Freethought & Rationalism Archive

garsy · 01-02-2003, 07:54 AM

To conceptualise something either concrete or abstract, like a mathematical equation for instance, it has to 'be' in some sense. Given the premise that the being known as God, with all the attributes attributed to him, does not exist, what is it we are thinking?
As a nonbeliever, I guess I name God by the definitions of believers. Someone who is a believer and not just an idiot giving idiotic reasons for God's existence, must 'know' God in another way than I do-- a kind of experiencing, rather than a knowing only, it seems to me.
This induced state, a living of fantasy is a choice, to experience their lives as a religious narrative, rather than as the existent narrative of time\space, to which the abstract of narrative belongs.
Any thoughts upon this, folks?

Uni-Universe · 01-02-2003, 10:26 AM

garsy,

Interesting. In response to your question: "What is it we are thinking?" I believe in God because I believe that God is the Universe. People have different names and anthropomorphic definitions for the Universe.

I don't have a religious view of God.

I have my philosophy of the Universe etc. and other people have religions surrounding their definition of God. Religions serve a function in society. So I don't think it is necessary to rally against religious groups or individuals. People have a right to believe what they need to in order to function in the world. It is better to be religious and functioning rather than to be non-functioning at all. People do what they need to do.

Religions are too deeply imbedded in culture, tradition, and history to be regarded as mere fantasies. I believe that religions will evolve but the religions will never leave our cultures.

Maybe if people began to think of God differently, we will all find a point in the future where we can all agree.

The Universe is God. God (minus anthropomorphic characteristics) is the Universe. What do you think about that?

(stirring the discussion pot)

Selsaral · 01-02-2003, 10:54 AM

I dunno. People believe in all sorts of crazy stuff. People are (were) completely positive of things that were utterly disproven, for instance insisting the world would end in biblical apocalypse on January 1st 2000. Human existence from the earliest has been built upon the fact that we really don't know much at all about anything, but we get by fine believing the thing we think is 'best' at the time. I think it is human nature to fill in the gaps with whatever we want. I think we are fundamentally gullible. When I was 14 years old, and my older friend mocked me by telling me the word 'gullible' wasn't in the dictionary, I said 'really?!'. We like to believe things, and we like to tell stories. We all know the more a story is told, the taller it gets.

As for why people obviously seem to have serious religious experiences, again I think it's just human nature. There are tons of documented cases of psychological conditions such as schizophrenia, dual personalities, etc etc. I am not saying religious people are freaked out psychos, I am saying human beings have complex mental processes and that our consciousness is strange and difficult to understand, and has plenty of room for odd perceptions and interpretations. Starvation has been known to cause hallucinations for instance. (I find it so suspicious that many religions feature fasting, and that many religious experiences happen while fasting). I've burst into tears hearing a moving piece of music, moved deeply emotionally just because of some sound waves hitting my ears. I regularly hold conversations with myself, arguing in several different voices several points of view. I regularly act like mere coincidences are telling a larger picture, when after the fact I learn that that's all they were: mere coincidences.

The same thing that makes me a paranoid, hardcore pessimist (I ALWAYS assume something will go wrong almost to the point of absurdity) i would suggest is similar to a religious belief. I mean, I don't know for a fact that when I drop my bagle that it won't land cream-cheese side-down, but I assume it does and I act accordingly. I obviously count the hits much more often than the misses (in the case of pessimism i count the poor outcomes more than the good outcomes, and i think it's because when things go poorly I'm screwed and have to fix it, and when things go well I say 'good' and move on), and I am therefore acting on and perceiving the universe through a particular perspective that has little basis in reality. Objectively, I don't really think the universe is out to get me. But I act like it is in order to pre-emptively reduce the occurance of poor outcomes (to speculate, a religious equivalent would be sacraficing an animal to please the gods and insure the season's harvest).

This was a bit ranty, and not very organized, and essentially pure speculation, but to sum up: i think it's human nature to be religious, have religious experiences, and be completely 100% positive about all sorts of things, real and not real. When I say 'human nature', I mean the human condition including the nature of our consciousness, the nature of our environment, and the nature of our culture.

garsy · 01-02-2003, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Uni-Universe
garsy,

Interesting. In response to your question: "What is it we are thinking?" I believe in God because I believe that God is the Universe. People have different names and anthropomorphic definitions for the Universe.

God is the universe, yes, I can accept that -- but it does not comply with what Christians believe God to be. They would say The creator created your universe. If the universe is God then it is not their God but yours...in other words you do not believe in God.

I don't have a religious view of God.

I have my philosophy of the Universe etc. and other people have religions surrounding their definition of God. Religions serve a function in society. So I don't think it is necessary to rally against religious groups or individuals. People have a right to believe what they need to in order to function in the world. It is better to be religious and functioning rather than to be non-functioning at all. People do what they need to do.

Religions are too deeply imbedded in culture, tradition, and history to be regarded as mere fantasies. I believe that religions will evolve but the religions will never leave our cultures.

So was the fear and numonous awe in and surrounding people in the old days. fantasies! which have to alarge degree fallen by the way-side due to the enlightenment of science.

Maybe if people began to think of God differently, we will all find a point in the future where we can all agree.

The Universe is God. God (minus anthropomorphic characteristics) is the Universe. What do you think about that?

(stirring the discussion pot)

cpickett · 01-02-2003, 12:05 PM

Very interesting Selsaral. :notworthy

It kind of depends on what you mean by "God is the Universe". By that do you mean that God is still a God, still having all the attributes generally applied to a God? (IE Omniscient,Omnipotent,etc.)

If you think the universe is just an inanimate object in which we live, then does it matter wether you call it God or the Universe?

Parts of religion have a reason to be around. There are a lot of people that couldn't cope without it, and I think that a church being there when that person is in need is a great thing. Religions also keep people who don't have a natural sense of Good Vs. Bad, in check...

Most people would be able to live their life, without the fear of eternal damnation, and not kill everyone.
I also truly belive that the main reason we see no technological advances during the medieval era, is due to the Catholic church basically ruling Europe. 9/11, the Crusades, Abortion clinic bombs, all (along with many other things) wouldn't happen if it weren't for religion, how many millions of people have suffered or died in the name of religion?

Uni-Universe · 01-02-2003, 12:41 PM

cpickett,

You opened a whole giant can of worms by asserting that 9/11 etc would not have happened if it weren't for religion. There are so many sociological reasons why violence happens, not to mention biological, neurological, and psychological reasons as well. Reasons, not excuses.

Religion is often used as a scapegoat for people. People who commit violence have a highly disturbed interpretation of what their religion is telling them to do. It is further compounded if these individuals were a part of a terrorist group. Terrorist group, not religious group. Saying religion is the cause of violence would also mean that you are saying all religious people are violent which is not true. It is also not true that violent actions have a root religious cause.

If you look into the doctrines of religion, you will see that they state that murder is wrong.

cpickett · 01-02-2003, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Uni-Universe
cpickett,

You opened a whole giant can of worms by asserting that 9/11 etc would not have happened if it weren't for religion. There are so many sociological reasons why violence happens, not to mention biological, neurological, and psychological reasons as well. Reasons, not excuses.

Religion is often used as a scapegoat for people. People who commit violence have a highly disturbed interpretation of what their religion is telling them to do. It is further compounded if these individuals were a part of a terrorist group. Terrorist group, not religious group. Saying religion is the cause of violence would also mean that you are saying all religious people are violent which is not true. It is also not true that violent actions have a root religious cause.

If you look into the doctrines of religion, you will see that they state that murder is wrong.

I may have been off base with 9/11, although I still belive it wouldn't have, I have no evidence to support this... But would the crusades have happened or would religious fanatics blow up abortion clinics without it?

Mark David Chapman, IMO is a person, that without religion, probably wouldn't have even thought about assasinating John Lennon. He killed him, because he thought he was impure, and according to his new found religion, John Lennon must die.

Now admittedly the guy was disturbed to begin with, but I think having to live up to the expectations of what he thought his religion was requiring, put him over the edge.

I'm sorry if my post came off like that, but I in no way meant that all religious people are violent. A religious person is not violent as a rule, but a religion can be.

Maybe you should mention something to God about that then, and have him appolgize to:

Soddom & Gommorah
The Egyptians
The Mid'ianites
Gibeon
Kir'iath-se'pher

and the many other cultures/cities that God in his infinte wisdom decided to "smite".

excreationist · 01-03-2003, 02:44 AM

This thread is repeated, at least initially, in the General Religious Discussions... it has many interesting posts in it.

Anyway, this is what I wrote in it..........
*****************************************
I think "God" is just like an invisible friend or parent... they call it/him "God" because of the concept's superiority and power over other things in the universe. For them, "God" is the name they use to talk about a force - a force with a personality. (Well I guess for some people, "God" doesn't have a human-type personality - it is a more mystical force)

God is also an explanation for things that are hard to understand - e.g. "how did everything get here?" - "an invisible force called 'God' made it all".

BTW, the concept of "God" can evolve throughout a believer's lifetime -
see the book "Stages of Faith" by James W. Fowler:

Quote:

Stage 1--Magical World
Ages 2-6, perceives the world through lens of imagination and intuition unrestrained by logic e.g., lives in a magical world in which anything is possible

Stage 2--Concrete Family
Ages 6-12, sees the world as a story--concrete, literal, narrative family of ritual and myth e.g., "In the beginning, God created the . . ." Stage 2 collapses when teenagers use newfound power of abstract thought to deconstruct previous understanding of the world e.g., risk of rejecting religious beliefs of parents, and identifying with surrounding secular culture

Stage 3--Faith Community *
Teenager to early adulthood or beyond, sees the world through the lens of the peer community e.g., unconsciously "catches" faith, values, and way of thinking from peer group or subculture tends not to question the accepted ways of thinking e.g., "if the Bible says . . . it must be true" or "if some group says . . . it's the Truth" difficult dealing calmly and rationally with issues that touches on one's identity

Stage 4--Rational Constructs *
Adulthood (if) traditional answers stop making sense e.g., beliefs previously unquestioned are called into account develops the capacity to step back (usually for the first time) and examine beliefs with reason universe is reconstructed with self-chosen concepts might experience deep disappointment/anger on finding some beliefs did not stand up to investigation

Stage 5--Numinous (Supernatural/Mysterious) Universe
Mid-life or latter (if) it seems we have run up against the limits of rational thought e.g., the search for certainty can end in feelings of failure/despair we come to live in a spiritual universe of mystery, wonder, and paradox e.g., we might return to sacred symbol, story, tradition, liturgy, spiritual community, but no longer captured in a theological box

Stage 6--Selfless Service **
Rare stage for many. Identifies deeply with all humanity, and spends themselves in service of worldwide issues of love, and justice e.g., Mahatma Gandhi, Mother Theresa, etc.
________________

(*) To those in stage 3 or higher, the next stage looks like a loss of faith, and the previous stage is repulsive. This can be seen when stage 3 engages in witch hunting, and stage 4 baits and taunts stage 3.

A longer "Stages of Faith" summary

01-02-2003, 07:54 AM	#1
garsy Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Leeds via London, England Posts: 14	Given that God does not exist -- what are we thinking when we think 'God'? To conceptualise something either concrete or abstract, like a mathematical equation for instance, it has to 'be' in some sense. Given the premise that the being known as God, with all the attributes attributed to him, does not exist, what is it we are thinking? As a nonbeliever, I guess I name God by the definitions of believers. Someone who is a believer and not just an idiot giving idiotic reasons for God's existence, must 'know' God in another way than I do-- a kind of experiencing, rather than a knowing only, it seems to me. This induced state, a living of fantasy is a choice, to experience their lives as a religious narrative, rather than as the existent narrative of time\space, to which the abstract of narrative belongs. Any thoughts upon this, folks?

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

01-02-2003, 10:26 AM	#2
Uni-Universe Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Earth/USA Posts: 28	garsy, Interesting. In response to your question: "What is it we are thinking?" I believe in God because I believe that God is the Universe. People have different names and anthropomorphic definitions for the Universe. I don't have a religious view of God. I have my philosophy of the Universe etc. and other people have religions surrounding their definition of God. Religions serve a function in society. So I don't think it is necessary to rally against religious groups or individuals. People have a right to believe what they need to in order to function in the world. It is better to be religious and functioning rather than to be non-functioning at all. People do what they need to do. Religions are too deeply imbedded in culture, tradition, and history to be regarded as mere fantasies. I believe that religions will evolve but the religions will never leave our cultures. Maybe if people began to think of God differently, we will all find a point in the future where we can all agree. The Universe is God. God (minus anthropomorphic characteristics) is the Universe. What do you think about that? (stirring the discussion pot)

01-02-2003, 10:54 AM	#3
Selsaral Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan Posts: 3,095	I dunno. People believe in all sorts of crazy stuff. People are (were) completely positive of things that were utterly disproven, for instance insisting the world would end in biblical apocalypse on January 1st 2000. Human existence from the earliest has been built upon the fact that we really don't know much at all about anything, but we get by fine believing the thing we think is 'best' at the time. I think it is human nature to fill in the gaps with whatever we want. I think we are fundamentally gullible. When I was 14 years old, and my older friend mocked me by telling me the word 'gullible' wasn't in the dictionary, I said 'really?!'. We like to believe things, and we like to tell stories. We all know the more a story is told, the taller it gets. As for why people obviously seem to have serious religious experiences, again I think it's just human nature. There are tons of documented cases of psychological conditions such as schizophrenia, dual personalities, etc etc. I am not saying religious people are freaked out psychos, I am saying human beings have complex mental processes and that our consciousness is strange and difficult to understand, and has plenty of room for odd perceptions and interpretations. Starvation has been known to cause hallucinations for instance. (I find it so suspicious that many religions feature fasting, and that many religious experiences happen while fasting). I've burst into tears hearing a moving piece of music, moved deeply emotionally just because of some sound waves hitting my ears. I regularly hold conversations with myself, arguing in several different voices several points of view. I regularly act like mere coincidences are telling a larger picture, when after the fact I learn that that's all they were: mere coincidences. The same thing that makes me a paranoid, hardcore pessimist (I ALWAYS assume something will go wrong almost to the point of absurdity) i would suggest is similar to a religious belief. I mean, I don't know for a fact that when I drop my bagle that it won't land cream-cheese side-down, but I assume it does and I act accordingly. I obviously count the hits much more often than the misses (in the case of pessimism i count the poor outcomes more than the good outcomes, and i think it's because when things go poorly I'm screwed and have to fix it, and when things go well I say 'good' and move on), and I am therefore acting on and perceiving the universe through a particular perspective that has little basis in reality. Objectively, I don't really think the universe is out to get me. But I act like it is in order to pre-emptively reduce the occurance of poor outcomes (to speculate, a religious equivalent would be sacraficing an animal to please the gods and insure the season's harvest). This was a bit ranty, and not very organized, and essentially pure speculation, but to sum up: i think it's human nature to be religious, have religious experiences, and be completely 100% positive about all sorts of things, real and not real. When I say 'human nature', I mean the human condition including the nature of our consciousness, the nature of our environment, and the nature of our culture.

01-02-2003, 12:05 PM	#5
cpickett Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Arcadia, IN, USA Posts: 308	Very interesting Selsaral. :notworthy It kind of depends on what you mean by "God is the Universe". By that do you mean that God is still a God, still having all the attributes generally applied to a God? (IE Omniscient,Omnipotent,etc.) If you think the universe is just an inanimate object in which we live, then does it matter wether you call it God or the Universe? Parts of religion have a reason to be around. There are a lot of people that couldn't cope without it, and I think that a church being there when that person is in need is a great thing. Religions also keep people who don't have a natural sense of Good Vs. Bad, in check... Most people would be able to live their life, without the fear of eternal damnation, and not kill everyone. I also truly belive that the main reason we see no technological advances during the medieval era, is due to the Catholic church basically ruling Europe. 9/11, the Crusades, Abortion clinic bombs, all (along with many other things) wouldn't happen if it weren't for religion, how many millions of people have suffered or died in the name of religion?

01-02-2003, 12:41 PM	#6
Uni-Universe Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Earth/USA Posts: 28	cpickett, You opened a whole giant can of worms by asserting that 9/11 etc would not have happened if it weren't for religion. There are so many sociological reasons why violence happens, not to mention biological, neurological, and psychological reasons as well. Reasons, not excuses. Religion is often used as a scapegoat for people. People who commit violence have a highly disturbed interpretation of what their religion is telling them to do. It is further compounded if these individuals were a part of a terrorist group. Terrorist group, not religious group. Saying religion is the cause of violence would also mean that you are saying all religious people are violent which is not true. It is also not true that violent actions have a root religious cause. If you look into the doctrines of religion, you will see that they state that murder is wrong.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.