How The Modern World Makes Us Mentally Ill

[Gonnagle]

Dear Sane,

I feel very comfortable saying it, we go back away on this forum and the old Beeb, I have asked on more than one occasion for the atheist to open up, purely because I would really like to understand why But the conversation never really gets started, it fizzles out, they would much rather explore my belief, they would much rather take my beliefs and throw cold water on them, so in my quieter moments when the grey cells are churning away I think why, are they afraid, is the topic to boring??

Gonnagle.

[Stranger]

I feel very comfortable saying it, we go back away on this forum and the old Beeb, I have asked on more than one occasion for the atheist to open up, purely because I would really like to understand why But the conversation never really gets started, it fizzles out, they would much rather explore my belief, they would much rather take my beliefs and throw cold water on them, so in my quieter moments when the grey cells are churning away I think why, are they afraid, is the topic to boring??

But the point (in my case) is that the why begins and ends with never having been given a sensible reason to take any of the god-concepts seriously. I cannot understand why people do take it seriously - which I guess is why the conversation turns to why you believe.

What else are you expecting? I'd genuinely like to know.

[Nearly Sane]

Dear Sane,

I feel very comfortable saying it, we go back away on this forum and the old Beeb, I have asked on more than one occasion for the atheist to open up, purely because I would really like to understand why But the conversation never really gets started, it fizzles out, they would much rather explore my belief, they would much rather take my beliefs and throw cold water on them, so in my quieter moments when the grey cells are churning away I think why, are they afraid, is the topic to boring??

Gonnagle.

And I have happily opened up. When have I ever refused to answer a question?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I wasn't defining god as anything - you asked for my reaction to the word, which is what I gave you.

Once again, you asked for a reaction, not something directly comparable in every way.

The (real) reasons for my reaction is that I have never been presented with a reason to think that the various god concepts are anything more than superstition and that some people's god-concepts lead them to take attitudes that are dangerous.

But if we break down your objections they come from a philosophical materialism(Yes I am saying that as though it were a bad thing)
Any reading of your input recently shows an emotional dislike of religion in the form of anger and an irrational fear of religious danger but the biggest pointer to your action is your acceptance of the idea that an intelligent creator of the universe is a reasonable idea solong as you don't call it God.

Your agreement with Dawkins not having to know any theology to expertly dismiss everything you didnt know it contained is unreasonable.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Stranger,

Are you able you come up with some objective reason (evidence or logical argument) to take a god-concept seriously? If you can't - I would suggest that it is you who is not examining your beliefs...

I examine them every single day, for me it is all part of being a Christian, it is a journey, I have tried to examine all the evidence, all the scientific evidence but nothing touches what God is, nothing says why I am the way I am, there is a hell of a lot of theory but nothing concrete, there is no fact to say, not one fact that there is no God.

Gonnagle.

[Nearly Sane]

But if we break down your objections they come from a philosophical materialism(Yes I am saying that as though it were a bad thing)
Any reading of your input recently shows an emotional dislike of religion in the form of anger and an irrational fear of religious danger but the biggest pointer to your action is your acceptance of the idea that an intelligent creator of the universe is a reasonable idea solong as you don't call it God.

Your agreement with Dawkins not having to know any theology to expertly dismiss everything you didnt know it contained is unreasonable.

I think you tread dangerous ground expressing your opinion of someone's motivation as a fact.

[Stranger]

But if we break down your objections they come from a philosophical materialism(Yes I am saying that as though it were a bad thing)
Any reading of your input recently shows an emotional dislike of religion in the form of anger and an irrational fear of religious danger but the biggest pointer to your action is your acceptance of the idea that an intelligent creator of the universe is a reasonable idea solong as you don't call it God.

Pure fantasy. The reason is that I have never been presented with any evidence or argument for god that isn't obviously flawed. The (non-god) intelligent creator has been dealt with at length and I don't think it's "reasonable" but the argument is somewhat (only just) better than the god arguments.

Your agreement with Dawkins not having to know any theology to expertly dismiss everything you didnt know it contained is unreasonable.

Yawn - theology is irrelevant until you can demonstrate that it's about something real...

[Gonnagle]

Dear Sane,

And I have happily opened up. When have I ever refused to answer a question?

Never, but it might just be me, maybe I don't know the right questions to ask, or maybe I don't like opening up a can of worms, but I do feel like it is a closed shop, we don't discuss it on this forum, one of the reasons I don't understand atheism, nobody wants to talk about it.

Gonnagle.

[Gordon]

Dear Vlad,

Sorry old chap, against the rules, sub section 5 paragraph 4 of the forum rules, thou shall not ask the atheist to examine their beliefs, it makes them think!

Gonnagle.

But I don't have any beliefs about gods to examine: all I've done is think about what those who do have beliefs about gods say and I've concluded that their beliefs are demonstrably flawed in various ways (depending on how they express their belief), to the extent that their god claim isn't a serious proposition.
 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I think you tread dangerous ground expressing your opinion of someone's motivation as a fact.

I don't think I have said anything here that Stranger would not agree with except perhaps that his fear of religion was irrational by don't of it's implied universality to be potentially so.

[Stranger]

I examine them every single day, for me it is all part of being a Christian, it is a journey, I have tried to examine all the evidence, all the scientific evidence but nothing touches what God is, nothing says why I am the way I am, there is a hell of a lot of theory but nothing concrete, there is no fact to say, not one fact that there is no God.

I didn't claim that there was any evidence or argument that there is definitely no god(s) - which is why I accept the possibility.

However, that isn't a reason to take the idea of god(s) seriously - why would it be?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Dear Sane,

Never, but it might just be me, maybe I don't know the right questions to ask, or maybe I don't like opening up a can of worms, but I do feel like it is a closed shop, we don't discuss it on this forum, one of the reasons I don't understand atheism, nobody wants to talk about it.

Gonnagle.

It's true Atheism is often covered over in these parts with the default delusion and ''atheism is merely the lack etc.''

[Stranger]

...one of the reasons I don't understand atheism, nobody wants to talk about it.

Perhaps you are expecting more than there is?

As several have said here - atheism (as applied, I think, to most atheists here) is simply the result of not finding the god-concepts and the reasons given for believing in them, at all convincing.

That's it. That really is all there is to it.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Yawn - theology is irrelevant until you can demonstrate that it's about something real...

It is not irrelevent if you then wish to make pronouncements upon what it is saying....and many obviously want to. Atheism itself is a theological position.

Your belief is evidence, IMHO of a slavish worship of even the great master Dawkins verbal toe clippings.

[Stranger]

It's true Atheism is often covered over in these parts with the default delusion and ''atheism is merely the lack etc.''

atheism - Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Like it or not - that is what (true) atheism is.

[Stranger]

Atheism itself is a theological position.

Drivel - see definition above.

Your belief is evidence, IMHO of a slavish worship of even the great master Dawkins verbal toe clippings.

Worse drivel. I guess making daft assertions is a way for you to avoid actually thinking.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

atheism - Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Like it or not - that is what (true) atheism is.

In which case why don't people STFU after they've said it?

[wigginhall]

It does seem difficult to talk about not having a belief.   Of course, the old joke was talking about not stamp collecting, and you could even set up a club for non stamp collectors.    My old dad was an atheist, and he found the whole area deeply tedious, and there was little to talk about.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

. I guess making daft assertions is a way for you to avoid actually thinking.

And I guess saying that atheism is merely the lack of belief in Gods is a way for you to avoid it.

[Nearly Sane]

Dear Sane,

Never, but it might just be me, maybe I don't know the right questions to ask, or maybe I don't like opening up a can of worms, but I do feel like it is a closed shop, we don't discuss it on this forum, one of the reasons I don't understand atheism, nobody wants to talk about it.

Gonnagle.

Atheism is a position on a single question. Do you believe in god(s)? And you answer no, that's it. No more complex no more deep. For atheism itself that is the only question that will gave any consistency.

[Nearly Sane]

And I guess saying that atheism is merely the lack of belief in Gods is a way for you to avoid it.

No, this is you making stuff up about motivations again. Tgatis what atheism is.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Gordon,

But I don't have any beliefs about gods to examine: all I've done is think about what those who do have beliefs about gods say and I've concluded that their beliefs are demonstrably flawed in various ways (depending on how they express their belief), to the extent that their god claim isn't a serious proposition.
 

To me that is a very honest reply, if I say God is Love, the standard answer is the newborn with cancer, and that is fine, very human response, how can he be a God of Love if he allows that.

But what if I say God is that part of us waiting to be awakened, to be more human, by human I mean, that part which spits in the eye of the war mongers, that part of us that hates greed, that part of us that feels compassion for every living thing, this is my God and more.

Can you believe in that God??

Gonnagle.

[Nearly Sane]

In which case why don't people STFU after they've said it?

Because that's not all of what the people yohare talking to are. It's all of what atheism is.

[Nearly Sane]

Dear Gordon,

To me that is a very honest reply, if I say God is Love, the standard answer is the newborn with cancer, and that is fine, very human response, how can he be a God of Love if he allows that.

But what if I say God is that part of us waiting to be awakened, to be more human, by human I mean, that part which spits in the eye of the war mongers, that part of us that hates greed, that part of us that feels compassion for every living thing, this is my God and more.

Can you believe in that God??

Gonnagle.

No, because (a) it's nonsensical since surely the war mongering is Hunan so why is your position more human, and (b) surely that would mean if I said look here's a lamp that I am going to call 'god' you believe in the lamp existing ergo 'god' exists. It's not an argument it's a semantic game that makes the term meaningless

[Gonnagle]

Dear Sane,

Atheism is a position on a single question. Do you believe in god(s)? And you answer no, that's it. No more complex no more deep. For atheism itself that is the only question that will gave any consistency.

Well our Gordon has just said he only disbelieves in what other have described as their God, so not gods but only the ones he has heard about.

Am I right Gordon?

Gonnagle.