When did you stop believing in god?

[He's Dead, Jim]

Ve believe in nussing Lebowski

this.

 

[SocialNumb]

Jind + rational. Good job.

Though I don't fully agree with free will. Partly.

 

[Jind]

Ok I'll not call it faith then I was giving just an example. I only said faith once btw.

Falling through the floor is highly unlikely to happen because you never hear about people falling like that. I'm saying that we believe in science, thanks to observation and experimentation like the article posted previously says. I'll believe in science and not religion but claiming that "science is the ultimate truth" like neil degrasse says it's fucking stupid. Science is not the absolute truth like many people say.

I think, if polled, the majority would state that science does not equal the absolute truth, but is the closest to absolute truth as currently understood based upon an ever deeper dive into the unknown or less known - a big differentiation from faith which requires acceptance of age old writ; which by the way, has been selectively chosen by man/men to convey an ideology, a supposed belief system, a specific doctrine which absence the permission of a higher authority (by the way, another group of men or a man e.g. the pope, a proclaimed prophet, ... you get the drift) are unlikely to change, even in minor ways, despite an ever changing world.

Of those two - do tell - which sounds more like a belief in an "absolute truth" and which is likely to be adaptive to new data?

By the way - this is not necessarily directed at the poster, just a comment based upon the quote and open for comment to all.

 

[SocialNumb]

Mashreef, I think, if you want, you should clarify what you believe and if you follow a certain dogma. ie, do you have a religious faith of choice/tradition/upbringing/ect. If so, what is it?

Just curious.

 

[indecizo]

I think, if polled, the majority would state that science does not equal the absolute truth,

I don't know, have you read youtube comments on that kind of matter? Reddit, facebook, etc? Even some posts in this thread.

- a big differentiation from faith which requires acceptance of age old writ; which by the way, has been selectively chosen by man/men to convey an ideology, a supposed belief system, a specific doctrine which absence the permission of a higher authority (by the way, another group of men or a man e.g. the pope, a proclaimed prophet, ... you get the drift) are unlikely to change, even in minor ways, despite an ever changing world.

The pope and the church can go fuck themselves. They make everyone who believe in god just for the fact of believing in god look bad, seriously. You don't need an organized religion to believe in any form of god.

 

[Jind]

Jind + rational. Good job.

Though I don't fully agree with free will. Partly.

Thank you, but I have to ask, as I always find interesting things in peoples thoughts and posts, if not free will, what? - does that imply you believe in things like luck/bad luck and fate? Really? From what I thought I knew about you, would have guessed otherwise.

While I don;t think "free will" equates to unlimited choices, it at a bare minimum deals with a simple do/don't do, yes/no type scenario in which the choices we make impact the choices we get further on down the road.

Certainly others choices have impact on the options you have, but it's still free will in how you react (possibly the heart of free will as it's could be the only thing one really has complete say over - the only thing one really controls).

While I'm not religious in any sense of the word, I don't discount the wisdom of several religious believers simply because of their beliefs. One of my favorite quotes, that to me speaks to how I see free will, is by Dr. Viktor Frankl - the author of several books including "Man's Search for Meaning" which is rooted in his experiences during the Holocaust where he spent time in Auschwitz and Dachua - his wife, brother, and mother all dying while in concentration camps.

He came to believe that even through the most painful and dehumanizing experiences, life can have potential meaning - that even suffering can bring about meaning. He expressed that while the conditions one find themselves in may be chosen by others, however how we react to them is completely within our control.

The quote is:

“Everything can be taken from a man but one thing; the last of the human freedoms - to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way” - Dr. Viktor Frankl

 

[Jind]

I don't know, have you read youtube comments on that kind of matter? Reddit, facebook, etc? Even some posts in this thread.

The logic that results in a proof of concept being YouTube and forum posts as the data one draws a conclusion from escapes me. Simple statistics would reason that much fewer people post their thoughts on YouTube or forums than those that hold differing opinions in silence. Just saying

The pope and the church can go fuck themselves. They make everyone who believe in god just for the fact of believing in god look bad, seriously. You don't need an organized religion to believe in any form of god.

My point was that the image man has of a god and how he interacts with man has been selectively created and curated by man himself - you have faith that you have not been mislead - no reproducible results are required. While you may not need organized religion to believe in a god, it certainly has influenced what one thinks a god is and how, as man, we interact with a higher power and what one believes it wants/expects from us.

A fully formed idea, at a bare minimum, requires a construct of what one thinks something is and is not.

 

[XxSicRokerxX]

Let me ask you guys this, if you don't believe in god or religion, do you stay away or parricipate in religous activities such as Christmas and Easter?

 

[John_C]

Let me ask you guys this, if you don't believe in god or religion, do you stay away or parricipate in religous activities such as Christmas and Easter?

Me and my whole family do easter (sortof, it's just an excuse to meet up and eat chocolate) and Christmas. None of us are religious in the least, but it's part of our culture.

 

[Jind]

Me and my whole family do easter (sortof, it's just an excuse to meet up and eat chocolate) and Christmas. None of us are religious in the least, but it's part of our culture.

I host dinners on both days, well Christmas eve , but simply to get family together. No prayers, no masses. If someone wanted to say a prayer I'd let them, as stated earlier in the thread, I have zero issues with others of faith and those I do know accept my non belief. I'd rather present tolerance than conflict to those that show it to me.

 

[kass]

Ok I'll not call it faith then I was giving just an example. I only said faith once btw.

Falling through the floor is highly unlikely to happen because you never hear about people falling like that. I'm saying that we believe in science, thanks to observation and experimentation like the article posted previously says. I'll believe in science and not religion but claiming that "science is the ultimate truth" like neil degrasse says it's fucking stupid. Science is not the absolute truth like many people say.

Ok. I came into the conversation and im sure I missed your intention. Sorry

 

[kass]

Let me ask you guys this, if you don't believe in god or religion, do you stay away or parricipate in religous activities such as Christmas and Easter?

Well on Easter I just go see the family. On Christmas I go see the family and exchange gifts with the parents and siblings. No mass on either holiday.

 

[drew_drummer]

P.S. I would openly describe myself as a feminist. Bite me.

So instead of actually asking me why I said feminists are irrational, you attack me with your Americanized "bite me" phrase? You've proved my point.

Basically I found your statements to be completely without merit, but I was trying to be polite about it. Everything you said was just wrong, and demonstrated a rather fundamental lack of understanding of the difference between emotion and logical thinking/deductive skills.

At least Genius Gone Insane makes that distinction!

 

[drew_drummer]

EVERYBODY STOP WHAT YOU ARE DOING....



THE SAFETY WORD HAS BEEN ACTIVATED, PLEASE LEAVE THE THREAD.

 

[blue_fAng]

 

[mstone564]

Well i never stopped..

Thought the same thing lol.

I was raised by Christians parents and have questioned it at times, but ultimately I do believe and I respect others who disagree.

The one thing I can't stand is when people bash Christians as a whole and say "they're the most inconsiderate/hateful people on earth."
Yes, of course there are some who are like that, but not all of us!

 

[viralz]

What I don't like about religion is that it makes humans believe they deserve a special treatment because they have intelligence. I'm human and believe I'm just part of nature, I'm no different from trees, flowers or ants, we're all just organic materials that will vanish one day.

 

[DanLights]

The dude who mentioned atheists celebrating Easter and Christmas... They're holidays, you don't have to be religious to have a Christmas dinner or to go the beach in Easter. And that's also stupid ironic if you consider the only Christian thing about Christmas is the name, it's nothing more than a bunch of stolen pagan traditions put together and given the name Christ's Mass. Christ (whether he existed or not) wasn't even born that day, and if you read your bible, putting up a Christmas tree (by its real name, a Saturnalia tree) is a sin punished by your god, so please don't bring up the retarded "then work at Christmas" bullshit. Oh, and Halloween is as anti-Christian as could possibly be.

 

[LeSedna]

I was meaning what drew said, you don't believe in science, there is no faith as in a religious type of faith on science. Sure you can sort of draw equivalences. What most people do is they accept the new discoveries since there is no way technically for us to actually have our hands on the result and understand them not to mention the knowledge required which almost no one has anyway, that's why there are specialists who simply propose us their results. But it is acceptable if the source of this new knowledge is reputable and has proven trustful in the past, it is not a blind faith in them, and only respectable results are accepted in the community. There are flaws, once in a while a genius is not understood by his pairs, but all in all it simply progresses step by step thanks to that.

And the big big big difference is that we know that the discovery is based on the scientific method, itself mostly based on hypothetico-deductive methods. This method allows for no subjectivity, personal interpretation, faith, nothing but the facts. It has limits, scientists do mistakes including in their conclusions, but it still works all in all. It just cannot not work by construction, logically selecting results based on objective criteria cannot not work. Just like evolution's theory cannot not work. You can argue on its details, maybe it needs to be re-evaluated but it cannot not work since its pretty obvious the principle of selection works, it just logically cannot not work. Or you'd have to prove the DNA reproduction doesn't work this way, which it does.

That's why we don't "believe" in science like people believe in religion. We trust in science, yes, but we don't have faith as in "Faith" in it and it doesn't need it at all since the knowledge it brings doesn't need it.

 

[Jind]

Someone gets it