philechat

luvluv

"The presense"--many people of different religions might attribute it to ancestors' spirits, wandering ghosts, and the Superego. The problem here is not that you are hearing or perceiving something that does not exist, but that what you just perceived is a "phenomena", which says nothing about the exact nature of the "thing" you witnessed.

That is, like the experience of color, mystical experiences are subjective phenomenal experience--one that might not come directly from source but rather from the interaction of complex factors, both outside and inside the perceiver. For example, I may "feel" as if my crush is present and loving me back, but it says nothing as of whether he truly likes me back or not. Or, I may empathize with a character in Shakespeare without believing the character's existence. They are "ideas"--things that are constructed by our minds to interpret phenomenal experiences, and God may just be one of the "ideas"of ours.

wordsmyth

[QUOTE]Originally posted by luvluv
They generally are not "voices", they quite often feel more like stern looks or nodding approval. I don't "hear" a voice saying "You shouldn't have done that" but I "feel" like someone I love and respect is staring at me with their arms folded and a disappointed look on their face.

Do you realize just how closely what you describe resembles "paranoid schizophrenia"??

The problem here, folks, is that I'm just not crazy. Not the least little bit. In total honesty, I'm one of the most mentally healthy, happy people I know. For all the people who have had dealings with me before this conversation, have you ever had any notion that I might be mentally unbalanced? I'd like to believe that I am generally pleasant and well-spoken.

Yes, we are all well aware that someone suffering from a delusion is always aware they are suffering from a delusion. In fact the majority of mentally ill people are fully cognizant of their own mental state.

No offense but Ted Bundy was also reportedly a pleasant and well-spoken person, so that seems a bit irrelevant to a person's mental stability.

I'm pretty sure I'm just not crazy at all. But I believe God communicates his will and His presence to me on a daily basis. Make of that what you will.

If "God" is indeed communicating "his will" to you on a daily basis, then it seems to me he is limiting your free will by influencing your decisions.

luvluv

wordsmyth:

I recognize it as my duty to try to explain things to unbelievers who are sincerely looking to understand, but I don't consider it my duty to expose my beliefs to someone who just wants to ridicule them for their own amusement. For one, it wastes my time. So I'm looking for you to confirm your intentions here and modify your tone if your questions are sincere. Otherwise I'll just be throwing words away, and we're both too busy for that aren't we?

philechat:

Entirely possible. Or He might be real.

wordsmyth

I apologize if that is the impression that my response has given you. It is not my intention to ridicule the beliefs of others for my, or anyone elses, amusement. Although my response may have seemed a bit harsh (again I apologize) it did however raise a couple of important points which you did not address.

I am indeed a non-believer. My motives, while sincere, are two-fold.

First, I wish to know "what" people believe and to find out whether those beliefs are logical and internally consistent. Wherever I see an inconsistency, I feel obligated to expose it.

Second, I would like to understand "why" people believe in the supernatural and to gain some insight into the psychological implications and ramifications of beliefs that are based on faith rather than logic and/or empirical evidence.

Scottyman

My point was this. I don't hear voices but the reason I come to this site is for the support of fellow atheists. I find the discussions quite refreshing considering the way we are constantly bombarded with religious nonsense so why are you here? The only reason I can think of is that you are not totally sure of your feelings but you feel you can convert others that come to this site. In a way, affirming your position.

I don't personally know you and you do seem like a pleasant person. It wasn't a personal attack but a way of showing you a different aproach to the argument. Don't you think that if you could really communicate with the dead or with "angels" or "god" for that matter that more of the human community would be afflicted in my opinion.

If "god" really did exist, would he have allowed that abomination of an election we had in 2000 take place or allow Saddam Hussain to massacre the Iranians or for Al Queda to attack the world trade center? I have to wonder.

Scottyman

This is exactly what I'm talking about. I know "god" does not exist but you are telling me I should prepare for it anyway. Don't you think that's a little presumptive? After all, you aren't even sure yourself!

Scottyman

Again, this is why you are really here. You feel the need to "save the lost souls" that inhabit this site. I think you need to be a little more honest with yourself regarding your motives.

cricket

Wordsmyth,

I know your question is for luvluv, but I am sitting here on a no-life night and I can’t resist.

People believe in the supernatural because it works for them. It makes them feel stimulated or fascinated or intrigued (conspiracy theories, Ouija boards, astrology...) Or, their beliefs give them something -- social status, a purpose in life, a higher power who is on their side, a chance to see dead relatives, or... something.

The belief works for them on a personal level. For example, my daughter believing in Santa late into her childhood, because she got more gifts that way. Or, me pronouncing that “I really do believe in God; I can’t explain; but I do.” I didn’t really think about this statement the day I said it. But later I did. I was hoping to talk myself into it, knowing it would be of benefit to me in myriad ways if I DID "feel" that belief.

these are the reasons I believed (on those rare occasions when I felt an iota of belief) ... (very rare):

I believed because I wanted to believe.
I wanted to believe because

a) I feared there might be a chance it was true

1. I wanted to have an afterlife, if there was one
2. And did not want to lead daughter to a hell by my example (didn’t think there was a hell, but “just in case”)
3. I thought if I said that I believed, IF a god was there he might hear and then *make* me into more of a believer.

b) I wanted the advantages it would give me to have a belief in god. Even knowing it was not true, I thought if I could TALK MYSELF into believing, I could have those advantages.

1. I wanted to harness God’s power, ie, be stronger
2. I wanted the happy smily churchy life with a devoted husband and children; seemed stable and picket-fence-y
3. It was an advantage socially and professionally
4. I wanted to “be a good person”; in my hometown atheists were viewed as a blight on society
5. wanted to please my mother-in-law and others like her
6. later, single again, wanted to cast widest possible net in terms of dating; knew that belief in God made me more attractive and compatable to most men, and that atheism was a turn-off to most men.

Why did I want to believe, try to believe, and at least once even go so far as to PROCLAIM that I believed?

Because people do what works.

For most people, in most places, a belief in God gets them further than no belief in God. People know this, on some level. Consciously or unconsciously they shape their beliefs accordingly.

Family Man

It doesn't matter what you say about your "first time" for two reasons:

1) It is not your personal expectations that is the basis of the argument. Unless you have been living in complete isolation your entire life, you have been undoubtably exposed to the idea that God affects our lives. You may not have been consciously expecting anything, but you may have been unconsciously.
2) We have no way of verifying your personal experience. You could be lying, or more likely you could have put a more benign interpretation on your own behavior than is justified.

In other words, your perceptions can not be trusted in this matter -- which is the whole point of the thread. The only way to attack this argument is to show the argument is flawed. You can't use your personal experience to attack it because, if correct, your experience is not reliable.

If you can't show me a valid logical argument against my position, then it would appear that my argument is valid. I can't help it if you can't defend your position. And your personal experience does not deviate from the classical self-fulfilling prophecy.

Self-fulfilling prophecies depend on psychological insight, but so does teaching, coaching, advertising, marketing, criminology, parenting and a host of other activities. We're not talking mental illnesses here, and I certainly hope you're not going to require parents to all get degrees in psychiatry. If we were to accede to your demands, we'd have to come to some very absurd notions about what can and can not be discussed.

Since self-fulfilling prophecies are not mental illnesses, I can't answer that question from a clinical standpoint.

See my opening remarks for the answer to this.

If the presented evidence for theism is not reliable, then there is no reason to attempt to deal with them.

I've given you my reasons why I don't believe God speaks to people. The argument seems sound to me.

No, you're a walking personification of my hypothesis. You can't falsify a logical argument that questions the soundness of personal experience with personal experience. You can only attack the soundness of the argument.

Note: since much of what Luvluv says beyond this point is repetition (not that that's bad, just that it is repetitious) and points I've already answered, I'm going to snip most of it.

Don't confuse falsifiability with whether something has been falsified. The fact that Christianity clearly set these expectations only strengthens my argument -- makes my argument in reality. But clearly my hypothesis is falsifiable.

True, and since the requirement is met by the unchallenged observation that Christianity has set up a belief about divine intervention, my burden has been met. Remember that self-fullfilling prophecies are well-known phenomenon that is widely accepted by science; hence, all I need to do is to show that the conditions are met to question the validity of personal experience.

Unless the concept of self-fulfilling prophecies is invalid, all I need to show is that the claims of personal experience meet the requirements of self-fulfilling prophecies. You need to show that the conditions do not apply. You haven't done that.

YOUR. EVIDENCE. IS. FLAWED.

Aside from establishing that the expectation is clearly set up, I don't need any.

Evidence is not the only way of knowing things; there are logical arguments, you know.

Untrue. I, too, have children. They got good grades in school, have numerous friends, get great reviews from their teachers, and according to our neighbors, behave very well (but then they don't live with them). This is solid, independent evidence that my children will turn out well. Something else might happen between now and then to change that, but little faith is required. In fact, I can't think of a single personal belief I hold that doesn't have independent evidence behind it. Christianity, however, seems to demand faith and faith alone and it is far too outside of my experience to accept.

That's a nice hope, but how realistic it is to have a relationship with something that doesn't exist?

I don't doubt that, but believe and reality are quite different thigns.

But if I should believe before I get adequate reason to believe, then I have to give the hundred dollars. And why would I need proof that my family has "objective value" (whatever that means)?

And I you. Maybe now you understand my point about perceptions.

Actually, I did miss it. My apologies.

I most certainly have. I suspect you don't really understand it. You haven't addressed it.

Boro Nut

EURIPEDES!!!

What? By carefully impersonating all the classic symptoms of self delusional behaviour? Is there no end to his power?

I would be more inclined to agree if I did not actually know for a fact that God definitely does not exist, and that all the classic symptoms of self delusional behaviour do not constitute phenomena consistent with His existence, even if you do spell him with a capital letter.

Boro Nut