Sorta Summing it Up...

[aeroz19]

Ok, I've been posting in a lot of threads in Philosophy and Morality and Creation & Evolution forums, and I have begun to see some patterns in atheist thought. Correct me if I'm wrong, but here's what an atheist believes:

First and foremost, there's no evidence to prove God's existence.

The remainder are derived from evolution and/or belief in God's non-existence.

I'll have to start off with sex because of some posts in threads that deal with sex have stuck in my mind.

Sex in and of itself has no deep/spiritual meaning of bonding etc. It's just a physical experience and does not do anything but cause pleasure. No bonding.

In fact, everything we do and are is nothing but our physical experiences. All our experiences are physical and are caused by chemical reactions, nothing more. There is no meaning or purpose to anything we do. It's all chemicals. Why elevate chemical reactions to something more than it is (by giving it special meaning)--reactions?

When we eat, that's all chemical reactions. But yet we add special meaning to it by having social activities with it.

When we get married, we have a ceremony. Special meaning again.

Do you see the point I'm trying to make? I am having difficulty organizing my thoughts...

In conclusion, why would anyone want to be an atheist?

 

[seebs]

Because it best matches their experience and data?

Imagine, if you will, the belief "The entire world is run by invisible sky fairies. Everything we choose to do is very very meaningful and will make us deleriously happy in the afterlife."

Why would anyone take Christianity, when the sky fairies offer a much easier deal?

Because it appears to be true... Like it or not, it appears to be true.

 

[ravenwolf]

whats wrong with faeries???

 

[USincognito]

Since this is a more appropriate forum, I'll reply here. Keep this analagous bon mot in mind as you read my replies - just because you know how the trick is done, doesn't take away from it being magic.

Ok, I've been posting in a lot of threads in Philosophy and Morality and Creation & Evolution forums, and I have begun to see some patterns in atheist thought. Correct me if I'm wrong, but here's what an atheist believes:

Well unlike most religions, there really aren't any tenets between lack of a diety/deities. It's hard come up with something like an atheist Nicean creed. There's even a fundamental schizm between week and strong atheists.

First and foremost, there's no evidence to prove God's existence.

If one had to say there were some unifying "tenet" of atheist thinking, this would be it. Though it extends beyond the Christian God to any and all deities known (existing or archaic religions) or unknown (a deity or deity unknown or unknowable to man).

The remainder are derived from evolution and/or belief in God's non-existence.

Evolution doesn't really play a role in atheism, except as in justifying a rejection of Young Earth Creationism, and the creation myths of other religions. Those who actively believe no gods exist are "strong" atheists. Whether weak atheism is a belief can be argued, but strong atheism is definately a belief.

I'll have to start off with sex because of some posts in threads that deal with sex have stuck in my mind.

Sex in and of itself has no deep/spiritual meaning of bonding etc. It's just a physical experience and does not do anything but cause pleasure. No bonding.

At a fundamental level, sex is how humans and all gamete producing animals and plants reproduce their genes for the next generation. That is true, but it doesn't take away from the fact that our bodies produce chemicals during sex that cause emotions. Those emotions are the same whether it's happiness from a job well done, pride in your baby's first word or pleasure during sex.

As far as the bonding goes, the physiology alone undermines a lack thereof. You're literally coupling together your bodies. The act of sex itself requires amounts of trust ranging from her not lying about being on the pill to trusting him not to have 5 friends in the closet who'll jump out and rape you once naked. There's a lot of bonding with sex, even if it's not for procreation.

In fact, everything we do and are is nothing but our physical experiences. All our experiences are physical and are caused by chemical reactions, nothing more. There is no meaning or purpose to anything we do. It's all chemicals. Why elevate chemical reactions to something more than it is (by giving it special meaning)--reactions?

First part is correct, but only half the story. Second part is way off base. As some have pointed out, a lack if intrinsic meaning does not infer a lack of imparted meaning. My watching (biology) a sunset (astronomy) over the Bay of Banderas in Puerto Vallarta was just a physical experience that created memories (biochemistry) had no meaning in the grand scheme of the Universe. It has meaning to me and to my friend who watched it with me.

When we eat, that's all chemical reactions. But yet we add special meaning to it by having social activities with it.

Well, I consider a good meal to be a pleasure experience on par with sex, but I don't get gassy after sex. And no, one does not need to be social in order to enjoy a good meal. My tastebuds or my joy of hitting my neighborhood Indian buffet aren't enhanced or diminished by whether I dine alone or with friends.

When we get married, we have a ceremony. Special meaning again.

Marriage is a social and religious custom. It developed culturally, probably to induce fidelity in a speicies that values monogomy and assurances that our progeny that we expend resources on raising are our own. Doesn't make that 5 tiered brides cake any less expensive or worth keeping a piece in the freezer until your first anniversary though.

Do you see the point I'm trying to make? I am having difficulty organizing my thoughts...

In conclusion, why would anyone want to be an atheist?

Well, most poeple don't want to be an atheist. They just are an atheist. And I think you need to do some more discussing, but with different atheists than the ones you have been. Either they're reinforcing your misconceptions, or they're not doing a good job dispelling them.

 

[Nathan David]

In conclusion, why would anyone want to be an atheist?

It's not a matter of wanting. It's a matter of accepting what seems, to us, to be true.

 

[P4g4nite]

Was this an attempt to prove that unless we attach a religion to it, life has no meaning??
Are you serious??, We may just be another type of animal but animals have feelings too.
Yes, sex and eating fill physiological and biological needs but they are also deeply linked in filling our emotional needs as well (scientifically proven).
If you want to add a spiritual catergory to our needs you might like to consider how it actually differs from emotion, if at all.
And if you can, please feel free to share it with me.

 

[Eudaimonist]

First and foremost, there's no evidence to prove God's existence.

This is the typical view among atheists, yes. If the evidence seemed more split or indecisive, that person would probably count herself an agnostic.

The remainder are derived from evolution and/or belief in God's non-existence.

Well, no, nothing can be "derived" from "belief in God's non-existence". Let's just say that this knowledge comes from the experience of life, and sometimes evolution theory can be informative, although evolution is not essential to atheism.

Sex in and of itself has no deep/spiritual meaning of bonding etc. It's just a physical experience and does not do anything but cause pleasure. No bonding.

Wow, who said this? I don't agree with that at all.

In fact, everything we do and are is nothing but our physical experiences. All our experiences are physical and are caused by chemical reactions, nothing more. There is no meaning or purpose to anything we do. It's all chemicals. Why elevate chemical reactions to something more than it is (by giving it special meaning)--reactions?

I don't quite agree with this. I agree that we are physical beings, but we are physical beings with complex emergent biologies and psychologies for which certain values matter to us in a beneficial way, and so we can find meaning in those values. I personally think all human beings have "spiritual" needs, such as needs for purpose and meaning, although these could just as easily be called "psychological" or "emotional" needs.

In conclusion, why would anyone want to be an atheist?
First, there is incredible diversity of views among atheists, just as there is an incredible diversity of views among theists. A particular atheist need not become the example atheist you present.

Second, few people, if any, become an atheist because they "want" to be an atheist, as if they were choosing the tastiest dinner item off of a menu. They become atheists because they become persuaded that there just isn't enough rational reason to believe that gods exist. What they then do after they become atheists may take them down a good or bad road, depending on the quality of the ideas they then adopt. Something similar is true of theists, who may become believers in a benevolent religion... or a dangerous cult.

 

[Nietzsche]

The truth dosnt always have to be so great does it? id rather live my life knowing this is why x is done then belive its because magical faries caused it.

 

[The Bellman]

Ok, I've been posting in a lot of threads in Philosophy and Morality and Creation & Evolution forums, and I have begun to see some patterns in atheist thought. Correct me if I'm wrong, but here's what an atheist believes:

There is NOTHING you can point at as what "an atheist believes". It is not a belief. It is a LACK of a belief.

First and foremost, there's no evidence to prove God's existence.

Wrong. An atheist is someone who does not believe in god, for wwhatever reason. They may find no evidence, they may say no evidence exists, they may say evidence exists that there is no god.

The remainder are derived from evolution and/or belief in God's non-existence.

An acceptance of evolution has nothing to do with a belief in god's existence. Theists can accept evolution; atheists can deny evolution.

Sex in and of itself has no deep/spiritual meaning of bonding etc. It's just a physical experience and does not do anything but cause pleasure. No bonding.

No doubt some believe this - but it is not an atheist belief. It is not a consequence of either atheism or evolution.

In fact, everything we do and are is nothing but our physical experiences. All our experiences are physical and are caused by chemical reactions, nothing more. There is no meaning or purpose to anything we do. It's all chemicals. Why elevate chemical reactions to something more than it is (by giving it special meaning)--reactions?

Same as above. This is not a consequence of either atheism or evolution.

In conclusion, why would anyone want to be an atheist?

People aren't atheists because they "want to be". They are atheists because that's where they have been led by their experiences and the evidence they have encountered.

In other words, this entire post is one big strawman.

Nice try, though.