Gurdur

Yeah, sure, sure.

BTW, there were three large genocides in the 20th century, and three or four attempted ones.
Name one really caused by religion.
Answer: none. Repeat: none.

In fact, the three or four attempted ones were all lead by atheists.

There's no answer in trying for Brave New World.

Gurdur

This is to make me laugh, since my favourite playground here (because it's so easy ) is the Political Discussions forum.
Loads of atheists there pushing faith-based stances.

You even get faith-based stances from atheists flying in the face of the evidence here in the Philosophy forum.

heh, heh. Explain the medical evidence that an optimistic attitude actually makes your life better, despite there being an element of "delusion" involved.
Only insofar as it pertains to the non-existence of the supernatural.
Atheism does not guarantee any other area will be subject to rationalism.

HelenM

But how can that be possible in a place like IIDB, where reason and evidence prevail over everything else?

Helen

Gurdur

Dangin, must you remove all the fun from life ?

Gurdur

Ah, therein lies the rub.

However, Helen, I doubt you'ld either accept or like my long answers to that question anyway, so I think I'll just wander away and think up more ideas for my garden sculpting instead of trying.

Just think of me as the Eternal Non-Aligned Loose Cannon Albeit Hardline Atheist, But With Real Training In Some Neuropsych.

dangin

Optimism is delusion? I thought it was luck. I don't see how this is tied to religion at all. I thought you were going to have me explain the "medical evidence" linked to prayer healing.

This I agree with, but when christians (I'm talking about serious ass christians here and throughout this thread, not the average post modern, harmless variety of christian) discuss their world view it is based on "faith", or faith is a large portion of it. It is on their mind more that "average" christians.

Atheists would define their world view as something to do with rational or empirical thinking.

So we have a group that states a purpose of scientific understanding of life, and we have a group that uses "faith" to inform their understanding of life. In an objective, naturalistic world, which group shares more with the delusional?

dangin

Maybe if we all prayed about it, it would all work out.

I'm not even going to bother to type NOT at the end of this post.

Shit, when I think about it, it just shows up here.

HelenM

Maybe you're right. Have you posted it to me before and I rejected it? Is your assumption about me rejecting it based on my stubborn refusal to give up my theism? You've certainly made me curious

I wouldn't want to tear you away from something that enjoyable, but if you've written out your long answers already and you have the link, please post it for me.

Will do

Helen

Charlie

You can have any belief you want! I would even say that having beliefs is part of being human. All I wish is that people could have their beliefs and still realize that's all it is, a belief. Why can't theist view their belief with reason and rational thinking. For example, a scientist would call a belief a theory and then try to prove it. As long as it is unproven then it remains a theory or belief. If it is ever proved (and of course with verifiable testing) then it is no longer a belief as it then becomes accepted as real.

What fascinates me, and herein lies the problem, is how humans can believe in something and then turn their belief into truth with no evidence or proof. They then turn this truth into their reality! This is where it becomes delusional. But hey, this would even be ok if they kept it to themselves. But no, they believe so much that their religion is true, that they have to try and make everyone else accept it as reality.

Also, we are not just talking about religion. There are many people who honestly believe with certainty that they have been abducted by aliens! And like with religion, there is no actual proof. And the list goes on with people convinced that it is possible to talk with the dead, accurately predict the future, psychic ability, cast magical spells...

emotional

Being proved and being real are two separate things. Things can be real even if there is no proof for them. Was evolution unreal before Darwin proved it? Certainly it was real. Reality is absolute, proof is a subjective human endeavour. And for supernatural concepts, such as God and afterlife, there can by definition be no scientific proof (for science concerns itself only with the natural), but that does not make them any the less real.