How many people would go for this if they could?

[dingdong]

Its pretty easy to have opinions about things that have been components of human mythology for millenia.
.
First find out what they mean.
.

Human mythology being the operative words, where do myths originate? who needed to have and believe myths? were they always myths or were they once believed to be the truth? was that the same time ghosts demons and dragons walked the earth?

 

[durangodawood]

You are of course free to think and believe as you wish.

That typically goes without saying. Its more the specific idea in my post that merits consideration.
.

 

[dingdong]

That typically goes without saying. Its more the specific idea in my post that merits consideration.
.

How about the specific idea in my post that merits consideration, what happened to that?

 

[SithDoughnut]

Please tell me how I can have an opinion about something that can not be shown to exist? we could be here for days listing the things that we can not show to exist, I asked you about Unicorns and Dragons, do they exist or shall we put them in the 'might' box the 'don't know' box or the 'probably not' box? what we are not allowed to do is put them in the 'no' box because according to you they just might, that is just.....

Yeah. That's what I do and any logical person would do. You cannot prove a negative, unless you can prove a mutually exclusive positive.

 

[durangodawood]

How about the specific idea in my post that merits consideration, what happened to that?

I specifically addressed your idea by showing how sin may have an alternate origin other than being mere contivance.
.
I certainly gave you more than some generic platitude.
.

 

[The Valkyrie]

For a small fee I will take all of your sins to Hell with me when I die, and I will even let you decide how much you pay me for each sin, what do you think? let me take the wrap, after all what have you got to lose?

I would not, as it doesn't make sense.

 

[dingdong]

I would not, as it doesn't make sense.

Of course you wouldn't and like religion, it doesn't make sense.

 

[dingdong]

I think thats quite wrong. Sin, I think, was a sort of proto-explanation for our personal failures, as conscious beings, to live up to our ideals. Its essentially an explanation for the tricks of the selfish ego, as opposed to apparently ego-less animals.

The vast but vague notion of sin was only later codified by religious institutions. And yes, it was then used. But essentially its a much deeper concept than a mere power-getting contrivance.

I certainly gave you more than some generic platitude.

And a wonderful explanation it was, it didn't mean a thing but you used some fancy words so it read very well.

Religions are for people who can not accept that life ends with death, they think they are far too important for it to be like that for them so they scratch around for an answer, any answer, then fool themselves into believing the answer they come up with is in fact the real meaning behind their life, religions teach people how to fool themselves and be happy while they're doing it.

 

[The Valkyrie]

Of course you wouldn't and like religion, it doesn't make sense.

Religions make sense in that they've likely been useful for the survival of mankind. In my opinion most religions don't make much sense in and of themselves. It's not that all people need them, but apparently many do, and it's kind of interesting that so many cultures around the world developed conceptions of deities and afterlives. Such ideas are useful for some people and likely have been useful for our species as the first organisms on the planet to be able to realize their own mortality.

What doesn't make sense to me is being mildly hateful towards people just because one is on an anonymous forum. I suppose anonymity makes people feel more powerful, more free.

I think discussing philosophies and religions with people that one disagrees with is important, as it helps keep people balanced and ideally leads people to truth, but there are skillful and unskillful ways of going about it.

People are on all different levels and have a variety of reasons, intellectual and emotional, for believing what they do. Trouncing over their feelings without tact is not likely to lead to their realization of truth in your claims.

I guess what it comes down to is, do you argue to make the world a better place, or do you argue to bring people down for some emotional high that it gives you?

 

[dingdong]

What doesn't make sense to me is being mildly hateful towards people just because one is on an anonymous forum. I suppose anonymity makes people feel more powerful, more free.

I think discussing philosophies and religions with people that one disagrees with is important, as it helps keep people balanced and ideally leads people to truth, but there are skillful and unskillful ways of going about it.

People are on all different levels and have a variety of reasons, intellectual and emotional, for believing what they do. Trouncing over their feelings without tact is not likely to lead to their realization of truth in your claims.

I guess what it comes down to is, do you argue to make the world a better place, or do you argue to bring people down for some emotional high that it gives you?

So you think I should tippy toe around in case I offend someone by disagreeing with them?

Yes I argue to make the world a better place, which I think it would be without religion.

If I say I believe in Santa Claus I would expect someone to say that they think I'm crazy for believing as I do,
if my belief is firm I can shrug it off if it's not then I don't really believe as strongly as I should.

 

[SithDoughnut]

Yes I argue to make the world a better place, which I think it would be without religion.

In that case: [Citation Needed]

 

[dingdong]

In that case: [Citation Needed]

Show me that it wouldn't and I will give you a Citation.

 

[durangodawood]

And a wonderful explanation it was, it didn't mean a thing but you used some fancy words so it read very well.

You thought those words were "fancy"? I thought they were rather ordinary.
.
I suspect its actually the ideas that seem "fancy" to you.
.

 

[SithDoughnut]

Show me that it wouldn't and I will give you a Citation.

Burden of proof. Look it up.

 

[b&wpac4]

Burden of proof. Look it up.

So, are you as embarrassed by what I can only describe as an atheist fundamentalist as we are by ours?

 

[SithDoughnut]

So, are you as embarrassed by what I can only describe as an atheist fundamentalist as we are by ours?

Big time. This is why I wish atheism had groups like theism does...

 

[b&wpac4]

Big time. This is why I wish atheism had groups like theism does...

When I considered myself an atheist, around the year 2000, I remember making it a rule of mine never to belittle someone for simply having faith or a religious belief. It seems like such a petty and stupid argument.

 

[SithDoughnut]

When I considered myself an atheist, around the year 2000, I remember making it a rule of mine never to belittle someone for simply having faith or a religious belief. It seems like such a petty and stupid argument.

It's a good rule, that one.

 

[durangodawood]

So, are you as embarrassed by what I can only describe as an atheist fundamentalist as we are by ours?

No. There's no common basis on which to be embarrassed.
.
An athiest position is merely a single belief position. If we shared some deeper identity or institution, then I might feel bad and have to make out that she is not a "true atheist"...
.

 

[dingdong]

So, are you as embarrassed by what I can only describe as an atheist fundamentalist as we are by ours?

How does one aquire the lable Atheists fundamentalist?
Is an Atheist fundamentalist someone who says 'there are no Gods' instead of saying 'I have no proof that there are no Gods so there just might be'?
because if they thought like that they would be Agnostics and not Atheists.