U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-02-2013, 01:51 AM
 
7,802 posts, read 5,281,003 times
Reputation: 2973

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
However, you can find absolutely zero evidence that any of this is true. So, is it still okay to believe in all of this in spite of the absence of evidence?
I still have not got past the HOW people do it. Let alone to the question of whether it is OK to do it.

However my feeling is that no, it is not ok. The reason is that the more divorced a world view is from reality is... the more potential for hurt and pain and harm it contains. To you and others. Clearly for example if you maintain a world view in which you believe you can fly then you are very quickly going to injure or kill yourself. If you maintain a world view that you can heal people by laying your hands on them then you are going to cause harm to people, especially if there are other caveats built in such as "These people must first give up whatever medication they are on".

And there ARE people with such world views. People who think they have healed others through Christ and they admonish such people to then give up the medications and other things that have actually been keeping them alive.

However as I said I am more fascinated by HOW people can decide to believe things there is no evidence, argument, data or reasoning on offer to believe. I am constantly interested to know how labile their self delusion is. For example are the people who you can give an empty box to that can simply decide to believe... and then actually believe... that the box is stuffed full of money.

Self delusion is an interesting Neuro Science phenomenon. VS Ramachandran studies some interesting forms of it. There are people with partial paralysis in the world who genuinely believe they are NOT paralyzed. It is truly astounding to watch this self delusion at work. There is simply nothing you can do to convince these people they are paralyzed.

One example that sticks out in my mind was a patient with one totally dead arm. Ramachandran in the video asks the man to touch his nose with his right hand. The patient did it. He then asks him to repeat this with the left. The patient... without being aware of it himself..... used his right hand to lift the finger of his left hand to touch his nose with it.

Which means SOME part of this patients brain is aware of the paralysis but the patient himself is not consciously aware of it. And the brain takes steps to maintain the delusion.

I however simply do not have this ability to modify my moment to moment beliefs by choice. I simply can not choose to believe something if there is no reason to do so. I am entirely unable. And GIVEN there is quite literally no evidence, argument, data or reasoning on offer.... much less from anyone on this forum.... to even lend a modicum of credibility to the idea there is a god.... I simply can not choose to believe it anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio View Post
Good thing we've got a whole bunch of evidence--including creation, and even a book that he inspired that contains the very words he's spoken. If people are closed-minded enough not to recognize the evidence we have, then there's not much we can do with that.
A man writing a book is not evidence for anything other than a man wrote a book. Calling people close minded does not magically make it evidence either. It just means you prefer name calling to discourse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-08-2013, 03:39 PM
 
5,733 posts, read 4,636,428 times
Reputation: 1860
I think what the OP is getting at is not whether there is any evidence per-se but in light of a person evaluating the evidence put forth not being persuaded by it - and in light of this should they still just believe.

And since the Christians on here have admitted that people should not believe without evidence then why compel someone to live against their conscience regarding the evidence they put forth and reject?

I have asked this of a person who was trying their best to tell me why I should believe and I told them that I am well aware of the 'christian evidence' and their 'apologetics' and was not persuaded in my conscience. I asked them if I they wanted me to violate my conscience and live in opposition to it? They were stumped because they could never say 'well then it's ok not to believe or you should not believe in order not to violate your conscience' They just shrugged it off.

I think this is the point - no matter how one wishes it were true they just can't bring themsleves to ignore their process of evaluating evidence and not believing and then just believe for the sake of belief. Christians will them try to attribute this to some alterior motive or actually portraying the person as morally corrupt in their disbelief - as if to justify their immoral life style they become irrational in their disbelief and have no real standing upon which to not believe.

The real problem is that Christians are the ones who follow the pattern of beileving at all costs - they are the ones who have less ground to stand on as a basis for their beliefs. Ironic.

They are quite pathetic when push comes to shove about this issue - they will accuse unbelievers of all kinds of shenanagins none of which allows for well reasoned and conscientious objections to their stories about God which actually allows a person to have reasonable unbelief.They just can't admit that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2013, 04:08 PM
 
40,066 posts, read 26,739,576 times
Reputation: 6050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiloh1 View Post
I think what the OP is getting at is not whether there is any evidence per-se but in light of a person evaluating the evidence put forth not being persuaded by it - and in light of this should they still just believe.

And since the Christians on here have admitted that people should not believe without evidence then why compel someone to live against their conscience regarding the evidence they put forth and reject?

I have asked this of a person who was trying their best to tell me why I should believe and I told them that I am well aware of the 'christian evidence' and their 'apologetics' and was not persuaded in my conscience. I asked them if I they wanted me to violate my conscience and live in opposition to it? They were stumped because they could never say 'well then it's ok not to believe or you should not believe in order not to violate your conscience' They just shrugged it off.

I think this is the point - no matter how one wishes it were true they just can't bring themsleves to ignore their process of evaluating evidence and not believing and then just believe for the sake of belief. Christians will them try to attribute this to some alterior motive or actually portraying the person as morally corrupt in their disbelief - as if to justify their immoral life style they become irrational in their disbelief and have no real standing upon which to not believe.

The real problem is that Christians are the ones who follow the pattern of beileving at all costs - they are the ones who have less ground to stand on as a basis for their beliefs. Ironic.

They are quite pathetic when push comes to shove about this issue - they will accuse unbelievers of all kinds of shenanagins none of which allows for well reasoned and conscientious objections to their stories about God which actually allows a person to have reasonable unbelief.They just can't admit that.
The problem is that they have been misled by their religious leaders to think that they can CHOOSE what they truly believe. They cannot . . . but they can claim to accept things they themselves do not truly believe. This deception about choosing belief is central to the promotion of membership in the churches. It has nothing to do with following Christ.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2013, 06:35 PM
 
7,378 posts, read 6,731,664 times
Reputation: 1252
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
The problem is that they have been misled by their religious leaders to think that they can CHOOSE what they truly believe. They cannot . . . but they can claim to accept things they themselves do not truly believe. This deception about choosing belief is central to the promotion of membership in the churches. It has nothing to do with following Christ.
Seems you've been engaging in some self-reflection.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2013, 07:12 PM
 
40,066 posts, read 26,739,576 times
Reputation: 6050
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
The problem is that they have been misled by their religious leaders to think that they can CHOOSE what they truly believe. They cannot . . . but they can claim to accept things they themselves do not truly believe. This deception about choosing belief is central to the promotion of membership in the churches. It has nothing to do with following Christ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaznjohn View Post
Seems you've been engaging in some self-reflection.
Yes John . . . for more than 40+ years now. It never ends.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2013, 11:58 PM
 
545 posts, read 382,901 times
Reputation: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
The problem is that they have been misled by their religious leaders to think that they can CHOOSE what they truly believe. They cannot . . . but they can claim to accept things they themselves do not truly believe. This deception about choosing belief is central to the promotion of membership in the churches. It has nothing to do with following Christ.
An individual can choose to reject common sense.

Its common sense which fuels whatever approach. Common sense is ignored all the time with all kinds of evidence.

God is understood to be pure reason in the majority of belief systems.

So the 100% closed door, decided thing -non-believer who is acquainted with a god idea in a pure reason scheme, is justifiably not allowed to believe and is in order following conscience,

but relative to the believer, out of order relative to the believers said experienced individual curiosity , and the freedom to believe in something greater then self.

Or another way to say, man would need to have a fundamental God suggestion believable before going to the next step trying to join dots which is mostly the case ( all the different beliefs...( concrete fact

so the common sense and choosing to see the common sense of it would be contained in that potential openness to the idea itself. So the vikings would of had idea's over the common sense of it and reasons to choose or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2013, 12:07 PM
 
741 posts, read 1,067,550 times
Reputation: 1214
I think it's fine, as long as you remain honest with yourself and others that you are CHOOSING to believe, and remaing honest with yourself and others that there really is NO EVIDENCE for it.
And be at peace with those who do NOT believe for the same reason (no evidence).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2013, 12:12 PM
 
40,066 posts, read 26,739,576 times
Reputation: 6050
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeMachine View Post
I think it's fine, as long as you remain honest with yourself and others that you are CHOOSING to believe, and remaing honest with yourself and others that there really is NO EVIDENCE for it.
And be at peace with those who do NOT believe for the same reason (no evidence).
This is such an annoyingly pervasive misunderstanding of evidence. There is plenty of evidence currently assigned to "nature" or "natural." What you should say to reveal that you actually have an open mind and a scientifically objective one . . . is that there isn't sufficient evidence to convince you that our inscrutable reality is God. You prefer the "We don't know what it is" answer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2013, 08:18 AM
 
Location: The land where cats rule
10,946 posts, read 8,256,113 times
Reputation: 3602
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
This is such an annoyingly pervasive misunderstanding of evidence. There is plenty of evidence currently assigned to "nature" or "natural." What you should say to reveal that you actually have an open mind and a scientifically objective one . . . is that there isn't sufficient evidence to convince you that our inscrutable reality is God. You prefer the "We don't know what it is" answer.

Of course, you have never considered that this "misunderstanding" of evidence could possibly be yours, have you? That would require you to admit fallibility and that just can't be!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2013, 03:18 AM
 
3,637 posts, read 2,697,489 times
Reputation: 4300
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
This is such an annoyingly pervasive misunderstanding of evidence. There is plenty of evidence currently assigned to "nature" or "natural.".
No - it is not a misunderstanding of evidence to suggest that the data we have in no way supports the claims - yours included - of an intellgent agent behind the universe.

Which - pretty much - is all we mean by "natural". Something that occurs or occured without influence from an intelligent agent based on any intention or design.

There is not a shred of evidence for any intelligence behind the creation and existence of our universe. Certainly not what you keep offering of "I was meditating one day and decided for myself there is a god".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top