Searching for GOD...

[Stranger]

Your problem is that the only "reasoning and evidence" you are willing to consider is entirely based on the materialistic "cause and effect" scenario which will inevitably lead to the foregone conclusion that our conscious freedom to control does not exist.

Back to the mindless, thought-free repetition. Lost count of how many times this has been addressed and you've ignored it.

Why can't you accept the abundant evidence out there which indicates that the results of what we do, think or say comprise far more than what can be achieved by inevitable reactions beyond our conscious control?

You have provided no such evidence. Not the slightest hint of the merest suggestion of any.

Are you afraid to admit that there may be more to life than material reactions?

It's you who seem to be afraid of evidence and reasoning.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Ignoring the argument from consequences just supposing you heard an argument that made you change your mind and you lost your belief in God. Would you then think it ok to steal, murder and rape because nothing matters?

Ignoring the argument from consequences, I agree with the basic point that regardless of belief or lack of it, people still have a personal morality. So while I agree that individuals and societies decide what matters to them, regardless of whether they have a belief in a higher power or not, I don't think the psychology of personal morality is clear cut. https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicolefisher/2019/03/29/science-says-religion-is-good-for-your-health/?sh=755f618c3a12

From the article, which links to research, it seems there is research to indicate that belief in a higher power does have an influence on thoughts and behaviour - and that influence can be good and bad. The extent to which that influence operates in a loop based on the person's nature / nurture is yet to be ascertained and probably varies from person to person.

But the article shows that positive thoughts and outcomes can be linked to belief e.g. effect on mental health, which is linked to physical health outcomes. 

There are lots of behaviours that can be affected before you get to stealing, murder and rape - e.g. from the article "Words that are often associated with religious beliefs include connectedness, hope, optimism, trust and purpose. All of which have been shown to boost mental health. Compassion, forgiveness and gratefulness are also qualities that are strongly associated with individuals who are spiritual and religious. Practicing these qualities is thought to be associated with decreased stress and increased resiliency.". I would say that this has been my personal experience if I was to compare with my former atheist self.

Of course it's possible my thoughts may have changed anyway over time, while still being an atheist but I personally don't think so - since I remember specific instances of a thought about a higher power in the context of gratefulness, mercy and compassion expressed in Islam that changed my personal perspective and /or approach to an interaction with someone else. And if I switch to an atheist outlook, my perception is that my thoughts change and losing that component of caring how I am judged by that higher power does not seem to induce a feeling that I would consider beneficial.

Of course there are lots of examples of religious belief leading to behaviour that is the opposite of compassion, forgiveness and gratefulness so it's not possible to generalise that religious belief only leads to positive thoughts.

And of course, none of this tells you whether a higher power really exists. But since the thread is about Searching for God rather than offering proof of the existence of a higher power, presumably the point is that the process of searching can have an influence on people's thoughts and behaviours.   

[bluehillside Retd.]

VG,

S'funny – in my (purely anecdotal) experience the most religious people I’ve known have been the opposite of these things – bitter, resentful, guilt-ridden, intolerant, solipsistic etc. It’d be interesting to know therefore whether “Practicing these qualities is thought to be associated with decreased stress and increased resiliency" actually translates to real world incidences of, say, depression or other mental disorders. Do religious people suffer from them less than non-religious people, or vice versa?

I believe as an aside that US prisoner ratios are more skewed toward religious than to non-religious people than the general population would suggest, though the data are very fuzzy because greater religiosity is also correlated to other crime-related factors like poverty and low educational attainment.   

In any case though, you were rightly careful to frame your comments around beliefs in gods rather than the existence of gods. AB’s actual claim was:

“Consider these two scenarios -

A) God does not exist - therefore we can do whatever we want because nothing really matters.

B) God does exist - therefore we can't just do whatever we want because everything matters.”

Which is a very different (and entirely unqualified) position to take.   

[Nearly Sane]

VG,

S'funny – in my (purely anecdotal) experience the most religious people I’ve known have been the opposite of these things – bitter, resentful, guilt-ridden, intolerant, solipsistic etc....

Any chance that the people you define as the 'most religious' are those that live up to your prejudices of what you think they are i.e  'bitter, resentful, guilt-ridden, intolerant, solipsistic etc..'?

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

Any chance that the people you define as the 'most religious' are those that live up to your prejudices of what you think they are i.e  'bitter, resentful, guilt-ridden, intolerant, solipsistic etc..'?

Not in my experience no - I've found that the more fundie the religionist, the more bitter and resentful they were. Conversely, the only two C of E clerics I've known have both been rather jolly. Go figure.     

[Nearly Sane]

NS,

Not in my experience no - I've found that the more fundie the religionist, the more bitter and resentful they were. Conversely, the only two C of E clerics I've known have both been rather jolly. Go figure.   

So you define 'most religious' as what you regard as fundie, and people who have become clerics as not that religious. Seems to hint at you having a touch of the No True Most Religious approach.

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

So you define 'most religious' as what you regard as fundie, and people who have become clerics as not that religious.

The only C of E clerics I’ve known, and pretty much yes. OT literalism seems to me to be a reasonable correlate for “fundie”, and more nuanced, NT-based “maybe the devil just had a bit of bad press”, denim and dog collar-style vicaring seems to me to be a reasonable definition of non-fundie.     

Seems to hint at you having a touch of the No True Most Religious approach.

Not really – see above.

[Nearly Sane]

NS,

The only C of E clerics I’ve known, and pretty much yes. OT literalism seems to me to be a reasonable correlate for “fundie”, and more nuanced, NT-based “maybe the devil just had a bit of bad press”- style vicaring seems to me to be a reasonable definition of non-fundie.     

Not really – see above.

You seem to have missed a logical step. You used the term 'most religious' and now you are talking about 'OT literalism' and 'fundie'.  You haven't justified the terms being equivalent except by repeating your No True Scotsman approach. My take is that if someone has gone to the effort in becoming a member of the C of E clergy, they would normally be defined as very religious.

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

You seem to have missed a logical step. You used the term 'most religious' and now you are talking about 'OT literalism' and 'fundie'.  You haveb't justified the terms being equivalent except by repeating your No True Scotsman approach. My take is that if someone has gone to the effort in becoming a member of the C of E clergy, they would normally be defined as very religious.

Maybe, but there seems to me to be a useful scale of religiosity from “if it’s written in the OT it’s literally and categorically true” at one end to “if it’s written in a different book it’s likely allegorical, open to interpretation, good enough to be true but not necessarily certainly so” etc at the other. The former is what I meant by “most religious”.

I take the point that Fred Phelps and my local jolly vicar both were (presumably) strongly religiously motivated to do their jobs, but that’s a different matter from the way they do their jobs.

This doesn’t seem very controversial to me by the way. Asks a Phelps type “are you a fundamentalist?” and the answer will likely be yes; ask the local vicar the same question and answer will likely be no. I merely began this with the observation that in my (very limited) experience the former are less happy in their skins than the latter. Your experience may be different.         

[Nearly Sane]

NS,

Maybe, but there seems to me to be a useful scale of religiosity from “if it’s written in the OT it’s literally and categorically true” at one end to “if it’s written in a different book it’s likely allegorical, open to interpretation, good enough to be true but not necessarily certainly so” etc at the other. The former is what I meant by “most religious”.

I take the point that Fred Phelps and my local jolly vicar both were (presumably) strongly religiously motivated to do their jobs, but that’s a different matter from the way they do their jobs.

This doesn’t seem very controversial to me by the way. Asks a Phelps type “are you a fundamentalist?” and the answer will likely be yes; ask the local vicar the same question and answer will likely be no. I merely began this with the observation that in my (very limited) experience the former are less happy in their skins than the latter. Your experience may be different.         

And again all you are doing is saying the people who are most religious in your view are the ones that meet your existing prejudices. Why do you classify your vicar not amongst the 'most religious'?

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

And again all you are doing is saying the people who are most religious in your view are the ones that meet your existing prejudices. Why do you classify your vicar not amongst the 'most religious'?

And again, no I’m not. “Non-nuanced” and “nuanced”, “not open to interpretation” and “open to interpretation”, “I self-identify as a fundie” and “I don’t self-identify as a fundie” etc all seems to me to me to be reasonable correlates for "most religious" and "not most religious" respectively. That has nothing to do with my “prejudices” –  if, say, one group could not be persuaded out of their beliefs no matter what (because there’s no interpretative aspect), and the other possibly could be in certain circumstances at least in principle (because interpretation is all) then of the two the former seem the “most” religious to me.   

To be frank I don’t particularly care about the terminological exactitude of this. If you don’t like “most religious” then by all means use “most religiously literal” or some such if it makes you happier. It makes no difference to my point, which was that in my (entirely anecdotal) experience the former have shown (considerably) less “…compassion, forgiveness and gratefulness” than the latter.     

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

NS,

Maybe, but there seems to me to be a useful scale of religiosity from “if it’s written in the OT it’s literally and categorically true” at one end to “if it’s written in a different book it’s likely allegorical, open to interpretation, good enough to be true but not necessarily certainly so” etc at the other. The former is what I meant by “most religious”.

Why would this be the way you define "most religious".

Aren't you essentially saying that your definition of "most religious" is those who are most fundamentalist, extremist and dogmatic?

This definition is problematic in many areas, not just religion e.g. politics, philosophy, ethics - I would disagree that "fundamentalists" or "extremists" should be synonymous with "most religious" or "most political" or "most ethical". Why should someone who is dogmatic or unable to change their political belief be considered the "most political"?

Not really sure how "extremism" and "fundie" should be defined. After years of invoking the subjective idea that extremists oppose “fundamental British values”, the government’s current definition of extremism been decried as unfit for purpose, with some far right-wing groups even using it to their advantage. The UK government currently defines extremism as, “vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs”. But this definition and its emphasis on “fundamental British values” allows the far right to lean further into nationalism and distance themselves from allegations of extremism"

https://theconversation.com/extremism-in-the-uk-new-definitions-threaten-human-and-civil-rights-157086

[Nearly Sane]

NS,

And again, no I’m not. “Non-nuanced” and “nuanced”, “not open to interpretation” and “open to interpretation”, “I self-identify as a fundie” and “I don’t self-identify as a fundie” etc all seems to me to me to be reasonable correlates for "most religious" and "not most religious" respectively. That has nothing to do with my “prejudices” –  if, say, one group could not be persuaded out of their beliefs no matter what (because there’s no interpretative aspect), and the other possibly could be in certain circumstances at least in principle (because interpretation is all) then of the two the former seem the “most” religious to me.   

To be frank I don’t particularly care about the terminological exactitude of this. If you don’t like “most religious” then by all means use “most religiously literal” or some such if it makes you happier. It makes no difference to my point, which was that in my (entirely anecdotal) experience the former have shown (considerably) less “…compassion, forgiveness and gratefulness” than the latter.   

If you are uncomfortable with the term you used, not my problem.

[Alan Burns]

S'funny – in my (purely anecdotal) experience the most religious people I’ve known have been the opposite of these things – bitter, resentful, guilt-ridden, intolerant, solipsistic etc.

You have not known many Christians then.
CS Lewis was surprised by Joy.
GK Chesterton said Joy is the gigantic secret of the Christian.

here is a very entertaining talk on the subject if you are interested:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnVWYHoHLsM

[Nearly Sane]

You have not known many Christians then.
CS Lewis was surprised by Joy.
GK Chesterton said Joy is the gigantic secret of the Christian.

here is a very entertaining talk on the subject if you are interested:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnVWYHoHLsM

Did all the clergy who raped children find joy in that?

[Aruntraveller]

Couldn't we just all agree that all sorts of people find joy. Some are religious, some aren't.

I really should not need to spell out the fucking obvious.

[Nearly Sane]

Couldn't we just all agree that all sorts of people find joy. Some are religious, some aren't.

I really should not need to spell out the fucking obvious.

Come on! BHS knows the religious are smelly, and AB knows atheists are just nasty.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Couldn't we just all agree that all sorts of people find joy. Some are religious, some aren't.

And we’re just supposed to accept your unargued thesis are we?

[Aruntraveller]

And we’re just supposed to accept your unargued thesis are we?

Accept it or don't. It's up to you. I'm certainly not going to argue the toss with someone who seeks to make a mountain out of every molehill he comes across.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Accept it or don't. It's up to you. I'm certainly not going to argue the toss with someone who seeks to make a mountain out of every molehill he comes across.

You haven't given anything for me to go on.
For starters, as far as I can see Alan is the only one using the word joy which rather suggest it isn't much of a thing in today's Christian minority society.

[Aruntraveller]

You haven't given anything for me to go on.
For starters, as far as I can see Alan is the only one using the word joy which rather suggest it isn't much of a thing in today's Christian minority society.

Go on. Do your best to prove Blue's point.

[torridon]

You have not known many Christians then.
CS Lewis was surprised by Joy.
GK Chesterton said Joy is the gigantic secret of the Christian.

here is a very entertaining talk on the subject if you are interested:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnVWYHoHLsM

If you manage to convince yourself of an appealing belief system, it stands to reason that you may be happier as a result.  It doesn't mean your chosen belief system is true.  Appealing beliefs are more, errm, appealing, than cold hard reality.  People have multitudinous ways of finding peace of mind and happiness.  One such is to convince yourself that you are not going to die when you die, and that your loved ones who have died, are not really dead.  Most religions leverage this mind trick.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Go on. Do your best to prove Blue's point.

Never mind about Blue ;what's your justification?

[Aruntraveller]

Never mind about Blue ;what's your justification?

You really like to make heavy weather of stuff don't you? Perhaps Blue was right after all.

Definition time:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/joy

My point is simple. I have friends who are religious who say they experience joy. I have friends who are not religious who say they experience joy.

Therefore joy is not contigent on belief or non-belief in a religion.

Now you can argue about what joy is, because it is personal and fairly subjective, but to make a claim that only some people are able to experience it is ludicrous.

I take great joy from Shostakovich's Festive Overture Op.96. I don't expect others to, it is a personal experience. I take great joy from watching and hearing a skylark over the bird sanctuary at Selsey.

Other people take great joy from things I'm not remotely interested in, it doesn't make their experience of joy any less valid because I'm not interested does it?

Do you have to go on so?

[Gordon]

For starters, as far as I can see Alan is the only one using the word joy which rather suggest it isn't much of a thing in today's Christian minority society.

Oh I don't know Vlad: there may not be as many of them these days, but there is great joy (and mirth) to be had in watching some insightless Christians making utter fools of themselves.