Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Stephen T-B · 10-13-2003, 06:56 AM

The deal at that juncture was, God would make his will known to me in an unambiguous manner, and I would spend the rest of my life in His service.

He didn�t and I didn�t.

I now know I was able to ask God to come out from behind the tree because I was psychologically prepared for a non show, and when that happened, I gave a mental shrug and got on with my life. In other words, I was indifferent as to the outcome of my challenge, which isn�t to say I wasn�t 100 per cent serious about keeping my side of the bargain: as far as I knew, the God my family and their friends talked about every day (and a good deal of every day) really did exist; it just happened that I had no personal experience of what they were talking about, and now, on the verge of a life-long commitment, I required it.

Ever since then (and I think I�m not different from very many other atheists in this respect), the God thing has been something people can go in for, or not, depending on how they feel.

I communicate with my ancient uncle, a Franciscan Friar, in the spirit of this relaxed attitude, and it informs many of my exchanges with Believers here at II.

What I�ve come to realise, however, is that Belief is not a take-it-or-leave-it add-on in the Believer�s lexicon.
It is not an optional extra: it is compulsory: a person MUST believe, or be damned - and that�s not to be shrugged at.

God and damnation are part of the same package, and both are real. Absolutely real. Those who believe in them do so for the rather obvious reason that they believe them to be real.

Atheists like me are unsupportable, not because we disagree about something trivial but because, through sheer willfulness, we refuse to acknowledge a blinding truth, and with such consequences that all of Man�s woes fade into insignificance when compared with them.

I think this accounts for the exasperation - and anger - we sometimes see here.

Hopeful Monsters · 10-13-2003, 07:12 AM

Fair points being made Stephen T-B.

But just supposing the believers who are certain it is REAL - of whom you speak - are just in a kind of sleepwalk through life and could be woken up with a bit of self insight about themselves and the world, the universe?

God might be beautiful - but for me the reality of the universe as revealed by science, engineering, psychology, art etc is exceedingly more so.

It's a battle for Truth and the only victor will be Truth.

(It's times like these that I just hate my iidb name choice)

Stephen T-B · 10-13-2003, 07:20 AM

I think a person can only stop believing when believing doesn''t matter. I therefore doubt that a jolt administered by anyone else can shift that person from a need-to-believe to a no-need-to-believe position.

The jolt comes from somewhere else - and can work both ways.

Hopeful Monsters · 10-13-2003, 07:29 AM

The 'when it no longer matters' is a crucial point - it highlights how (for me anyway) belief is NOT a matter of intellectual embrace but of emotional, neurological, cultural and sociological foundation(s).

But I won't continue in case I get your Thread kicked out of EoG into GRD or something.

markfiend · 10-13-2003, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stephen T-B
Atheists like me are unsupportable, not because we disagree about something trivial but because, through sheer willfulness, we refuse to acknowledge a blinding truth, and with such consequences that all of Man�s woes fade into insignificance when compared with them.

I think this accounts for the exasperation - and anger - we sometimes see here.

I'd agree with your analysis, but add that the reverse is also true; this "blinding truth" is (in my opinion at least) an utter absurdity. And I tend to get exasperated and angry when it is asserted again and again as "incontrovertible", despite the fact that it has been (again, in my opinion at least) completely controverted, time after time. (Is "controverted" a word?)

Stephen T-B · 10-13-2003, 07:34 AM

I am sure you are right, TruthisTold, that it is not a matter of intellectual embrace.

It's the attempt to make it seem so which drops Believers into eye-level goo; its why their arguments are so terribly and painfully convoluted.

Stephen T-B · 10-13-2003, 07:55 AM

There's "contravene" in my dictionary. Means disagree with, contradict.
No "contraverted" but it's a good word; sounds more up-market than "disputed."

You're right to say there is exasperation on both sides of the Beleif / Unbelief fence, and it is to do with incomprehension.

Atheists approach the issue as something you can make a rational decision about; weigh up the pros and cons; balance the chances of there being an invisible god-thing which we're in the image of and which is everywhere, all the time, against the chances of it being pure fiction. We play games with it, (like the POE and Occam's Razor) issue challenges and generally muck around.

The Believers who come here try to join in these games - but don't know they're games. From their point of view, dicing with Damnation isn't something you do in a flippant kind of a way.

Hopeful Monsters · 10-13-2003, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stephen T-B

<snip>

You're right to say there is exasperation on both sides of the Belief/Unbelief fence, and it is to do with incomprehension.

Atheists approach the issue as something you can make a rational decision about.

<snip>

We play games with it, (like the POE and Occam's Razor) issue challenges and generally muck around.

The Believers who come here try to join in these games - but don't know they're games. From their point of view, dicing with Damnation isn't something you do in a flippant kind of a way.

Another very sound point - I'm too insensitive and hot-headed to recognise the 'don't know they are just games to Atheists' point that you make.

This is why I am now desperately trying to withdraw my involvement in these Boards (yes).

Stephen T-B · 10-13-2003, 08:17 AM

I should have said "some of us platy games." Which doesn't mean to say they aren't engaged in seriously. And there's nothing wrong with passion.
(Unmitigated Anglo-Saxon sang froid is damn boring.)

markfiend · 10-13-2003, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stephen T-B
I should have said "some of us platy games." Which doesn't mean to say they aren't engaged in seriously.

Heh. There is nothing more serious than fun

10-13-2003, 06:56 AM	#1
Stephen T-B Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Leeds, UK Posts: 5,878	Not an optional extra The deal at that juncture was, God would make his will known to me in an unambiguous manner, and I would spend the rest of my life in His service. He didn�t and I didn�t. I now know I was able to ask God to come out from behind the tree because I was psychologically prepared for a non show, and when that happened, I gave a mental shrug and got on with my life. In other words, I was indifferent as to the outcome of my challenge, which isn�t to say I wasn�t 100 per cent serious about keeping my side of the bargain: as far as I knew, the God my family and their friends talked about every day (and a good deal of every day) really did exist; it just happened that I had no personal experience of what they were talking about, and now, on the verge of a life-long commitment, I required it. Ever since then (and I think I�m not different from very many other atheists in this respect), the God thing has been something people can go in for, or not, depending on how they feel. I communicate with my ancient uncle, a Franciscan Friar, in the spirit of this relaxed attitude, and it informs many of my exchanges with Believers here at II. What I�ve come to realise, however, is that Belief is not a take-it-or-leave-it add-on in the Believer�s lexicon. It is not an optional extra: it is compulsory: a person MUST believe, or be damned - and that�s not to be shrugged at. God and damnation are part of the same package, and both are real. Absolutely real. Those who believe in them do so for the rather obvious reason that they believe them to be real. Atheists like me are unsupportable, not because we disagree about something trivial but because, through sheer willfulness, we refuse to acknowledge a blinding truth, and with such consequences that all of Man�s woes fade into insignificance when compared with them. I think this accounts for the exasperation - and anger - we sometimes see here.

10-13-2003, 07:29 AM	#4
Hopeful Monsters Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: God is a Mind Loop Posts: 1,344	"When it no longer matters" The 'when it no longer matters' is a crucial point - it highlights how (for me anyway) belief is NOT a matter of intellectual embrace but of emotional, neurological, cultural and sociological foundation(s). But I won't continue in case I get your Thread kicked out of EoG into GRD or something.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-13-2003, 07:12 AM	#2
Hopeful Monsters Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: God is a Mind Loop Posts: 1,344	Fair points being made Stephen T-B. But just supposing the believers who are certain it is REAL - of whom you speak - are just in a kind of sleepwalk through life and could be woken up with a bit of self insight about themselves and the world, the universe? God might be beautiful - but for me the reality of the universe as revealed by science, engineering, psychology, art etc is exceedingly more so. It's a battle for Truth and the only victor will be Truth. (It's times like these that I just hate my iidb name choice)

10-13-2003, 07:20 AM	#3
Stephen T-B Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Leeds, UK Posts: 5,878	I think a person can only stop believing when believing doesn''t matter. I therefore doubt that a jolt administered by anyone else can shift that person from a need-to-believe to a no-need-to-believe position. The jolt comes from somewhere else - and can work both ways.

10-13-2003, 07:34 AM	#6
Stephen T-B Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Leeds, UK Posts: 5,878	I am sure you are right, TruthisTold, that it is not a matter of intellectual embrace. It's the attempt to make it seem so which drops Believers into eye-level goo; its why their arguments are so terribly and painfully convoluted.

10-13-2003, 07:55 AM	#7
Stephen T-B Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Leeds, UK Posts: 5,878	There's "contravene" in my dictionary. Means disagree with, contradict. No "contraverted" but it's a good word; sounds more up-market than "disputed." You're right to say there is exasperation on both sides of the Beleif / Unbelief fence, and it is to do with incomprehension. Atheists approach the issue as something you can make a rational decision about; weigh up the pros and cons; balance the chances of there being an invisible god-thing which we're in the image of and which is everywhere, all the time, against the chances of it being pure fiction. We play games with it, (like the POE and Occam's Razor) issue challenges and generally muck around. The Believers who come here try to join in these games - but don't know they're games. From their point of view, dicing with Damnation isn't something you do in a flippant kind of a way.

10-13-2003, 08:17 AM	#9
Stephen T-B Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Leeds, UK Posts: 5,878	I should have said "some of us platy games." Which doesn't mean to say they aren't engaged in seriously. And there's nothing wrong with passion. (Unmitigated Anglo-Saxon sang froid is damn boring.)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.