Atheism/agnosticism?

[C~Q]

I like the water analogy too, when I think of a God I always think of him/her/it (!) like the force of nature.

My views are very confused and complicated! I am Jewish but not religious. I was born Jewish so will always be a Jew. I think of myself as a Jew, as part of a race of people and not part of a religion IYKWIM? I would love to believe in God giving commandments to Moses etc but I just find that I can't. It seems that people watch magicians on TV and say "wow, how do they do it" believing it to be a trick and yet they believe unequivocally in water turning into wine and people walking on and parting the sea. I don't get it but as I said, I wish I could.

I believe there is something guiding us and helping us occasionally but we control ourselves and our destiny.

[The[cookie]Doctor]

I believe there is something guiding us and helping us occasionally but we control ourselves and our destiny.

I agree with Rachel, whilst DF and i have both been brought up catholic, neither of us have any particular belief in it. There i things i would like to believe, but when you see hurt, pain, suffering it's difficult to, and then yet, when you see it, it's like hoping that it really is for some greater purpose, so to speak.

DF and I are going to baptise 'jellybean' catholic, whilst we both believe that it is fair for the child to have it's own opinions, once it is old enough, the both of us were both brought up to do the rituals, and also feel that it may as well have a knowledge/belief base in something as well... It's a very conflicting thought for us though.

I know this is mostly irrelevant, but even though Dan Brown is an atrocious writer, i quite enjoyed his two books surrounding religion. No matter how fact, fiction, true or controversial they may have been, it was something that i could say gave me a different perspective. And when i was skeptical of believing in anything, it was enlightening to look at it in a different light. I do want to believe that science, darwin, evolution etc & a god, or many gods, or a 'divine power' that is a central bond to the universe, can both exist, i've just seen no proof of the latter and therefore it is a biased opinion.

DF and i have discussed with friends, the conclusion was...
"It can be presumed (seeing as there is continuing advancements in scientific discoveries), that there is an infinite number of galaxies, and an infinite number of universes, and an infinite number of bodies that survive and live there, so it is fair to assume that there is an infinite possibility that a god, or many gods, or something exists, it's just a matter of personal belief of whether it exists here..." IYKWIM

I'm hoping this made sense!

[Roryrory]

i do not think morality is tied to organised religion. I know many, many moral athiests. The rejection of or questioning of God need not mean the departure from morality.

Hoobley, like I said I haven't read the book yet but when I discussed this thread with DH and mentioned Bath's comment about Christian values, he reminded me about a part of the book he told me about where Dawkins has apparently looked into the morality of non-Christian peoples (pygmies in the Amazon for example, with no connection to western culture at all). He (or someone else, probably an anthropologist) has hypothesised that morality is in fact an evolutionary by product - we wouldn't survive as a species if we coupld work harmoniously in groups, etc.

Ryn I think the reason why "hard" science doesn't marry well with "creationism" is that creationism still presupposes that there was an intelligent god who in some way directed or put into place the elements necessary for creation to unfold. I can see how from a Christian POV evolution could be part of God's plan, just as a scientist could see God or a god in creation. But I think from a strictly atheist POV (taking atheism to be as much a matter of "faith" in there being nothing as anything else) you could not see creationism as akin to evolution.

From a personal perspective I was raised a Christian and when my dad was diagnosed with lung cancer when I was 8 I started getting right into Sunday school and church. Problem is my religious education teacher didn't take the opportunity to discuss with me anything other than what I call the "child's view" of Christianity - Jesus loves little children, pray and He will listen, good things happen when you are good. My dad died when I was nine so I was totally disillusioned and have been a non-believer since (obviously now due to slightly more complicated reasons LOL!) But I find it a shame on her part that my teacher wasn't a bit "smarter" in how she handled the situation.

DH and I will raise our children to know about all religions, more so that they can understand other people's motivations and beliefs and function well and tolerantly in society than so they can choose their own beliefs. I am right into reading about Islam ATM because as an Aussie kid growing up in the 21st century I think that is one social force my children will definately need to understand and appreciate.

[Heaven]

he reminded me about a part of the book he told me about where Dawkins has apparently looked into the morality of non-Christian peoples (pygmies in the Amazon for example, with no connection to western culture at all). He (or someone else, probably an anthropologist) has hypothesised that morality is in fact an evolutionary by product - we wouldn't survive as a species if we coupld work harmoniously in groups, etc.

From a christian point of view I would think. Well we all came from adam and eve, we were all made by God, so we would all be the same, have morals, etc, because that's how God made us. And God gave us things like the mind, emotions etc. What is the mind exactly? You can't see it or measure it, I think it's something that God gave us and shows that just because you can't see something it's not 'supernatural' or 'magic' and can still exist. Oh jeez, well I don't know if those thoughts were even connected, hahaha, sorry. But that's something I've been pondering lately.
But it's interesting how you can take any piece of information and view it in a way that fits with your argument or beliefs I think.

[Bathsheba]

I had it in the back of my mind that Albert Einstein said something relevant (he believed in God)... I Googled and found it: "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

Whilst searching I found that many famous scientists also believe God had some imput into our universe: Copernicus, Newton, Descartes and Mendel to name a few. Now I loved science at school but can't say I am an expert... however I guess I do trust these guys.

For balance i'm now going to Google Atheist scientists... unless anyone knows any?

[Tyige]

James Watson the Structure of DNA
Francis Crick Molecular Biology
Alfred Kinsey Human Sexuality

Just a couple of Atheist from The Scientific 100:
A Ranking of the Most Influential Scientists, Past and Present

[Roryrory]

Alfred Kinsey is a personal fave of mine, not just athesit scientist but visionary - what a great stand for him to make at that time!!

[paradise lost]

In general the religious Scientists existed longer ago. Once all science came from the Church because all the learning was in the Church, the Church knew Latin and could write it down.

I think that to a massive extent religion comes "through the milk" from our early baby-hood. Never having a religion is a different stance (IMO) to having been brought up in one and rejected it. It is very common for people to reject their religion and then have their children brought up in said religion. Probably because saying "this is the choice i make for my soul" is not the same as saying "this is the choice i make for their soul". Our children are precious, we want to do things right and if our own morality/spirituality/religious feeling came from a church before we rejected the ideas, it's perhaps difficult for us to imagine our children could grow up without that church and still be able to have morality, spirituality and religious feeling. This would not be any different for scientists. Being a scientist doesn't mean you did not once sit on your mothers lap in church, full of wonder and belief. Children believe with far greater ease than adults. So many things seem mysterious to them, religion is but a small leap. Such beliefs, that we held onto during the confusing times of childhood and adolescence, are not easy to throw away without feeling we might be throwing away a part of ourselves.

Children are reverent creatures. They worship. Their parents, their friends, their favourite toys. Children are naturally full of wonder and ready to be inspired. I think so long as that need is met by SOMETHING, it needn't be organised religion.

Bx

[Mrs Jak]

I was wondering what the name was for my belief's or lack of. Thanks Rory!

I guess I believe that there has to be more to life and the universe than just us and there is a (or more than one) higher being.

I would never say that one religion is less or more important than the other. I personally don't like religion/s or religious leaders that dictate what you must wear or discriminate against gender and etc..

I'm still figuring it all out in my head I guess. Never say never, but I couldn't imagine puting a lot of effort in to a religion.

I do thank 'God' most nights/days for all that I have though.

[Bathsheba]

I was thinking about this thread today. It popped into my head as i was reading a future forecast in a book "The Spike"....anyhow. I thought about what we know now, as a race, compared to what our ancient ancestors knew. How blown away would they be by the internet? How impossible would it have sounded to them! How humbling would it be if we could be given a glimpse into our future (if we survive predicted climate change) how many things would seem miraculous? Can we really humble ourselves just for one minute to admit that we know nothing compared to the human race of a thousand years hence? Absolutely nothing?! of course we can't. We will proudly point to example of our knowledge; look at this laptop, look at this medicine, look at this camera that can tell when a specified person smiles and only take a picture at that precise moment (invented in Japan recently so we can all look forward to taking more successful photos of our babies!). We are so damn proud of ourselves hey? We are like primitives pointing proudly to our stick of fire.

If there is a God then we are just babes playing with fire in comparison. With the benefit of recorded history we can look backwards and say how clever we are... but are we really? I think a little humility goes a long way and the thing with atheism is that there is a denial of anything greater than ourselves. Maybe I am wrong but it seems to me that it is only via spirituality that people are encouraged to be humble? Please correct me if I am wrong. It just doesn't sit right with me that we, at this point of our development know all that there is to know.

[paradise lost]

Do you mean individual humility, racial humility or species humility?

I know a lot of people who are better than me and i know the technology i am using right now would not have been possible without the scientist who developed the stick of fire your primitive was holding.

An awareness of how insignificant humanity is, in comparison with the universe, doesn't rely on the existence of God. An athiest doesn't believe Man is God. He believes there is NO god. It is not about comparative greatness, it is about conscious force driving the universe (or not).

Bx

[Bathsheba]

All forms of humility, all of above. I think, as a race, we have become so arrogant, our egos are our Gods and we serve them daily. Advertisers know how fragile we all are when it comes to our egos and love to reach us through them. The only time I am reminded to be wary of serving my ego is via my spiritual readings. How do atheists deal with this? how are they motivated to be humble if they acknowledge no greater knowledge than themselves (the human race)?

I believe that a conscience power greater than ourselves and God may be intertwined. Like someone posted in the 'Religion' thread #1 there are many examples of guidelines in the Bible of rules (for example, the storage of food) that were laid down before any knowledge of bacteria... the bible said "just do it" no explanation. Who are we to judge that our level of technology/scientific knowledge is enough to help us get through this life unscathed? I'm not saying that the Christian model is the right model... just that we should be open to the idea that there is a higher consciousness that can see more than we can see and needs us to follow advice regardless of whether it makes sense to us or not. A bit like how we tell our children to "just do it" because we understand the consequences of not doing it. We expect our children to have faith in us without explanation. It just seems to me that we are often too prideful of our knowledge and abilities.

[paradise lost]

You mean whites? I don't know what race you are Bath...?

One doesn't have to believe in a "higher knowledge" to understand one's own knowledge is partial and lacking. There are many things which aren't known. You don't have to think everything that is known is all that there is to be known! Atheists don't believe that humans know everything, they just don't believe in a god that knows everything either.

The bible was written by people. Yes, God may have instructed people not to do x, y and z in order to keep them safe, but cause and effect is not dificult to determine. How many people need to die after eating too-long-dead meat before you realise it's a bad idea? We were not there when the bible was written, many religious books with common sense could be the documentation of a long oral tradition of education of information learned through trial and error. Most animals have instinct to protect them. In the subversion of instinct brought on my civilisation (which demands we ignore some instincts in order to allow it to run smoothly) we might well have needed to write such instinctual knowledge down before it left us.

I would not say "just do it" to my child because i don't believe it fosters a sense of natural curiosity and a love of learning. I would always explain my requests, so i don't know about that bit. I have to admit i feel a bit saddened with the idea that humanity can only recognise it's own failings under assumed scrutiny by and comparison to some higher being. It makes me think of children who will misbehave as soon as the teacher leaves the room. Some kids (i was one of them) behaved whether the teacher was there or not.

Bx

[Bathsheba]

I'm of the "human" race Bec I know I know you all thought was some space cadet from some distance universe :P

Regarding telling our children what to do for their own good: I agree that where possible it is a good idea (to explain) but it is not always possible, especially with the very young. Even after explanation many children will just do what they want to anyhow because they don't believe you. I'm sure most parents feel this frustration. And yes I also was a good kid even when the teacher left the room LOL but many aren't. And why should they? Why should they follow our definition of what is "right" if there is no higher authority then why the hell can't they do as they please? Who decided what is right anyhow?

[paradise lost]

"human" is a species, "caucasian" is a race. Sorry for the confusion.

Bx

[Bathsheba]

I was speaking in broad terms... have often heard the term "human race". I guess it's a misnomer?

I guess what I am trying to say is that there are rules that man knows he must follow that man himself did not devise. I of course mean mankind. We do not follow these rules because they always benefit us, we often follow rules that inconvenience us but which we know are The Right thing To Do. I just want to know where these rules came from. They often to seem to be like the laws of physics. There really seems to be more than one kind of "reality"... our reality and an "ideal reality". Some of us try to ignore anything beyond our own reality... but anyone who has a conscience I think feels that greater reality pressing on them everyday as we make a thousand decisions about what is 'right' and 'wrong' each day.

[paradise lost]

If you know right from wrong does it matter who first told you what is right?

If an atheist behaves well does it matter that it is his conscience and not a bible which directs him to do so?

Bx

ETA - what i mean is, if you believe in God you believe the bible is from him, but if you don't believe in god, you believe it is from men, from mankind. So following it makes no sense. Without the faith it doesn't matter. But the faith isn't intrinsic to the behaviour.

[Bathsheba]

Ah but this "conscience" thing.... where does that come from? How come most of us seem to know innately what is wrong and what is right? What dictates the rules of what is "fair". When two kids are playing a game and one cheats they BOTH know that one of them has chosen to play unfairly... this isn't something that an adult needs to teach a child. Even a child raised by the worst parents understands "fairness" even if he chooses not to practice it. Mankind did not devise "fairness" in itself only some of the rules pertaining to it's use. I think it's one of many rules that are above and beyond the facts of man's behaviour. It's a law we didn't make but which we are compelled to follow.

ETA: I just found C.S Lewis' take on atheism: he reckons it's too simple (although he used to be one): "If the whole universe has no meaning then we should have never found out it has no meaning: just as, if there was no light in the universe, and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. "Dark" would be a word without meaning".