Atheists and the soul

[DaveC426913]

Feeling good about it is not the reason, but it is a stimulus. 'Expected' reciprocity is the actual (evolutionary) reason.

You equate 'actual' and 'evolutionary', as if evolution is the only real reason for actions. That's a very simplistic stance. Humans are quite capable of acting on their will, without being slave to their evolutionary instincts.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
Luckily for the lepers... Jesuses payoff was to for-fill his desire to be kind... weighed aganst the low risk of becomin ill.!!!

I've heard this argument before; I think it's lame.

A have a friend "E" that claims it is logically impossible to commit a selfless act. "E" claims all acts that are supposedly selfless actually benefit the doer, because they feel better about themselves.

I think that's a misinterpretation of selflessness. No one said you can't be pleased by committing a selfless act, the key to a selfless act is that you put others' needs and wants before your own - not that you have none.

If E were correct, it would mean I give away my canteen primarily because it makes me feel better to do so.

Think about this:
Two of us, A and B. in the desert. I give my colleague B my canteen and, before he can drink any, he trips and drops it, bouncing over a cliff.

E thinks that my act, while seeming selfless, is really selfish.
Is it? Do I derive pleasure merely from the offer of water? Or is it only meaningful if my B's suffering is actually relieved?

A proper definition of selflessness means it really is about the other person's relief. It is not about how I feel about my own deed.

Why did you give you'r colleague you'r canteen.???

 

[DaveC426913]

Why did you give you'r colleague you'r canteen.???

Because he's thirsty. Haven't you been following?

(That's a lousy scenario, now that I re-read it. I didn't make my point very well.)

 

[Enmos]

You equate 'actual' and 'evolutionary', as if evolution is the only real reason for actions. That's a very simplistic stance.

I used the brackets meaning 'and also'.

Humans are quite capable of acting on their will, without being slave to their evolutionary instincts.

I'm not sure that I agree with that..

 

[cluelusshusbund]

(That's a lousy scenario, now that I re-read it. I didn't make my point very well.)

I liked it oK.!!!

 

[cluelusshusbund]

Humans are quite capable of acting on their will, without being slave to their evolutionary instincts.

Thats interestin... give an example.!!!

 

[DaveC426913]

I'm not sure that I agree with that..

Soooo, your evolutionary instincts, not your intellect, caused you to post a message on a forum on the internet?

 

[DaveC426913]

Thats interestin... give an example.!!!

See above. Post 167.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

See above. Post 167.

Is intellect somehow separate/not influenced by evolutionary instincts.???

-------------------
You gonna give anuther examle that makes you'r pont beter.???

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread...and-the-soul&p=3226831&viewfull=1#post3226831

 

[DaveC426913]

Is intellect somehow separate/not influenced by evolutionary instincts.???

Then it's turtles all the way down. Reducto ad absurdium.

We don't act because of evolution, we act because evolution is a product of atoms forming molecules.
Or, better, we act because the 4 fundamental forces combine in just the right way.


No, I say my actions are controlled by the emergent phenomenon of intellect - more than the sum of its parts. And it can cause my actions to run counter to evolution if I choose.

 

[Aqueous Id]

If GOD is in everyone and all things, are we not all then, GOD?

Ephesians 4:6

No, and the various lost sources collectively referred to as Paul could not possibly have an authoritative opinion on the question, as these rambling narratives originate with the unknown Tarsian who lived nowhere near the action of the Gospel legend, nor did he live contemporaneously with the events alleged in the legend.

And no, humans are not supernatural beings. We are entirely natural beings. That (biology) is the only level of inquiry which is sane. The rest is superstition.

You equate 'actual' and 'evolutionary', as if evolution is the only real reason for actions. That's a very simplistic stance. Humans are quite capable of acting on their will, without being slave to their evolutionary instincts.

Evolution is the only reason humans split from the common ancestor with other apes. The primary difference in the genotypes is the fusion of Chromosome 2 in humans.

There is nothing special about human instinctual motivation, which you call will. It is a feature of the primitive animal brain. Group behaviors which influence one individual's instinctual motivation are also features of the primitive animal brain. The more elaborate behaviors are endowed by adaptations to specific brain sites. More complex behaviors are learned. This is the primary purpose of animal intelligence. It provides the platform for acquiring real time programming.

The fact that higher animals socialize in complex ways is entirely a product of a long complicated sequence of adaptations, which became possible ever since the planaria evolved the first primitive ganglia.

We are slaves to our instincts. When we make choices between self preservation and altruism, we are subjected a process analogous to the birds who hunt for their chicks, in the choice they make to protect the young (carry the food to them) rather than self preservation (eating the food themselves). In fact this is quite complex, insofar as they will regurgitate the food as a mean of pre-digesting it. All we are biologically is instinctual automatons, over which a group behavior is acquired through learning (socialization / acculturation). Altruism for the young is programmed, self preservation is programmed, and intelligence is programmed. Beyond that the main difference between us and other animals is our ability to make inferences and to recognize cause and effect, and thereby to make predictive judgments other species can't make. Further, much of this additional capability of the human faculty is connected to human speech. But none of that liberates is from the chains of instinct. The sense of well being itself is instinctual and primitive.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

I say my actions are controlled by the emergent phenomenon of intellect - more than the sum of its parts. And it can cause my actions to run counter to evolution if I choose.

Is the "I" you speek of an "intellect" the same thang... or do they separately influence choices.???

 

[DaveC426913]

And no, humans are not supernatural beings. We are entirely natural beings. That (biology) is the only level of inquiry which is sane. The rest is superstition.

yeah...


In my most melancholy moments, I kind of wish there were a god. It would make life so simple. Someone watching over us, making sure we kept our noses clean, meting out justice, and telling me - so I don't have to determine it for myself - what is Right and what is Wrong.

We, all 7 billion of us, would essentially be teenagers, living in the basement of the uber-parent, never having to take personal responsibility. I could always defer upwards.. I'd love to be a "teenager" my whole life. It would be so much simpler than knowing there is no Right and Wrong except what I (we, all) decide it should be.

This is why I explore these hypotheticals.

But reason re-asserts itself, and I know I am biological; I know my actions, and my destiny, are my own.

That's a good thing. The world is an unwritten page, and I have the power to write on it. That's what makes the world fresh and new.



I like to call myself the Unwilling Atheist. I kinda wish their were a god/parent, but my heart knows there is not. I am a grown up, and I must put away childish things.


So there you have it.

That's my "end game", as one poster called it.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

At my most melancholy of moments, I kind of wish there were a god. It would make life so simple.

What about the hell part... how coud you be sure you woudnt wind up in hell for eternity.???

Someone watching over us, making sure we kept our noses clean, meting out justice, and telling me - so I don't have to determine it for myself - what is Right and what is Wrong.

Personaly... i prefer to determine myself what is wright or wrong.!!!
I dont see an up-side to ther realy bein a Bible God.!!!

The world is an unwritten page, and I have the power to write on it. That's what makes the world fresh and new.

I thank free will is an illusion... an the future is fresh an new because we dont have enuff information to predict what the future will be.!!!

 

[Aqueous Id]

yeah...


In my most melancholy moments, I kind of wish there were a god. It would make life so simple. Someone watching over us, making sure we kept our noses clean, meting out justice, and telling me - so I don't have to determine it for myself - what is Right and what is Wrong.

That pretty well covers the rationale for "why I think men invented the gods", as Critias put it. Except he also realized it was done to legitimize the authority of the governments (in Greece anyway).

We, all 7 billion of us, would essentially be teenagers, living in the basement of the uber-parent, never having to take personal responsibility. I could always defer upwards.. I'd love to be a "teenager" my whole life. It would be so much simpler than knowing there is no Right and Wrong except what I (we, all) decide it should be.

The God in question doesn't do that. He takes vulnerable minds and fills them with morbid X-rated material, throws temper tantrums, and then slaughters his Pinocchios. The only hope of living off the fat of the land is after death, which is pretty useless.

This is why I explore these hypotheticals.

But reason re-asserts itself, and I know I am biological; I know my actions, and my destiny, are my own.

That just discounts Calvinsim. It leaves the rest of the doors open.

That's a good thing. The world is an unwritten page, and I have the power to write on it. That's what makes the world fresh and new.

That doesn't reflect a particularly atheist position.

I like to call myself the Unwilling Atheist. I kinda wish their were a god/parent, but my heart knows there is not. I am a grown up, and I must put away childish things.

That sounds like waffling.

So there you have it.

That's my "end game", as one poster called it.

You mean me. But your explanation is not very convincing. There is a huge activity on this site from religious trolls, and one of their tactics is to use thinly veiled pretenses ("I'm a Catholic" was one) to hope to hide their fundamentalist stance, which has one main objective: to attack science wherever people are posting it. They are con artists. One of the ways to spot them is that they run between threads with sock puppets, the way some of the anti-science posters weave in and out of existence anti-parallel to your appearances here.

 

[Arne Saknussemm]

Give an example of Bible Jesus actin selflessly.!!!

There was that one time when He was crucified and died for our sins, but I'm going to guess you won't count that for some 'clueluss' reason.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

There was that one time when He was crucified and died for our sins, but I'm going to guess you won't count that for some 'clueluss' reason.

Hmmm... did Jesus freely choose to make that sacrifice... or was it Gods will that it be done.???

 

[DaveC426913]

That pretty well covers the rationale for "why I think men invented the gods"

Yes, I do think humans are predisposed to create a parent figure. I see it as part of a human desire to have order. But a predisposition doesn't make it true.

That doesn't reflect a particularly atheist position.

There is no such thing. Atheists are not a group. Beyond not believing there's a god, atheists are individuals, and only share other viewpoints by happenstance. Atheists don't need backup.

That sounds like waffling.

The very premise of the thread is my waffling. I've made no bones about that. No, I've been explicit about that.

I want to waffle, so I ask questions that probe the leaky boundaries between theism and atheism.

But after hearing a lot of opinions, I realize that I'm fooling myself. The existence of a god is a romantic viewpoint.

You mean me. But your explanation is not very convincing. There is a huge activity on this site from religious trolls, and one of their tactics is to use thinly veiled pretenses...

Well I'm not really obliged to convince you of anything. If you think you're seeing something walk like a duck, and you decide that means it's a duck, frankly, that's on you.


What you're seeing, I suspect, is that I don't talk like a "classic" atheist talks. To my chagrin, many atheists (at least the outspoken ones) are full of what I interpret as anger and cynicism: "... fills them with morbid X-rated material, throws temper tantrums, and then slaughters his Pinocchios. The only hope of living off the fat of the land is after death, which is pretty useless. "
(seriously, not picking on you, it's just a nearby example of a very common theist-bashing rant)

I don't feel this cynicism, so I find myself actually defending the sensibilities of theists against meanness. This would not be the first time I've had someone see my moderate views and declare me to be a closet theist.

 

[Trooper]

In my most melancholy moments, I kind of wish there were a god. It would make life so simple. Someone watching over us, making sure we kept our noses clean, meting out justice, and telling me - so I don't have to determine it for myself - what is Right and what is Wrong.

We, all 7 billion of us, would essentially be teenagers, living in the basement of the uber-parent, never having to take personal responsibility. I could always defer upwards.. I'd love to be a "teenager" my whole life. It would be so much simpler than knowing there is no Right and Wrong except what I (we, all) decide it should be.

This is why I explore these hypotheticals.

But reason re-asserts itself, and I know I am biological; I know my actions, and my destiny, are my own.

That's a good thing. The world is an unwritten page, and I have the power to write on it. That's what makes the world fresh and new.



I like to call myself the Unwilling Atheist. I kinda wish there were a god/parent, but my heart knows there is not. I am a grown up, and I must put away childish things.


So there you have it.

That's my "end game", as one poster called it.

Survival is the end game. We’re not simply living beings, we’re life keepers. Evolution may dupe us into romanticizing life, and its challenges, but not without its rewards.

That doesn't reflect a particularly atheist position.

Aqueous Id, I think he’s experiencing the greatest nostalgia. Time is irreversible. He's becoming disenchanted with the truth. Maybe he’s just trying to overcome nihilism. Some people experience nothingness as something essential, you know.

Help him.

 

[sculptor]

You can not know GOD
You can not know the name of GOD
You can not say the name of GOD

If you can settle for "I AM" then You will know of the god of abraham, isaac and jacob.

From east to west the same concept echoes down through the generations of man:
The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal TAO. The name that can be named is not the eternal name.

If you would seek GOD through knowledge or science,
You are batting way the hell out of your league.