Atheism illogical?

[Isambard]

I think you are misunderstanding the argument.

Atheists are materialists - everything is material. Since they are materialists they deny the existence of the spiritual realm. Since they deny the spiritual realm they deny the existence of the soul. Since there is no soul, there is no Mind that exists over and beyond the physical brain.

Not at all atheists are materialists. I’d say historically speaking, most “atheists” have been spiritual.

But if there is no Mind then man is incapable to freely inquire and to use reason to freely come up with rational conclusions. All this has already been biological determined.

Hmmm, your missing part of it. A major part of it is also the environment you’re in influencing your genes, as well as elements of chance. This can been seen with higher probability of developing personality or mood disorders if your biological parents had them in adoption studies.

A mere thought is a product of random electrical impulses going on his head. Only the physical brain exists. There is no such thing as the mind existing.

Given how easily it is to influence a person’s mind either pyschologically or physically, I’d say the idea of a “mind space” is largely fictious. The location of the mind space also proves to be a problem as for example, the early greek believed the mind to be located in the stomach.

But this is a contradiction. If thoughts are only a product of random electrical impulses that pass through your brain, then how can you trust your thoughts? So what is the point of this forum? What is the point of discussing anything with anyone?

If you know that taste is a result of smell, certain sensory areas on your tongue, and pyschological factors, what is the point of going to a buffet? What is the point of ever going out and trying to get tasty food?

What we think has all been randomly determined. I am a believer because my electrical impulses zigged and you are a non-believer because yours zagged. There would be no point for two beings programmed with random beliefs to discuss whose belief is correct. Whatever outcome of that discussion would itself be determined by chance.

As mentioned above, there are factors influencing who/what we are. Learning and memory atropy keep us from being mechanical. You can see the evidence for this premise in individuals who have had brain damage to the learning areas of their brain, or severly mentally retarded individuals who are unable to develop mentally after a certain age. In both cases, they is a certain element of predictability in their behavior and thoughts.

But to say that we think BEFORE the electrical impulses in our physical brain occurrs, is to say that our thinking exists over and beyond the inner workings of the physical brain. That would mean that the Mind, apart from the brain, exists. That would mean that the world is not completely materialistic. That would mean that the non-physical Mind exists. Another word for Mind which we use is the word soul. So then if the soul exists, then the spiritual exists.

One would need to explain why a “spiritual mind” can be so heavily altered by outside factors over which the individual would have absolutely no control over. That doesn’t sound like the properties of an immortal spirit to me.

 

[CentralFLJames]

??
Who is making absolute assertions?
As I’ve previously said, I lean toward atheism but I also accept the possibility that there might be a god. That is not being irrational.

Strictly speaking everybody is agnostic. This is based on the fact that the word agnostic is taken from the Greek agnostos which means unknown. Nobody truly knows if there is a god.
I suspect that there are more atheists than we are lead to believe. They more than likely don’t say the same thing, just like catholics don’t all say the same thing.
That’s right, I’m not.
It was you that said all atheists assert there is no god. It was I that disputed this.
You don’t have to take my word, just look up the meaning.
Being fallible doesn’t mean I can’t make some assertions.
Here goes:
In Greek adding “A” to the beginning of a word, is equal in English to putting “without” or “un” in front of a word. Therefore, theism = having a belief there is a god, becomes atheism = without the belief there is a god.
I disagree.
I make no such assertion.
I haven’t said any such thing.
You would.
It seems to me that you’re making assumptions as well.
Pascal’s wager is irrational because it doesn’t take into account all the other religions that exist, unless you’re suggesting that they all should be followed, just in case. Besides, don’t you think that a god would see straight through someone who was merely hedging their bets?
That is rather a mercenary attitude.
I reject your assertion that atheists are illogical.
That is opinion not fact.
I disagree.
Faithful atheist? Now that is an oxymoron.

R McGeddon - we are at am empasse that I am too bored to further pursue. So I am withdrawing from this dialog and moving onto more productive things. Good luck in “your world”.

James

 

[Contarini]

Atheism is more logical than Catholicism. Just think of some of the fundamental teachings of Catholicism:

-The virgin birth
-Bread changes into the body of Jesus
-An all-powerful God listens to everybody’s prayers and chooses to grant some people’s wishes
-Spiritual (aka invisible) beings roam the earth helping and hurting people
-God speaks directly to very few people, often those who don’t appear to be mentally stable

How logical are these?

The last point contains some questionable premises, but apart from that, could you construct an argument showing how these are illogical? You seem to be confusing “illogical” with “strange” or “contrary to the commonly received way the world works” or even “unscientific.”

Edwin

 

[nuntym]

The last point contains some questionable premises, but apart from that, could you construct an argument showing how these are illogical? You seem to be confusing “illogical” with “strange” or “contrary to the commonly received way the world works” or even “unscientific.”

Edwin

I believe you are looking for the term “alogical” Edwin

 

[R_McGeddon]

R McGeddon - we are at am empasse that I am too bored to further pursue. So I am withdrawing from this dialog and moving onto more productive things.

It’s more like your argument ran out of steam.

Good luck in “your world”.

???

 

[antunesaa]

I like this site pointed out by R McGeddon:

American Atheists: Coming Out - Atheism: The Other Closet

Now that’s a profession of faith, if I ever seen one

…

Whether atheism is logical or not is irrelevant, for logic can actually support both ways (theism and atheism, I mean). But to live for logic only, either as a theist or an atheist, is not a life worth living. But to be a mystic AND a logician…THAT is a life worth living. And a life worth living IS relevant.

Excellent post. It is obvious that you share Chesterton’s opinion that what makes life interesting are not the things that can be explained, but rather those that no one can explain - like love, joy, hope. You take the supernatural out of life, and you’re left with the unnatural.

 

[antunesaa]

Atheism is more logical than Catholicism. Just think of some of the fundamental teachings of Catholicism:

-The virgin birth
-Bread changes into the body of Jesus
-An all-powerful God listens to everybody’s prayers and chooses to grant some people’s wishes
-Spiritual (aka invisible) beings roam the earth helping and hurting people
-God speaks directly to very few people, often those who don’t appear to be mentally stable

How logical are these?

The big question that we humans try to answer is this: Is everything that exists pure chance or not? If it is pure chance, then God is irrelevant for all practical purposes. If not everything is chance (and this includes the possibility that matter and energy at some point didn’t exist) then God is what we call to the creator of something out of nothing.

If, for example, you defend that something cannot appear from nothing and at some point nothing existed (a perfectly respectable position if you think about it), then you need God. And the immediate consequence is that adopting an ex-ante position against miracles such as those you mention is not only unwarranted but also illogical. It’s like saying that Shakespeare could compose an long poem like the Venus and Adonis, but could not compose a simple sonnet…

 

[Michael_Francis]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Sticky: Temporary Ban on Evolution/Atheism Threads