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.
But I loved science, and despite the tempting social pressures and warm smiles, I just couldn't ignore the heaping helpings of rational and scientific absurdities I was being asked to believe.
About science or about religion? If about science, what absurdities? That is 'all by chance'? Close, cigar?
If so, was that the reason for the conversion? I'm curious rather than trying to debunk your conversion.
You see, I take the view that we are all born atheists and are open to conversion all the time, even if we are not drafted into religilion as children.
I have been greatly struck, I may say, by an atheist poster here who drifted into deism by becoming convinced that some sort of cosmic intelligence had to exist. So it does happen.
Several high profile atheist conversions have been mentioned on the boards - none of them for good reasons, Anthony Flew converted to Deism by Behe's non -science, Peter Hitchens converted by a dislike of the Soviet state and a terror of hellfire and an atheist blogger apparently coming to see 'morality' as a separate entity which had it own existence.
So I'm rather interested in the process through which you came to theism and whether that has led onto Bible and organized religion.
I have been greatly struck, I may say, by an atheist poster here who drifted into deism by becoming convinced that some sort of cosmic intelligence had to exist. So it does happen.
Indeed it does. Personally, I am inclined to believe that there is no Creator or primordial intelligence, thus I call myself an atheist, but I'm somewhat agnostic concerning vague concepts of cosmic or primordial consciousness. It's only when the concept of "God" starts to be defined in fairly traditional Intelligent Design/creator terms that I become a true-blue atheist. Which is why I like to pay attention to the type of theist one converts to. A drift from atheism to some vague, loose sense of mysticism or cosmic mind is probably fairly common. I would imagine, however, that the move from atheism to full-blown fundamentalist theism would be rare. These are the cases I would find most interesting.
Ashleynj didn't specify what rational/scientific absurdities led to atheism, but my wild guess would be the general problems that people have with one or all of these:
(1) "Something from nothing"
(2) Life from non-life
(3) Consciousness from non-consciousness
I suspect that these are the classic deep questions that can easily account for many rational conversions to theism. (By "rational" I mean a conversion that is not driven by social pressures, personal crisis, cult techniques, etc.). These are tough philosophical and scientific problems, and I can't blame anyone for landing on the side of some form of theism when they take time to dig into them. There is simply nothing irrational or even unscientific about concluding, on the basis of these puzzles, that "mind" or consciousness of some sort is fundamental to reality. As I've said in other threads, I don't personally buy consciousness or intelligence as fundamental, but I do see subjectivity or proto-qualitative aspects of reality as fundamental. This tends to temper my atheism.
Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 02-09-2015 at 07:11 AM..
Bottom line: For me, the only transformation that I would find surprising would be a transformation from well-educated atheist to fundamentalist. All other transformations can be made without any serious affronts to rationality and science.
I more or less agree, so long as the person in question wasn't originally a fundamentalist in the first place. If that is how you grew up, and especially if there was useful social support you're missing, then you would be more likely to deploy compartmentalization and return to what, e.g., your sainted mother has been pining for you to return to. One must not forget the importance of social pressure in overriding rational considerations.
Besides, it's not like there are no scientists who are fundamentalist Christians; they just aren't paleontologists (unless they are starving paleontologists) and the like. Compartmentalization can, to an extent, save one from the logical consequences of one's thought-system.
Ashleynj didn't specify what rational/scientific absurdities led to atheism...
Sorry, I didn't catch this typo in time to edit. I meant to say theism. I will be curious to see if Ashleynj or other atheist-->theist converts will list "absurdities" beyond the three that I listed.
My very brief atheist response to the three deep puzzles would be:
(1) Science does not posit "something from nothing" in the sense of absolute pure nothingness. The Big Bang singularity is not a total "nothingness." The physical vacuum in quantum theory is not pure nothingness.
(2) Life from non-living materials is not such a deep mystery now that we understand the principles of self-organization from chaotic conditions. Insofar as "life" is defined in terms of behaviors (metabolism, reproduction, etc.), there is simply nothing, in principle, to prevent living systems from developing out of an abiotic environment. And given the track record of science for explaining things that seemed unexplainable to previous generations, I think it is irrational to bet against science on the origins of life question.
(3) This is the tough one for me. We don't need the designing talents of a primordial intelligence to explain the origins of intelligent creatures, but I think we do need some sort of primordial qualitative potential in order to explain the emergence of sentience (the feelings of being alive). This is one area where I might be accused of having quasi-theistic sympathies, or at least I might count as more agnostic than atheist in some respects.
Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 02-09-2015 at 07:40 AM..
Indeed it does. Personally, I am inclined to believe that there is no Creator or primordial intelligence, thus I call myself an atheist, but I'm somewhat agnostic concerning vague concepts of cosmic or primordial consciousness. It's only when the concept of "God" starts to be defined in fairly traditional Intelligent Design/creator terms that I become a true-blue atheist. Which is why I like to pay attention to the type of theist one converts to. A drift from atheism to some vague, loose sense of mysticism or cosmic mind is probably fairly common. I would imagine, however, that the move from atheism to full-blown fundamentalist theism would be rare. These are the cases I would find most interesting.
Ashleynj didn't specify what rational/scientific absurdities led to atheism, but my wild guess would be the general problems that people have with one or all of these:
(1) "Something from nothing"
(2) Life from non-life
(3) Consciousness from non-consciousness
I suspect that these are the classic deep questions that can easily account for many rational conversions to theism. (By "rational" I mean a conversion that is not driven by social pressures, personal crisis, cult techniques, etc.). These are tough philosophical and scientific problems, and I can't blame anyone for landing on the side of some form of theism when they take time to dig into them. There is simply nothing irrational or even unscientific about concluding, on the basis of these puzzles, that "mind" or consciousness of some sort is fundamental to reality. As I've said in other threads, I don't personally buy consciousness or intelligence as fundamental, but I do see subjectivity or proto-qualitative aspects of reality as fundamental. This tends to temper my atheism.
I agree, which was why I as asking (without intent to argue). Was there some good reason why an atheist converted? or bad reasons, like fear of hellthreat? Or the usual ones that seem pretty sound, but in logical fact have to be regarded as speculations about unknowns and with some feasible alternatives.
I am pretty foggy about a lot of this Woo end of Physics, biology and mental studies, but what evidence we do have suggests that something from nothing, life from non -life and consciousness from non -consciousness (or so we would consider it) is not only possible, but feasible.
So an outright rejection is simply lack of understanding, and that is why i talk of 'Thinking atheists': that is, atheists who know the debate and the pros and cons.
Those who were simply brought up without any religious input may well find these stock arguments from first cause, evolution on the rocks and the fave theist apologetics ploy last year 'Consciousness proved God', persuasive.
That initial creator -concept sold, it is easy to fling the newly persuaded sortagod believer, like Gimli into a pile of Orcs into the book that tells us all about Him and what He plans for us and expects from us.
In that respect First cause and Abiogenesis and the whole evilooshun -thing, while strictly speaking irrelevant to the religion -debate, is vitally important in putting the answers to the First -cause, I/D and Life cannot come from non -life claims. Because, though persuasive, they are actually not valid.
I won't go into the whole debunking science can of worms, but suffice it to say, that if you discard science, then you cannot (logically) appeal to science. Though in fact, they do - in spades - when it suits them. And of course incorrect science, if it suffices to make the conversion to what is known to be true on Faith anyway.
P.s I guessed you meant Theism. It is a whole study and thesis on how we can work out from experience what is what, notwithstanding how it appears, and given the propensity of human perceptions to mislead. We already knew what you were going to say. That is why I so often have to catch myself musing 'Now is this bod arguing for religion or against? Am I looking to discredit their testimony or commend it to the jury of browsers? And I have to remind myself what I am doing is seeing first what the valuable lessons are. After all I'm not being paid as an advocate.
P.p. s. As you may know, in a vague way I can imagine how the feelings of identity can emerge, develop or evolve. It's like an instinctive prompt, like the community and status -order of a pack. It must come out of the simpler reactions to possible food or possible threat and those from the simpler ones like flying or turning leaves towards the light, because that is what enables survival and became genetically encoded as instinct. That's why I think consciousness in humans has a lot to do with problem -solving combined with social structure - instincts. I can see how some might prefer an 'Adam -Eve' event that reduced our jaw and enlarged our brain and enabled higher thought and complex speech, either by God or Alien scientists, take your pick. But I can't rule out a very remarkable development in a walking chimp that had only its wits to survive on.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 02-09-2015 at 07:51 AM..
It's a pretty large group seeing we are all born Atheist until someone tells us about religion. So, pretty darn large group of people that go from Atheism to some sort of belief. Yes indeedy.
Well there is me. Raised in an atheistic home. In my 20s became a believer in God then a few years later a Christian.
And there is my friend Chuck. Raised nominal Methodist. Became atheist. After 20 years found atheism lacking in the light of scientific evidence-biological and in how the universe came about. Became an Evangelical Christian about 10 years ago.
There's one thing to be brought up in a brainwashing/religious environment and thus delusional....but IMO it is a whole different animal when one is delusional enough to see the reality/facts and still go towards fiction that is religion/god!
to me, that's mind boggling. The only thing i can assume is that they didn't really understand ALL the reasons 'to be' an atheist......you know, kind of like those who 'become atheists, because "they're mad at god"! lol". I could believe them going 'back' to their fairy tales, because, again, they didn't understand why it makes sense to be atheist in the first place.
There's one thing to be brought up in a brainwashing/religious environment and thus delusional....but IMO it is a whole different animal when one is delusional enough to see the reality/facts and still go towards fiction that is religion/god!
to me, that's mind boggling. The only thing i can assume is that they didn't really understand ALL the reasons 'to be' an atheist......you know, kind of like those who 'become atheists, because "they're mad at god"! lol". I could believe them going 'back' to their fairy tales, because, again, they didn't understand why it makes sense to be atheist in the first place.
I think it is also important to consider these two factors:
(1) Level of education during period of atheism
(2) The type of believer the atheist becomes (i.e., liberal/non-literalist Christian vs. fundamentalist/literalist Christian)
I would be most curious to hear about cases where a college-educated (especially someone with a college science background) atheist becomes a fundamentalist/literalist Christian. I suppose there are some examples of this, but I suspect it is a fairly rare phenomenon.
For someone who does not have much background in science, the transition from atheist to liberal Christian could be a relatively easy change. The transition to fundamentalist is probably a tougher change, but it is nevertheless fairly common because the fundamentalists tend to be active evangelists. When I was in college, I tended to be shy and somewhat of a longer. Some beautiful Christian gals from the "Campus Crusade for Christ" lured me in with amazingly warm smile and a bubbly attitude about how great it was to be Christian. It was emotionally/socially enticing (almost like taking a hit of crack cocaine) and I almost fell for it. (BTW: I really didn't consider myself to be an atheist; I thought of myself as loosely Christian, but I'd read the Bible and I had doubts.) But I loved science, and despite the tempting social pressures and warm smiles, I just couldn't ignore the heaping helpings of rational and scientific absurdities I was being asked to believe. If I had not been so science-minded, the appeal of being accepted into this almost cult-like mindset might have been too powerful for me to resist.
The difference between liberal Christian and fundamentalist can be dramatic. My college Organic Evolution professor considered himself to be a Christian. He could reconcile evolution and Christianity by assuming that most of the Bible should be understood as, in effect, inspirational poetry - not literal history or the literal words of God. He saw no serious conflict between religion and science, and given his loose sort of theism, he was correct.
Bottom line: For me, the only transformation that I would find surprising would be a transformation from well-educated atheist to fundamentalist. All other transformations can be made without any serious affronts to rationality and science.
Not as rare as you'd think. Though it seems crazy that you'd involve yourself with religious fundamentalism. You can logically talk yourself into Christianity (or any faith), but usually becoming a fundamentalist is not a rational decision. It's an emotional one, usually from a life that's about to fall apart (I met a fundamentalist couple, the woman was on drugs, then got saved by her to-be husband). They go fundamentalist, because these types reach out to them first (nobody else is actively converting).
I never was an atheist. I went to church, with sort of "going through the motions" mentality. Then something weird happened. I met this girl, and in the course of getting to know her, I changed alot about myself. I wanted to be someone she cared about, but realized in the process, I wanted to be someone I cared about. Now, I attend church and try to live my life in the realization that the Jewish law was impossible to keep, and that's actually what grace is about, living your life with the knowledge someone out there loves you. (I still have depressive episodes, where I don't have the energy to go to church, but I try to attend as much as possible) I'm a Christian, but also a pantheist. So what is Jesus, to me?
It's a pretty large group seeing we are all born Atheist until someone tells us about religion.
I'm not sure about that. Ancient primitive cultures are animist. They see a sense of wonder about everything without adhering to specific deities. I would like to instill that same sense of wonder in my children. I would like them to meet Jesus too, but more important to me is a general feeling that the spiritual world is everywhere. Given that children have that same sense of joy and wonder, I can only assume that the default status of humans is this, until someone talks them out of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thinking-man
There's one thing to be brought up in a brainwashing/religious environment and thus delusional....but IMO it is a whole different animal when one is delusional enough to see the reality/facts and still go towards fiction that is religion/god!
Here's the thing. We humans don't really know what reality actually looks like. At all. Example: the shoes on your feet. They look perfectly solid. Right? Put it under the microscope. It's mostly air. You may think of the "solid" world of rational atheism as the real world, but that doesn't mean everyone does.
For other people, seeing their wishes/prayers come to pass at the hands of coincidence, seeing the love of their life enter, when all odds were that they would wind up alone... somehow that feels more real than this.
We can believe what life leads us to believe, and we can also believe what we want. Being someone who can logically prove that atheism is illogical, I find your lack of faith disturbing.
Last edited by bulmabriefs144; 02-09-2015 at 06:45 PM..
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.
First cause and Abiogenesis and the whole evilooshun -thing, while strictly speaking irrelevant to the religion -debate, is vitally important in putting the answers to the First -cause, I/D and Life cannot come from non -life claims. Because, though persuasive, they are actually not valid.
So, pretty darn large group of people that go from Atheism to some sort of belief. Yes indeedy.
