Philosophy Discussion Forums

Teacher4U wrote: hahah that's how you view reality, which is just the phsyical world with no afterlife. That type of perspective of reality is called an ATHEIST one.

No, actually you're wrong. You can be an atheist and believe in an afterlife - as long as you disbelieve in a god. Not all atheists reject afterlife or accept evolution. Some atheists accept that intelligent aliens created us, some accept that we created ourselves by dimension jumping in the future, some may even accept that fairies created us 10 minutes ago and gave us all memories. you see, atheism is not a universal. The only views that atheists must share by definition is disbelief in a god. Some atheists could believe that we live eternally. What you're doing is making blanket statements, and assuming that all atheists may accept evolution or disbelieve in an afterlife. This isn't true, and just because you're an atheist, it doesn't require you by definition to disbelieve in an afterlife.

I have had to do this like 10 times on this forum. Here's the definition of an atheist

atheist: One who lacks belief in the existence of any god.

This doesn't have any concern with regards to an afterlife. Yes, many religions believe in afterlives, but you don't have to believe in god to believe in afterlife.

Maldon007 wrote:
Might want to check with mexico on that.

Fair enough, maybe I was not sufficiently precise with my words; If you have a society with very strict gun control laws and they are applied, the statistics on murder will be less.

-- Updated July 25th, 2012, 6:54 am to add the following --

Recoil wrote: What I mean is as the percentage of religious beliefs raise in a country, statistics show the worse they score on societal health problems.


What about someone who commits mass murder then is saved? They wouldn't be punished at all. Whereas I, have never raped or murdered someone, and by your theology I'm going to hell simply because I don't believe in a god. It's a loophole, and every part about it is flawed. If James Holmes prays for forgiveness (again, according to your theology) he will go to heaven! The thing is, your religion doesn't reward deeds, it simply rewards one thing: blind faith in a mythical creature. Why would he punish those who use their brain logically? Why would he punish atheists simply for being open minded and considering all points of view?

If you use religion as a way of controlling people, it has less an impact than if you use other means, such a technology, to catch liars, crooks and the like.

Those religious people who resist modernity are right in one respect. They are right that post-enlightenment views are immersed in history just as are religious views; but they are wrong if they think that post-enlightenment views are as dogmatic as many religious views. Post-enlightenment views include scepticism and rigorous search for evidence whereas pre-enlightenment views look to traditions. Traditions are often wrong, if only for the simple practical reason that the world has changed and our survival strategies need to change as necessary.

If the general need to think with scepticism and scientific rigour is taught to children then children will assuredly not be taught that revealed religions are text books for living. Any parent who teaches her innocent child that religion is always helpful in any practical or intellectual endeavour is polluting the child's mind with a lie.

I am not entirely against religion but it must be modernised if it is to be good for society or for individuals. For one thing religion should be democratised so that it cannot be used by the powers that be to indoctrinate us hoi polloi to suit the ends of the elite.

Bermudj wrote:

If you use religion as a way of controlling people, it has less an impact than if you use other means, such a technology, to catch liars, crooks and the like.

Ruling elites have been so clever with mind control on enormous scales that other social control technologies such as torture and prisons are feeble by comparison. Religion can be used and has been used to control minds, and I want religion to be democratised so that it is as free from the powers that be as it possibly can be . The ruling elites are in the indoctrination business for obvious reasons and the only defences that ordinary people have are practical common sense enhanced whenever possible by modern scientific methods and knowledge of how those elites work and what their aims are.

Children are the future and we surely want them to be free of coercion when they are grown up.

Recoil,

Recoil wrote: Ok I'm sorry that's just generalizing bull ****. You can't say "all atheists destroy god's existence" or stupid stuff like that. By the way, there is no actual way to "prove something doesn't exist". Again, if you disagree then disprove the existence of goblins for me.

What you say here has an element of a strawman to it. There is no other explanation; because you are quoting me as saying something that I did not say and then attacking the statement. I did not say that "all atheists destroy god's existence" what I said was quite different. If you want to quote me as saying that then you are the one who is generalising.

I think that by using reason and logic, we can determine whether something exists or not. For example: As far as I am aware, there is no logical or reasonable explanation or evidence which suggest that goblins exist. If there was, I'm sure that we would all know about them by know. Are there any credible witness accounts of goblins? Have they left any evidence of their presence behind? If they exist, why are they in hiding and where? I think that questions along this line of enquiry, that is using reason and logic, would ultimately disprove the exixtence of goblins.

Recoil wrote: And my point is, god would want atheists in heaven because STUDIES SHOW that they are morally nicer people. Why would god want to send a perfectly peaceful person to eternal torture simply for not believing in him? If your child did not love you, would that be justification for you to lock them in the basement and torture them FOREVER? God punishes people infinitely for finite crimes according to your theology, AND you can get away with any crime if you just call yourself a christian. Whereas an atheist may not "sin" his or her entire life and still burn eternally.

According to scripture unbelievers will suffer the same fate as sinners. Therefore according to the bible, God would not want atheists in heaven. You keep mentioning these "studies" yet you do not provide the web addresses for them? Or if they are not avaible on the web, you do not state the source that you got them from. Why should I believe that atheists are "morally nicer people" just because you say so? The answer to your analogy is no. Just because my child does not love me, that does not give me the right to lock them up and torture them forever. But the difference I think, is that God does not have any type of relationship with an atheist, because they do not have faith in him. Therefore, he has no reservations about punishing them for their disbelief. I think that one has to bear in mind that God wants to be worshipped and believed in, it seems to be a requirement that we do; not a choice.

Recoil wrote: You're rationalizing by saying that all atheists attack god, which is amazingly false, many atheists keep their beliefs and dis-beliefs to themselves, where many theists have reason to impose their religion on others by converting people.

I think its a case of some atheists being vocal about their disbelief in God or gods; whilst some atheists are not. The same is true for theists.

Recoil wrote: As far as the study, I love how you ask for a website, like all reliable studies are on the Internet.

Another strawman Recoil? When did I say or even imply the above?

Belinda wrote:...religion to be democratised so that it is as free from the powers that be as it possibly can be ....

Are you thinking of taking religion along the path of political parties?

Teacher4U wrote:
Overall yes, in this time of age, it is ridiculous to think people still view reality through an theistic perspective. its abuse to themselves mostly ha, but they do have an effect on society, which slows it down.

Theistic thinking slows what down? How and in what way? What do you want to move faster, and for what?

-- Updated Wed Jul 25, 2012 6:06 am to add the following --

At the beach with my 5 yr old grandson, who became afraid of a thunder storm and cuddled up next to me, looking wide eyed at me said - Mamaw, God loves us so why is he trying to kill us? Out of the mouths of babies!

Misty wrote:

Theistic thinking slows what down? How and in what way? What do you want to move faster, and for what?

-- Updated Wed Jul 25, 2012 6:06 am to add the following --

At the beach with my 5 yr old grandson, who became afraid of a thunder storm and cuddled up next to me, looking wide eyed at me said - Mamaw, God loves us so why is he trying to kill us? Out of the mouths of babies!

theistic perspective is how a person perceives reality, they are perceiving reality by thinking their is Divine intervention. I believe in the afterlife, but for people to still believe in divine intervention tells me they do not understanding cause and effect.

Understanding cause and effect, is a very important skill we as individuals need to know and how our society depends on understanding what is truly happening in front of us. As in the shootings in Colorado, I lectured someone early because they said " HOW COULD GOD DO THIS!!", well it wasn't Gods divine work at hand, it was just one individual human that was lost in life. That's just one of many examples of how theistic perspectives slow things down.

Fanman wrote:Xris,



What you've said here is a strawman. Where is your evidence that teaching children about God, or giving them a religious education (what you sensationalise by callling it "abusive indoctrination") is detrimental to the child's upbringing? And, I said evidence not your own opinion...

What evidence would you like. Statistics are never used to enlighten us simply to support an argument. 99% of criminals on death row in America claim to believe in god. Is that sufficient?

Look at the figures, if a child is not introduced to religion till they reach age of reason the vast majority become atheists. So with that reason those who are introduced to religion early must be indoctrinated. Indoctrinating a young mind in my opinion is abuse. Catholics appear in catholic countries, Muslims appear in Islamic countries. Hindus appear in countries where Hinduism prevails. Catholics give birth to catholics, protestants give birth to protestants. The evidence is clear, those parents by the laws of averages have to indoctrinate their offspring. Do all those parents know the best for their kids or none of them? The adverse effects for many are as long as elephants nose, would you like to hear about them?

Recoil wrote: No, actually you're wrong. You can be an atheist and believe in an afterlife - as long as you disbelieve in a god. Not all atheists reject afterlife or accept evolution. Some atheists accept that intelligent aliens created us, some accept that we created ourselves by dimension jumping in the future, some may even accept that fairies created us 10 minutes ago and gave us all memories. you see, atheism is not a universal. The only views that atheists must share by definition is disbelief in a god. Some atheists could believe that we live eternally. What you're doing is making blanket statements, and assuming that all atheists may accept evolution or disbelieve in an afterlife. This isn't true, and just because you're an atheist, it doesn't require you by definition to disbelieve in an afterlife.

I have had to do this like 10 times on this forum. Here's the definition of an atheist

atheist: One who lacks belief in the existence of any god.

This doesn't have any concern with regards to an afterlife. Yes, many religions believe in afterlives, but you don't have to believe in god to believe in afterlife.

ha people who don't believe in one GOD but also believes in an afterlife are called DEISTIC! People who only believe in the physical world to only exist are called ATHEISTIC. These are well known concepts. A lot of afterlife beliefs that do not believe in God; Buddhism, I.A.M....

Does anybody else believe in Recoil that an atheist is some one who believes in an afterlife just not a God?

so yes, people who do not believe in God but believe in afterlife are called Deistic, not atheistic. Have you ever heard of Deism?

Someone who believes in anything is a dogmatist.

Teacher4U wrote: Does anybody else believe in Recoil that an atheist is some one who believes in an afterlife just not a God?

It may be very unlikely, but you're assuming that they don't. I'm saying they don't necessarily have to disbelieve in it by definition. Again you're making blanket statements that don't necessarily have to be true.

That's what an atheist is, some one who only believes in this lifetime, therefore you don't believe in an afterlife. I don't belief in a God, but I belief our reality reaches further than just the physical world (universe and beyond). How I perceive my reality, would be with an Deistic Perspective. Your view of reality (only the physical world existing), would be with an Atheistic Perspective.

People who basically believe in divine intervention (not going by cause and effect), view reality in a Theistic Perspective.

Tell me where I am wrong? please.

Teacher4U wrote:That's what an atheist is, some one who only believes in this lifetime, therefore you don't believe in an afterlife. I don't belief in a God, but I belief our reality reaches further than just the physical world (universe and beyond). How I perceive my reality, would be with an Deistic Perspective. Your view of reality (only the physical world existing), would be with an Atheistic Perspective.

People who basically believe in divine intervention (not going by cause and effect), view reality in a Theistic Perspective.

Tell me where I am wrong? please.

The place where you're wrong is saying that "an atheist is someone who only believes in this lifetime". That is no where mentioned in the definition. Like I said. Atheism is lack of belief in a god. Nothing else. Sure; tons of atheists disbelieve in an afterlife; but an afterlife is not mutually exclusive to a god. In no definition of atheism does it say "disbelief in an afterlife". only god.

I believe in the possibility of an afterlife but I am an agnostic atheist. So what am I?

Xris wrote:I believe in the possibility of an afterlife but I am an agnostic atheist. So what am I?

You are you. When it comes to all of these there are so many sub-divisions, and it applies to everything, nationalities, political parties, types of cancers and so on. I am supposedly Bipolar-I, but if you bothered to look at the wide range of Bipolars.

So you are you.