Hhmmm... perhaps I am not understanding exactly what you're saying but I'm having a little difficulty with a common denomination that has exclusions.Belindi wrote: ↑May 27th, 2023, 5:11 amI agree, Lucky, and I want to continue to examine existence from where you left off at the point that existence includes both existence in time and place, and existence in minds.LuckyR wrote: ↑May 27th, 2023, 3:28 amThis thread (and most of the arguments it contains) suffers from using terminology such as "belief" and "exists". These terms have well appreciated meanings when addressing the objective. I am holding an apple, does this apple exist? If you can see this apple, do you believe in the apple? Everyone agrees on the meaning of the ideas involved. OTOH when addressing the inter-subjective, such as gods, corporations, countries and money those terms lose their traditional meanings.rainchild wrote: ↑May 26th, 2023, 10:57 pm In what sense is atheism "not logical"? Disbelief in gods is not a self-contradictory position. Neither does it entail the denial of any evident truth, for the simple reason that gods are invisible, intangible, and non-physical--and can therefore not be evident. Never mind the fact that theism lacks any evidence in its favor--it lacks even a coherent account of the nature of objective evidence for a deity, and how any finite effect could constitute evidence for a being of actually infinite power and infinite knowledge.
I submit that the claim that "atheism is illogical" makes no sense.
Apple corporation, most lay folk would agree "exists", yet no one can see it. It isn't the campus in Cupertino. It isn't it's board of directors or shareholders. If the campus burned to the ground, Apple corp would still exist. If all of it's board of directors died, it would still exist. It exists within the minds of just about everyone on planet earth, yet corporations can cease to exist the moment a large subset of believers disbelieve in it's existance. Just ask Bernie Madoff. Similarly if you asked anyone on planet earth in 1989 if the USSR "exists", they would have looked at you as if you had two heads, of course it existed. Yet three years later it ceased to exist.
If you asked a citizen of ancient Egypt does god exist? He could point to a physical god, since Pharaoh was the personification of god on earth. No one can argue that Pharaoh "existed", objectively. But Pharaoh as a god existed inter-subjectively, not objectively. And since no one currently believes in the ancient Egyptian religion, their gods no longer "exist", since the inter-subjective "exist" solely in the minds of large groups of humans.
The common denonimator of existence and space-time and existence in minds is experience. Experience of course excludes inanimate things such as rocks and computers which go into the future wholly determined by their histories.
It's existentially important to recognise and honour experience as pertaining to living things, because AI is now an existential danger.
Atheism is not Logical
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Atheism is not Logical
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8265
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Atheism is not Logical
Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑May 27th, 2023, 1:44 pm So, just confirming, do concepts like courtesy or arithmetic also exist in that way too?
I agree that concepts cannot exist without being experienced, although that experience is also a non-physical thing; concepts are experienced only in a mental way, I think. But yes, I agree.Belindi wrote: ↑May 27th, 2023, 2:59 pm Yes, I think so. Courtesy, for instance, for me brings to my memory certain actual experiences I've had or that others have told me about and these memories are as concrete as the expressions on the courteous person's face. I suppose it's much the same for others. It would be interesting to find out.
The concept of arithmetic also reminds me of happenings such as a school classroom and so on. Related to arithmetic is the concept of 33, and 5, and seventeen which appeal to me. I suppose many others have more intellectual memories of number, and arithmetic. I think concepts could not exist unless they were experienced. Don't you agree?
Is it an exclusion if experience simply doesn't apply to "rocks and computers", because they cannot experience experience? I think this is what Belindi meant?
"Who cares, wins"
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: Atheism is not Logical
Thank you Pattern -chaser, that's what I mean.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑May 28th, 2023, 7:12 amPattern-chaser wrote: ↑May 27th, 2023, 1:44 pm So, just confirming, do concepts like courtesy or arithmetic also exist in that way too?I agree that concepts cannot exist without being experienced, although that experience is also a non-physical thing; concepts are experienced only in a mental way, I think. But yes, I agree.Belindi wrote: ↑May 27th, 2023, 2:59 pm Yes, I think so. Courtesy, for instance, for me brings to my memory certain actual experiences I've had or that others have told me about and these memories are as concrete as the expressions on the courteous person's face. I suppose it's much the same for others. It would be interesting to find out.
The concept of arithmetic also reminds me of happenings such as a school classroom and so on. Related to arithmetic is the concept of 33, and 5, and seventeen which appeal to me. I suppose many others have more intellectual memories of number, and arithmetic. I think concepts could not exist unless they were experienced. Don't you agree?
Is it an exclusion if experience simply doesn't apply to "rocks and computers", because they cannot experience experience? I think this is what Belindi meant?
-
- Posts: 199
- Joined: April 28th, 2008, 11:27 pm
Re: Atheism is not Logical
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Atheism is not Logical
Thanks, I suspected I was misunderstanding something. Carry on...Belindi wrote: ↑May 28th, 2023, 1:26 pmThank you Pattern -chaser, that's what I mean.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑May 28th, 2023, 7:12 amPattern-chaser wrote: ↑May 27th, 2023, 1:44 pm So, just confirming, do concepts like courtesy or arithmetic also exist in that way too?I agree that concepts cannot exist without being experienced, although that experience is also a non-physical thing; concepts are experienced only in a mental way, I think. But yes, I agree.Belindi wrote: ↑May 27th, 2023, 2:59 pm Yes, I think so. Courtesy, for instance, for me brings to my memory certain actual experiences I've had or that others have told me about and these memories are as concrete as the expressions on the courteous person's face. I suppose it's much the same for others. It would be interesting to find out.
The concept of arithmetic also reminds me of happenings such as a school classroom and so on. Related to arithmetic is the concept of 33, and 5, and seventeen which appeal to me. I suppose many others have more intellectual memories of number, and arithmetic. I think concepts could not exist unless they were experienced. Don't you agree?
Is it an exclusion if experience simply doesn't apply to "rocks and computers", because they cannot experience experience? I think this is what Belindi meant?
- Newme
- Posts: 1401
- Joined: December 13th, 2011, 1:21 am
Re: Atheism is not Logical
All babies see their parents (or caregivers) as Gods. THAT is the default. Gradually, we grow to see that no, they are not gods, but maybe other authorities (leaders/friends/mentors) are as gods. But inevitably, all imperfect people let us down so we come to realize no human being can be trusted as if they’re infallible gods. Then, ideally, we look higher - to higher values. That’s pretty much what God is - the highest GOoD.
Paul Tillich defined god as “one’s ultimate concern” - that which you worship or prioritize above all… not in word, but in deed. Some attach myths, some use logic maybe with mental gymnastics. As imperfect people, we cannot help but involve imperfection with our highest ideals or priorities. So this may be why we have the symbolic example for us to follow of Jacob wrestling (his ideas of) God, so then was renamed Israel.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: Atheism is not Logical
I think the first thing is for babies to see their parents as sources of sustenance.Newme wrote: ↑May 29th, 2023, 1:04 pmAll babies see their parents (or caregivers) as Gods. THAT is the default. Gradually, we grow to see that no, they are not gods, but maybe other authorities (leaders/friends/mentors) are as gods. But inevitably, all imperfect people let us down so we come to realize no human being can be trusted as if they’re infallible gods. Then, ideally, we look higher - to higher values. That’s pretty much what God is - the highest GOoD.
Paul Tillich defined god as “one’s ultimate concern” - that which you worship or prioritize above all… not in word, but in deed. Some attach myths, some use logic maybe with mental gymnastics. As imperfect people, we cannot help but involve imperfection with our highest ideals or priorities. So this may be why we have the symbolic example for us to follow of Jacob wrestling (his ideas of) God, so then was renamed Israel.
The idea of "god" is something they are forced to learn. They are taught by parents to obey with either the implicit or explicit withdrawal of privileges and rewards, to this degree parents are seen as gods and children obey. The Christian god is pretty much the same idea. be good or go to hell. Not really a care giver, except in the most brutal way.
I utterly reject the implication in the sentence "That’s pretty much what God is - the highest GOoD." in the same way that I feel DOG and GOD are spelled backward is of no importance or relevance. These rather childish observations might work in English, I wonder if it is true of other languages?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Atheism is not Logical
Actually the first religions were animistic not theistic, thus there is no basis to theorize that theism is intrinsic to humans (or what you referred to as the "default").Newme wrote: ↑May 29th, 2023, 1:04 pmAll babies see their parents (or caregivers) as Gods. THAT is the default. Gradually, we grow to see that no, they are not gods, but maybe other authorities (leaders/friends/mentors) are as gods. But inevitably, all imperfect people let us down so we come to realize no human being can be trusted as if they’re infallible gods. Then, ideally, we look higher - to higher values. That’s pretty much what God is - the highest GOoD.
Paul Tillich defined god as “one’s ultimate concern” - that which you worship or prioritize above all… not in word, but in deed. Some attach myths, some use logic maybe with mental gymnastics. As imperfect people, we cannot help but involve imperfection with our highest ideals or priorities. So this may be why we have the symbolic example for us to follow of Jacob wrestling (his ideas of) God, so then was renamed Israel.
-
- Posts: 199
- Joined: April 28th, 2008, 11:27 pm
Re: Atheism is not Logical
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8265
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Atheism is not Logical
Sorry, but this post doesn't seem to work. You reject a "stance" in humans, because human babies can't entertain a "stance"? The grown-ups can, though...
"Who cares, wins"
-
- Posts: 199
- Joined: April 28th, 2008, 11:27 pm
Re: Atheism is not Logical
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8265
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Atheism is not Logical
Now that you've clarified your intended meaning. You forgot to offer enough context for me, and quite likely for others too. Your initial statement (top) seems to be opposing a "default stance" in humans, that begins at birth.
"Who cares, wins"
- Stoppelmann
- Premium Member
- Posts: 847
- Joined: December 14th, 2022, 2:01 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Alan Watts
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Atheism is not Logical
Animism is often considered one of the earliest forms of religious belief, but on closer look, it may be that the ideas were more complex than we expect. It encompasses the idea that all elements of the natural world, such as animals, plants, and natural phenomena, possess spiritual essence or souls, which could mean that this ‘spirit’ is what we now call consciousness and having varying degrees. Modern science is discovering a form of sentience even in fungi and moss, which have no brains, but react to challenges in a way that has not been expected. Animism involves venerating life-forms and seeking to communicate with their ‘spirits,’ and a holistic approach to life.
Shamanism, which may have emerged from or is closely related to animism, originated in various indigenous cultures around the world and revolves around the belief that certain individuals can communicate with the spirit world or sense the interaction between different aspects of nature and their effects on humans. Shamans are said to perceive the influence of the natural world in ways that modern humans are not aware of, and to act as intermediaries between the human, natural and spiritual worlds, performing various rituals, healing practices and forms of divination.
There have been several well-received books written about personal encounters with shamans and shamanic practices. For example, "The Way of the Shaman" by Michael Harner. This book is a classic in the field of shamanism and introduces core shamanic practices based on the author's experiences with indigenous shamans from various cultures. It provides insights into shamanic journeying, healing methods, and the role of the shaman in different societies.
"The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge" by Carlos Castaneda: This book chronicles the author's encounters and apprenticeship with a Yaqui shaman named Don Juan Matus. It explores shamanic practices, altered states of consciousness, and spiritual teachings.
"The Shaman's Toolkit: Ancient Tools for Shaping the Life and World You Want to Live In" by Sandra Ingerman, a renowned shamanic practitioner, who provides practical guidance and tools for incorporating shamanic practices into daily life. It covers topics such as journeying, working with power animals, and creating sacred rituals.
"Shaman, Healer, Sage: How to Heal Yourself and Others with the Energy Medicine of the Americas" by Alberto Villoldo, a psychologist and shamanic teacher, who shares his experiences studying with indigenous shamans in the Americas. The book explores shamanic healing techniques, energy medicine, and the integration of ancient wisdom into modern life.
It is not a great distance from animism/shamanism to a belief that there is an underlying 'spirit' or consciousness, which in other forms of religion could be venerated as a god. Brahman is such a god, who resonates with himself in human beings, Atman. So, although the further development into polytheism or theism may have taken some time, the ground may have been laid in animism.
One, that home is not a place, but a feeling.
Two, that time is not measured by a clock, but by moments.
And three, that heartbeats are not heard, but felt and shared.”
― Abhysheq Shukla
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: Atheism is not Logical
Although atheists are capable of employing counter-arguments gainst abstract concepts, this ability does not define what an atheist is, nor is it a necessary quality of being atheistic
Atheism is not a stance, except in the breach of faith.
All babies are, necessarily atheistic since they cannot have a concept of god, nor can they have a belief in a thing they have not been shown.
-
- Posts: 199
- Joined: April 28th, 2008, 11:27 pm
Re: Atheism is not Logical
To define atheism simply as a lack of theistic belief is to include not only babies, but anything that isn't human, such as protons and rocks, in the class of atheists. Since this is an absurd claim, I reject the "lack of belief" definition.
What is more, the definition spuriously establishes that atheism comes more readily to human beings than theism, which makes a needless mystery out of why the vast majority of human beings have been theistic since the dawn of history.
The "babies are atheists" thesis is also irrational, since one can't rationally claim that atheism comes more readily to human beings than theism merely by definition or stipulation.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023