Arriving at beliefs

[2PhiloVoid]

If you feel like it, please share how you arrive at a position of belief or non-belief (or truth or falsehood if you prefer) on the following claim:

"The USA landed a man on the moon in 1969".

This is not a trick question but predictably will be followed up with another thread citing your answers to this one.

Hmmm....

I just look it up on Wikipedia --like I do with everything else-- and I know that I can trust and believe everything I read there, because being that its on the internet, we know it's as up to date as anything could be. Thus, there really isn't any reason to look up any other information from any other angles, whether from books, educational websites, or professional journals; since we know we really don't need logic, math, history, physics, linguistics, biography, biology, philosophy,--or any of those other subjects that just eat up our precious time or bore the heck out of us-- to figure out anything. In fact, the combination of reading Wikipedia and using just common sense alone can work wonders for how we perceive the world.

And that's how we can know the USA landed a man on the moon in 1969.

 

[Deidre32]

I was raised in a Christian home. I believed for years, and spent a lot of time in prayer and in church. I also questioned if heaven and hell existed, never fully convinced. I don't think that there was any one defining moment that pulled me away from faith, but my doubts about heaven and hell grew and so I started researching more. I read Charles Darwin's story of how he abandoned Christianity, and his doubts were similar to mine. The research and self reflection continued and it seemed like atheism was a natural progression for me, not so much a choice.

When I was a Christian, even though I had atheist friends, I had misconceptions about it. But coming along this path now, I have to say, it's a lot more positive than what I once thought about atheism. I'm at peace but it wasn't easy leaving Christianity, as it was very much all consuming at one time, for me.

That's my story in a nutshell. Thanks for letting me share.

 

[Gladius]

I was raised in a Christian home. I believed for years, and spent a lot of time in prayer and in church. I also questioned if heaven and hell existed, never fully convinced. I don't think that there was any one defining moment that pulled me away from faith, but my doubts about heaven and hell grew and so I started researching more. I read Charles Darwin's story of how he abandoned Christianity, and his doubts were similar to mine. The research and self reflection continued and it seemed like atheism was a natural progression for me, not so much a choice.

When I was a Christian, even though I had atheist friends, I had misconceptions about it. But coming along this path now, I have to say, it's a lot more positive than what I once thought about atheism. I'm at peace but it wasn't easy leaving Christianity, as it was very much all consuming at one time, for me.

That's my story in a nutshell. Thanks for letting me share.

Hi Deidre, you may have posted this in the wrong thread...

 

[Targaryen]

If the Bible says that the USA landed a man on the moon in 1969, then that's what I believe. God said it, I believe it, and that's that.

If you are going to simply take the Mickey with statements like that, why on earth are you here?



I thought atheists prided themselves on being smart?

 

[Gladius]

If you are going to simply take the Mickey with statements like that, why on earth are you here?



I thought atheists prided themselves on being smart?

While I sympathise, I notice you didn't make the same accusation against the equally sarcastic theist post above.

 

[quatona]

I thought atheists prided themselves on being smart?

How did you arrive at that prejudice?

 

[Targaryen]

you mean the "authority" post.

Hmm, authority could be based on seeing it, having it in school materials, empirical knowledge from the experiments concluded from what they did in 69.

So you can base a sarcastic theistic post based off of one word?

Interesting....see I require more then just a word. but then, I try not to go on faulty evidence or convict the person ahead of time.

 

[Eudaimonist]

If you are going to simply take the Mickey with statements like that, why on earth are you here?

You missed it, but I was making a philosophical counterpoint to the previous one-word post that read simply "Authority". I was showing how such a concept is inadequate to deal with the subject.

You also missed my following posts, which expanded on what I think is the problem with the "Authority" reply. Not all authority is alike.

If you have followed my posts here at CF over the past decade, I do sometimes like to use humor to get my posts across, but I don't shy away from the more straightforward philosophical discussion.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Targaryen]

You missed it, but I was making a philosophical counterpoint to the previous one-word post that read simply "Authority". I was showing how such a concept is inadequate to deal with the subject.

You also missed my following posts, which expanded on what I think is the problem with the "Authority" reply. Not all authority is alike.

If you have followed my posts here at CF over the past decade, I do sometimes like to use humor to get my posts across, but I don't shy away from the more straightforward philosophical discussion.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Hmmm, is that so?

See I think not, and here's why: Instead of saying you found the response to be inadequate, you made a "joke" and thus made a conclusion as well based on no real evidence to support your hypothesis.

And isn't that something that atheists can't figure out about people of faith?

So I made a conclusion on you based on the evidence you provided, which in that post I quoted was as fishy as anything in the authority post.

Isn't that something.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Hmmm, is that so?

See I think not, and here's why: Instead of saying you found the response to be inadequate, you made a "joke" and thus made a conclusion as well based on no real evidence to support your hypothesis.

I made two posts (#8 and #13) explaining in a more traditional way why I found the response to be inadequate. Oddly, that doesn't matter to you, and you treat #7 as all that I had written. You are on a witch hunt.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Gladius]

you mean the "authority" post.

Hmm, authority could be based on seeing it, having it in school materials, empirical knowledge from the experiments concluded from what they did in 69.

So you can base a sarcastic theistic post based off of one word?

Interesting....see I require more then just a word. but then, I try not to go on faulty evidence or convict the person ahead of time.

No I meant 2PhiloVoid's wikipedia post

 

[KCfromNC]

Except that we do know lots of things about evolution which make creationism ridiculously wrong.

A few people know these things, others have taken them on "authority". Despite that, people in the latter group can still make a reasonable determination that some things are correct and others aren't.

 

[Nithavela]

If the moon landing had been faked, the USSR would have found out and made sure to publish the news to embarass their enemy.

 

[Received]

A few people know these things, others have taken them on "authority". Despite that, people in the latter group can still make a reasonable determination that some things are correct and others aren't.

And the goal here should be to minimize authority whenever possible while still not dismissing it when necessary.

 

[Received]

Wow, nice recipe for the Orwellian State.

Then I guess the Orwellian state is everywhere, therefore nowhere.

Are you seriously arguing that you believed the moon landing because your believe everything the US Government and media tells you?

I believe the government isn't hiring hack scientists, and I trust scientists primarily, given that this is their area of expertise. If I was hearing a lecture on lying, I'd prefer a politician, of course. All the same, expertise area or not, precisely because I'm not the expert means I have to trust them as authorities. Well, I don't have to trust them, really. I could hold everything I can't prove myself in suspension until I can prove it. But that would mean I can't read any book ever, pretty much, given that learning presupposes authority.

 

[Feldon]

I personally agree with this logic myself, as I wasn't born at the time of the landing. Modern history shows just how hard it is to keep a really juicy secret from the public (just ask Bill Clinton).

Ew! Gross! LOL

But I agree with you. If the government couldn't hide a private sex affair that just one, two, or three people knew about, there's NO WAY they could hide a fake moon landing.

And BTW, wouldn't an extension of this thought process also mean that there probably WASN'T an elaborate hoax for the resurrection of Christ, or when Moses receiving the commandments on Sinai in front of hundreds of thousands? Think of all the eye witnesses!

Mohammed "spoke" to an Angel in private. Budhha allegedly meditated by himself. Joe Smith located, dug up tablets on his own, and spoke to an Angel on his own.

Notice that of all the major religions, only Judaism & Christianity had their miracles witnessed by multitudes & multitudes of people!

 

[Deidre32]

Hi Deidre, you may have posted this in the wrong thread...

Lol!! I think I read the title and thought you were asking how we arrived at our beliefs.

I fail at reading comprehension! lol

 

[bhsmte]

Ew! Gross! LOL

But I agree with you. If the government couldn't hide a private sex affair that just one, two, or three people knew about, there's NO WAY they could hide a fake moon landing.

And BTW, wouldn't an extension of this thought process also mean that there probably WASN'T an elaborate hoax for the resurrection of Christ, or when Moses receiving the commandments on Sinai in front of hundreds of thousands? Think of all the eye witnesses!

Mohammed "spoke" to an Angel in private. Budhha allegedly meditated by himself. Joe Smith located, dug up tablets on his own, and spoke to an Angel on his own.

Notice that of all the major religions, only Judaism & Christianity had their miracles witnessed by multitudes & multitudes of people!

You cant compare determing the credibility of events from 2000 years ago vs 45 years ago.

The moon landing was broadcast on live tv and involved numerous scientists some of which are still living and have been interviewed countless times.

Anything to do with jesus, was written about by anonymous authors decades after jesus died and likely after most potential witnesses were dead. The gospels themselves, dont claim to be first hand accounts of the events but are hearsay. When 40-50 years went past 2000 years ago it was much easier to simply fabricate stories, with little to no means to determine their true credibility.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Hmmm....

I just look it up on Wikipedia --like I do with everything else-- and I know that I can trust and believe everything I read there, because being that its on the internet, we know it's as up to date as anything could be. Thus, there really isn't any reason to look up any other information from any other angles, whether from books, educational websites, or professional journals; since we know we really don't need logic, math, history, physics, linguistics, biography, biology, philosophy,--or any of those other subjects that just eat up our precious time or bore the heck out of us-- to figure out anything. In fact, the combination of reading Wikipedia and using just common sense alone can work wonders for how we perceive the world.

And that's how we can know the USA landed a man on the moon in 1969.

Hi All,

Feel free to disagree with my previous sarcasm. I'm always open to suggestions as to what 'research methods' might work best to ascertain knowledge. Maybe there's a better way than what I learned at the university.

Peace

 

[Gladius]

Notice that of all the major religions, only Judaism & Christianity had their miracles witnessed by multitudes & multitudes of people!

Except less than a handful thought to write any of it down, and all of them were "disciples".

Not too many contemporary Jews, Romans, or other gentiles agreed that any of the New Testament occurred as written by the founders of the religion i.e. they who wrote the story.

The USA moon landing was probably on the Russian news too, and is today accepted by every Government in the entire world as fact.