The current state of religious debates

[Phill]

I mean but scientifically if there is different hypothesis wouldn’t you as a scientist want to contribute to your hypothesis or help dispel false hypotheses?

I didn’t mean looking at God scientifically or anything like that I was merely comparing burden of proof to co mo parking hypotheses.

As far as this goes. I don’t understand the “accident” part. I get that stuff thrown at me all the time

I never claimed you believed in chaos, but if there is no creator then we would be more akin to accidents then anything else. Unless you ascribe to a more pantheistic approach, which i think neither of us do.

Why must I be logical in my beliefs when they aren’t in theirs?

I mean it depends on your definition of logically consistent. To them their ideas are, just are your ideas are to you.

I can recognize order and not believe that a god is responsible for it

But wouldn’t order have to come from something external, especially since the universe isn’t sentient(as far as we know)

 

[Rabbi]

Why would you want to debate with an atheist? What would you gain? Nobody ever convinced anyone of the existence of G‑d through debate.

The atheist believes that the universe is cold and indifferent. The believer believes the universe is warm and caring. Show this person caring and warmth and perhaps then he or she will come to believe. And if not, you still made the universe a more caring and G‑dly place.

 

[Calliope]

I never claimed you believed in chaos, but if there is no creator then we would be more akin to accidents then anything else. Unless you ascribe to a more pantheistic approach, which i think neither of us do.

Calliope:

I still don’t understand the accident thing. The universe creates following it’s own order. There’s nothing accidental about it. I guess it boils down to what you consider and accident or even how you define random. To me those things tend to mean without order, which the Universe most definitely is not.

I do consider myself a pantheist in the sense that the Universe is the Ultimate Reality, but in no way does it have attributes of a being or godlike interest in us. It does it’s thing and we are one of the countless results of it doing it’s thing.

I suppose if your definition of god is creator, then the Universe could be plugged in as equivalent, but all the gods I’ve ever heard described seem to have a particular agenda that has humanity front and center. That doesn’t appear to be the case with the Universe.

But wouldn’t order have to come from something external, especially since the universe isn’t sentient(as far as we know)

Why would order need to be imposed from something external? What model do we have that suggests that? From what I know of reality (which as a mortal and finite being is pretty small) order seems to come from within, not without. My cells run my body, not me. Chemistry and physics call the shots and the characteristics of things come from within, not without.

And what difference does sentience make? Whatever “intelligence” that operates in the Universe certainly doesn’t bear any resemblance to human sentience. It’s constantly surprising us. I guess I posit that sentience like our own is clearly NOT necessary for the Universe to do it’s thing since it’s been doing its thing for a heck of a long time without us or anything like us calling the shots.

I find the watchmaker example beyond laughable. Yes, if I found a watch on the beach I’d guess that some human made it because it bears all the marks of something made by a human to solve a human problem.

Nothing in the Universe appears inconsistent with its surroundings such that it immediately begs that something outside and different from it manufactured it. It’s all so consistent and integrated.

I get the exact opposite reaction (apparently) than those who find the watchmaker to be a convincing argument. The more I learn about the universe or see something beautiful and astounding, the less any kind of personal God makes sense to me. Nothing is out of place or inconsistent. Nothing seemed fashioned with the sort of intention that theists tend to put on things.

Honestly, gods seem so small and petty and ridiculous compared to reality. I literally have the exact opposite response than most believers. I wonder why it is that we look at exactly the same things and reach opposite conclusions.

 

[Pattylt]

I think there are several issues going on in the atheist community. I’m often appalled at the anger expressed in atheist fora. Some general facts seemed to come out…note: not ALL atheists.

The age of the atheist. The younger ones seem to be a bit more “in your face” than older ones.

The amount of time that has passed since a believer became a non believer. The more recent ones are still dealing with issues of betrayal and feeling they were lied to. They still have strong anger issues.

The education level of the atheist. Anyone who makes a basic claim that atheists are higher IQ than the general population hasn’t seen some of the posts and comments I have. It will quickly disabuse the IQ theory.

The intelligence of their friends and previous co-religionists. If you were presented with low level arguments and strict regulations on your life before de-converting, one tends to keep the absolutist mentality and brings it into atheism. Those that had higher levels of religious thought and was involved with groups that had more nuanced views of faith tend to have more thoughtful and nuanced views of atheism. This second group is those that intelligent debates can be had.

In general anyone that knew really wonderful, intelligent religious people understand that they aren’t stupid blind followers regardless if you agree with their beliefs or not. Some atheists have never interacted with these types.

And, yeah, some atheist fora are just sounding boards for them to pat each other on the back. I stay far away from those types as I do fundamentalist fora of the same.

 

[Calliope]

The atheist believes that the universe is cold and indifferent. The believer believes the universe is warm and caring. Show this person caring and warmth and perhaps then he or she will come to believe. And if not, you still made the universe a more caring and G‑dly place.

In my experience believers tend to find the Universe cold and indifferent which is why God is so important to them. It fills a void and supplies meaning to something that they feel or fear is meaningless otherwise.

While I do consider the Universe to be indifferent to me personally, I don’t feel that it’s cold in a scary sort of sense. I’m not sure if I can find the words to explain it or not. The Universe is so magnificent that I feel honored to be part of it, even if it doesn’t care about me personally, here I am, able to experience it, part of the whole thing, fully integrated in the most amazing thing that I couldn’t possibly have dreamed up on my own.

Theists often assign ideas of what I MUST think or feel as an atheist, and they are often incorrect.

People don’t always debate hoping to change the other side, sometimes they do it for fun or to learn.

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

I’d suspect most atheists are relatively quiet about it IRL. Probably closer to what some call apatheists.

In some ways, citing the more obnoxious of them is like me citing the WBC (or insert controversial church here) as representative of Christians.

Debate is hard to find these days. On FB I’ve encountered many Christians who are just like the atheists you describe, but Christian. It’s the people, not the belief.

 

[stavros388]

Even among most atheists, Dawkins is not known for being very philosophically astute. There are much better authors out there.

 

[stavros388]

That is a terribly uncharitable generalization. Yes, there are lots of poorly read teenage atheist trolls online. There are also very many shallow thinking, inept Christian posters. You cannot judge an entire intellectual or philosophical stance based on the poorest exemplars.

 

[stavros388]

I have read probably half of Dawkin’s books, and no where do I recall him stressing the atheism of Darwin. He has written about Darwin’s struggles reconciling what he observed in the natural world with what he was raised to believe as a Christian, and how he lamented this difficulty.

 

[Lion_IRC]

I’ve really noticed the rise of a group of people known as “The New Atheist”

LOL - you’re only just noticing this now?

…I’m an atheist which means I lack belief in a God, so you have the burden of proof while I don’t have to prove anything”

LOL

Yes, they do say that a lot.

I respond by telling them that I agree. The persuasive burden rests on the person who wants to persuade. And that if atheists want to remain unpersuasive that’s totally fine by me.

They say…“what do you mean by God?”

And I’m like…how can you be an atheist and not know what it is you don’t believe in?

I ask them, why is there something instead of nothing? They say…“there’s no such thing as nothing.” But then they say God is non-existent.

 

[Salibi]

I agree. Albert Camus, anyone?

His book “L’Etranger” is a superb work of literature.

 

[laylow]

Most of the arguments have already been advanced. If you are looking to be entertained, a Hitchens debate rarely disappoints. Comparing other debates to ones he was involved with usually has the opposite effect.

 

[laylow]

I think humans are strongly inclined to think of the necessity of a beginning, since for them, they obviously had one. But all of the “stuff” in all of the universes could be infinite, just in differing forms…

 

[Calliope]

I ask them, why is there something instead of nothing? They say…“there’s no such thing as nothing.” But then they say God is non-existent.

When people ask me that I answer I have no clue, because I don’t. I’m not sure why (not saying you are this way) some folks think having any answer is automatically better than saying “I don’t know”.

I’m a human. A very limited being in a vast Universe, like seriously how could I ever expect to know all the hows and whys? And I don’t need to know all the hows and whys in order to live a productive life.

I understand that some people are bothered by those questions and literally lay in bed at night stewing over them. People on both sides of the theism issue. They can’t understand why I’m fine with not knowing and I can’t understand why they are restless until they find an answer. But it truly does take all kinds, and the human race benefits from people having different personalities, talents and styles of thinking.

 

[laylow]

When people ask me that I answer I have no clue, because I don’t. I’m not sure why (not saying you are this way) some folks think having any answer is automatically better than saying “I don’t know”.

I’m a human. A very limited being in a vast Universe, like seriously how could I ever expect to know all the hows and whys? And I don’t need to know all the hows and whys in order to live a productive life.

Only some 10 thousands of years ago, we could barely even communicate well with each other (some would argue we still can’t) so why do people think we have even close to all of the answers?

 

[Bradskii]

I have read probably half of Dawkin’s books, and no where do I recall him stressing the atheism of Darwin. He has written about Darwin’s struggles reconciling what he observed in the natural world with what he was raised to believe as a Christian, and how he lamented this difficulty.

Correct. And I’ve read them all.

There seems to be a lot of shooting from the hip in this thread. To take Dawkins again as an example, he is not an atheist by his own admission. He is an agnostic. And what he rails against is not religion per se, but fundamentalism. Which obviously runs counter to his professional expertise.

And Harris is one of the most reasonable people I have listened to. You don’t have to agree with what he says, but he is always worth listening to. In fact, he is most worth listening to when you don’t agree with him.

And Hitch (sorely missed) was a street fighter. He enjoyed going head to head in bare knuckled debate with a host of people, most of whom couldn’t construct a logical answer if their life depended on it. It was brutal and because of that people tend to respond to the man rather than his arguments.

Lots of invalid comments in other posts as well (especially that all atheists think the universe is a cold and unthinking place and THEREFORE we consider humankind to be nothing more than bags of chemicals).

As to what an atheist doesn’t believe, well that depends on what you tell me you believe in. I don’t believe in gods so why would I make up a random definition that almost certainly wouldn’t align with what each of you personally believes?

A god that started creation? Yeah, quite possibly. A god that created everything 6,000 years ago? No, that didn’t happen. And incidentally, Dawkins would give the same two responses…

 

[Hodos]

My one encounter with a New Athiest online involved him telling me Christians are psychopathic retards and leaving the conversation when I asked him if he’d like to talk about why he thinks that.

Unfortunately, in all different philosophies, name-calling is becoming the norm for “debate”. It seems that shaming people tends to be fairly effective. Dawkins himself basically says that is his goal.

 

[Bradskii]

Salibi:

My one encounter with a New Athiest online involved him telling me Christians are psychopathic retards and leaving the conversation when I asked him if he’d like to talk about why he thinks that.

Unfortunately, in all different philosophies, name-calling is becoming the norm for “debate”. It seems that shaming people tends to be fairly effective. Dawkins himself basically says that is his goal.

That might require a quote so we could look at the context. Could you please oblige?

 

[Rabbi]

To an atheist, the universe is cold all the time. To people of faith, we don’t have to supply anything, we already have G-d. I know you mean well, and your response was phenomenal, but I would add that since we know G-d exists, there’s nothing cold about it.

I too feel honored to be in it, as well as G-d’s plan.

As far as debating atheists, I’ve found hypocrisy on both sides; it’s why I’d rather direct my time towards hobbies. I’m not saying it’s bad to debate, but to me, personally, I’ve done my share.

 

[Bradskii]

To an atheist, the universe is cold all the time.

I’m just prepping some food for tonight. Family and friends coming over to see us off on a trip. Good food, good wine, love and children and grandkids.

You are kidding, aren’t you?