LOL! You could try hitting your screen with a hammer

__________________
"I fully comprehended the power of the human mind at the exact moment I came to the realization that I'm totally insane and have no idea what I'm talking about."

You guys are hilarious.

It appears that we talked past each other with our last two posts so that each of us appear to have misinterpreted what the other was saying to a large extent. When I said there was no such thing as "materialism", I was doing so from the paradigm of how we as scientists work. "Materialism" is a philosophy and not a scientific paradigm.





Depends on how one defines "atheist", but I do understand what you're saying and I do agree if you define "atheist" as one whom believes there is no deity or deities. However, please realize that some others define "atheist" differently and, as a matter of fact, we had a rather lengthy discussion on the various definitions here several months ago.




Again, here's where we appear to have another disconnect in understanding where each of us was coming from.





Yes it has been related to consciousness simply because we know that different lobes of the brain that react differently depending on which senses are being stimulated. IOW, when you think, different lobes will be involved depending on what stimulus you a reacting to and which emotions are being affected. Of course the e.e.g. doesn't tell us what you are thinking.





But your use of terms didn't state it as an opinion but as if it were a fact. Please reread your previous post and I think you'll see what I mean. There's a difference between saying "God is..." versus "I think God is...".




If it's "unknown", then how do you know it exists? What evidence do you have to even suggest that a deity or deities exist? IOW, since you have an opinion that there's a god, what evidence do you base it on? If none, then why do you have such an opinion? If I were to say that the world was coming to an end tomorrow, wouldn't it be quite appropriate for you to ask me why I think it's coming to an end tomorrow?




Because, like yourself and myself, atheists often have opinions that cannot be verified one way or another.



Two final points. One, I'm not an atheist. Two, if we cannot discuss such things without getting personal and using slam terminology, then I think it best to just ignore each other. It appears to me that we misunderstood each other, and it is a shame that communication is not such a perfect exercise.

Anyhow, shalom & have a nice weekend.

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein

Yes, I think we did talk past each other. I was starting to get frustrated. If you were also getting frustrated then I'm sorry.


Where can I find this lengthy discussion?


I understand this. The only reason we believe that thinking is occurring in other people is because we know that we are thinking. Materialism doesn't predict that thoughts exist because thoughts are made up of concepts and concepts are not material in nature. Since materialists know that they are thinking they have to try to explain it in a material way(This is one of those matter of the gaps beliefs I was talking about). So far, I haven't heard a good enough explanation to convince me that minds are material and I highly doubt that such an explanation will ever be presented to me. I believe that there is a brain(material)/mind(immaterial) relationship. This is one of the reasons I believe there is more to nature than just matter. If there could be an immaterial aspect to my material brain then it is possible that all matter has a immaterial side to it. Kind of like the mind and the brain are two sides of the same coin. Also, My mind is controlling the behavior of my body. If I will my hand to move it moves. That's basically what I was referring to by the laws of nature working in harmony together and how I believe God being behind it. All this suggests to me that there is something on the other side of matter controlling how matter behaves. It's kind of like all of matter is God's brain and/or body and what controls the behavior of matter is God's mind.


Sorry about that. I assumed you would know what I meant. Sometimes I get tired of saying I think and I believe but I'll try not assume things so much. It is a fact that God "IS" though. Well, maybe?


I meant it was unknown to science but I get what you're saying. Well, for me it is more like a bet then a strong conviction that there is a god. I look at the world and how I understand it. Something I understand is that this world came about either intentionally or it accidentally came about this way. I also understand that both options are unknown. So, I have to look at the world and ask myself,"Which option seems more likely? Which one would I bet on?" It's kind of like my own version of Pascal's wager. If I was told that the answer has been discovered, that it will be released tomorrow, and people were placing bets on it then I would put all my chips on this world being intentional.

Here is a thought experiment for you. Lets say someone presented an atheist, a scientist, and me with two pieces of paper. The two pieces of paper represents the universe in this experiment. One piece has just random nonsense on it and the other piece has the most intelligent masterpiece we have ever read on it. The scientist is asked if he can tell which one if either was written by a person and which one looks like it was just randomly typed. The scientist points out that the probability of either being typed randomly is the same and therefore science can't answer that question. The atheists is asked the same question and points out that the scientist showed that it is possible that both could be typed randomly and that he sees no reason to assume that someone wrote either. I'm asked the same question and I point out that the scientist is correct but unlike the atheist I have reasons to assume that the intelligent masterpiece was written by a person. I point out that it is very intelligible and that we learned a lot by studying what was written on it. I admit that I don't know that it was written by a person but If I had to bet on it then I would bet that it was written by a person. The atheists says that sounds like faith to him. I asked him why. He said that the scientist just proved that it was possible for it to be randomly typed and that science can't answer that question. So, my answer must be based on faith because it is unscientific. I point out to him that his answer was also based on faith because science can't answer the question and he did by assuming that they both were typed randomly. He says that it is not based on faith but a lack of faith in a person writing it. I point out that he does have faith that randomness wrote it though. He said that it is not faith but science and that the burden of proof is on me to prove that a writer exists. I tell him that the burden of proof is on both of us to prove our beliefs. He tells me that my belief is based on blind faith and his is based on science. I get offended and instead of reasoning together we both yell at each other for the rest of eternity.

Anyway, I look at the universe and see an intelligent masterpiece and atheists either believe it just appears that way or it isn't at all. Neither atheists or I know. They are placing their bets on no god and I'm placing my bet on a god. I get offended if they talk down to me. I don't like being accused of blind faith, of believing in the god of the gaps, of being unscientific, and telling me that the burden of proof is on me. These kind of things make me feel like they believe their position to be the intelligent one and mine is totally unreasonable. By your tone I felt like you were ridiculing me the same way. Maybe you were and maybe you weren't but that is why I've been getting a tone myself.


Why are you not an atheist?

I think I'm capable of not getting personal. It is hard but I think I'm capable. If you're offended I'm sorry. We misunderstood each other but I think we understand each other a little better now. So, peace and I would tell you to have a nice weekend yourself but the world "IS" coming to an end tomorrow!

__________________
"I fully comprehended the power of the human mind at the exact moment I came to the realization that I'm totally insane and have no idea what I'm talking about."

You can play too!

__________________
"I fully comprehended the power of the human mind at the exact moment I came to the realization that I'm totally insane and have no idea what I'm talking about."

I am not an atheist but iam very interested in gaining knowledge about it... I was wondering how does it feel to believe in no god. how does it feel to hav no religion. How does it feel when ur having a hard time and u dnt noe know who to turn to and who to pray to for help...?? If there was no god who created teh eartha nd the humans.. If the big bang created teh earth then who created the big bang?? this can go on but ill just leave there

I don't see how the two are mutually exclusive. It's true that atheism is reactionary, but it doesn't follow that it is unnatural.

I think mysticism would be much more popular.


Probably to both.

__________________
We do not fear the night, who have loved the stars so fondly.

First of all, sorry for the long delay. I'm glad we seem to understand each other better now.



I tried to find it but it's like looking for a needle in a haystack since it was part of another discussion, but I can't remember which. However, if you look up "atheism" at Dictionary.com, you'll note that there are different definitions. I'll return back to this a bit later on this post.




By chance have you read any of Baruch Spinoza's or Einstein's theologies? They pretty much tend to agree with your approach. If I were a theist, I also would gravitate in that direction.




I spliced these together, so I hope you don't mind.

First of all, sorry if it sounded as if I was ridiculing you but actually I wasn't. Trouble with posting is that it tends to be fairly impersonal and, since we can't read the person's expressions or body language, sometimes we may not have enough info to draw more correct conclusions.

As far as the above is concerned, yes I have gone through similar types of questioning many times over, and I came to the following conclusion: I don't know. As one whom delves rather heavily into Buddhist dharma, we are discouraged from basing beliefs without sufficient evidence, and guesswork is just that-- guesswork-- and we're discouraged from that as well.





The definition I use is that an "atheist" is one who believes there is no god. In my case, I don't believe there is a god or gods, but I don't believe that there's not either. IOW, I take a more agnostic position. I refer to myself as a "non-theist", which is a Buddhist term, that reflects a non-belief in a creator-god, but not a denial that there couldn't be. There's a bit more to the story if you'd want to hear it.



Haha! It's Tuesday and I'm still here! Or am I just dreaming? But if I'm dreaming, doesn't that mean I'm still here? I'm soooooo confused!

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein

No, I haven't read any of Baruch Spinoza's or Einstein's theologies. I came up with most of my ideas on my own.


Share your story please.


Tuesday isn't tomorrow. It is still today and as far as I can tell every day has been today ever since I was born.

__________________
"I fully comprehended the power of the human mind at the exact moment I came to the realization that I'm totally insane and have no idea what I'm talking about."

I'll give you the very condensed version, OK?

Religious faith and me have always been at war with each other since going back to when I was in high school (we used to meet in caves back then). I had and have a scientific orientation, and faith, since it's really not based on evidence per se, has always been difficult for me. And, over the years, I drifted from my fundamentalist Lutheran upbringing, through an agnostic period, into my wife's Catholicism, then to Judaism (where I still am), and into my study of Buddhism, which really got going starting back in 1999 while I was in Israel.

What makes Buddhism so appealing to me is that it encourages one not to accept any belief whatsoever without evidence, and that one should tend to go in the direction where the evidence takes them, which is also the general direction that science encourages us to take. And because I can incorporate this and still belong to my synagogue, I decided to stay put.

At my age, I don't think I may have enough time left to make any other changes.

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein