Extreme Atheism - leads to a Proxy God by default.

He isn't doing anything out of kindness. It's more like, "so you like immigrants, then you take care of them". It puts the financial burden solely on a few cities rather than on the national government. It's a political stunt in other words.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

How can abstract concepts though, really be held to such stringent expectations? As with most topics on philosophy or religion, threads like this ebb and flow, and boomerang back to the original premise, at times. Only to ebb and flow again. I think that if atheists believe in determinism, then that could potentially lead to a god by proxy. Although, I'm not sure one can become faithful, by proxy.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think the premise for this thread is a false one. The premise is that atheists think that the Universe is deterministic and therefore God is the same as this universal determinism.

Of course, most theists, if not particularly well informed about how the brain works or how classical physics works, would probably say that we have free will and therefore this shoots down the premise for the thread.

Those more scientifically minded might say that there is more determinism than many would think and that would be based either on how the brain works (much that we do is not conscious) or based on the atomic level where if you know all the variables you could predict what would happen at some future point in time.

This isn't a God or Universe predetermining everything about one's life (which is the suggestion in the OP). Furthermore, someone conversant with quantum physics would be less deterministic (more probablistic) in the first place, again, shooting down the premise in the OP.

The only ones pushing the concept of atheists and determinism being a proxy for God and those who already believe in a God. Much like the Christian apologists and their "arguments". They are seems as rational arguments only to those who already believe in God and convert no one by their "logic".

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Science is held to such stringent expectations. If a person wants to declare to have a proposal that God exists, fine.

But that is not the case at all. In fact the opposite is true where many theists feel they have the right to declare atheist are apostate and will surely burn in hell for not beliveing in that which cannot be explained. Do you see the duplicity/

Hypatia (first woman astronomer and atheist) was torn to shreds and the great Library of Alexandria was set on fire setting science back a thousand years. On the strength of an abstract concept by theists acting as proxy for God?

I submit that Extreme Theism leads to acting as Proxy for God. And that can be proved by historical fact.

 

Well, QQ prefaces the OP by indicating that this thread was ''inspired'' by another. Additionally, he does bring up the idea of self-determinism in the OP. I wouldn't take it personally.

 

If you read the ad hominems accompanying the arguments from authority, such as calling atheists stupid and citing Newton as the proof for the existence of God. You will see that I only gave as I received. Hence my list of great intellectual Atheist scientists as rebuttal to his measly example.

Let me qualify, I like QQ and agree with several of his other posts. But I am in total and complete disagreement with his extreme radical assumption and the incoherent manner in which his "notion" of belief in a Proxy God was presented.

That does not make me an extreme atheist, it makes me an atheist arguing with an extreme theist seeking to act as human proxy for God.

 

Another wopper... do you ever learn?

 

what is the proxy God by default described in the OP?

 

understandable but the words are not just atheist but extreme atheists.
As explained countless times since posting it...

 

it does if you believe freewill is an illusion and a self deception... do you or not?

 

I would consider one of the traits of an extreme theist to be that they do not believe in freewill or self determination...
is that a reasonable position for me to take do you think?

So why not apply the same criteria to an atheist?

 

Yes, my point remains the same even though I didn't include the word "extreme".

 

fair enough....opinions are after all just opinions...

 

So how do we accommodate the following quote posted in the OP?
Posted by another member in another thread.
"Belief in gods is a commonly held position by most humans, but such beliefs, just like your (the) notion of self determinism, aren’t rational or consistent with scientific understanding."

Does every atheist believe as such or is this quote indicating a some what extreme view?
Why is freewill and self determination associated with theism by an atheist, any way?

 

The entire concept of God with or without the ridiculous attachment to determinism or free will is meaningless to me.

You want to discuss Determinism or Free Will, fine. Don't bring God in the picture. God doesn't exist as commonly defined and can only be used as a kind of argument from authority.

Bad form.

 

You are making the claim. In order to posit any association of anything in relation to a God it's up to you to define God in the first place and you cannot.
So drop it.

 

proxy God = "It means treating something non-Godlike as if it were God, I suppose."
by default = as a consequence of the deterministic universe being responsible for all human activity and decisions and choices. That Humans have absolutely no choice that they need to be responsible for.

so we end up with
"proxy God by default"

 

No we don't. It's all nonsense. There is no equation of any kind.

You keep pushing God in my face. Gods don't exist and nothing relates to a god or gods.
That is your completely subjective assumption and has no standing in objective science.

 

I've just noticed but you have once again altered the quotation of another member. You have dishonestly inserted the "(the)" as if there is just one possible notion of self determinism, and that they consider this notion to be inconsistent with scientific understanding.
That is blatantly dishonest of you, and not the first time you have altered quotes in an effort to change their meaning. The issue the poster had was with certain notions - I.e. yours. Yes, there really are different notions, just as there are different notions of free will. You changing his quote is just another mark of dishonesty against your name.

The quote indicates your extreme dishonesty. The actual unaltered quote merely indicates a disagreement with YOUR notion of self determination, the kind requiring what the poster considers a non-trivial notion of freedom, the kind he considers to be inconsistent with science.

It's not, typically, unless one asserts that the freedom within the freewill and self-determination requires some spirit, some deity etc.
Otherwise it is just a disagreement as to the nature of the freedom that the deterministic universe allows. Some atheists think that the freedom is of a non-trivial kind, others don't, and think the only freedom to be found can also be found in a thermostat. How it is used, and the complexity of the system using it, may be different but that is the kind of freedom they see. No God necessary.

Your "proxy God" remains ill-defined. Do you regard the laws of the universe as a "proxy God"? Do you think humans are in any way able to do something that those laws say we can't?
I'll assume that for the last your answer is "no". Thus you think that we are entirely bound by those Laws, right?
So you believe in a proxy-God!
See how pointless this entire thread is yet?

 

No I do not believe in a proxy God. I am an atheist. I believe the universe is co-deterministic and no Proxy God or any God is needed as freewill and self determination are quite compatible and necessary in any case. so I remain an atheist with out any contradictions.
What about you?

It is only those atheists that transfer responsibility for human thoughts and actions to an all powerful universe that believe in a proxy god by default.
In other words believe in a God with out realizing it... by default of their extreme deterministic beliefs.
Generating a contradiction that is terminal IMO.
Do you believe that the deterministic universe is responsible for human choices? Of course you do as you have repeatedly stated in the "What is Freewill" thread that there is absolutely no choice and any choice we think we have is an illusion. Just like the theists who believe mankind has no choice but to do as God wishes.

Perhaps the author of that quote can explain what he means.... by "Your" self determination?

I am sure he was speaking about any self determination as in his view there is absolutely no self determination, just as you had been arguing endlessly in the freewill thread.

Is there a problem?

I placed the edit "The" to minimize the sort of confusion that you wish to bring to the discussion.
I even put it in brackets...