Do you sometimes feel you NEED to believe in something else out there in spite of being an atheist intellectually? (Revelation, faith)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Although sometimes I wish I did believe, at least in an afterlife. It would be cool to see my parents again.
Yeah, sometimes it's nice to think about it - the same way I might close my eyes on a lazy summer day and daydream about winning the lottery.
I've always said that any afterlife would likely be a construct of our own mind, not some one-size-fits-all heaven ruled a needy god. If going to heaven meant a lobotomy at the Pearly Gates so that one particular heaven is appealing to everyone, then that really does make this life purposeless.
It would be odd, though ... because your parents would each have their own version of heaven so there's a good chance some projection of yourself is already there with them. When you finally pass on and arrive in your own heaven, a projection of your parents will be in your particular heaven. It's kind of mind-boggling how that works. Would the parents in your heaven be real? Or just mental holograms? And, truth be told, would it even really matter?
This is something that happens to me from time to time. Even though I "know" that atheism is probably the most intellectually honest position, I find that it does not always relieve anxiety and bring peace and happiness to the mind.
Can anyone else relate to this? If so, how have you reconciled this contradiction? Let's hear about your journey.
Just curious. Why would I need to believe in anything to relieve anxiety?
How would believing in something make that better?
Just curious. Why would I need to believe in anything to relieve anxiety?
How would believing in something make that better?
It is not the believing itself but the substitution of an anxiety-inducing reality with a less scary alternative.
If I know I am going to die and I'm afraid of that, I might be less anxious believing there's an afterlife.
The problem is that on some level you know there's no evidence for the afterlife, so one must furiously deny all evidence for what is actually likely. This in itself is anxiety-inducing. But people don't generally think it through that much; they want the short-term high of belief and discount the reality of the long term downer of pesky ol' reality.
I can honestly say that no, I do not feel the need to believe anything supernatural or without good evidence and I suffer no axiety because of it. But then again I was never heavily indoctrinated. I had a very moderate Christian upbringing until I decided on my own that it was BS at around 11 or 12. I never had to go to church after I decided for myself. I can totally understand how someone who was a Christian for many years could experience this. Especially if your family is religious. Unfortunatly because my first answer is no, I can't really offer help with the second question.
I can honestly say that no, I do not feel the need to believe anything supernatural or without good evidence and I suffer no axiety because of it. But then again I was never heavily indoctrinated. I had a very moderate Christian upbringing until I decided on my own that it was BS at around 11 or 12. I never had to go to church after I decided for myself. I can totally understand how someone who was a Christian for many years could experience this. Especially if your family is religious. Unfortunatly because my first answer is no, I can't really offer help with the second question.
The problem is that on some level you know there's no evidence for the afterlife, so one must furiously deny all evidence for what is actually likely. This in itself is anxiety-inducing. But people don't generally think it through that much; they want the short-term high of belief and discount the reality of the long term downer of pesky ol' reality.
The problem is our knowledge of what reality actually is usually does not track with what we DO know about it. It is rather based on some common sense model based on our sensory experiences of it. Unfortunately, gaining sufficient knowledge to get beyond such simplistic views of reality is usually beyond the grasp of the masses.
The problem is our knowledge of what reality actually is usually does not track with what we DO know about it. It is rather based on some common sense model based on our sensory experiences of it. Unfortunately, gaining sufficient knowledge to get beyond such simplistic views of reality is usually beyond the grasp of the masses.
What we do know about reality would count as our knowledge of reality. Maybe it's just too late for me but that seems to read: "...our knowledge of what reality actually is usually does not track with our knowledge about it."
What we do know about reality would count as our knowledge of reality. Maybe it's just too late for me but that seems to read: "...our knowledge of what reality actually is usually does not track with our knowledge about it."
Seems like word salad...
You're right. He just violated his own tautology. But given your knowledge of reality, you're wrong. You're right, therefore, you're wrong. I play by Mystic PhD's rules, FYI.
The problem is our knowledge of what reality actually is usually does not track with what we DO know about it. It is rather based on some common sense model based on our sensory experiences of it. Unfortunately, gaining sufficient knowledge to get beyond such simplistic views of reality is usually beyond the grasp of the masses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nosmas
What we do know about reality would count as our knowledge of reality. Maybe it's just too late for me but that seems to read: "...our knowledge of what reality actually is usually does not track with our knowledge about it."
Seems like word salad...
The fact that I reference the masses is the part you either missed or refuse to understand. Any thought that the masses have an accurate knowledge of our reality is nonsensical. Apparently for you in Rio Linda I needed to phrase it differently. "The problem is the masses' knowledge of what reality actually is usually does not track with what we DO know about it. It is rather based on some common sense model based on our sensory experiences of it." I will try to remember to simplify my posts further.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
