith is to believe what you do not see; the reward of this faith is to see what you believe.
(St. Augustine, Sermones)

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

Hi hephzibah,
How y'all been? Commercial's over, back to South Park!

Hey there Chumly. Been doing well. Smile

Thanks for asking. How have you been?

0 Replies

Quote:

"Because God wants us to have free will" or "Faith is the ingredient you are missing."

These are insubstantial claims with no merit whatsoever.

Unlike the claim that all concepts humans relate to are representations of whatever we want to discuss. That is a claim that can be verified by countless examples.

If the cocepts we invent are belief systems, then law is a belief system. Philosophy, science, just about anything we can say something about. Isn't that taking it a bit too far?

0 Replies

Atheists, smarter than religious people

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know