Why are you Atheist Agnsotic?

Is the World itself not proof that a higher intelligence must exist? If you say the world happened by chance, that rocks just smashed together and we evolved into what we are, could that chance not be God? How we know their is no ideology behind chance?

That is to say that chance IF chance created the universe, that is not what I beleive.

 

r33

This is what occam means in suggesting 'direction' [or god as many will call it] evolved within a reality that is infinite in duration.
Occam thinks it absurd to even consider the idea that humanity is
the sole example of reasoning beings in the total of reality.
Even if there is only one such race in every BILLION GALAXIES
Thats 400 such races in the small part of reality we call the observed
universe.
Look at the technology/understanding we have gained in just
10 thousand years and imagine a race with a 1 billion year history.
Not hard to fit into an observed universe conservatively dated at least
11.5 billion years in age.
And a totality of all reality with no science defined cap to age.

Occam sees no barriers to a race with such knowledge, theoretically
they could manipulate reality to result in 'big bangs' with laws to suit.
As easily as we build a new office block.

Occam

 

I agree

 

Yes. It's quite possible. And we (well -- at least the agnostics such as myself) do not discount this possibility. We only work to understand the probability of such being true.

If there is insufficient evidence to conclude something as true or even probably true, then one must rationally remain undecided on the issue -- such is agnosticism. The idea that "I don't know, so I'm not going to take a one-way-or-the-other stance on the issue."

To answer your first question, no, it isn't. At least, no argument that can hold up to scrutiny can demonstrate that our world is proof of an intelligent designer. That is not to say that such a case is not true; it just is not as probable as its antithesis: that the world arose from a seemingly endless number of occurrances all over the universe that have exhausted the seemingly gigantic improbability of life arising.

Just imagine -- take 1 cubic centimetre for example.

Inside of it is nearly a SEXTILLION of molecules!

How many does it take for a protocell to form? Certainly not more than several thousand, or perhaps several ten thousand.

Now that's just 1 cubic centimetre. Look at our world! kilometres upon kilometres! Something close to 50,000 kilometres, and that's in circumference alone! And that's just Earth! Now take into account the size of the entire known universe!! The possibilities are virtually infinite! With billions of stars to a galaxy, and potentially billions of galaxies, not to mention the parts of the universe that we don't know ...

Then, multiply the number of chances for something to arise, by 13 billion -- the number of years our universe is calculated to have existed. Of course, we are talking years now ... multiply that number by another 365 days, and 24 hours, and 60 minutes, and by 60 seconds ...

However infinitely large the number of this result turns out to be -- it is incalculable by human minds, larger than the largest googol, stretching to the limits of the googolplex! (A googol is a 1 followed by 100 zeroes. A googolplex is a googol multiplied by itself a googol of times -> that is, a googol to the googolth power.)

That is a LOT of probability for something as simply complex as our lives are to come into existance!

Anyhow, to answer your second question -- could that chance be God? Depends on what you define as God. If you are talking about a limited, specific God, such as YHWH, the Christo-Judean God, then ... no. Because such a God cannot be defined as chance alone.

If you are talking about "god" as a concept in that it is the direction of the universe -- the sort of all-pervading force that gives the universe shape and physical laws ... quite possibly, it may be rational to call that "god." Although I bet you'd get into a lot of arguments with people if you keep referring to that concept as "god," lol.

How do we know there is no ideology beyond chance? Because it's chance. It's kind of like the last frontier. Even if an all-powerful god exists, and even if he created the Universe through the big bang and then afterwards everything evolved by chance ... it still evolved by chance! It may have been a created chance, but it was still chance ...



-----

And I can't stop recommending this short story: Isaac Asimov's The Last Question. It addresses the issue of God and the big bang ... in one of the most imaginitive ways I have ever seen.

 

I have faith that there is no god
but I know better than to say it is a sure thing

 

Yes i always get into arguments over this concept of god we have haha.

Hikaru have you read any of Terrance Mckenna's work?

I've had the Archaic Revival for a while and never finished, it say you give it a read if you can get yourself a copy. It's really interesting stuff, and by interesting, I mean it makes a lot more sense than everyone else in the world these days.

I think the closest we can come to true knowledge is applying this all and having a psychadelic experience, on shrooms, not LSD. This book revolves around the fact that mushrooms could have been the reason we evolved and created language and what not, and experience a trip on psylocibib gets you closer to the Gnosis, "knowledge", in the Logos, that Carl Jung and others speak about.

 

This is true. However, intuitions are often wrong; the mind often presents things as 'true' which are actually entirely bogus. (Eg. optical illusions). Intuitions are not a reliable way of knowing things. Concepts of gods, spirits and ghosts represent just such "intuitively real" entities which sub-conscious processes in the brain present to our conscious mind as obviously true. This is a function of how we perceive and of how our brains are structured.

Given this awareness it's wise to only accept ideas which are logically sound and have a testable, rational basis. So to answer the original question, that's why I'm an atheist. Technically we are all agnostics, because the existence of god is one of the many things which cannot be disproved, but in practice, there's absolutely no reason to accept intuitive conjectures. What does interest me is what we can know. The question of what we can't know is an interesting conceptual paradox but claiming knowledge beyond what is knowable is an exercise in meaninglessness.

 

im actually a gnostic, not agnostic, theres a big difference. Mainly i just beleive in the Gnosis, the divine knowledge essential to life, which Terrence Mckenna speaks of in his book "The Archaic Revival", achievable through a psychadelic mushroom trip.

 

Religion and "gods" are overrated. I have yet to hear of a "god" that isn't obviously a creation of the human mind. We have god's that are as as petty as humans, gods that want to "save" humans but could care less about the rest of life on the planet, gods that make silly rules about how much of your money you have to give them or who can sleep with who, gods that hide themselves from the people they want to be with them...it is just rediculous. These are obvious human creations, because these gods are practically human with silly human ideas and created by human perspectives. Not to mention there hasn't ever been decent evidence of ANY of the kajillions of gods that people have defined over the centuries. Why would a god shape earth, care about people of earth and what we are doing, then hide from us while still wanting us to believe in him (or it)?

It tells me a few things, a.) there is a god, but he doesn't give a shit about us or what we do (cause he hasn't made an appearance) so therefore it doesn't even matter, or b.) there isn't a god.

I guess there could be a "god", some "gods", or a creator of the world. There could be beings with higher intelligence and more ability than we can fathom. I just don't think our human definitions and explanations of "gods" exist at all. And I definitely don't think we needed a god to create the world and create us.

 

That's always fascinated me ... that ideas of gods when examined basically represent a version of an imagined human mind with thoughts just like ours. We truly create gods in our own image. Silly yes, but that's exactly why they appear so plausible to people, because we evolved to be aware of other human minds in our co-operative societies, and to detect deliberate social activity from other persons. This combined with a tendency to understand our world in terms of human intention can easily give rise to an intuitive understanding of an "invisible person" who has some influence on social interaction and the natural world.

Why some people (most people in fact) just accept this intuition that there are invisible persons as true and why some question it is what I don't understand

 

I admittedly haven't read any of it ... but I might check it out. Any recommendations?

Actually, studies have shown that intiution is correct about 80% of the time.

But I agree that 80% is definitely not a high enough probability to call something "knowledge."

 

I am Agnostic and the reason for that is we will never know if there is a God or not, not a scientist or a priest or politician can ever give us answer to our questions. Plus there is too much sadness in world for there to be a God and there is no logical explanation for the Big Bang theory, somewhat for Evolution, but still not enough, so why worry about it just live life to the fullest.

 

Ah, "studies have shown" In which field?

Intuition in many cases is a response to cues not consciously detected and can indeed be right in cases where such cues exist, such as in social interaction, sensing the weather, illnesses, sensing something is "about to happen" or that something is wrong etc. However no study could show the efficacy of intuition as a good way of detecting things like the origins of existence or things which are otherwise beyond detection and I'd suggest it's probably a particularly bad way of gaining knowledge about such things.

Intuitions like the presence of ghosts and gods seem likely to be in part a consequence of the misfiring of our cognitive person-detection or threat-detection mechanisms. If you are alone in your house and hear a floorboard creaking, you will probably sit up and pay attention in case there is a burglar. These things misfire all the time, probably because those of our ancestors who were more finely tuned to the presence of possible predators would have been more likely to survive and pass on their genes... we are constantly thinking about intention-led creatures which we cannot see and I'm sure this feeds into the belief in unseen spirits.

 

*shrugs*

I just remember seeing that on the tele once, lol.

Take it or leave it, I suppose, I can't back it up at all.

I'd have to agree. You might have a *feeling* that something is wrong. You might have a *feeling* that God exists.

But based on that feeling alone -- which is something that the religious folk like to call "faith" -- one cannot *conclude* a universal truth.

 

I've actually thought about this a while ago ... do you ever get that feeling that you have, where, say ... you feel that your blood sugar is too high. Or that you're a bit dehydrated, or about to get sick ...

If you think about it, our senses and perceptions in each of these situations are altered. Considering the fact that even the air we breathe is a psychoactive drug, and also considering the fact that NOT breathing anything is also psychoactive, it is reasonable to conclude that in all circumstances and at all times, our psychological status is persistantly changing, and is never the same. It is always distorted to varying degrees.

That distortion often plays into such a scenario as a floorboard creaking, or "catching something in the corner of your eye" that wasn't really there. Or even seeing things -- patterns or figures, outlines -- in reflections, etc.

I think most stories about "ghosts" and such are merely distortions of reality interpreted to be such.

 

The Archaic Revival by Terrence Mckenna, its a great read.

This too is also something I've been reading. http://enkispeaks.com

 

BTW, that's a great signature, with the Cheney/Bush/Alice in Wonderland thing going on, lmao.

 

Yeh.. is that condoleezza rice to the left of madmag/jesus?
The one with white skin and black face paint.
Whoa...someone is expressing cutting opinion in that pic.

Da Vinci would laugh no doubt.. then cry at seeing democracy
fall into the power trip of theocracy

Occam

 

I'm agnostic in knowledge. I don't know for sure God or any gods exist, but I don't know they don't exist either. Thats why its a matter of faith, what you believe. I don't believe God exists, so I am atheist. I do however like to think of God as a metaphor or symbol.

 

Green

You mean technically you are an agnostic.
But by personal desire.. an athiest.

Hey, the power of an accute mind is the abillity to hold 2 or more conflicting beliefs in mind without imploding.

One could even be empirically an athiest
Rationally an agnostic and emotionally a thiest.

Spent 3 decades or more blending empirical experience with reason and emotion and u may well settle for he middle ground.
it's called

'I dont know'
No human being EVER has known more than a very small fraction of all there is to be known. [ indeed a minute trace of a fraction]

'I dont know' is the natural state of humanity.
not surprising then that agnosticism is the only non contradictory position
on the issue of a 'god'
Occam trusts reason... it works.
Thus he is agnostic. [at this time]

Occam