Posts by unshackled

207

On becoming atheist - the tug of war

by Nickolas in

perhaps, if you are a theist, you might not want to read this.

if you are nevertheless curious about how an atheist thinks, then please read on.. i don't think there are any active members of this board who have been atheists all their lives (are there?).

i think virtually all of us transitioned into non-belief from a religious beginning.

unshackled

Found this quote recently by Kenan Malik, Neurobiologist:

Invoking God at best highlights what we cannot yet explain about the physical universe, and at worst exploits that ignorance to mystify. Moral values do not come prepackaged from God, but have to be worked out by human beings through a combination of empathy, reasoning and dialogue.
This is true of believers, too: they, after all, have to decide for themselves which values in their holy books they accept and which ones they reject. And it is not God that gives meaning to our lives, but our relationships with fellow human beings and the goals and obligations that derive from them. God is at best redundant, at worst an obstruction. Why do I need him?

I have yet to read it but am looking forward to Sam Harris' latest book The Moral Landscape...coming out in paperback soon. Harris contends that the only moral framework worth talking about is one where "morally good" things pertain to increases in the "well-being of conscious creatures".

207

On becoming atheist - the tug of war

by Nickolas in

perhaps, if you are a theist, you might not want to read this.

if you are nevertheless curious about how an atheist thinks, then please read on.. i don't think there are any active members of this board who have been atheists all their lives (are there?).

i think virtually all of us transitioned into non-belief from a religious beginning.

unshackled

Star tiger...consider that in the 200 years since Darwin's incredible insight on nature, evolution has been the most scrutinized scientific theory ever. It not only has stood tall but a mountain of evidence since has continued to prove it true. If Darwin could see what we've discovered since he'd either shit his trousers or do the chicken dance.

72

New Statesman: famous atheists explain why they don't believe in God...what is Hawking saying?

by unshackled in

http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/07/god-evidence-believe-world.

found this new statesman article linked in a sam harris tweet.

it is a collection of comments on reasons for non-belief from such ones as richard dawkins, daniel dennett, sam harris, jerry coyne and stephen hawking...to name a few.. what caught my eye about the tweet was this comment by harris, his actual tweet:.

unshackled

From the article that has the believer's explain their faith, this one is particularly interesting and honest. It is by journalist Peter Hitchens, the brother of renowned atheist Christopher Hitchens. Does belief stem from a desire to want to believe? Peter seems to admit just that (italics mine)...

I believe in God because I choose to do so. I believe in the Christian faith because I prefer to do so. The existence of God offers an explanation of many of the mysteries of the universe - especially "Why is there something rather than nothing?" and the questions which follow from that. It requires our lives to have a purpose, and our actions to be measurable against a higher standard than their immediate, observable effect. Having chosen belief in a God over unbelief, I find the Christian gospels more persuasive and the Christian moral system more powerful than any other religious belief.

Does choosing and prefering to believe something make it real or true?

72

New Statesman: famous atheists explain why they don't believe in God...what is Hawking saying?

by unshackled in

http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/07/god-evidence-believe-world.

found this new statesman article linked in a sam harris tweet.

it is a collection of comments on reasons for non-belief from such ones as richard dawkins, daniel dennett, sam harris, jerry coyne and stephen hawking...to name a few.. what caught my eye about the tweet was this comment by harris, his actual tweet:.

unshackled

Shelby, thank you for the clarifications. Wasn't completely sure of what you were saying, but now have a better understanding. You should start a thread detailing the similarities of each side and the shared hypocrisy. If you already have, sorry I missed it...please post a link and I'll see what I can add to the discussion.

Bohm...thanks for your thoughts on what Harris meant. Hawkings comment left me wanting more as well, for him to elaborate. I considered it as well, and you're right, that maybe his cheek was just damn tired.

Twitch...your expansion on what Hawking's comment is excellent. (And yes, no doubt Hawking has never conferred with 45639PintofKeiths323432...LOL.) I agree that is the likely direction he was briefly alluding to. Which brings me back to Harris - if we can expand on the likely meaning of Hawking's comment, why couldn't or wouldn't he? May have been a simple, perhaps jokingly, passing comment but that doesn't seem to be Harris' style.

Harris does a frequent Q&A video which he invites the questions from readers...so I've sent him a tweet and email asking him to elaborate on what he meant. There's a Snowball's (Snowball the cat, not the winter precipation) chance in hell that it'll make the Q&A...but who knows right?

72

New Statesman: famous atheists explain why they don't believe in God...what is Hawking saying?

by unshackled in

http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/07/god-evidence-believe-world.

found this new statesman article linked in a sam harris tweet.

it is a collection of comments on reasons for non-belief from such ones as richard dawkins, daniel dennett, sam harris, jerry coyne and stephen hawking...to name a few.. what caught my eye about the tweet was this comment by harris, his actual tweet:.

unshackled

Agreed Sweeney. Certainly don't mind different thoughts and views outside of the OP...there's lots to discuss in those articles. BUT this isn't the thread to continue on where the other left off. That is horse is dead.

What I found equally as interesting as Hawking's comment, is Harris' reaction of "I have no idea what Hawking is talking about." Why do you think Harris made that comment? Simply because he would consider human behavior very much part of the science of it?

72

New Statesman: famous atheists explain why they don't believe in God...what is Hawking saying?

by unshackled in

http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/07/god-evidence-believe-world.

found this new statesman article linked in a sam harris tweet.

it is a collection of comments on reasons for non-belief from such ones as richard dawkins, daniel dennett, sam harris, jerry coyne and stephen hawking...to name a few.. what caught my eye about the tweet was this comment by harris, his actual tweet:.

unshackled

What a human can see with the naked eye and what reality is are different because we don't see all of the light bands for instance and our depth persception is limited.

Designs, this is true and viewed from the right perspective an exciting time to be alive. There is still so much to discover. I'm reading a book titled "13 Things That Don't Make Sense: The Most Baffling Scientific Mysteries of Our Time" So I've been reading up on Dark Matter and Dark Energy. As you likely know, we can only account for 4% of our universe, the other 96% has been labelled Dark Matter...we don't know what it is, but know it is there because of gravitational pull. Dark Energy applies to the unknown "cause" of the universe's expansion actually is accelerating. Previously thought that it would slow.

Point is...there is so much we indeed do not know. But that doesn't mean we can invoke "causes" that can't be proven with evidence. It really is okay to wait until all the evidence is in.

72

New Statesman: famous atheists explain why they don't believe in God...what is Hawking saying?

by unshackled in

http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/07/god-evidence-believe-world.

found this new statesman article linked in a sam harris tweet.

it is a collection of comments on reasons for non-belief from such ones as richard dawkins, daniel dennett, sam harris, jerry coyne and stephen hawking...to name a few.. what caught my eye about the tweet was this comment by harris, his actual tweet:.

unshackled

Shelby, I'm familiar with that thread you referred to but haven't read all the comments. Unfortunately, I also missed the show on Discovery.

If I follow you, you're saying atheism is no different than religious belief. And also, that the more well-known atheists argue amongst themselves. And further, that these well-known atheists like Stephen Hawking carry themselves with an air of superiority that if you don't think like them, then you're just common folk. In a nutshell, is that it?

If so, I would say the attitude of superiority may apply to some, but not all. There isn't a brush big enough to paint them all that color. I can see how some would feel Richard Dawkins can appear that way, he has a certain disadvantage of being a rather starchy, dry Brit. I wouldn't apply that to Stephen Hawking though. Christopher Hitchens? Yes, but that's what's great about him…he does it with a swagger that is infectious, IMO.

I would hope they would argue amongst themselves. That keeps each other honest, peer review and continually scrutinizing with critical thinking is the backbone of the scientific method.

As for atheism being no different than religious belief, I'll use Sam Harris' words from that article:

The most common impediment to clear thinking that a non-believer must confront is the idea that the burden of proof can be fairly placed on his shoulders: "How do you know there is no God? Can you prove it? You atheists are just as dogmatic as the fundamentalists you criticise." This is nonsense: even the devout tacitly reject thousands of gods, along with the cherished doctrines of every religion but their own. Every Christian can confidently judge the God of Zoroaster to be a creature of fiction, without first scouring the universe for evidence of his absence. Absence of evidence is all one ever needs to banish false knowledge. And bad evidence, proffered in a swoon of wishful thinking, is just as damning.

72

New Statesman: famous atheists explain why they don't believe in God...what is Hawking saying?

by unshackled in

http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/07/god-evidence-believe-world.

found this new statesman article linked in a sam harris tweet.

it is a collection of comments on reasons for non-belief from such ones as richard dawkins, daniel dennett, sam harris, jerry coyne and stephen hawking...to name a few.. what caught my eye about the tweet was this comment by harris, his actual tweet:.

unshackled

And just as I started nailing the coffin shut, Shelby resurrects the thread. I guess Miracle Max is having an off day.

**puts the loose change back**

Let me give your comment a read and I'll be back.

72

New Statesman: famous atheists explain why they don't believe in God...what is Hawking saying?

by unshackled in

http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/07/god-evidence-believe-world.

found this new statesman article linked in a sam harris tweet.

it is a collection of comments on reasons for non-belief from such ones as richard dawkins, daniel dennett, sam harris, jerry coyne and stephen hawking...to name a few.. what caught my eye about the tweet was this comment by harris, his actual tweet:.

unshackled

Thanks for your charity, Mr. Sweeney...you're a kind man. But I took this thread to Miracle Max and he said unfortunately it is not mostly dead but all dead. So there's only one thing to do...

Go through its clothes and look for loose change.

72

New Statesman: famous atheists explain why they don't believe in God...what is Hawking saying?

by unshackled in

http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/07/god-evidence-believe-world.

found this new statesman article linked in a sam harris tweet.

it is a collection of comments on reasons for non-belief from such ones as richard dawkins, daniel dennett, sam harris, jerry coyne and stephen hawking...to name a few.. what caught my eye about the tweet was this comment by harris, his actual tweet:.

unshackled

faith being based on human behavior (which somehow he manages to exclude from science)

Which would likely be part of what confused Harris, being his expertise is in neuroscience and wouldn't make the same exclusion. Especially the "free will" reference, which I believe he touches on in his book The Moral Landscape. Regardless, I found the comment from Hawking lacking compared to the other comments, such as this one by Kenan Malik, neurobiologist (italics mine):

"Invoking God at best highlights what we cannot yet explain about the physical universe, and at worst exploits that ignorance to mystify. Moral values do not come prepackaged from God, but have to be worked out by human beings through a combination of empathy, reasoning and dialogue.

This is true of believers, too: they, after all, have to decide for themselves which values in their holy books they accept and which ones they reject. And it is not God that gives meaning to our lives, but our relationships with fellow human beings and the goals and obligations that derive from them. God is at best redundant, at worst an obstruction. Why do I need him?"