Reasons for believing (devils advocate)

[Sebbi]

I consider myself an atheist.

It's strange I know especially if you've read some of my other stuff on anything spiritual. I talk about faith in God, and surrendering to the supreme and such, but the reason for that is purely about language.

I do believe the universe works in ways we cannot fathom. The law of Karma works for example.

Then again you don't need God to explain this. In fact, you don't need God to explain many (or if you're me, all) phenomena which (I accept you probably don't believe in [even if I do]) appear at first glance to require God to explain.

The reason why believing, may not actually be a bad thing is quite simple and that is that I believe faith is good for you.

So many of us have so much more on our plates then we can deal with. I believe that with many things, if you don't do it, someone else will, or (going into the seemingly god-fearing realms of speech that I'm so used to using now) the universe will take the burden.

I also believe that we are never given more than we can deal with, if we've got more than we can deal with then we can't do it anyway and have to drop some things.

Going again into the god-fearing speech again, we sometimes have to step back and let the universe do it's work.

Bare with me on this.

People who have faith, I bet if their faith is sincere, have lower stress levels.

Those who unload and carry what they can and trust that the universe will do the rest don't worry about the rest and therefore have lower stress levels. It's as simple as that really.

Again, you don't actually need God (though it puts it in terms that are easy to understand) to explain this. But at the same time, I've tryed it and tested it and it works.

Also all these teachings about love and loving God, and vice versa. If you think about the effect that must have on the psyche, it has to bring something good.

Blessings

Sebbi

P.S. I admit you probably wouldn't think me an atheist, more Taoist probably, and I admit you'd probably be right. I am questioning my atheism at the moment. Still, at the moment I would still consider myself an Atheist (and Taoist).

[geckopelli]

mumble-jumbo.

I am a devote muslim.

"quote nobody reads" from blushed allah.
-----------
Now that's Sarcasm .

Instead, why not play god's advocate and tell me why I should believe in magic?

[BlackGuardXIII]

mumble-jumbo.

I am a devote muslim.

"quote nobody reads" from blushed allah.
-----------
Now that's Sarcasm .

Instead, why not play god's advocate and tell me why I should believe in magic?
I will never tell you what you should or should not believe. I believe in magic through sheer weight of numbers of experiences. That cannot possibly mean you should. You believe what you think is best, and that is good enough for me. I accept your beliefs as equally true and valid as my own.

[Sebbi]

I never said to believe in magic. I said, I doubted you would share my views.

Besides many of these things "miracles" I described can be put down to psycology and even biology (normally those with biological basic have basic in theories that are just devoloping and most [not all are unproven]).

Nothing to do with magic at all. However I confess to believing in Phenomina that is not physical, for example I believe in chi and similar forces.

Blessings

Sebbi

[Disarm]

I do believe the universe works in ways we cannot fathom. The law of Karma works for example.

Then again you don't need God to explain this. In fact, you don't need God to explain many (or if you're me, all) phenomena which (I accept you probably don't believe in [even if I do]) appear at first glance to require God to explain.

If we needed g-d to explain anything we would have less athiests and a different definition of science.

[geckopelli]

My problem is with dogmatic belief itself.

As long as people "... confess to believing in Phenomina that is not physical."
And at the same time "...believe the universe works in ways we cannot fathom."
Humanity will remain locked in ignorance and stupidity.

How can one learn and grow, (rather indivdual or species), when one has faith that all is known or unknowable?

Such people, in thier self-righteous ignorance, are a damn trying to hold back a flood of knowledge and social progress.

They know god-but to they seek it?

[BlackGuardXIII]

My problem is with dogmatic belief itself.

As long as people "... confess to believing in Phenomina that is not physical."
And at the same time "...believe the universe works in ways we cannot fathom."
Humanity will remain locked in ignorance and stupidity.

How can one learn and grow, (rather indivdual or species), when one has faith that all is known or unknowable?

Such people, in thier self-righteous ignorance, are a damn trying to hold back a flood of knowledge and social progress.

They know god-but to they seek it?
but i've fricken seen it too many times, i guess i am locked then.......sigh

[geckopelli]

Why not seek-out the inexplicable phenomena?

There's a difference between unknowable and unknown.

But be warned; too seek the source of faith is to be demonized by the faithful.

[Sebbi]

Why not seek-out the inexplicable phenomena?
That's the entire point.

I do not pursue God. I do not persue magickal powers. I do not persue to unstand the entire universe, for it that is impossible.

I persue only happiness.

I believe in Chi and the like from experience. I believe the universe works in ways we cannot fathom, because it is so immense and our minds are very small.

I do not seek to hold back information about the universe, only admit that I cannot know all.

You hold back "a flood of knowledge and social progress" by not admitting that some things could exist. It called being open minded.

Blessings

Sebbi

[geckopelli]

Your decadence is frightening.

And You're wrong.

Anything can exist- that follows the rules of reality.

[mati]

I would put forth that it is perfectly acceptable to acknowledge that the ultimate workings of our perceptual world may in instances be unknowable to us at this time. The scientific method is used to try to explain why certain phenomena occur. If such and such an event occurs contiguous with some other event, then, when the former event is perceived to occur again, we expect the latter event to occur also. But the mind is open to many mistakes. Perceptions occur and follow each other with great rapidity, sometimes resembling each other in many details but at other times differing somewhat in details that are indistinguishable. It is incumbent on the scientist to recognize what is knowable and what is unknowable, what is based on experiential data and what is not, and to keep those distinctions clear. All our perceptions are distinct and separable. To begin to describe unknown phenomena as "magic", "god", or whatever you want to call it seems to be creating a circular argument in which a label is given to this unknown "thing" and it doesn't serve any purpose but to confuse the issue more and more as more unknown phenomena is put under that heading. Then people are asked whether or not they believe in this thing, worship it, or whatever. It would be better if we just admit from the beginning that there are things which we don't understand and leave it at that, keeping an open mind and one in which clear distinctions are kept, while moving on to things where we may better place our attentions, things of which we can perceive and experience.

[geckopelli]

I reject the concept of "unknowable".

unknown- sure. But Unknowable?

[mati]

I would agree with you that unknowable might be putting an unnecessary limit on our ability to know the unknown. What I was trying to explore was why we find it necessary to invent a concept such as God to explain things that are unknown. Take auto mechanics for instance. An experienced mechanic will know to check the fuel or spark when the engine doesn't start. Someone without the experience will have no idea what is happening and, might think he is being damned by God or something. It may be that the problem lies in how religion has framed our reference. Such questions as to the nature of the universe have always been regarded by religions as beyond our understanding and better left up to the deity. These "ultimate" questions are created and we are told that proper students should be contemplating such mysteries. Whereas I would like to question validity of the question itself and whether we should be looking at it when maybe there is no answer. There are better things to be doing than torturing ourselves over questions that we are told mean so much but in fact probably, even if answered, wouldn't effect our daily lives much. Instead of asking "why", it is better to look around at what is in front of our noses.

As to "reasons" for belief. Belief is not a function of the reasoning faculty. To reason is a comparison of ideas. It is not possible to base a belief solely on a comparison of ideas. Belief is a perception based on an impression that has been experienced.

[Razorofoccam]

What I was trying to explore was why we find it necessary to invent a concept such as God to explain things that are unknown.
Because we are only just now realising... That we CAN explain things that are unknown.
Most still have no faith in US.

Faith [trust] in US..Is based on precedent.
Unlike the other one.

Occam

[BlackGuardXIII]

I reject the concept of "unknowable".

unknown- sure. But Unknowable?
Chaos theory offers a very convincing case for 'unknowable'.
It suggests things such as weather forecasting are beyond predictability.
The analogy I like is the straw that breaks the camels back. Add one piece of straw at a time, and one will break its back. Predict which one.....
Chaos theory claims that you cannot for certain pick the exact one.

[geckopelli]

Chaos Theory reflects the statistical nature of the Universe, as regulated by Uncertianty

Ultimately, everything must be understood has a manifestaion of probabilities. At that point, Uncertainty is a wall which we may not be able to pass.
But I envision the day when all possibilities/probabilities this side of the wall are known. Why Not?

Of course, that does not imply 100% predictability.

[BlackGuardXIII]

Chaos Theory reflects the statistical nature of the Universe, as regulated by Uncertianty

Ultimately, everything must be understood has a manifestaion of probabilities. At that point, Uncertainty is a wall which we may not be able to pass.
But I envision the day when all possibilities/probabilities this side of the wall are known. Why Not?

Of course, that does not imply 100% predictability.
I feel the same........and the theory does claim that. I recall that regarding weather forecasting, we would be 100% accurate in predicting that it will be one of seven possibilities, but could never predict for sure which one.
Maybe, I am with you, I dont know.

[geckopelli]

"Maybe, I am with you, I dont know."

You ARE me- you simply have fewer explanations at your disposal. No detraction- I've had an illegally inordinate amount of time on my hands for these last 46 years.

Some people think that understanding detracts from the miracle of - EVERYTHING!

But let me tell you, IT DOESN'T!!!!!!

I don't even "believe" in "god" or the "supernatural"- yet such things lay only inches beyond my grasp.

There are a few pieces of the puzzle just out of reach-

[BlackGuardXIII]

"Maybe, I am with you, I dont know."

You ARE me- you simply have fewer explanations at your disposal. No detraction- I've had an illegally inordinate amount of time on my hands for these last 46 years.

Some people think that understanding detracts from the miracle of - EVERYTHING!

But let me tell you, IT DOESN'T!!!!!!

I don't even "believe" in "god" or the "supernatural"- yet such things lay only inches beyond my grasp.

There are a few pieces of the puzzle just out of reach-
Yonder person, I am he.
God and you are one, and God and I are one, so you and I are one in God. Hindi


I don't 'believe' in god, and re: the supernatural, not that either, since it is not something I accepted on faith, it was pounded into me for decades.
Why others do not get this pounding......not knowing.

[geckopelli]

All ocurrences have explanations, and all explanations have occurances. Some yet remain beyond our ken.

I have faith in those whose understanding exceeds my own; yet there remain explanations not yet offered.

Shall we seek them?

[BlackGuardXIII]

All ocurrences have explanations, and all explanations have occurances. Some yet remain beyond our ken.

I have faith in those whose understanding exceeds my own; yet there remain explanations not yet offered.

Shall we seek them?
I have faith that love shall never be ousted from our reality, and that if there is an end, or victor in good vs. evil, good will win. It goddamn well better, or I'll be really p'd off at someone/something/force/wave/energy, whatever, real pissed.

[geckopelli]

I lack the same faith- but I sincerly hope you're right.

[BlackGuardXIII]

I lack the same faith- but I sincerly hope you're right.
Oh I'm right. I am infallible, and am very affronted by the inference that there is any chance I am not.......okay I am kidding. But I do feel strongly that it is all for the best, though not necessarily humankinds best. And I also feel strongly that good can never be beaten by evil, though it may look that way short term.

Here is a brief summation....he he he


Insofar as I have the exclusive communication line to the Almighty, I command you to change your personal spiritual beliefs immediately, and believe exactly whatever I decide is the correct interpretation of whichever one of the multitude of scriptures in the world that I, in my infinite and infallible reason, say is the ONE TRUE RELIGION.
If you refuse to join me and my most righteous mates, I am compelled to warn you that the most hideous tortures the worst criminal minds that have ever lived will be enacted upon your person for no less a period of time than a googleplex to the power of a googleplex millenia. That is a fairly long time, I might add. I am right and you are wrong, that is what I know for an indisputable fact is what the one true God wants.
So there.

[geckopelli]

And thusly shall all find contentment...

Except that poor slob geckopelli.

He shall die as the king of the discontent.

[BlackGuardXIII]

And thusly shall all find contentment...

Except that poor slob geckopelli.

He shall die as the king of the discontent.
hey, look at the bright side........at least then you can likely get some rest.

[Occam]

hey, look at the bright side........at least then you can likely get some rest.
Nah

Rest implies existance...
Death is not something that happens to you. It is the end of all happening.

We exist for a short time..then do not...just like everything else but reality itself.[that which alows existance]
Why do we think we have to have more of the thing we got for nothing.
Self interest and fear.
The two prime motivations of the human ego.
Thus self aware life is unique...It is the only thing that knows of and wants more of...existance.
It DISPUTES REALITY.

Occam

[BlackGuardXIII]

Work hard

Play hard
Sleep when you're dead.


No longer my motto.
Too hard on you

[mati]

Just for fun, I think I will play the devil's advocate, defending God, which is an odd twist. If we could look into the origins of the concept of God, might it not come from man's desire to give a name to the unknown creator. If we left it at that I would have less trouble. Still, there is no reason why there needs to be a cause to every existence. I also think that, by definition, belief is supported by some reifying perception, and should be distinguished from faith, which perhaps is a better descrription of what those who "believe" in God are imagining.

[BlackGuardXIII]

If only we could all believe that our choice of what to believe is just our own best guess. Then, others choices would have no less meaning, and there would be no need to convert another to our way. The admission that I could be wrong opens the door for me to accept different views as being just as valid.

[Kharakov]

whoever wrote this is a whackjobwhoever wrote this is a whackjob

Nice criticism of the statement. I got a lot from what you said. Thank you for providing insightful criticism of BG's statement.

[Occam]

If only we could all believe that our choice of what to believe is just our own best guess. Then, others choices would have no less meaning, and there would be no need to convert another to our way. The admission that I could be wrong opens the door for me to accept different views as being just as valid.
Blackguard

Well said my friend.
That is EXACTLY how human understanding works.

EVERYTHING
each individual calls belief..is a best guess.
Some base their guesses on no method other than..'i want it to be true'
Some , like occam, base their guesses on methodology that he ego has no access to.
That method is very similar to scientific method.

Occam


Except " i reason therefore i exist..and thus 'a' reality exists"

[Occam]

thanks Khrackjobber - i appreciate it - keep up the good work my man, i love you J Kerry

So you appreciate the 'whackjob' comment by kharakov on the post by Blackguard.
The post occam just responded to.

Blackguards post was more than just reasonable,,,It was insightfull.
And yes occam considers blackguard a friend...Yet if he said a thing occam did not agree with..he would know it.


Occam

[Occam]

thanks occam, i love you man - you are great - thanks for the positive feedback - i've learned a lot here today

salem
J Kerry

And what is that?

Occam

[mati]

Scepticism is, perhaps, the best attitude. As even our ideas, as copies of our perceptions, are not always identical. And memory is a source of many errors as well. Our present perceptions, which in the final analysis, is all we have that we can be sure of, is found at times to be less than its' objects. After all this, who can be sure of anything? But then total scepticism returns upon itself and is sceptical of that as well. So in the end, belief is something that we feel more strongly about as compared to the alternatives.

[Occam]

Scepticism is, perhaps, the best attitude. As even our ideas, as copies of our perceptions, are not always identical. And memory is a source of many errors as well. Our present perceptions, which in the final analysis, is all we have that we can be sure of, is found at times to be less than its' objects. After all this, who can be sure of anything? But then total scepticism returns upon itself and is sceptical of that as well. So in the end, belief is something that we feel more strongly about as compared to the alternatives.
mati

Many call sceptics...cynics...
This is false.
SOME sceptics are cynics..But only some.

Occam is a sceptical optimist :D
That is.

Human beings Have a HUGE future...
As long as we dont believe our own bullshit.

Occam

[BlackGuardXIII]

mati

Many call sceptics...cynics...
This is false.
SOME sceptics are cynics..But only some.

Occam is a sceptical optimist :D
That is.

Human beings Have a HUGE future...
As long as we dont believe our own bullshit.

Occam
I agree, but with the one change that I feel 99% of sceptics are cynics, and the optimistic sceptic is a rare one indeed. I feel I am one of these as well, since I am very sceptical towards the traditional, established line that the system says is the true fact of our history. A sceptic that uses critical thinking skills, along with compassion, to confirm what is being said to him is an uncommon sceptic. I doubted that the media and education system were giving me the total picture long ago, researched it to see if it held up to my inspection, and for the most part found that it did not. Scepticism is healthy, but only to a point.
It can also be damaging when expressed in a derogatory manner towards someone who is vulnerable to personal criticism, imho.

[Occam]

I agree, but with the one change that I feel 99% of sceptics are cynics, and the optimistic sceptic is a rare one indeed. I feel I am one of these as well, since I am very sceptical towards the traditional, established line that the system says is the true fact of our history. A sceptic that uses critical thinking skills, along with compassion, to confirm what is being said to him is an uncommon sceptic. I doubted that the media and education system were giving me the total picture long ago, researched it to see if it held up to my inspection, and for the most part found that it did not. Scepticism is healthy, but only to a point.
It can also be damaging when expressed in a derogatory manner towards someone who is vulnerable to personal criticism, imho.
Blackguard

Agree..but would put sceptics who are cynics at 50 to 80% ..
Cannot agree with 99%... [based in life observation]

The media and eduction system exist to entertain and conform..
Not educate. [well maybe a wee bit]
Remember..Public education would not exist if industry did not go to government and say...[in the 19th century]
"These peasants are to ignorant to run our new machines. Give them a basic education so they can"

Believe it or not..That is how public education began.

Occam

[mati]

scepticism is an important attitude for the scientific method. the doubting Tomas is, for me, a more preferred interpretation, suggesting the whole thing is psychological and within. Albeit it is still open to criticism for the delusional references.

[Occam]

scepticism is an important attitude for the scientific method. the doubting Tomas is, for me, a more preferred interpretation, suggesting the whole thing is psychological and within. Albeit it is still open to criticism for the delusional references. Mati

The 'doubting thomas' is what the ignorant call a 'friend' that does not believe.

Emotion has quelled the base desire to eradicate the sceptic..By calling him one that may be re-converted to ignorance.
A doubting thomas, may once again be the 'faithfull'.

A sceptic however. Is one that can never be regressed to ignoance.

Occam

[quotient]

Occam,

Didn't the printing press have something to do with the begining of mass education?