Based on probability, if one had to make a choice, is it more reasonable to be an Atheist or a Theist

[Strydersroom]

It is more reasonable and logical to be atheist or agnostic in my opinion. It’s called faith versus suspension of disbelief. We know that magic isn’t really, yet many people are convinced and belie with all their heart in miracles, God and other things unseen.

But I like what Neil degrasse Tyson says that science is true no matter what you believe. As far as the afterlife, it’s logical to admit no one knows, hence agnosticism.

 

[Trident_H]

It is more reasonable and logical to be atheist or agnostic in my opinion. It’s called faith versus suspension of disbelief. We know that magic isn’t really, yet many people are convinced and belie with all their heart in miracles, God and other things unseen.

But I like what Neil degrasse Tyson says that science is true no matter what you believe. As far as the afterlife, it’s logical to admit no one knows, hence agnosticism.

Well. I guess you’d have to vote with where your head’s at already. So that’s consistent and fine.

But belief’s also about logic too. It’s about reasoning out that blind molecules don’t have feelings. No matter how you mush them together. So the fact that we have some must mean something.

And once you get on that road you sort of add things in a row until you get a full set.

It’s sort of a kind of math. In its own way.

Peace.

-Trident

 

[anon67074017]

It is more probable to be a theist because there is a lot of evidence of the existence of God.

 

[Trident_H]

But choosing a no-God belief stance or not believing a god exists isn’t choosing despair.
What’s despair have to do with it?

Why do you think that?

.

Because it’s the opposite of hope. You can either hope for an eternal life with friends and family. Or you can just do the opposite of that. You can just accept life ends for everyone. That nothing really really matters. And we’re all just temporary place-holders for the next generation to come along and pick up our stuff cheap at the thrift store.

Or something.

 

[IWantGod]

Because it’s the opposite of hope. You can either hope for an eternal life with friends and family. Or you can just do the opposite of that. You can just accept life ends for everyone. That nothing really really matters. And we’re all just temporary place-holders for the next generation to come along and pick up our stuff cheap at the thrift store.

Or something.

Very few atheists have actually taken their atheism seriously. What you have written here has probably not even occurred to them.

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

Because it’s the opposite of hope. You can either hope for an eternal life with friends and family. Or you can just do the opposite of that. You can just accept life ends for everyone. That nothing really really matters. And we’re all just temporary place-holders for the next generation to come along and pick up our stuff cheap at the thrift store.

Or something.

I don’t see how accepting the possibility that there is no eternal life is despair. Accepting that life is finite is not the same as nothing really matters.

Must there be something after this life for this life to be meaningful? I say the finite nature of life adds beauty and makes it that more precious.

Very few atheists have actually taken their atheism seriously. What you have written here has probably not even occurred to them.

For me, atheism is not something I lose any sleep over. From my pov it is not filled with despair. It is simply accepting limits of our early existence as I do not feel a need for something outside myself to give my existence meaning and so forth.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

If there is a God, it is more reasonable to be a Theist.

If there is no God, it is still more reasonable to be a Theist since the belief by itself gives us hope.

Atheism gives neither conviction, nor hope. You can never be certain there is no God, but you can be certain that you are without hope.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Choosing via Pascal’s Wager sounds like an agnostic hedging her bets and leaning to one side to be safe or accepted or etc.

But…if you are not certain there is a God, but decide to believe there is a god anyway to be on the safe side…wouldn’t an all-knowing god know you don’t truly believe?

And if this all-knowing god still gives you the benefits of hedged-bet believing…then wouldn’t this same all-knowing god give the same benefits to the atheists?

.

As for Pascal…in my opinion the wager is actually the weakest part of the book (Pensées). The rest of it is much better. I personally don’t have much use for the wager itself, it is just a few pages - though along those lines I would argue that an existence without transcendent, infinite love (i.e. God) is pointless in view of death, suffering, evil. I admire those who can just breeze through all the death, suffering, evil *sans *God, in perfect contentment and stillness of mind…or do I… (I am not sure even a dog can match that, but then I think they go to heaven too, so there you go. I would be willing to wager on that.)

 

[HelenRose]

As for Pascal…in my opinion the wager is actually the weakest part of the book (Pensées). The rest of it is much better. I personally don’t have much use for the wager itself, it is just a few pages - though along those lines I would argue that an existence without transcendent, infinite love (i.e. God) is pointless in view of death, suffering, evil. I admire those who can just breeze through all the death, suffering, evil *sans *God, in perfect contentment and stillness of mind…or do I… (I am not sure even a dog can match that, but then I think they go to heaven too, so there you go. I would be willing to wager on that.)

Assuming that God does exist - which I do believe - it is hard to imagine Him unware that we are hedging our bets.

Somehow, there has to be more to believing in God than just “being on the safe side”.

Although that may be a good beginning.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Assuming that God does exist - which I do believe - it is hard to imagine Him unware that we are hedging our bets.

Somehow, there has to be more to believing in God than just “being on the safe side”.

Although that may be a good beginning.

Good point. God is not mocked. But I believe he saves his children - those who do his will whether they know it or not - or even openly (nominally) oppose him. Likewise, those who profess deep commitment to him but don’t follow his will…don’t make it.

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

If there is a God, it is more reasonable to be a Theist.

If there is no God, it is still more reasonable to be a Theist since the belief by itself gives us hope.

Atheism gives neither conviction, nor hope. You can never be certain there is no God, but you can be certain that you are without hope.

Hope for what? An afterlife?
Cause it certainly doesn’t mean a lack of hope for our life here on earth.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Hope for what? An afterlife?
Cause it certainly doesn’t mean a lack of hope for our life here on earth.

Hope is both for this world and yet another.

Atheism is hopeless as to another world.

Is it so wrong or so absurd to believe and hope in something you cannot see with your eyes?

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Christopher Beiting, Historian:

“Pascal’s Wager, however interesting it is to some folk, is in reality only a very small part of Pascal’s thought, and a disproportionate focus on it is a common mistake I have seen countless of my freshmen college students make. The Wager is not an end; rather, it is a beginning. Pascal is not, in actuality, interested in trying to “prove” the existence of God to his readers. The Wager is only a starting point. Pascal was no mere theist – he was a committed Christian, dedicated to trying to get his readers not to know God but to love Christ. Indeed, Pascal asserts, one cannot really know God at all apart from Christ (#449), and as a result Pascal is as hostile to the Deist as he is to the Muslim (#321), and as critical of the Jews for not recognizing Christ (#502) as he is admiring of them for bequeathing Him to the world (#451-455). To Pascal it was actually dangerous to know God apart from Christ! But how, then, does one know Christ? We can only know Him through Scripture (#417), as well as orthodox belief and membership in the Church (#733). These ideas are the core of what was truly most important to Blaise Pascal, and are critical to understanding him.”

 

[FollowChrist34]

Christopher Beiting, Historian:

“Pascal’s Wager, however interesting it is to some folk, is in reality only a very small part of Pascal’s thought, and a disproportionate focus on it is a common mistake I have seen countless of my freshmen college students make. The Wager is not an end; rather, it is a beginning. Pascal is not, in actuality, interested in trying to “prove” the existence of God to his readers. The Wager is only a starting point. Pascal was no mere theist – he was a committed Christian, dedicated to trying to get his readers not to know God but to love Christ. Indeed, Pascal asserts, one cannot really know God at all apart from Christ (#449), and as a result Pascal is as hostile to the Deist as he is to the Muslim (#321), and as critical of the Jews for not recognizing Christ (#502) as he is admiring of them for bequeathing Him to the world (#451-455). To Pascal it was actually dangerous to know God apart from Christ! But how, then, does one know Christ? We can only know Him through Scripture (#417), as well as orthodox belief and membership in the Church (#733). These ideas are the core of what was truly most important to Blaise Pascal, and are critical to understanding him.”

Thanks for posting this and clarifying. I totally agree. The wager was just supposed to be aimed at atheists; it is just one very small section of the book. Pascal is a deeply committed Christian; I think he is one of the best apologists for Christianity ever.

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

Hope is both for this world and yet another.

Atheism is hopeless as to another

oh? Must it be a package deal?. Besides “hopeless” isn’t the same as despair. There are often more than two choices in nearly all things.

Is it so wrong or so absurd to believe and hope in something you cannot see with your eyes?

For the vast majority of people, n

ot at all. Belief in something more seems to be something most people need or desire. Despite being a nonbeliever I do not begrudge you your belief. If it brings you hope and joy I hope you continue to believe and practice. However, such belief is a bridge too far for me. One I’ve attempted several times through action, attempting to be open, and trying to “decide” to believe. But we are all built a little different.

 

[meltzerboy]

Assuming that God does exist - which I do believe - it is hard to imagine Him unware that we are hedging our bets.

Somehow, there has to be more to believing in God than just “being on the safe side”.

Although that may be a good beginning.

There is more. It’s not just the promise of a blissful afterlife but the ethical, moral behavior that belief in G-d encourages in this life, which not only includes personal contentment but striving for selfless, meaningful behavior for the benefit of others. This is also part of Pascal’s wager.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

I don’t see how atheism means hopeless to another world.
There can be no god, and still be an afterlife.

Please name one reputable atheist who believes this.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

The spread of atheism is a distinctly modern phenomenon.

That does not mean it is a rational phenomenon.

Lord knows, much of what he have witnessed in modern times is hardly rational.

There is no rational defense of atheism, since it is impossible to prove there is no God.

Since hope springs eternal in the human breast, it is more hopeful to believe than not to believe. It is more hopeful to have beliefs that encourage the good life than to have no such beliefs with a firm and absolute foundation, but rather to make all values rest upon foundations of shifting sand, which is the most that atheism can hope for since it denies all absolutes.

 

[Trident_H]

I don’t see how accepting the possibility that there is no eternal life is despair. Accepting that life is finite is not the same as nothing really matters.

Must there be something after this life for this life to be meaningful? I say the finite nature of life adds beauty and makes it that more precious.

Flip it in the end and see if this makes sense. You’re on a boat that’s sinking. It’s going down for sure in a measured time. Drop by drop it’s sinking. And then you’ll drown. There’s absolutely no hope of rescue.

But when you first got the boat you remember someone telling you there might be a life raft hidden on board somewhere. And enough supplies for you to make it out alive.

So tell me this. Do you make a try for the raft and supplies? Do you look high and low for that? Or do you just go ahead with waiting for the boat to sink? Being ‘pretty’ sure you didn’t see a raft. Well not anywhere near where you’re sitting at any rate.

I mean is the sunset nice and pretty enough for you to happily sink into the ocean with a sigh? Is that what you’re living for? Just to count sunsets until the last 1?

For me, atheism is not something I lose any sleep over. From my pov it is not filled with despair. It is simply accepting limits of our early existence as I do not feel a need for something outside myself to give my existence meaning and so forth.

I know you might be happy with the full temporary of this world. Sort of like a video game that gets unplugged in the end. And maybe you’ve got heaps of good reasons for that.

For me though? It’s not that simple. I can pick a life of pain. Or a life of flashing colors. I can go full in for a fast slide to the end. Or I can linger here in discomfort and frustration. Now give me a reason to do 1 over the other. Give me a deep reason. Why shouldn’t I just spin around in a life of drinking and drug use? Why shouldn’t I come and ‘borrow’ your stuff to pay off my bills? I mean it’s all temporary. It’s not yours for keeps. And maybe you’re getting old and forgetful anyway. Maybe you don’t really need that stuff all that much. Maybe you’ve got too much of it to carry as it is. Why should I care?

Now sure that pretty much looks like the only reason I care about people and their things is because otherwise I might get mine in the end. Sure. And maybe at the basic level it might even start there. Maybe that’s the 1st level.

But on the other hand maybe the idea that we all have a whole eternal life ahead of us means I think a lot harder about how my acts might hurt others. Because that hurt might vibrate for a long time. It might make ripples that bounce forward and back and affect a lot of others. And those others might act the same. And they might all in the end change where they were otherwise headed. And the fact they were ‘headed’ anywhere now means this life is a journey and not just an end game. It means we’re here for a bit of work. That we’ve got a job to do in this.

So without that? Well then we’re all just on a bit of a cruise. We’re all just on a temporary trip to nowhere in particular. And our boat’s slowly sinking. Measured and true. So if we’re all on this boat and we know how it all ends? Why are some of us choosing to be workers on board? Why are some of us giving up our valuable now to serve others instead of just lying in the sun on deck? Why? To be ‘nice’? But then what use is nice on a temporary trip? Who cares? We’ll never see each other again. Nothing we do has any real meaning. We’re not changing things for the better except for a temporary feel into the future dark. And none of that has a surprise ending.

So convince me man. Convince me really well. Because I’d rather just slide back into my token life and let the hard glide right over me. I’d rather feel the softness of my seat at the bar of oblivion than sit on this hard bench of consequences and truth. So tell me what I want to hear. Let me now none of it matters in the end. Do your best. Make it convincing. Make sure it’s good and clear. Because I don’t want to doubt you here. I want the full reveal.

So I can revel in my lack of accountability. So I can relax in that no one remembers any pain past present. And so I can be sure that my own past doesn’t matter. Sounds like the easy life’s pretty close up. It’s in reach man. Push it to me.

I’m really thirsty here.

 

[Trident_H]

But…not believing in a God doesn’t mean you don’t have hope.

Hope for what? That there’ll be a sale on pizza bread just when you’re craving it?

And…not believing in a god doesn’t mean no afterlife, either.

Right. But it does sort of mean it’s a shaky forward you’d be heading into. What with not having prepared for it and all.

And, even if a person doesn’t think there is an afterlife, that is not a position of despair over hope.

Lying in a hospital bed expecting to die is hardly hope. Expecting to not survive something might maybe be a taste of the pragmatic. But it sure isn’t hope. It can be resignation, sure. It can be acceptance even. But all of those first start with a lack of hope. An acceptance of despair.

And…even if life ends, that doesn’t mean nothing matters.

Every point you make, above, is based on an opinion or an assumption that many would not agree with. I don’t, and many people I know don’t.
.

Ok. I’ll bite. What about a temporary life matters?

And how does it matter?

Fill my plate here.