Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Talk about anything and everything not related to this site or the Dreamcast, such as news stories, political discussion, or anything else. If there's not a forum for it, it belongs in here. Also, be warned that personal insults, threats, and spamming will not be tolerated.
User avatar
hey911
DCEmu Junior
DCEmu Junior
Posts: 45
https://www.artistsworkshop.eu/meble-kuchenne-na-wymiar-warszawa-gdzie-zamowic/
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:50 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by hey911 »

There was a discussion on the BBC's 'Today' program between Dr Justin Barrett and Prof. Lewis Wolpert.
You can listen to it here: - http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/ne ... 745514.stm
At a Cambridge University lecture, Dr Justin Barrett will argue it is the natural default position of children to believe in God. This challenges the view of some atheists that religion is learned through family indoctrination. Dr Barrett, from the Institute for Cognitive and Evolutionary Anthropology at Oxford University, discusses whether religion or atheism is learned with scientist and writer Professor Lewis Wolpert.
Dr. Barrett, a byproduct theorist, thinks that belief in a god or gods is a byproduct of several cognitive tools our brain uses to help us survive. Briefly, these tools are: agent detection, the tendency to believe that the motion you see out of the corner of your eye is a real person or animal (priming us to believe in things we can only catch the faintest glimpse of), causal reasoning, the tendency to explain everything using cause and effect (leaving us open to divine explanations when no empirical one seems to fit), and social cognition, the ability to anticipate others’ actions and assume the existence of minds that we cannot see or feel (from which it is a short step to assuming the existence of minds or souls that are unfettered by a body) - http://www.cogito.org/Interviews/Int...ontentID=16509

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So here's a question from me:
Is the belief in God(s) a result of a inborn reality of life, or is it the result of being "taught" by parents, peers, the community, or even society as a whole?

Example: If there is no sensory input coming in from your external environment or from internal bodily sensations, does it even exist at all beyond an abstract thought in your mind? Wouldn't belief in such a thing be, A.K.A. = Delusion.

Please note, this in no way assumes that there can be no higher being than yourself, omnipotent or not. Some have said primitive peoples who believed in basic animistic, naturalistic, or pantheistic gods did so to make sense of unexplainable phenomena they witnessed. And the basic religions evolved from those, and that could explain the evolution of the historical and culturally rich religions that exist in this modern world.

Some evolutionary psychologists have proposed a "God module". - http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic ... 65,00.html,

Some say once the need the for affiliation that most poeple have is explained there will be no more ground for for faith based believers to stand on. - http://scienceandreligiontoday.blogspot ... eting.html

For arguments sake: People used to explain a wide variety of phenomenon like earthquakes, thunderstorms, maggots in rotting flesh, and rain itself as the result of a supernatural (unknowable to humans) force. Now that we know these are caused by natural forces, such as seismic activity, electric conductivity/resistance, flies laying their eggs, and the water cycle.

Some people could then say: "That is way that our God(s) made things to work".

But I say this:
We would no longer need a God(s) to make these things "work", because we can explain these phenomenon, without needing to presume a higher cause. In other words, we already have a determination of the cause, and wouldn't need any unnecessary extra "steps" to explain anything. It would not be the result of me seeing, hearing, touching or in any way knowing a God(s) was the cause. It would me "thinking" that was the reason.

Isn't a rule of thumb is simplicity? So like Occam's Razor, wouldn't it be completely illogical to defer causation to another unknown entity, without justification of something tangible?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are some following Q&A's for fun...

Q: What about the origin of the universe? Some people think that God is the best explanation for the big bang--the beginning of space and time.

A: God is not necessary. God is not even an explanation.

Q: What about religious experience? Some people have experiences that they think are best explained by the existence of God.

A: But these experiences can be produced in a laboratory by ordinary mortals.

Q: God clearly remains a live option in terms of explanation. Isn't it just a tad arrogant and cocksure, not to mention dogmatic, to state that we can just explain everything.

A: No, it's just stating a fact. We can explain all of the mysteries that were used as evidence of "god" by theologians before the 19th century. What is left for god to do?
Ex-Cyber
DCEmu User with No Life
DCEmu User with No Life
Posts: 3641
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 1:55 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Ex-Cyber »

Is there only one god, many gods of roughly equal authority, or many gods with one god ruling over them? Are gods physical beings with bodies, or ethereal entities? Are they conscious and possess personality, or are they impersonal forces, energies, or substances? Are they omnipotent, or is their power limited in magnitude and/or scope? Are they omniscient, or can they be tricked? Are they invulnerable, or can they be wounded? Have they existed since the beginning of time, or were they born later? Do they have a special purpose for or affinity with humans, or are they indifferent? If there were an inborn concept of "God", different cultures should have the same answers to these questions, but they don't; the concepts of "God" differ tremendously among different cultures.

Whether and how our cognitive biases lend themselves to inventing gods is its own question, and is probably more interesting.
"You know, I have a great, wonderful, really original method of teaching antitrust law, and it kept 80 percent of the students awake. They learned things. It was fabulous." -- Justice Stephen Breyer
User avatar
Specially Cork
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11625
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2002 10:01 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Specially Cork »

I am prepared to accept the idea of a God creating the universe, but most theists bundle this concept with a free moral compass and post-death prize for those who stick to the "rules".
Image
User avatar
Eviltaco64X
DCEmu Ultra Poster
DCEmu Ultra Poster
Posts: 1778
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:12 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Eviltaco64X »

In my opinion, people from both sides (Atheists and Christians) indoctrinate the people they have a hold of to find anything other than their beliefs ignorant.

Saying that only one side is brainwashing people while the other is completely harmless is ridiculous.
User avatar
Wagh
Wagh
Posts: 5746
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 7:59 pm
Location: YSOH
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Wagh »

basic chemistry leads me to believe that there is not a god.
Bush and Hussein together in bed
Giving H-E-A-D head
Y'all motherfuckers heard what we said
Billions made and millions dead
User avatar
Maturion
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 1:52 pm
Location: Munich, Germany
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Maturion »

Atheists are everything but tolerant. I am Christian. I have no problem with anyone being an atheist, but they seem to have a problem with us who believe in god. They want to "proof" that there is no god. Those "scientists" do actually know nothing about god, just because you can explain something logically, doesn't mean that god wasn't involved in it. Well, I can't do anything else than feel sorry for those people and hope that one day they get back to the right way.

A life without god, is, in my eyes, very sad and senseless. Religions and religious rules have a sense. So for example, most theistic religions forbid us to have sex before the marriage.

Just look at Africa: In religious territorries the number of people having AIDS is way lower, than in countries where people are not religious.

God is inmaterial. You can't prove his existence, but you can also never prove that he doesn't exist.

In my honest opinion, atheism is a sign of decadence and means the loss of morale. Population in western countries is decreasing (look at the white people in the USA) and our economy is going down hill.
|darc|
DCEmu Webmaster
DCEmu Webmaster
Posts: 16373
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 6:00 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 103 times
Been thanked: 90 times
Contact:

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by |darc| »

Maturion wrote:Atheists are everything but tolerant. I am Christian. I have no problem with anyone being an atheist, but they seem to have a problem with us who believe in god. They want to "proof" that there is no god. Those "scientists" do actually know nothing about god, just because you can explain something logically, doesn't mean that god wasn't involved in it. Well, I can't do anything else than feel sorry for those people and hope that one day they get back to the right way.
There are a lot more atheists out there than you think there are. There are a small amount of vocal atheists and a lot of atheists who don't really care.

I've never heard of atheists going door-to-door trying to convert people, yet Christians do it all the time. They also stick their doctrine, etc. into our law system.

Stay out of our lives and we won't care if you practice Christianity. I only care so much because Christians so often infringe on my right to freedom!
Maturion wrote:A life without god, is, in my eyes, very sad and senseless. Religions and religious rules have a sense. So for example, most theistic religions forbid us to have sex before the marriage.
Life is what you make of it. I have my own goals and standards for happiness in my life. It's sad that yours is so misguided and empty that you have to dream up an imaginary friend and be forced into servitude to him so you think you're being part of some mystery higher good.

I want to spend my life enjoying the things I love, with a wife, and raising kids to go on to be better and more learned people than I could ever be.
Maturion wrote:Just look at Africa: In religious territorries the number of people having AIDS is way lower, than in countries where people are not religious.
Uhm, because they don't have sex as much. Duh? It makes no sense to use sexually transmitted diseases at a higher rate in non-religious areas (i.e. areas where sex is suppressed) as a reason for God's existence.

I'm not a fuck-around type of guy, but once you're in a relationship for a while there is no reason not to have sex before you are married. The reason it was forbidden in biblical times is pretty obvious. Courting was very short, you picked a bride, committed (marriage), and then fucked her. You were either unmarried or married. There were no long term unmarried relationships. So if you were unmarried and having sex, you were probably fucking everybody, which is obviously problematic in a society (regardless of one's moral opinion on random sex, everyone can agree that having a primitive society full of random unwed mothers is going to be quite problematic).
Maturion wrote:God is inmaterial. You can't prove his existence, but you can also never prove that he doesn't exist.
There's plenty of claims one could make that are unprovable either way, so why should I believe in any of them? If one says "clearly because Christian societies are better off, look at Africa," why should I force arbitrary constraints upon my life when instead I can make intelligent decisions in the choices I have in life? There are more choices than "fuck no one until married" and "fuck everybody," you know.
Maturion wrote:In my honest opinion, atheism is a sign of decadence and means the loss of morale. Population in western countries is decreasing (look at the white people in the USA) and our economy is going down hill.
Atheism isn't a sign of decadence; it's a sign of reason and enjoying things that can be enjoyed without consequence because we live in a fucking civilized society now. We have no reason to continue with artificial constraints designed to help people in a completely different era in human history.

Loss of morale comes from people wanting a bigger TV set more than they care about the world around them. Is it right to scare them with an eternal life in fire just to motivate them? Or should they be taught about philosophy and morality? You don't need to believe in an imaginary magician in the sky to have a decent set of morals.

I don't see any correlation between population and religion in the civilized world. How on Earth can one claim a decline in population of white people is because of irreligion? Nobody really dies of hunger in the USA, so if you want to turn things into extremely polar examples, the irreligious fuck like crazy and produce ten kids for whom they're unaccountable financially, while the religious wait until marriage and have a kid or two and pay the irreligious people's welfare check.

And I sure as fuck don't see what the economy has to do with religion at all, unless you want to concoct some bullshit about the big bad genie being angry with us or something.
It's thinking...
User avatar
FamilyGuy
Insane DCEmu
Insane DCEmu
Posts: 132
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:53 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 0

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by FamilyGuy »

IMO God/Jesus only is an old story that evolved through time and translations errors into something completely off the track. It's just like we had take the Homer's Odyssey as our bible then create a religion based on it.

Nobody beleives in god when they born, jsut as nobody beleives in santa claus or rudolf the red nose reindeer without being told they exist.

Of course men will always be intrigued by life and how it works (and why) and they'll surely always develop ideas to understand or modelize how it can exist. But nothing of the story they'll build will be true. The greek invented gods, so did the perses and the indians, etc..

It's in man essence to be intrigued by misticism, jsut like almost anybody is impressed and attracted by the size of the sea, or the amazing bigger than nature landscapes all around the world. That doesn,t mean god exist. If I took a newborn children and grow him with me in a normal day life and always explain him how things works without summoning any god, he'll never ask me if there's an omniscient spirit(s) taht control and created all he sees.

In fact, I truly beleive that the existence of god is as fantastic as the existence of santa claus.

I see religions as philosophical doctrines taht were of great use in the past, when the people needed to wed to perpetuate the humanity, when pork was really full of disease (jewish/muslims) and when the ecclesia wanted to take control of the mass and make people assimilate "good valors". But now, in our society, these ideas are often obsolete. Stop living in the 7th century, let your vision of the world evolve!

I've nothing agianst beleivers, do what you like and think what you like, I ain't your mom. But when some illuminated folks try to scientifically prove that god is an universal beleif we have in our brains at birth, I can only disaprove. That's taking the people for stupid dumbasses. I also hate stubborn old fucktards that can't take a single argument against their ideas, and use biaised results and logic (sophismes) to make their point valid. And that last statement apply to every field of science/philosophy/whatever.

I base my opinions on personnal experiences and facts, not presumptions I got from idea I've been brainwashed by.

That's my humble and honest opinion about the topic, it's worth what it worths to you.


Sincerely,
FG

PS: I come from a religious family, I'm kind of the black sheep, but I can handle itl
Last edited by FamilyGuy on Wed Dec 17, 2008 5:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Maturion
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 1:52 pm
Location: Munich, Germany
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Maturion »

Life is what you make of it. I have my own goals and standards for happiness in my life. It's sad that yours is so misguided and empty that you have to dream up an imaginary friend and be forced into servitude to him so you think you're being part of some mystery higher good.
I have a live that I do enjoy. But there are several rules I follow and that I am not going to break. But living to die 80 years later is sad. In my opinion I don't live to have fun, I live to live a life according to god's rules. That doesn't mean I don't want to enjoy my life. One day I want to have a family and children. I want that they will have the opportunity to learn more than I could do and they will have a better life than I do. But besides that the main goal in my life is living according to god's rules.
I've never heard of atheists going door-to-door trying to convert people, yet Christians do it all the time. They also stick their doctrine, etc. into our law system.

Stay out of our lives and we won't care if you practice Christianity. I only care so much because Christians so often infringe on my right to freedom!
Well, I don't want want to infringe your freedom. Christianity, as well as any religion and atheism, is an opportunity. You can chose it freely. You don't have to be Christian, I accept people how they are and I don't want to convince them to believe in my religion. I don't know how it is in the US, but here in Germany nobody tries to convert you. But you have to admit, writing a book called "The God Delusion" is sort of a way to convince people to stop believing in god. The term The Good Delusion translates to Gotteswahn in German, which remembers of the German term for witch hunt.
Stay out of our lives and we won't care if you practice Christianity.
I am quite sure that there is no one in this forum trying to convince you to believe in god. I only post about my religion in threads like this and when my feelings are hurt. I am not going on out and laugh about you because you don't believe in god while I remember several other members from here laughing about me because I believe in god.
There's plenty of claims one could make that are unprovable either way, so why should I believe in any of them? If one says "clearly because Christian societies are better off, look at Africa," why should I force arbitrary constraints upon my life when instead I can make intelligent decisions in the choices I have in life? There are more choices than "fuck no one until married" and "fuck everybody," you know.
I've nothing agianst beleivers, do what you like and think what you like, I ain't your mom. But when some illuminated folks try to scientifically prove that god is an universal beleif we have in our brains at birth, I can only disaprove. That's taking the people for stupid dumbasses. I also hate stubborn old fucktards that can't take a single argument against their ideas, and use biaised results are logic (sophismes) to make their point valid. And that last statement apply to every field of science/philosophy/whatever.
You can't prove his existence, but you can't prove that he does not exist either. Let's leave it at this.
User avatar
Wagh
Wagh
Posts: 5746
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 7:59 pm
Location: YSOH
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Wagh »

Maturion wrote:You can't prove his existence, but you can't prove that he does not exist either. Let's leave it at this.

I understand this line of thinking but I mean really. Look at a periodic table of elements. There is nothing about what is known about the basic ( excluding fundamental particles which provide even further complexity ) particles of all matter in the universe to suggest they were created by a god. Maybe not the most damning proof that there isn't a god but still there's a whole lot of evidence for the non exsistance ( several religions, several interpretations etc etc ). I think it is all fine and good to believe in god and such but I find it hard to see people using cars and the internet and claim that there is some how something mysterious to matter.
Bush and Hussein together in bed
Giving H-E-A-D head
Y'all motherfuckers heard what we said
Billions made and millions dead
User avatar
FamilyGuy
Insane DCEmu
Insane DCEmu
Posts: 132
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:53 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 0

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by FamilyGuy »

Maturion wrote:You can't prove his existence, but you can't prove that he does not exist either. Let's leave it at this.
I deeply think you can beleive in what you think as long as you don,t want to convert me to your religion (and you're more than ok with that :P) but I can't take that last statement as a real argument for anything, it's sophistry. This applies to anything you can think of: Aliens, secret conspirations, ghost, good rap music, antyhing!

To say something exist because you can't prove it don't exist is totally illogical. Something can possibly exist until you prove it does, or until you prove it does not. Then it exist or not. (You can also consider it a mixed quantum state of existence and unexistence until someone verify it's existence).
Sophism articles: to understand what a biaised argument is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophism
http://www.blind.net/pba1984.htm
The real statement, IMO, to say here would be, there's still a lot of things we can't/don't understand completely, and some might be releated to God, or not. There's still a possibility that it (he?) exists. (but IMO it's more than slight.). And there's a possibility it (he?) doesn't (this tends to be demonstrated, though it ain't sure at all).

I personnally don't think god exists, but I keep in mind that there's still a chance, though I don't think anything could ever make me think it (he?) does exist.

I may be too much nihillist btw, but to me life apears as a cool little chemical reaction we all are a part of and there's nothing before or after. The mere shadows of the reality we see is the interpretation we make of the stimuli around us that shock our brain with electrical discharges. An interpretation based on sociocultural filters, and we could never get rid of those goddamn filters trust me, to say so would be totally illusionnary and would fall into a doctrine: to say you know the universal truth.

Regards,
FG
User avatar
Stormwatch
DCEmu Fan
DCEmu Fan
Posts: 2090
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2002 11:55 pm
Location: Brazil
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Stormwatch »

Image

Image

Image

Image
Lines join in faint discord and the Stormwatch brews
. . a concert of Kings as the white sea snaps
. . at the heels of a soft prayer
. . whispered
Ex-Cyber
DCEmu User with No Life
DCEmu User with No Life
Posts: 3641
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 1:55 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Ex-Cyber »

Maturion wrote:living to die 80 years later is sad
It's not a matter of "living to die", it's a matter of accepting the simplest explanation of death: that when people die, they actually, truly, no-foolin', really do die, and trying to make the best use of the preceding years.
"You know, I have a great, wonderful, really original method of teaching antitrust law, and it kept 80 percent of the students awake. They learned things. It was fabulous." -- Justice Stephen Breyer
User avatar
Specially Cork
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11625
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2002 10:01 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Specially Cork »

living to die 80 years later is sad
So is starvation in Africa. Maybe I should forget about it by making up a more rewarding reality in my head? I would personally feel very uncomfortable with the idea that my personal beliefs are based upon the foundation that the alternative makes me feel sad, and thus can't possibly be true.
Image
|darc|
DCEmu Webmaster
DCEmu Webmaster
Posts: 16373
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 6:00 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 103 times
Been thanked: 90 times
Contact:

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by |darc| »

Maturion wrote:I have a live that I do enjoy. But there are several rules I follow and that I am not going to break. But living to die 80 years later is sad. In my opinion I don't live to have fun, I live to live a life according to god's rules. That doesn't mean I don't want to enjoy my life. One day I want to have a family and children. I want that they will have the opportunity to learn more than I could do and they will have a better life than I do. But besides that the main goal in my life is living according to god's rules.
You don't think it's sad that you have dreamed up a delusion, will be in servitude to this delusion, and will die one day with 80 years behind you in vain? Think of all the other religions out there for a second and all the things they do that have no significance to forwarding themselves because their religion is wrong (a harsh thing to say, but hey, they can't all be right) and then take a look at yourself and realize that that is you as well.

You live up to rules set in place over 2,000 years ago to help further the people in that era. These are rules that made sense and helped back then, but the consequences of breaking those rules are either no longer negative to a modern society (such as being a homosexual) or breaking those rules can be done smartly because we understand how to prevent negative effects (use contraception and good discretion and sleeping around is not much of a problem).

These rules were once good ideas but due to modernization they are dated, and all Christians do is hold back the rest of society by trying to force the government to make its policies religious.
Maturion wrote:
I've never heard of atheists going door-to-door trying to convert people, yet Christians do it all the time. They also stick their doctrine, etc. into our law system.

Stay out of our lives and we won't care if you practice Christianity. I only care so much because Christians so often infringe on my right to freedom!
Well, I don't want want to infringe your freedom. Christianity, as well as any religion and atheism, is an opportunity. You can chose it freely. You don't have to be Christian, I accept people how they are and I don't want to convince them to believe in my religion. I don't know how it is in the US, but here in Germany nobody tries to convert you. But you have to admit, writing a book called "The God Delusion" is sort of a way to convince people to stop believing in god. The term The Good Delusion translates to Gotteswahn in German, which remembers of the German term for witch hunt.
Stay out of our lives and we won't care if you practice Christianity.
I am quite sure that there is no one in this forum trying to convince you to believe in god. I only post about my religion in threads like this and when my feelings are hurt. I am not going on out and laugh about you because you don't believe in god while I remember several other members from here laughing about me because I believe in god.
I think you have gone on enough in this thread to insult me and other atheists. You have accused us of living sad, pointless lives and of damaging society. I have accused you of the same but only after you have condemned me and my lifestyle.
Maturion wrote:
There's plenty of claims one could make that are unprovable either way, so why should I believe in any of them? If one says "clearly because Christian societies are better off, look at Africa," why should I force arbitrary constraints upon my life when instead I can make intelligent decisions in the choices I have in life? There are more choices than "fuck no one until married" and "fuck everybody," you know.
....did you mean to write something here?
It's thinking...
Lartrak
DCEmu Respected
DCEmu Respected
Posts: 6166
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2002 9:28 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Lartrak »

At a Cambridge University lecture, Dr Justin Barrett will argue it is the natural default position of children to believe in God.
That's horseshit. Sorry, it has to be said. Belief in supernatural - maybe. But God? That's stupid.

In any case, I think the closest thing to a "natural" supernatural belief is animism - that is, thinking everything is "alive" in some sense. Best example is when people walk into a pole how many of them get angry at the pole, an inanimate object, for being there. Or get mad at objects they trip over.
How to be a Conservative:
You have to believe everything that has ever gone wrong in the history of your country was due to Liberals.
User avatar
Eviltaco64X
DCEmu Ultra Poster
DCEmu Ultra Poster
Posts: 1778
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:12 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Eviltaco64X »

Call me indroctinated if you will, but I believe in God. I'm a Christian, though I dislike the majority of Christians for being stuck-up gossippers that don't focus on the Word of God, but rather on making their church better than the nearby Episcopalian one or baking cakes for their next event.

And all this about Christians "forcing their policies into your government", I believe Christians were the first white people here (not to say I agree with them). ;)

I live a normal life. I'm not a wild animal, nor am I a religous fanatic that was sheltered my entire childhood. There's nothing wrong with having a few beers and playing some Halo in my opinion. :)

Furthermore, I thought the majority of Atheists were liberal (and by liberal I mean accepting of someone going out and exploring different things). Keep in mind that you gentlemen are very influential, and are in a position where you could indoctrinate yourself. ;)

But hey, each man to his own. I respect your beliefs if you respect mine.
User avatar
FamilyGuy
Insane DCEmu
Insane DCEmu
Posts: 132
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:53 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 0

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by FamilyGuy »

I kind of agree with darc on what he said beside the part he said he thinks Maturion has been rude against atheist, I think his reply was not mean to be rude, it think it was an open question, fair enough as long as we can answer.
Eviltaco64X wrote:And all this about Christians "forcing their policies into your government", I believe Christians were the first white people here (not to say I agree with them). ;)
I must say something, I live in a little canadian province called Quebec, itMs the only freaking french-speaking part of Canada, and about 70-years ago we were totally ruled by the church. A priest was going from house to house to tel lthe mothers to do more babies, or it'd be a sin (they probably wanted more young boy to abuse) and they were controlling the political scene pretty much completely, hand-in-hand with the province's prime-minister (different politic system than yours), the church was doing propaganda to promote the catholic christian very conservative ideas. The Unions were closed as soon as they were created, the movies and/or books were censored or indexed (made illegual, one by the prime minister Duplessi himself, what a prick), and the people were living in guilt and sadness because nobody was good enought. This period was so conservative, so fucking sad for the sake of our land, that our historians now call it the "Great Darkness" (La Grande Noirceur). We were fucking retarded and we were almost living in the middle-age.

Around the 50, after the war, the people kind of changed the things and a wave of protestations (not christian protestants) apeared, result: The Church loose all its power over the gobernment and politic. Of course a lot of people still beleived in christianism at the time (and still, but less), but almost everybody agreed to say that the church shouldn't be imposed at all in the political and social lives of everybody, you should follow their ideas onlyl if you liked it.

Today our province is as modern as anywhere else, even if Don Cherry (aka Hitler2) really dislike us and call us frogs because we kinda rock at hockey.

The withdraw of the church in school and in the politic field is a MAJOR inprovement we saw in our society, it helped to free the minds of the mass, they were starting thinking by their own and making bigger-than-nature project, like the LG2 hydroelectric power plant, the biggest in the world at the time IIRC.

I think it's sad that the religion still has a big chunk of (lobbying) power in the USA, the "most modern country in the world" according to some (mainly USA-ers) would still be greatly influenced by pre-middle-age minded old priests? I mean look at Sarah Paulin, she's a creationnist! Get rid of that right now! Alaska wasn,t created 3000 years ago it's obvious, beleive in god; ok, beleive the world was created in 7 (6) days; ok. But beleive it was made 3000 years ago is like thinking you can get pregnant from a kiss: Totally Naive.

But the main problem about religion ( I won't talk about McDo here) in the USA IMO, is that your protestant ancestors slowly built your social culture by associating the country and the religion. "In God We Trust" The salute in front of the flag with the recital of the national anthem. THe very patriotic valors in the USA tend to look pretty much like a religion. Patriotism and religion seems to be intricated, and that can be really dangerous in my humble, but critic, opinion.

FG

PS:
@Lartrak: I read in a national geographic magazine (or maybe Science&Vie) that some neurologist found a region in the brain for misticism in general and that excitement in that region send dopamina in the body. That'd explain the taste of misticism in general the humans have, the sea, the pyramids, the space, the world, "God", Chi, etc. BUddist monk in great meditation were found to "enjoy themselves a lot" while you or me would be completely bored, why? Their extreme concentration activated this misticism zone in the brain and released dopamine in their whole body. You think they meditated, but they feel as euphoric as you after a parachute jump!

@Eviltaco64X: You just happen to have the right attitude over all this stuff. 8-)
User avatar
Skynet
DCEmu T-800
DCEmu T-800
Posts: 8595
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 6:27 pm
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by Skynet »

I have only read parts of this thread as it's pretty long :P But I agree with what Darc said. And Maturion was being rude to atheists. As an atheist I could not care less what people believe. If that's what they want to believe then good on them. If you believe in god, great. If not, great. So long as no one is forcing anything on anyone, whether it be religious people forcing it on atheists and vice versa, then what's the problem? IMO religion is a great, yet very dangerous thing to have. It's great that everyone has their own beliefs, it's terrible that people harm others because of it.

I've never had the desire to harm other people because of me being an atheist. I guess I'm just talking of extremists but whatever.
Live gamertag: SKYNET211

Steam gamertag: SkynetT800
User avatar
hey911
DCEmu Junior
DCEmu Junior
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:50 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Is God a learned concept? And, who's teaching it?

Post by hey911 »

Maturion wrote:In my honest opinion, atheism is a sign of decadence and means the loss of morale. Population in western countries is decreasing (look at the white people in the USA) and our economy is going down hill.
People believe all sorts of crazy things, and it is possible to explain morality without god. If you you look around you and see that even these self-proclaimed believers, for whatever deism, have they're moral codes. The you can see that they are practicing these codes of conducts/ethics on their own. If a God(s) were to force these practices on people, then that would destroy the concept of free will. If a God did do this, it would be showing that it was imperfect and fallible, after all it created us...

I'll take this following argument to apply to any theistic belief, and/or pantheon of Gods.
Theodore Drange wrote:It is impossible for God to be infinite and personal.

1. Infinite = complete, unchanging, immutable.
2. Personal = capable of being affected by what happens.
3. Premise 1 + 2 = contradiction. That which is unchanging cannot be affected by what happens.
4. The infinite and personal God is not real.

Any premise you disagree with?

Premise three also concludes God cannot be all-loving and infinite if you believe to be loving one must be able to be affected by what happens, or at least able to choose to be loving or not. The infinite has no choice other than to be everything.

Infinite has no boundaries and no specific quality of its own. A personality at least has some boundaries, and some specific qualities. If you agree a personality is something other than everything, you agree that the infinite cannot be personal, nor have personal qualities. If the infinite is allowed to be considered a "personal" being, what does the word personal even mean anymore? It is a useless concept at that point.

An argument against this is God can be personal when he inhabits time/space and "lives" through a consciousness, but also an infinite complete being simultaneously. You can't eat your cake and have it too.

If one admits an infinite cannot be personal, then the true state of God cannot be personal and a contradiction is created within God. Only lesser, restricted, finite parts of God could have personal qualities, thus a personal God is not omnipotent or omniscient or infinite at all. And one cannot argue "infinite" is only one aspect of God, for there is nothing beyond infinite. Infinite is by definition, everything. God cannot be everything and something else. God cannot be infinite, and have a personality outside of that.

The "infinite" altogether is a contradictory concept, but I see that claim as the most important claim about God. If God is not infinite, he loses many of his traits, yet if he is infinite, he makes no sense. Nothing new.
Being an atheist has nothing to do with a lack of consciousness, and the idea that lawlessness and disease will follow this type of viewpoint is ridiculous. Without the general assumptions you're making, where is the data to back up a claim like this?

Which leads me back to one of my original points, without anything to show you it's there, why does "anyone" start believing it does?

Where does the belief in a god/gods start?
Post Reply