|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
 Posted - 09/03/2007 : 07:15:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
| It may be that it satifies some deep seated emotional need for purpose or meaning. |
It may be that this is what causes global warming, too, |
I was speculating sure. But there is a world of difference between plausible speculation and tossing out random non sequiturs.
but what is the evidence, and even if it does "satisfy" what is the evidence that this is healthy?
|
It is based on the claims of many people of various religious and non-religious stripes. This type of evidence (anecdotal for the most part) is not particularily robust of course hence any conclusions must remain tentative.
As for mental health, perhaps you don't appreciate just how debilitating things like existential angst, depression, or social anxiety can be. If a set of beliefs as mild as deism can offset it to some degree then it would be pretty hard for it to fail to be healthy in some cases IMO. |
 |
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 07:53:20 [Permalink]
|
As for mental health, perhaps you don't appreciate just how debilitating things like existential angst, depression, or social anxiety can be. If a set of beliefs as mild as deism can offset it to some degree then it would be pretty hard for it to fail to be healthy in some cases IMO.
|
Had some of that, and losing some of the hatred of reality that caused me to believe in gods helped.
I can understand, to a certain extent, someone telling me that they are comforted by a god that they believe has some effect on their life. I do not understand someone telling me that some god created the universe a long time ago, and went on an extensive vacation, and had nothing to do with humans after that, and therefore, they are comforted. You seem to be missing this particular point. What could possibly be comforting to anyone about that? Why not believe that Kosher pickles are alien communication devices and be "comforted" by that? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 08:46:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
Had some of that, and losing some of the hatred of reality that caused me to believe in gods helped.
I can understand, to a certain extent, someone telling me that they are comforted by a god that they believe has some effect on their life. I do not understand someone telling me that some god created the universe a long time ago, and went on an extensive vacation, and had nothing to do with humans after that, and therefore, they are comforted. You seem to be missing this particular point. What could possibly be comforting to anyone about that? Why not believe that Kosher pickles are alien communication devices and be "comforted" by that? |
I guess I just don't see the particular obstacle to someone finding comfort in deism.
Personal incredulity aside in the absence of evidence to the contrary what is wrong with simply taking deists at their word when they claim they are comforted by their belief. |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 11:06:49 [Permalink]
|
Personal incredulity aside in the absence of evidence to the contrary what is wrong with simply taking deists at their word when they claim they are comforted by their belief.
|
That wasn't the question. However, to answer this question, why don't we accept every subjective claim? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 16:22:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
That wasn't the question. However, to answer this question, why don't we accept every subjective claim? |
That's a question not an answer. 
I find your query way too general and OT to attempt to give a comprehensive answer to it. Is there a specific point you are trying to make with it? |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 22:17:12 [Permalink]
|
gorgo wrote: | Had some of that, and losing some of the hatred of reality that caused me to believe in gods helped. |
So we are to take you on your word of what sort of thought has helped you existentially, mentally, and emotionally, but we are not to take faithful people on their word.
And, of course, if your beliefs in gods was caused by hatred of reality, everyone's beliefs in gods must also be caused by hatred of reality, right? And if becoming an atheist was good for you, it must be good for everyone, right? |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 09/03/2007 22:17:29 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2007 : 22:34:30 [Permalink]
|
Dave wrote: I've been understanding you, marf. And you continue to use phrases like "literal belief" and "factual truth of the natural world" to save a hypothesis which, quite frankly, doesn't require saving. That's what I've been trying to get across to you.
…
It was plain to me that this thread began with a naive meaning of "belief in God," and I think we agree that such a belief is incompatible with skepticism.
…
But whatever god-concept you would like to examine, go ahead and toss it out for review. Because I can tell you that I haven't been posting with only the fundies in mind, but there's a long damn distance on the continuum of belief from them to your progressive friends. |
Okay, now I'm totally confused. I feel like I've waded into the deep end and forgotten how to swim. You may be understanding me, but I am not understanding you.
| But show me a claim which is not about the natural world. |
Supernatural claims are by definition not claims about the natural world.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2007 : 02:47:47 [Permalink]
|
And, of course, if your beliefs in gods was caused by hatred of reality, everyone's beliefs in gods must also be caused by hatred of reality, right? And if becoming an atheist was good for you, it must be good for everyone, right?
|
Talk to theists. They'll tell you the same thing. Read what the Rabbi said. It's right there in black and white. You don't need to take my word for it. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2007 : 02:55:33 [Permalink]
|
And if becoming an atheist was good for you, it must be good for everyone, right?
|
Depends on what you mean by good. If the goal is dealing well with reality, then yes, it's best to deal with reality. If the goal is to deny reality, then it's perfectly fine to create a fantasy world. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2007 : 05:55:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by marfknox
Dave wrote: I've been understanding you, marf. And you continue to use phrases like "literal belief" and "factual truth of the natural world" to save a hypothesis which, quite frankly, doesn't require saving. That's what I've been trying to get across to you.
…
It was plain to me that this thread began with a naive meaning of "belief in God," and I think we agree that such a belief is incompatible with skepticism.
…
But whatever god-concept you would like to examine, go ahead and toss it out for review. Because I can tell you that I haven't been posting with only the fundies in mind, but there's a long damn distance on the continuum of belief from them to your progressive friends. |
Okay, now I'm totally confused. I feel like I've waded into the deep end and forgotten how to swim. You may be understanding me, but I am not understanding you. |
Well, you ellided my explanations in your quote of me, above.
The hypothesis you're trying to save appears to me to be that some kinds of faith may be compatible with skepticism, and I would agree in principle. Each sort of faith needs to be examined on its own.| Supernatural claims are by definition not claims about the natural world. |
But what about in practice? Go ahead and give an example. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2007 : 09:28:11 [Permalink]
|
gorgo wrote: | Talk to theists. They'll tell you the same thing. Read what the Rabbi said. It's right there in black and white. You don't need to take my word for it. |
I do talk to theists (I've mentioned this repeatedly, and made clear many times that my disagreement with you stems from what I've learned from conversations with progressive theists.) Most of the theists I talk to are theists because they love reality and are in such utter awe of reality that they embrace vague, but metaphorically powerful and poetic concepts of supernaturalism to give broader meaning to their awe and acceptance of life. My neighbor's daughter is dying of cancer. The doctor told her she has 8 months to live. She says, "That's just what the doctor says. God might take her sooner or later." She says this with acceptance. By putting the concept of "God's will" she is emotionally and psychologically doing the same thing a Buddhist does when they decide to regard our fundamental situation of existence as joyful, and the same thing an atheist does when we find our own ways to accept painful realities.
I don't think you understand what the Rabbi said (for those who don't know what Gorgo's talking about, it is this article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12498143/site/newsweek/ )
First, in that article the Rabbi confuses the issue by mostly referring to atheists when he really means nihilists. Re-read the article…his complaint about some atheists is that they are in existential despair, that they have no hope, that they "ask too little of life here on planet earth." In the first paragraph when he says he doesn't agree with us on the question of "are we alone", but the topic of his article, what he "doesn't get" about atheists has nothing to do with that literal claim of fact (vague as it is). His confusion has to do with a mood and mentality about existence itself. For crap's sake, he quotes Spinoza – who was a pantheist and rationalist! Pantheism is completely compatible with skepticism and the label has been applied to humanistic theists and atheists alike.
In addition to existential angst, the Rabbis talking about morality. Again, he seems to regard atheism as a synonym for nihilism, and I find that incredibly offensive. But I agree with this statement he makes: | But our world is better and kinder and more hopeful because of the daily sacrifice and witness of millions of pious people over thousands of years. |
Yes, the world is made better and kinder and more hopeful by people who promote such things with their actions. In the end of the article, the Rabbi finally admits directly that atheists can be in this group of pious people when he says that Dr. James Watson is "an atheist I can believe in." The problem with the Rabbi is that he seems to think that Watson is a rare breed of atheist. To sum up, the Rabbi downplays the horrors done in the name of religion (which infuriates far more atheists than existential despair ever did!) and he misunderstands and mischaracterizes the mentality of many atheists. Sort of how you, Gorgo, are misunderstanding and mischaracterizing the mentality of many theists.
Thus, I repeat my objection to your ridiculous generalizations and assumptions about theists: If your beliefs in gods was caused by hatred of reality, everyone's beliefs in gods must also be caused by hatred of reality, right? And if becoming an atheist was good for you, it must be good for everyone, right?
| Depends on what you mean by good. If the goal is dealing well with reality, then yes, it's best to deal with reality. If the goal is to deny reality, then it's perfectly fine to create a fantasy world. |
If the goal is to know facts about reality, science and critical thinking are our only reliable tools. If the goal is to experience reality with the highest quality of life emotionally, physically, and intellectually, we still need science and reason, but we need a hell of a lot more.
The people who use religion to deny reality are wrong, and they probably are doing that because they hate or fear some aspects of reality. But not everyone with religion uses it to deny reality, and not every aspect of religion is used to deny reality. In fact, most aspects of religion are not used for that purpose at all.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2007 : 10:02:00 [Permalink]
|
To quote the Rabbi:
| I believe that the philosopher-rabbi Mordecai Kaplan was right when he said, “It is hell to live without hope, and religion saves people from hell.” |
Talk to people who believe in an afterlife, and they'll tell you the same thing. Life is not acceptable, so let's create a fantasy world.
The same is true for belief in gods and angels and faith healing.
Again, we're not talking about people who don't believe in these things, we're talking about people who do. You seem to want to confuse the issue.
Why are supernaturalist people so angry? They're not really any angrier than anyone else. They just make that anger sacred, but then, so do you and Dude and GeeMack. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 09/04/2007 10:02:44 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2007 : 10:08:30 [Permalink]
|
In fact, most aspects of religion are not used for that purpose at all.
|
You mean, some aspects of poetic atheism are not used for that purpose at all. As for those that believe in the supernatural, just talk to them, and they'll tell you. Once you point out what they've told you, they'll deny it, but if you ask, that's what they'll tell you.
Your idea that such things are "comforting" are further proof that they have such an emotional rejection of reality, that they think making shit up is a good idea. Better to be discomforted and see things as they are, than to be comforted by lying to yourself.
Or better, yet, accept yourself as you are, and not be too overly concerned about gaining your self-worth from some nonsense. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 09/04/2007 10:10:50 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2007 : 10:22:43 [Permalink]
|
Dave wrote: The hypothesis you're trying to save appears to me to be that some kinds of faith may be compatible with skepticism, and I would agree in principle. Each sort of faith needs to be examined on its own.
...
But what about in practice? Go ahead and give an example. |
I think I get it... you are saying you agree in principle and are thus asking me for a specific example of such a kind of theism that doesn't amount to atheism (like the priest who doesn't really believe but goes through the motions 'cause he thinks it is good for other people to believe.) Right? But haven't I given many examples already?
What about the "freelance monotheism" of Karen Armstrong, or the Christianity of Bishop John Spong? I've already quoted Armstrong on her view of "faith" as explicitly something which should not make claims of fact about reality, but rather should have to do with meaning and morality.
John Spong helps but also confuses the issues of this thread in this article where he praises atheists who criticize most aspects of religion: Link
Spong helps when he writes: | That is to say, theism is not what God is; it is what human beings have decided that God is. |
So theism is basically having a god-concept. Doesn't mean that god-concept resembles a or the real god, but it is a way for human beings to grasp that which we cannot understand. I once brought up this episode from Star Trek which I think bears bringing up again here – when Q takes a human to see the world of the Q continuum, but because the human is too limited and unable to truly understand the Q, they are presented as a virtual reality metaphor (the other Q are hanging out in front of a house by a road, and how they appear and the setting are all connected to some real aspect of their nature and situation.)
Unfortunately, Spong confuses the situation by rejecting all theism outright while making it clear he himself does believe in some concept of God. He may not be any kind of traditional theist, but he is a theist in that he does have and proclaim faith in a concept of God. He believes in God, he just rejects all clear definitions of God. To correlate this with Star Trek, John Spong is like the human who knows that the road and the house and the Q he sees are really just metaphors for something real and yet not fully comprehensible to the human mind. And when Spong criticism theism, he's criticizing the people who think the road and house and Q are literally accurate visions of the Q Continuum.
So John Spong's faith, his belief in God, is an example of religious faith that is compatible with skepticism. Do you agree?
It is my contention that a growing number of people who call themselves religious and say they have faith and say they believe in God are becoming aware of the falseness of their literal belief. They still cling to the specifics of their God concept (such as when my mother clings to the rituals and traditions of the Catholic church), but if you ask them if they think their religion is correct and others are all wrong, they say no, and then explain something pluralistic along the lines of "many paths to the same place" (which is exactly what my mother and most of my progressive theistic friends say when we talk about this issue.) They recognize that they can only get in touch with the supernatural through this vision, that this particular faith is best for them, but that the vision they have isn't true to the reality of the supernatural and that many other visions (including atheism!) are equally valid.
Edited to shorten link -- B10 |
| Edited by - Boron10 on 09/04/2007 13:54:18 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2007 : 10:36:15 [Permalink]
|
| SO, atheism is now a path to the supernatural? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Is Skepticism Compatible with Belief in God?
