The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect Kochivibe’s view.
My stint as an atheist burned out last week when I realized that I do not have what it takes to believe in the non-existence of a greater being other than myself. I can not. I’m not strong enough for that.
My understanding of morality and religion are intertwined. Coming from a society that’s only too happy to embrace a “holier than thou” regime, a majority of the people I know feel that kind of connection between the two- morality and religion that is.
When I had denounced religion, I found myself doing things I would have never done if I had something to fear. Things that I told myself were okay to do, because you have to live in the moment and think about your needs for that moment. Religion tells you otherwise. For that matter, even basic intelligence tells you otherwise. But that’s the problem right there. What good is it to know, when you can’t bring yourself to execute it? They say fear is the greatest motivator.
Some people don’t need that. But being the person I am and with reference to my history of being this crazy person; I can most definitely say that my intelligence is a risky thing to bank upon, simply because it can not see a second beyond the now. If I have to survive this world, I need to put up an act. I need to imagine an existence, bring to life a person seated up in the heavens or within my heart who is “looking out” for me; who tells me that he will “pick me up” when I fall, who tells me that he “won’t let” me make another mistake, who “whispers” into my heart all the right things for tomorrow. Because there is a tomorrow and we have to be prepared to live it.
More than anything, I think it is a sense of humility that lets me accept this way of life. On a broader perspective, the line that differentiates this sense of humility and a sense of inferiority can look quite blurry. During my atheist run, I thought both to be the same. With life’s passing woes and a mind let loose without any constraints, I’ve come into the realization that we are all something like molten metal that can be whammed into any which way, either by society or by religion. And I choose religion, because it is a safer bet. At the very least, it promises recovery 
If you declared yourself to be an atheist to look cool, that was the wrong reason. Atheism isn’t a fad like Caucasian women dancers in Bollywood movie song & dance sequences or some new pop song.
Also a question on morality : Is it moral cause religion says it is or does religion say so because it is moral?
Morality has got nothing to do with religion. But hey, if you want religion in your life, no one is gonna say anything bad. Peace!
I agree with Rohan on that, being an atheist just because you think its cool is definitely the wrong reason to be one. An atheist should be a person who searches for the truth and finds, after exhaustive research that blind faith in dogmatic tradition is nothing close to the truth.
I myself was a devout Christian for the majority of my life unfortunately but decided that I had to continuously look for answers, for proof, for evidence.
When you realise that religions directly contradicts science, one should realise that something is messed up in either one, and considering the track record of both of ‘em I would vouch for science anyday.
I do appreciate the fact that you admit that you are imagining this protector and that you do it because you require some extra moral support, which is fine. But there is no humility in creating an imaginary being and endowing it with super-powers. Its like taking an insurance policy against a black hole engulfing our planet in the next year or so, it isnt gonna happen.
There is a lot of material that can disprove beyond reasonable doubt, the existence of anything super-natural, if you just look. But, believing in an imaginary friend is good for you, health-wise, if your not strong willed enough to face the truth.
One last thing, being an atheist does not mean you believe in the non-existence of a deity, but rather it is the absence of belief in a deity, which by the way is the default position of every creature. We are all born atheists and then indoctrinated.
I do appreciate you’re humility though, stating that you aren’t strong enough to face the facts and be an atheist.
Please use a better font
Atheism is always cool. If you are true to yourself. The reason “why you choose atheism is irrelevant” the only thing you need to answer is ” do you still believe in god in any of its manifestations.”
Be an atheist… but respect others right to believe in whatever form of god.
Man is an arrogant animal, perhaps the only one.
And if we are to dig deep enough, we can easily figure out where the arrogance comes from.
It comes from Ignorance! Yes, for all our achievements in all spheres of life, our mastery over all other living things, our grasp of the workings of the universe, our long journey from caves dwellers to moon walkers, we still live in an abysmally ignorant world.
How else one would explain our propensity to attribute all the above achievements, all the marvels and mysteries of the world to the whims and fancies of gods?
Yes, I dwell on this very subject again and again.
Why? Why do we submit ourselves, in this life and in the hoped for afterlife, to the mercy of gods?
It takes a great deal of impartiality, an ability to be unbiased, to demystify the mystic.
Let us start over.
It was commonsense to manufacture gods when men trembled before the fury of nature. It was sensible for men to be hopeful of a better afterlife in a hopeless world made such by the plage and pestilence
Today, we stand far removed from the dark ages. Science has demystified the mysteries, cured the incurable, have seen the far ends of the universe.
A far cry from the times when earth was flat and everything revolved around earth, including stars.
Amazingly, none of our achievements were made or made easier by the scriptures. No e=mc2 in it, no formula for penicillin, none for telescopes, internal cumbustion engine and what not.
Unfortunately, and this is the single most misfortune ever to befall mankind, we carried forward the traditions of the rantings and ravings of the unlettered and the illiterate.
If, in the course of time, we progress on matters other than religion, don’t we discard what is outdated and accept what is updated? Floppy disc with compact disc? So to speak.
But religion, by it’s very nature , makes slaves of even the best of us because questioning the factuality of religion is prohibited by the very doctrines of religion that needs questioning.
It doesn’t sound right and it therefore isn’t right.
Where else would one find such hopeless situation?
Dictatorship would qualify as such.
Did Stalin promote free speech? Did hitler tolerate opposition? In the same breath, does religion subject itself to logic and reason?
No, no and NO!
The very existence of gods and religion hinges on the very fact that neither do believers question the veracity of their believes nor do they allow others to do so.
If only people would allow them the luxury of doubt, if only people would be the rational, thinking , debating, logical people they are in all other spheres of life, religion would come to an inglorious demise it deserves.
By the way guys, need to push atheism in a big way in Kerala. Any suggestions?
You do realise you are still an atheist, don’t you ? You cannot choose to believe in god. You either do or do not. It is clear that you do not.
Please tell me this is a joke. There are things you wouldn’t have done if you were a believer? So you are saying that because you are impulsive and lack proper self control you need to believe you are being watched. You are on video camera pretty much every where you go in public these days. So you are being watched… no god necessary. The idea that people do evil things without religion is bull. People with and without religion do bad things. It’s called being human. It doesn’t take an invisible babysitter to make you good. Be an adult and deal with your own problems. You are making ridiculous excuses for your own short comings that just because you are incompetent you believe there has to be an overseer.
@Arrakal, I agree with you on a whole lot of points you have made but cannot disagree more on your last point. We cannot and should not push ‘atheism’ forward in any place, quite frankly because it would be just as bad as a religion then. Blind faith in something is the problem. What we need to do is promote rationalism, critical thinking and just plain common-sense. It is upto each individual to decide what they believe in, the major issue we face in terms of atheism here is the social stigma that prevents people from doing something that isn’t normal in the society, in this case, believing in imaginary friends and old fairy tales.
The only way to go about it is increase awareness in a very subtle manner, as the human brain’s logic section gets closed for repair when confronted. We need to induce the thought process and let each and every person take it forward. Inducing a curiosity for how the world works should be good enough on that aspect, after which a sturdy support platform has to be set up to facilitate the support of people who want to learn more, facts that is.
Thats what I think. Would love to hear your take on it as well.
@Josh, you said it bro.
Josh said the tuf to gud thing…
and arackals last point hurts gud morale
Well from what I see , if you are good just because you want to escape God’s punishment, you are downright stupid, be good because that is how it is supposed to be, not because good will punish you later. That is really stupid. Even if you are a theist, if you can be good without looking at the future, you are much better off. I think in your case it happened the other way, you wanted to do something bad, and atheism was just an excuse you invented.
It is said in Bhagvad Geeta “To do our duties without expecting any results”, and even in other religions I believe. So even if you are a theist , if you do “good” things just because of fear, you are morally bankrupt.
@Arrakal, I agree with you on a whole lot of points you have made but cannot disagree more on your last point. We cannot and should not push ‘atheism’ forward in any place, quite frankly because it would be just as bad as a religion then. Blind faith in something is the problem. What we need to do is promote rationalism, critical thinking and just plain common-sense. It is upto each individual to decide what they believe in, the major issue we face in terms of atheism here is the social stigma that prevents people from doing something that isn’t normal in the society, in this case, believing in imaginary friends and old fairy tales.
The only way to go about it is increase awareness in a very subtle manner, as the human brain’s logic section gets closed for repair when confronted. We need to induce the thought process and let each and every person take it forward. Inducing a curiosity for how the world works should be good enough on that aspect, after which a sturdy support platform has to be set up to facilitate the support of people who want to learn more, facts that is.
Thats what I think. Would love to hear your take on it as well.
Ajay, assuming that we agree on the need to bring in the change and disagree on the means of doing it, let me elaborate.
I used the term “push” to denote an active participation in the process of laying bare the fallacies of organized religion.
Yes, it is true that we may end up promoting atheism as another belief system, which is just as bad.
But look at what we are up against.
Unlike many other advanced societies, our literacy has made absolutely no inroads in to rational thinking.
Perhaps we had a good thing going in the heydays of communism.
But we lost it!
Where is A.T.Kovoor now, Idamaruku?
There is not even a semblance of opposition right now.
Children are indoctrinated in to religion before anything.
It is a hopeless situation and that is why I asked for suggestions.
In my opinion, the way forward is as follows.
1) social media. Carpet bomb with rational arguments.
2) E-books. There are quite a few gems out there for free download.
3) YouTube. Post links to the debates of Christopher hitchens, Richard dawkins and the like.
4) friends and family. Sneak in sideways, the topic of religion and then proceed to dismantle it. Shock them. That is what I do.
5) leaflets. You can have the most absurd, violent, merciless quotations from scriptures printed and photocopied at very little cost. Spread them around.
6) introduce science. I think, people need to marvel at something all the time.
Let them marvel quantum mechanics!
I believe we need to “Do” something about it rather than being nice to everyone.
Your turn ajay.
(ps: if lost track, see you at, Facebook/atheist republic )
Lol! Blame it on my iPad!
You are not an Atheist, I agree…but I think that u are an Agnostic, like me. I want to be a believer in god but I cannot, I think that’s because it was not planted into me when i was a child…I think that believing in god is good because it gives u hope and courage. Its like an invisible harness when u are walking the wire of life…You are lucky that u could become a believer in god though u were an atheist…but it just doesn’t work for me.
This is amusing.
How exactly does one have a ‘stint’ as an atheist. You are either a very rational person or you are not. There is no middle ground.
Agnostics, and other fence-sitters you’re all just looking for an excuse.
Let me take a moment to leave my sarcasm-mask aside.
There.
You are worried about Moral Nihilism and how it overcomes you.
I feel for you. It is a valid concern.
How about we look at the problem from a macro level.
How does a person come to this moment of doubt?
I’ve never been a fan of so-called moral education as a subject in schools and [*disgust*] in some undergraduate colleges in India.
I find by personal observation and understanding of people, that good parenting and influential role models matter a LOT more than any set of written rules preached at a child.
Ever notice how children *always* do as their parents DO, not as they are told is right.
If you reveal to your kid that it is OK to pay a bribe in certain circumstances, then guess what: big surprise! your kid grows up to be just as terrible a citizen, as you are.
Right/wrong is irrelevant in this particular close analysis of human behavior. Humans just mimic their social peers. That is the way it has always been. The term is ‘Social Proof’; look it up.
[Ref: read Robert Cialdini's 'Influence' for this and a lot more about how humans are 'persuaded'.]
In the age of the Nuclear Family, the entire burden of ‘Lead by example’ falls squarely on 2 parents’ shoulders.
Parenting, today, therefore is the *biggest* responsibility ever.
Parents cannot just entrust the ‘moral education’ of kids to whatever social training ‘camp’ – Catechism/whatever and trust that it conditions the kids to be good citizens.(I avoid the term ‘moral’)
This is a flawed assumption.
Be the BEST human being you can be *before* you have kids.
Your kids will always learn by absorbing unconsciously from you.
That is the best you can aim for.
And finally,
Most people ‘believe’ out of fear rather than any rational reason.
The fears are many, ranging from the real, but overrated:social stigma, to the absurd:fear of becoming eternally slow-cooked barbecue meat. Mmm… meat!.
I quote the Ben Gesserit “Litany against Fear” from Frank Herbert’s sci-fi Epic: ‘Dune’.
“I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing……Only I will remain.”
This has influenced me profoundly since i read it at 13.
(Dune is brilliant btw, in the way it tackles the final clash of religion and technology; do read.)
And last: How do you know if an action is ethical?
Here’s a rule-of-thumb question you can ask yourself:
“If everyone did this, would the world descend into hell?”
Make the rational choice *after* you answer it honestly.
Hell is other people.
Lets face it, the world is run by sociopaths today..
If you are one, then have fun until the mob eventually rips you to pieces. :p
*goes back to minding my own beautiful business and talking to my fish*
I don’t think it was mentioned any where that the author declared himself/herself an atheist to look cool. So no point in bringing that up. Atheism shouldn’t be a fad. It is just another school of thought. That’s all. And if it makes perfect sense to you, go for it! But most often people embrace it for all the wrong reasons. Having said that, it does not mean that one can’t experiment with atheism. I mean, how would you know if something works for you without trying it out? It doesn’t make any sense to be a spectator and pass comments. I respect people who go out there, try out every form of living the mind can conceive, and after that, figure out where they belong. And even then, manage stay open to new ideas and new thought forms. Without experimenting, one can never know. And to experiment, one needs to have an open mind that’s game for any thing. I believe the author has that.
Morality is difficult to judge. Your sense of morality will be different from mine. You can never judge a person’s moral sense, it’s sort of subconsciously developed as a consequence of all the things that has happened in his/her life up until the present second. And judging his/her morality would mean judging his/her life and the events that happened in his/her life. No one has the right to do that to any one.
Now for some people it may not be developed that strongly, simple because some people never learn. May be they are just idiots. Or maybe they are just plain confused. They might realize this and decide that in order to lead a “safe” life, they need to cultivate some sense of right and wrong in them. Going by experiences from their childhood where they had some one to “teach” them this sense of right and wrong, they might think the safest bet would be religion. Because religion has that imposing thing about it. If it works out well for them, then why not do that? Force themselves to believe in a supreme force that helps them do what is “right”, and hence help them go about this world? Anything to just survive, that’s all.
The very feature of religion that atheists so hate is that, it is being shoved down people’s throats. If atheists start doing that as well, wouldn’t it be like some kind of joke?
@Ms T
for my benefit, please mention one instance where atheists try to shove ‘atheism’ as a belief system down someone else’s throat. I doubt any atheist ever forces anyone to stop believing in an imaginary deity, especially not through peer pressure, persecution: both intellectual and physical, etc.
Thats solely the job of the religious. So please do not blame atheists for trying to spread common sense. Its something people are supposed to develop by themselves, but unfortunately a lot of people are handicapped by religious doctrine in their area of thought.
Oh that was in response Arrakal’s : “By the way guys, need to push atheism in a big way in Kerala. Any suggestions?”
@ Ms. T
When did atheism say anything about morals? It is just a lack of belief in god/gods. A persons morality is subjective to their own culture and experiences. Someone can be an atheist and follow Orthodox Jewish morals if they so wish. It is just the removal of a deity. The author seems to be making the claim that they don’t believe in a deity, but want to believe there is over sight so they are forcing themselves to believe. Theism and atheism are not methods of thought that you can force yourself into. Either you believe or you don’t. I can not suddenly claim I believe in god, because I would be lying to myself, and not be holding a genuine belief.
On a side note I would like to know what all the wrong reasons are that people are embracing atheism for. I feel you may be severly mistaken as to why any of us areactual atheists.
@Ms T: Anecdote:
I’ve had people who believe in Homeopathy and other ‘alternative medicine ask me to be more ‘open-minded’.
They don’t understand that I’ve examined the evidence for it(none) and made my mind that it is no more effective than a placebo -commonly used in drug research.
I frown upon such abuse of the adjective ‘open-minded’.
Likewise for Vaastu, Feng-shui, Astrology and everything else today that has quacks ripping off rich+/clueless people.
Come to think of it, these quacks aren’t going to hell(what hell?). It is up to us to examine the evidence and denounce the frauds for what they are -regular frauds(albeit delusional).
I agree with you in disagreeing with Arrackal’s sentiment about ‘pushing atheism in a big way’. I believe that is not the solution.
Pushing ‘Reason’ is another thing altogether.
I long for the days of the Ancient Greeks when ‘Critical Thinking’ and Rhetoric were part of the syllabus (least for young people).
The ability to Reason about ideas – flawed or deserving merit, and the ability to persuade, make an argument, are sorely lacking in our generations.
What we see instead, is people immediately resorting to personal attacks(the Ad-hominem argument) instead of arguing the idea in question when they are unable to reason around it.
We are less civilized than the Ancient Greeks in this respect.
There are no new ideas, the philosophers have already thought about everything you might have a question about. Read, explore, critique.
What we have in its place is mostly religious/cult indoctrination of kids at a very impressionable age.
Using fear to condition a child’s behavior is CHILD ABUSE, plain and simple.
By not equipping children with the tools to effectively reason about the world, we are deliberately crippling them to be unable to make the best decisions in life.
Lastly, people who use fear+reward to prepare their kids for the world, should get a dog instead. They are unfit to be parents.
Guys guys guys,
Cutting through the mumbo jumbo here, if you people like to just stand there and debate the merits of atheism, but would have nothing to do in confronting the religious bigots, that’s fine.
Some said, don’t push atheism, push reason. Too much reading and too little action, that is what is ailing you.
Change, of what ever hue, is not going to happen because some arm chair intellectuals so wish. It comes from affirmative action. Till such times, religion will kill, maim, loot and generally make merry, while the atheist (your sort) debate the finer aspects of morality.
Guess what is worse than theism? It is text book atheism!
@Arakkal, still searching for you on Atheist Republic to discuss what more we can do to promote reason… I agree that our inactivity is, to an extent worse than the ignorant work that the theists do, because it, in essence promotes the very thing that is destroying our society: superstition, blind belief and fear.
@Arakkal
I rest my case, veiled ad-hominem non-withstanding.
Also, http://memegenerator.net/instance/16072922
I am anti-theistic in public. Its fun and satisfying at times to poke holes in circular logic and beat my chest at having beaten a lesser intellect and pre-baked ‘logic’.
But, the antagonistic school of atheism doesn’t actually work at changing the minds of real human beings, *at scale*. (ref: Late.Christopher Hitchens, and occasionally Richard Dawkins)
I have enormous respect for the men, nevertheless.
Ergo, I support rational amendments to student syllabi that *no one* can reject, without encountering some kind of cognitive dissonance.
When we are able to force more and more of this dissonance, i believe it will set the wheels in motion.
(Ref: Carl Sagan & Neil Tyson DeGrasse – school of action.)
Humans by nature always attempt to avoid cognitive dissonance; it is very stressful to our minds.
So, we should fight the war for reason, to counter early the strategies used by its enemies -”Catch em young and fill their little minds with ever-reinforced fear of a celestial superDad”.
I quote Yoda:
“Yes, a Jedi’s strength flows from the Force. But beware of the dark side. Anger, fear, aggression; the dark side of the Force are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will, as it did Obi-Wan’s apprentice.”
Choose wisely.
(and yet, I will continue to piss off people like Hitchens used to, because its just so much more fun that way :p. Everybody’s irrational!)
Cheers mate.
It doesn’t matter if you believe in something or not.Just keep it to yourself…
As someone once said,’Your religion is like your d**k.Don’t take it out in public.Also don’t try to shove it down someone else’s throat!’
http://www.facebook.com/arakkal.antony?ref=tn_tnmn
I found reading the comments down here more interesting that the article! Besides i know one thing.. the author was never a ‘true’ atheist or atleast anywhere close to it!
Trust me if you ever have happened to come out of the box and became a “true” atheist, then there is no goin’ back unless otherwise you are plain stupid or confused!!
dr.diabolics killd in with a few words ! hats off man !
dr.diabolics killd it with a few words ! hats off man !
Wow the pseudo intellectuals are out tonight aren’t they? It’s just a simple article guys no need to get your panties in a twist. Fear is a motivator and yes both fear and other motivators in religion have spurred on both tremendous works of selflessness (not often referred to) and atrocities. Do you have to be religious in order for you to self-regulate your behaviour? Depends on what sort of personality you are. Personality Enneagrams show that there are many but more or less static templates for human personality and yes a decent percentage of personalities do use fear as a motivator. Others dont. So less sweeping generalisations from the atheist camps about ‘humans’ in general please because your intellectualism sounds store-bought.
Are reason and religion at odds with each other? Never mind that science started as an endeavour from minds that took religion as a given. Science in the Western world began as an institution to explain what COULD be explained, in full acceptance of the fact that this would not be EVERYTHING. Ok so we are many centuries later and we now think everything must be explainable and reason is supreme. Well pure reason dictates that for the survival and thriving of the human species we should do away with the handicapped, the poor, the genetically inferior. Pure reason dictates that the physically and emotionallystrong and/or most adaptable individuals are the ones we should preserve. Pure reason, which is what modernity sought, led to the holocaust – there was a helluva lot of science around those events make no mistake. And after World War 2 when people realised that wow science and rationalism can only be taken so far in terms of how they should direct our living – it was the perfect time for the introduction of post modernism (also viewable on this board) ie. hey you have your beliefs and I have mine – that’s cool I wont force you you dont force me. They are both equally valid and have equal claim to truth. ie keep your penis to yourself.
Which is, if you think about it – stupid. True religion (like true atheism – as has been pointed out) permeates all activity. Hence one does not keep it to themselves unless they are in solitary confinement. Don’t like it? Tough – deal with it or according to pure rationalism, we need to put you in a concentration camp and gas the shit out of you.
Nik,
I have to butt in to refute some irresponsible bits.
But first, thanks for introducing me to Personality Enneagram types.
One of the ‘types’ seem to describe me almost completely. (just like the Zodiac signs)
This could be my next party trick.
Ok, back to your comment…
>>Are reason and religion at odds with each other?
Replace religion with the generic synonym ‘cults’ and it becomes easier to answer.
(sorry, but rhetorical[?] questions are hard to criticize.)
>>Science in the Western world began as an institution to explain what COULD be explained, in full acceptance of the fact that this would not be EVERYTHING.
I beg to differ.
‘The scientific method’ has always improved with time.
Assuming time is infinite, everything in the universe will be experimented with and understood.
Caveat: It will probably be our man-made AI’s descendants who finally do it, with their exponentially larger computation capacity.
>>Well pure reason dictates that for the survival and thriving of the human species we should do away with the handicapped, the poor, the genetically inferior.
There’s nothing rational about this.
It will lead to inbreeding among the remaining humans.
Selective inbreeding is traditionally used for making cuter dogs, not healthy ones with diversified immune systems.
And i thought *i* was a sociopath! Just kidding.(anonymous name-calling is so tempting, no?)
>>Pure reason, which is what modernity sought, led to the holocaust
Can you provide a citation?
>>there was a helluva lot of science around those events make no mistake.
Eugenics is not a science.
Several Nazi Doctors applied the scientific method in conducting dangerous experiments on live human subjects (obviously) without their consent.
They were all tried for War crimes after the war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctors'_Trial
This does not imply that the rational scientific method is the cause.
Flagged as ‘False cause’ http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause
>>True religion (like true atheism – as has been pointed out) permeates all activity. Hence one does not keep it to themselves unless they are in solitary confinement. Don’t like it? Tough – deal with it or according to pure rationalism, we need to put you in a concentration camp and gas the shit out of you.
Let’s just call it fundamentalism and save a few bytes.
The only things a rationalist fundamentalist wants to blow up, are delusions.
Also, flagged under : http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white
and :
Your interpretation of ‘rationalism’ is peculiarly subjective.
postscript: the list of logical fallacies in this comment is longer than i thought.
>>Wow the pseudo intellectuals are out tonight aren’t they?
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
ah never mind.
And the question about how atheists shove their views down people’s throats… are you kidding me? of COURSE that happens. The billboards and advertisements on the buses in the UK, in NZ in the States. There is definitely an agenda with atheism in many countries. Richard Dawking at least has stated as much. The difference is religion has had centuries of a head start.
Also earlier someone said that all creatures are born atheists and have to be socially conditioned or ‘learn’ religion. That is a truly stupid and unscientific statement to make. Please don’t do any more arguing on behalf of atheism because you are making it seem like an intellectually unfeasible position.
unless you can cite me some sort of experiment where babies are kept in labs, taught nothing at all about God one way or the other and then asked later on what their belief systems are – and then have enough of those experiments to confirm a general rule then what you are presenting is an opinion.I say all creatures are born with an awareness of the existence of God. Again – an opinion. Someone else might say you’re an idiot. Again an opinion although the experiment results are seemingly all pointing towards that conclusion.
Nik,
I have to butt in to refute some irresponsible bits in your first comment.
(My previous attempt at anon posting this is still awaiting moderation for some reason. Hope the moderator will disregard my anon post.)
But first, thanks for introducing me to Personality Enneagram types.
One of the ‘types’ seem to describe me almost completely. (just like the Zodiac signs)
This could be my next party trick.
Ok, back to your comment…
>>Are reason and religion at odds with each other?
Replace religion with the generic synonym ‘cults’ and it becomes easier to answer.
(sorry, but rhetorical[?] questions are hard to criticize.)
>>Science in the Western world began as an institution to explain what COULD be explained, in full acceptance of the fact that this would not be EVERYTHING.
I beg to differ.
‘The scientific method’ has always improved with time.
Assuming time is infinite, everything in the universe will be experimented with and understood.
Caveat: It will probably be our man-made AI’s descendants who finally do it, with their exponentially larger computation capacity.
>>Well pure reason dictates that for the survival and thriving of the human species we should do away with the handicapped, the poor, the genetically inferior.
There’s nothing rational about this.
It will lead to inbreeding among the remaining humans.
Selective inbreeding is traditionally used for making cuter dogs, not healthy ones with diversified immune systems.
And i thought *i* was a sociopath! Just kidding.(anonymous name-calling is so tempting, no?)
>>Pure reason, which is what modernity sought, led to the holocaust
Can you provide a citation?
>>there was a helluva lot of science around those events make no mistake.
Eugenics is not a science.
Several Nazi Doctors applied the scientific method in conducting dangerous experiments on live human subjects (obviously) without their consent.
They were all tried for War crimes after the war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctors'_Trial
This does not imply that the rational scientific method is the cause.
Flagged as ‘False cause’ http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause
>>True religion (like true atheism, as has been pointed out) permeates all activity. Hence one does not keep it to themselves unless they are in solitary confinement. Dont like it? Tough deal with it or according to pure rationalism, we need to put you in a concentration camp and gas the shit out of you.
Let’s just call it fundamentalism and save a few bytes.
The only things a rationalist fundamentalist wants to blow up, are delusions.
Also, flagged under : http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white
Your interpretation of ‘rationalism’ is peculiarly subjective.
postscript: the list of logical fallacies in this comment is longer than i thought.
>>Wow the pseudo intellectuals are out tonight aren’t they?
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
This is so common in the blogosphere that it’s not worth the effort.
ah never mind.
Vimal
Youre kidding right? Enneagram types are tools used by psycholosists, therapists, counselors and profilers and are as scientific as a doctor looking at symptoms and suggesting what the problem could be. Your idea that it is somehow akin to horoscopes is uncanny. The more he knows about the symptoms the more accurately he can diagnose the problem.
That is not a party trick by any means – it is the scientific idea that the more factors one is in possession of, the more likely they are able to predict the outcome. This is true of personality types as well – the more we know about their pattern of responses, their backgrounds, their preferences etc. the more easily we predict their reactions in situations. This plays into chaos theory but you being scientifically minded means I probably don’t have to go into that here and now.
I do come from a family of psychologists and counselors so I find it strange that you can choose to be condescending about something you yourself have admitted knowing nothing about.
Ok lets not get hung up on that. Your idea that everything is knowable and that our man-made AI’s descendants will probably finally crack it all is – interesting. Perhaps not the most scientific statement (unless Sci-Fi is now accepted as Sci). However I see what you are saying. I guess my take on it was not expressed well – I am a deist. Most deists believe that God (whatever that might be) is partly unknowable and that even infinite time will not reveal that unknown completely.
However, even if the scientific method does improve over time, my previous point is that science BEGAN with an acknowledgement of this same unknown. Sir Francis Bacon who was the dude who actually established the scientific method was a philosopher – and he believed that atheism was the result of too little philosophy. That if someone went further with philosophy, they would then become deists. Note here I am not arguing for deism – I am arguing that the scientific method was born from the idea that a little thought was a bad place to be. I personally am looking forward to tremendous leaps forward in science because as of now, we are simply messing with the peripheries and – a little bit of science might just be as dangerously ignorant as a little bit of philosophy. “for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity.” Flowery language I know – but I think he makes my point more clearly than I do. And Mr Bacon, being of the Christian faith, believed that that God was not completely knowable.
Vimal your idea that getting rid of the poor and handicapped and genetically inferior (that last one is of course subjective) would somehow lead to inbreeding is about the most unscientific thing I can pinpoint in what you’ve said. Really – inbreeding? I don’t know at what point you think being witty compensates for lack of rational thought. So what you’re saying is – if they were all to die out, we would end up shagging our sisters? When our populations on earth were much much smaller, perhaps this might have been true and also true for relatively closed communities. But the general idea that the practice of Eugenics would lead to inbreeding is – I dunno – delusional beyond belief. I assume you have in your mind the example of WW2 Germany where a RACE was PERCEIVED as being genetically superior and so of course inbreeding would result from that. I am not talking about perceived strengths my friend. I am talking about universally acknowledged strengths like not having a missing limb, or having poor eyesight or leukemia.
Of course, most people would understand that I am not advocating the practices of Eugenics and am completely against them. I am simply reiterating my point – that pure rationalism accepts that there are limited resources on earth. In the interest of the thriving of the human race, these resources are wasted on the handicapped and the dying and are best reserved for the already strong and superior genes. Otherwise humanity levels out to a happy medium. That’s rational.
As far as your inbreeding comment is concerned, I sincerely hope you yourself are thinking man I shouldn’t have said that, – because otherwise I am in awe that you are using ‘science’ at all in your argument.
For example.
YOU: Eugenics is not a science.
Merriam-Webster: Eugenics – A science that deals with the improvement (as by control of human mating) of hereditary qualities of a race or breed
Oxford: the science of improving a population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics.
I mean even Wikipedia describes it as a science and they’re just stupidly off the ball usually.
Your interpretation of Eugenics, (or perhaps science?), is peculiarly unique. I mean I dont know what sort of fallacy that is but its a whopper. Yes some websites call it a failed science – but that is hardly the point.
And my use of Ad-hominem (since you love that website so much) is just responding in like manner to your own thinly-veiled ones.
surely you would not begrudge me – from one arrogant prick to another. Damn – I did it again.
Interestingly, you did not respond to my other points. come at me bro – with some real arguments this time please.
Nik, (assuming you are the same as the first 2 Niks)
I am only going to refute the irresponsible bits in your comments like i stated earlier.
Just my ground rules for anon comments.
I will investigate Enneagrams further.
There may be interesting correlations between Myers-Briggs and Enneagrams .
Anecdote(Mea Culpa): I once tested strong INFP on the Myers-Briggs scale.
A year later, i tested as strong INTP.
So, i must be personally biased against classifying techniques since i’ve changed fundamentally or i’ve been abducted by aliens in-between.
>>However, even if the scientific method does improve over time, my previous point is that science BEGAN with an acknowledgement of this same unknown.
The beliefs of the earliest practitioners of Science are not relevant to the current state of the scientific method.
Here’s a minor list of new developments:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_control
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_experiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review
Science is always figuring out ways to route around human cognitive biases. (as everyone should)
Whether a scientist personally believes in a deity or not, should have no impact on the method practiced by her.
>> So what you’re saying is – if they were all to die out, we would end up shagging our sisters?
I expected this strawman.
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
Inbreeding and the resulting reduced fitness have been recorded in isolated island populations.
The smaller the potential gene pool, the more quickly its effects manifest on population fitness.
Ergo, selectively culling members of the species leads to inbreeding.
Also, this is genocide.
Attempts to describe human genocide as ‘rational’ aren’t new.
Genocide is human nature’s darkest side, as evidenced by recent history in this country.
It is only rational to suppress this destructive desire.
Back to inbreeding:
Pedigreed dogs have a much higher incidence of fatal defects that shorten their lifespan.
Dog breeders try to create beasts with desirable characteristics and some cull the ‘undesirable’ pups.
I don’t take issue with the culling of the pups so much as creating unstable lifeforms for profit and vanity.(though the dead puppy bit makes everyone sad too)
This is why i plan to adopt a newborn pup off the street when i have the resources.
They are very well-adapted and healthy thanks to natural selection within the largest available doggie gene-pool.
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
This is the last time i engage with *any* anonymous poster in this thread.
I think i’ve said pretty much all i need to say on these two dangerous ideas.
It is too easy to spurt random ideas when you’re not held accountable to them.
If you wanted to engage other people with your ideas under your own name, a place like Quora (or ‘Hacker News’ for the supremely nerdy) would be better.
It’s great that you are getting ideas from this article as well as from our discussion made at this time.
My blog post – blackette sodomis
I’m not certain the place you are getting your info, however good topic. I needs to spend a while learning much more or figuring out more. Thank you for great info I was in search of this info for my mission.
Feel free to visit my web page; Film x video gratuite anal gratuit