Atheists delusional?

[Mike_from_NJ]

The naturalist will believe that being consistent with both Truth and happiness is impossible for if naturalism is true then who could accept the Truth that there is no objective meaning, purpose and value to life and still be happy.

One can get meaning out of life in more ways than just honoring a creator ad infinitum in the afterworld. For many the fact that life (and assumedly personal existence) is finite increases the meaning of life instead of removing it.

They are forced to choose personal happiness and build meaning and value to their life from subjectivity because they would rather be happy than live by the objective truth.

You are assuming that yours is the objective truth. That is unprovable and unfalsifiable.

For the Christian, truth leads to happiness

Let’s take a religion that both a Christian and an atheist feel is not true. It doesn’t really matter what it is, whether it’s practiced now or not, whether it has 10 followers or billions. We can point to some of the followers of that religion and say undoubtedly that their belief has led them to happiness. If they promise an eternal afterlife then we can go so far as to say that their belief has led them to happiness in much the same way as it does for Christians. But there’s a snag. It’s not true. An untruth has led some of those followers to happiness just as Christianity has led some of its followers to happiness. Because of this we can’t say it’s the alleged truthfulness of Christianity that leads some Christians to happiness, but the promise (true or not true) of a good afterlife.

 

[Paddy1989]

No i’m saying the objective truth of Naturalism is that there is no objective meaning, purpose and value to life. This is the truth they reject when they admit that while yes the universe has no purpose, value and meaning they still say that theygive themselves subjective meaning, purpose and value. Their subjective opinion contradicts the objective truth that there is no value and meaning.

 

[Paddy1989]

Yes but my point is that under the Christian worldview which assumes that Christianity is true then the Christian believes the universe was created with purpose, meaning and value and objective principles such as equality, intrinsic value, justice etc are based on this fundamental truth. The Christian finds happiness in these concepts which they see not just as arbitrary concepts but concepts that stem from the Truth of human nature, that we TRULY do have purpose, meaning and value. Therefore the very thing that the Christian believes to be true is they very thing that makes them Happy.

As for the Naturalist and the naturalist world-view which assumes there is no God then they differ on this because if there is no God then there is no objective meaning, purpose and value to the universe, everything just is. The naturalist/atheist accept the truth of this fact but they live consistent with what they subjectively want to believe, that they have purpose, meaning and value. The Naturalist is forced to live a life as if their life does have meaning, value and purpose because this leads to happiness however they have also accepted that the objective Truth is contrary to this. I hope i’m making this all clear. Since purpose, meaning and value is subjective to the naturalist it’s merely arbitrary and it’s done to make life feel more comfortable.

The Christian if we assume that world-view is correct therefore lives the way they do because they believe it to be True and brings happiness, if either of these were compromised it wouldn’t have much merit. The naturalist if we assume that world-view is correct lives the way they do because the truth would lead them to misery. Who on earth could live consistently with the objective truth that the universe has no objective, meaning and value therefore the only option they have to create happiness is invent a idea based on their subjective opinion, that they have meaning, purpose and value. It’s a lie objectively speaking however and delusional

 

[IWantGod]

However what i noticed is this, the Atheist is also bound by the same objective truth here as the Christian that life objectively has no meaning purpose and value, how do they respond, by subjectively creating purpose and meaning to their life and live contrary to the objective truth there is no meaning and value. The atheist here is being delusional aswell but whats worse is they actually know the objective truth,

What you have written here is the truth and i have said it before. But what you have to understand is that a lot people want what they want regardless of the truth. An intelligent Atheist that is good at grasping concepts will realize that their behavior is irrational and is not consistent with the logical consequences of metaphysical naturalism. But their nature still drives them to the natural end of survival. They are still compelled by their emotions. They are still driven by nature to procreate. They know they cannot rationally justify blindly following these natural drives within us without meaning and purpose and so they invent that fantasy. The smart ones know that if metaphysical naturalism is true then how we normally relate to the world and each-other is a delusional fantasy, but they have no choice if they choose to continue in their existence. The world, and what we do in the world, has to make sense to us, even if it’s on the backbone of a delusional fantasy. We would all go insane otherwise.

Man cannot live by bread alone.

But what you must also recognize is that most Atheists are not cognizant of the ontological situation that they are in if there is no God. They do not truly grasp the consequences of rejecting God because their feelings and their behavior in the world naturally has the appearance of being rational, meaningful and worthwhile, regardless of whether they believe in God or not. Thus they do not know that they are living in a delusion.

You have to be capable of deep rational thought and be good at grasping concepts to possibly be aware of this and most people are not truly good philosophers, so trying to explain it to them is even more difficult and is almost a waste of time.

My motto is, let those with eyes to see, see…

 

[Paddy1989]

Thank you and that sums up exactly how I feel. If I was a naturalist I would merely say that I’m living a delusional lifestyle if I believed it actually has purpose, meaning and value. The delusion would still be preferable to the Truth. The difference between those two groups is the intellectually honest atheist and the pop culture atheist. The pop culture atheist is more of a phsychological atheist, they revel in their sense of superiority over people of faith and if they can’t comprehend an idea they attack the other person as being stupid to even put it forward. Their denial of God is as intellectual as a rebellious child. They idolize other pop culture atheist philosophers such as Sam Harris even without fully comprehending what he is talking about. My point with this thread was to try and explain the delusion of the atheist in a way they not just could understand but couldn’t deny. I do feel that since not many people on this thread understood what I meant I perhaps haven’t explained it clear enough. I feel we need to arm ourselves against the tide of Atheism. We need to put to bed the idea they are the rational ones and the Christians are delusional by exposing how inconsistent they are being with their own truth. I feel i need to simplify this truth more however so they can comprehend it

 

[IWantGod]

The difference between those two groups is the intellectually honest atheist and the pop culture atheist. The pop culture atheist is more of a phsychological atheist, they revel in their sense of superiority over people of faith and if they can’t comprehend an idea they attack the other person as being stupid to even put it forward. Their denial of God is as intellectual as a rebellious child.

We naturally desire what is good, but a lot of people don’t understand why that is and what that is, and don’t put much thought into that either way. And so, most people define the good merely in terms of what brings the most pleasure with as little pain as possible. In regards to their war on Religion, they think that they are gaining freedom. They imagine themselves as revolutionaries being freed from something that brought a lot of guilt and self loathing in their lives, or something that restricted their pursuit of pleasure to a degree that is undesirable to them. And so to think that religion, that thing which has restricted them, has undermined their autonomy, could actually be delusional and on top of that a moral threat to humanity, must seem like an exhilarating idea to them. It’s not surprising to me that some people think like this.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Because they life contrary to the truth that life has no objective meaning, value and purpose. When they choose to give their life subjective meaning it’s in contradiction of the objective truth that life has no meaning, purpose and value. Do you not see the delusion

Personally I am a believer and could make the argument that I have less to lose if I believe and there turns out to be no God than if I did not believe and it turns out there is. But I’m not following your view about how atheists live. Unless I’m not reading you correctly. Atheists it seems to me are capable of finding meaning and value and purpose to life on this earth without professing a faith by caring about their fellow man and woman, the poor, the sick and others Christ talked about. Perhaps even more than some of us who profess faith.

 

[Paddy1989]

Sorry, my the point i’m trying to make is this. If there is no objective meaning, purpose and value to life which is the objective TRUTH in a naturalist world-view then if they reject this truth by saying i give my own meaning, purpose and value what they were doing is delusional. On the one hand we can observe what the Truth is, there just is no purpose, meaning or value to life. The problem is they don’t like this truth so they live contrary to this truth but as i said living contrary to truth is delusional. Not accepting the Truth is one thing but living contrary to it is downright crazy in my mind

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

Have you read Plato’s Republic? You should really read Plato’s Republic.

 

[Paddy1989]

No, sorry I haven’t read It. Though I might give it a read if it can expand my mind on this topic more. Does it relate to it? Thanks

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

It might give you some insight into what I like to call “positive nihilism,” which seems to be the life philosophy of many atheists in this day and age.

 

[meltzerboy2]

Why are there only two worldviews: Christian and naturalist? What about other religions’ worldviews, which may differ a little or a lot from the Christian worldview? And what about different kinds of atheists, including agnostics and deists: should they all be lumped together according to the same worldview and mindset? Finally, why put atheists down? One might just as easily argue that those who believe in G-d are delusional, especially considering all the complexities found in the doctrines and practices of world religions which are believed to be inspired by G-d? Why not let people believe what they will and try to respect their personal choices in their own lives? I think if we all did that, we might have a much more peaceful world.

 

[Paddy1989]

I’m not trying to put anyone down and as I said before if there is no God the yes the Christian and anyone who believes in God is delusional. My point of this thread was to point out that no matter what world view is true the Naturalist/atheist who lives believing their life subjectively has meaning, purpose and value is in error if the objective truth contradicts this. I feel i explain this above but I can try and do so again if you like

 

[meltzerboy2]

The very topic of the thread, that you believe atheists are delusional, is, in a sense, a put down, in my view. But perhaps it was unintentional on your part. You mention the Truth several times. What if someone who is atheist believes we cannot know the Truth, and no religion has convinced them that it contains the Truth? Why would it be delusional of them in that case not to believe in G-d but instead find meaning for their finite lives on earth by enjoying life and its pleasures as well as making life better for others? That is the essence of humanism as Camus saw it. In other words, there doesn’t have to be an objective Truth: we can live our lives based on subjective human values without such objectivity. Is it delusional or illogical to try to seek happiness and meaning for our lives in the short-term if we are uncertain of the future? This seems to me a reasonable approach to life, for some, even if it might not be strictly logical according to your criteria. People, in general, spend more time living their lives than philosophizing about the logical consistency of their lives.

 

[Paddy1989]

No my intention wasnt to put anyone down and as i said if God doesnt exist then anyone who believes in God is delusional aswell. One truth a naturalist would have to accept is that the universe and everything in it has no objective meaning, purpose and value. Wouldn’t you agree? If the universe does have objective purpose, meaning and value then it needs a cause. There doesn’t have to be an objective truth on this I agree but there IS an objective truth and that is there is no meaning purpose, value and meaning to life. Life having purpose and meaning is either objectively True or not True. Now someone can easily say subjectively their life has intrinsic value, another person could say their life has measurable value depending on circumstance. Both objectively speaking are delusional because objectively NO life has value. They are creating this value out of one reason, self interest. If one wants to be believe their life TRULY has value above and beyone themselves then my friend one is on the road to finding the cause of this.

Now if this delusion leads to happiness which it’s obvious it will then so be it. My point however is that the naturalist therefore can’t be consistent with both the Truth and happiness, they choose one over the other therefore a delusion is preferable to the Truth. The delusion is they subjectively create meaning purpose and value contrary to the objective truth that there is no purpose, meaning and value

 

[meltzerboy2]

In psychology, we speak of the illusion of control. Illusion is different from delusion since the latter term is reserved for some people who suffer from psychosis. However, the illusion of control gives us a rationale for living in the present and planning for the future. In case you are unfamiliar with this concept, it means that we perceive we are in large control of our own lives, even though we objectively are not. In other words, we take precautions to insure we are safe, secure, healthy, and so on, thinking that we will be fine by doing this. This is objectively an illusion, yet we all do this to some extent. It is a normal way of thinking, and, more than that, it helps us function on a daily basis without constant worry and fear. Most likely naturalists also do this with regard to how they lead their lives without belief in G-d. It is rational even if not logical, since it helps them live happier and more meaningful lives, just as believers put their trust in G-d to do the same.

 

[Paddy1989]

Interesting perspective. How do we know objectively we are not in control of our lives? Do these precautions not ensure care is taken in terms of health which may reduce chance of catching infections, diseases etc. Our precautions affect outcome do they not? The difference between someone who believes in God however is that the objective truth is that the universe has purpose, meaning and value from God. They live consistently with this truth not contrary to it like the Atheist does in connection of the Truth of the naturalist worldview

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

I think the whole problem of meaning is one area where theists are proposing a solution to a problem that many non believers do not have.
The assumption here is that we all believe there is an objective meaning or purpose and that it is knowable if it exist. And secondly that an objective meaning or purpose is vital.

I’d challenge most of your OP based on the assumption that one needs an objective meaning or purpose in life. A subjective meaning or purpose or even one to be determined also works.

So I guess it comes down to this. Why would some random non believer need an objective purpose in life? Why go through the whole charade detailed in your argument?

 

[Paddy1989]

From what I’ve observed with many naturalists who I engage with is they agree that in order to be happy they find they need to give their life meaning purpose and value. The problem is the objective truth of a Godless universe teaches there is no purpose, meaning and value, what is the naturalists solution to this Truth? Stuff it I’ll make my own truth on this matter. It’s a rejection of objective truth in pursuit of happiness and fulfillment. As I said this is something I’ve observed and the reason I’m putting this observation forward is to challenge if it makes sense to you guys as it does to me

 

[FiveLinden]

‘Delusion’ is a word with heavy baggage. I do not think that religious people (include atheist religious like Animists and Buddhists) are delusional. It seems to me clear that the human brain generates religious ideas and that these ideas are concentrated in the areas in which people feel most vulnerable, and have least control. So gods and spiritual forces associated with hunting and gathering are important in those societies, with rain and agriculture and plagues of locusts and disease in new agricultural societies, and with lines, anxiety and health on our own. As scientific explanations are found for natural phenomena, the domain of gods gets smaller and smaller. The ubiquity of this belief over time (it seems even our cousins the Neanderthals shared them) and distance (from the lands in which we evolved in Africa to the last-settled in the South Pacific) strongly suggests tat religious belief, or something associated with it, had an evolutionary advantage. It may be that it provided hope ad stimulus to action in otherwise apparently hopeless conditions, or it may be a counteracting force on the awareness of our own mortality that we gained when we evolved consciousness. Or religious beliefs may have made us more effective hunters, or warriors. Humans have many inbuilt false beliefs and perceptions. Optical illusions are a famous example. Religion is better classified as evolutionary illusion rather than ‘delusion’ and the associated meanings of madness and non-rationality. We evolved to fill the earth by retaining advantageous genes. Whatever gene combinations give rise to religion appear to be advantageous. Religious belief in this sense is natural and part of the human condition. But that does not make our religious beliefs correct, any more than it makes our equally human dreams real. Logic challenges religious belief to the point where religious people appeal beyond reason to a thing we cannot see, or study: faith. It is the need for faith that requires study, not the products of it, just as we should study the need to dream, and not the dreams themselves.