"I was raised an atheist"- Professor František Vyskočil

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by TheCommentator

 

Of course I read your whole post, but the point I'm making here is that believing in stuff is not a very smart thing to do.

Depends really on what you base your beliefs on though doesn't it. Blind faith isn't really my style.

I believe the way I do because I have had a number of experiences throughout my life which cannot be explained through every day science alone. These are real life physical happenings which I have seen through the power of mine or another’s will and in circumstances where it would be completely illogical to believe anything other than there is far more out there operating than that which can be proved by science as it exists today.

Yes I know my experiences will not convince you, but I simply make this point to sahow that you can have some semblance of intelligence and still believe in something other than atheism.

You must also admit that if experiencing such things are in some way reliant on the way you view the world as a whole, then you have completely closed yourself off from any such things ever actually happening to you. This in turn will only serve to validate your own viewpoint....... to yourself at least.

reply to post by 1littlewolf

I find little to argue with in your response. Only a couple of points require comment.

You must admit that there would be very few atheists who are not empiricists.

As you may be aware, I live in a different part of the world from you: a multi-religious society where Christians are a minority even when the various denominations are all counted together. Many of my fellow-countryfolk are Hindus whose concepts of deity vary wildly. To poor, simple Hindus, the gods are anthropomorphic or theriomorphic spirits with human emotions and frailties. They walk the earth and intervene directly in human affairs, demanding sacrifices and penances in exchange for the favours they grant. Hindus who have the education and leisure to think about deeper religious and spiritual matters often have a concept of divinity similar to the Spinozan one you espouse. Pantheism shades easily from belief in an actual Pantheon to belief in the essential divinity of everything that is. But beyond that, and in between, Hinduism offers many, many different conceptions of divinity.

Atheists in my country often have views that fit within the Hindu-Buddhist world-picture. They are not necessarily empirical in their views, and very few could be called scientific materialists.

People who practice Buddhism as merely an everyday world view may well be atheists, but those who take it up a few notches will surely leave the realms of atheism behind and enter into a world that is spiritual.

Actually, it's the exact opposite. 'Everyday' Buddhists are the most superstitious folk in the world, because they belong, officially, to an atheist 'faith' that offers few of the consolations people derive from religion and so must find these elsewhere. In Buddhism, there's no-one to forgive your sins and make you feel better about yourself, no-one to pray to for protection from harm, danger, misery or death, no-one to beg for favours and miracles, etc. Therefore the unsophisticated Buddhist often turns to other sources for such consolation. He may worship Hindu gods or local folk deities (many Buddhist temples in my country house shrines to such deities on their premises, a practice that goes back at least a thousand years), become a disciple of some Indian 'holy man' (or rather holy fraud) like the late Satya Sai Baba, or indulge in magical practices like astrology, shamanistic healing or necromancy. It is the more thoughtful and better-educated Buddhists who are content to accept the essential atheism of Buddhist doctrine.

Most people in my country know little about the theory of evolution and care less. Most atheists I know here (not counting Buddhists, of course) are atheists because the religion they have been taught (Hinduism, Islam or Christianity) seemed irrational or wicked to them. Very often, they'll have tried one or more of the other options available before giving up on that, too. One very close friend of mine became an atheist after being caught up in the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami. His own conduct at the time was heroic; however, he found afterwards that he could not feel respect or love towards a God who could permit such terrible destruction and suffering.

Nearly all of what I have written above applies, not only to my small country, but to most of South Asia and much of Southeast Asia, too. China has its own dynamic between faith and atheism, which is made even more complex by the existence of an atheistic state 'religion', Communism; and Japan (the world's most atheistic society by some measures) has yet another. The fact is, people who believe in a single, personal God are mostly Jews, Christians or Muslims, and in a world where the influence of the West is declining, it makes no sense to address religious topics as if only Christianity, Judaism and Islam existed – or mattered.

Hey Astyanax,

Thanks for the really thoughtful response. I live in Australia and although we do have a fair mix of other cultures here, it is still well and truly a majority white western society. As such my answers were based on my (admittedly fairly limited) exposure to Buddhists in my own country. We do though definitely have our fair share of atheists though the majority of people don't really seem to think deeply enough about anything to fall into any category other than 'unconcerned agnostic'. Though it was probably a little ethnocentric of me I usually figure that most other people here on ATS are generally from the United States.

Your answer taught me a few things and though we probably won't ever see eye to eye on many issues I've always been a big admirer of most of your posts.

Thanks again.....and also if you don't mind sharing I was wondering exactly which country you do originate form?

Good to see yet another scientist thinking for himself instead of following the herd. I honestly can't see why people still consider evolution to be the origin of life.

Nothing debunks evolution harder than good ol math. I'll demonstrate.

It would take 10^96 grains of sand to fill the entire observable universe. That's a whole lot of sand. To give you some idea of just how huge this number is, approximately one million grains of sand will fit in a single cup.

So what are the chances of the proper chemicals combining in just the right way and under the proper conditions to create the spark of life?

10^340,000,000.

It's pretty much impossible. You could stretch the timeline out to 50 trillion years and it's still impossible.

Originally posted by Jaydee055
Good to see yet another scientist thinking for himself instead of following the herd. I honestly can't see why people still consider evolution to be the origin of life.

Who claims evolution is the origin of life?

Nothing debunks evolution harder than good ol math. I'll demonstrate.

It would take 10^96 grains of sand to fill the entire observable universe. That's a whole lot of sand. To give you some idea of just how huge this number is, approximately one million grains of sand will fit in a single cup.

So what are the chances of the proper chemicals combining in just the right way and under the proper conditions to create the spark of life?

10^340,000,000.

You must have failed math, because what you are saying about grains of sand has absolutely nothing to do with the probability of chemicals combining "in the right way". That is 100% assumption. You don't know the size of the universe. You don't know the conditions on primitive earth. You don't know the mathematical probability of RNA being formed or anything else, because there is so much missing information in the equation (which I doubt you'll source or post). Even if the chance of life is 1 in a million planets, that is still enough to have plenty of life sustaining planets in our galaxy alone. You simply don't understand how HUGE the universe is. There are BILLIONS of stars in our galaxy alone. There are billions of galaxies. Even if it's 1 in a billion, the odds are in favor of millions of planets in the universe with life. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, and probably just copied it from a deceptive creationist website.

yay its an atheist everybody

That was an excellent article and read OP.

Too many scientists flounder because they are too prejudiced in their narrow-way of thinking. Many evolutionists are very closed-minded and live open no option for a higher power. Thus they create theories that fit into their already pre-conceived notion of things. When none of those theories fit, which they never do, they instead of leading themselves logically where they should be going, try to invent other and more ridiculous theories, not out of scientific honesty, but out of prejudiced narrow-views they will not let go.

This is not that type of scientist. Many scientists who have been taught and trained to believe in evolution and have had no formal raising in a belief in a God lead to logical conclusions that there must be a designer. We can see how dishonest some people are, even by comments on this thread, by people who claim he is wrong to be intellectually honest.

There is something though that I've realized a long time ago. God works at his own time-table. He will make everyone know who he is one way or another. It appears that he is soon to settle all the issues himself. And well, at that time, well then they will know.

Originally posted by SubAce
That was an excellent article and read OP.

Too many scientists flounder because they are too prejudiced in their narrow-way of thinking. Many evolutionists are very closed-minded and live open no option for a higher power. Thus they create theories that fit into their already pre-conceived notion of things. When none of those theories fit, which they never do, they instead of leading themselves logically where they should be going, try to invent other and more ridiculous theories, not out of scientific honesty, but out of prejudiced narrow-views they will not let go.

This is not that type of scientist. Many scientists who have been taught and trained to believe in evolution and have had no formal raising in a belief in a God lead to logical conclusions that there must be a designer. We can see how dishonest some people are, even by comments on this thread, by people who claim he is wrong to be intellectually honest.

There is something though that I've realized a long time ago. God works at his own time-table. He will make everyone know who he is one way or another. It appears that he is soon to settle all the issues himself. And well, at that time, well then they will know.

Those wacky "evolutionists" and their logic... Why don't they just abandon scientific rigor for awhile and believe stuff for nor reason despite having the scientific process as a guide to truth?

I dont know why you are all arguing.. The answer to everything is "42"..

Anyone who does not think so is a closed minded fundementalist.... ;-)

Originally posted by SubAce
That was an excellent article and read OP.

Too many scientists flounder because they are too prejudiced in their narrow-way of thinking. Many evolutionists are very closed-minded and live open no option for a higher power. Thus they create theories that fit into their already pre-conceived notion of things. When none of those theories fit, which they never do, they instead of leading themselves logically where they should be going, try to invent other and more ridiculous theories, not out of scientific honesty, but out of prejudiced narrow-views they will not let go.

This is not that type of scientist. Many scientists who have been taught and trained to believe in evolution and have had no formal raising in a belief in a God lead to logical conclusions that there must be a designer. We can see how dishonest some people are, even by comments on this thread, by people who claim he is wrong to be intellectually honest.

There is something though that I've realized a long time ago. God works at his own time-table. He will make everyone know who he is one way or another. It appears that he is soon to settle all the issues himself. And well, at that time, well then they will know.

You should probably know that scientists have personal beliefs just like everyone else, and it is completely separate from their work. Everything experimented on in science is based on facts. It's not "scientist A believes in god so his theory is X" or "scientist B doesn't believe in god, so his theory is Y". Personal beliefs are separate from science and in no way whatsoever effect the actual scientific work. The facts speak for themselves in science, which is why its funny when people claim that a scientist who doesn't believe in god is biased. God just has no relevance in any equations because he's not observable, testable, repeatable or falsifiable.

Another way TPTB manipulate us, religion/spiritualality isn't meant to divide people, its meant to unite and inspire deeper thinking.

Instead of fighting corruption and a police state, we argue over gays vs non-gays, religion vs atheism, black v white, nation v nation.

I dont care what religion you are Muslim,Christian,Atheist, Hindu, Jew, Buddhist, I dont give a sht if you gay or not, I dont give a sht what football team you like. We all share the same damn 99.9% dna.

Close humanities 3rd eye, and trap us into a 1 dimensional paradigm.