Theism= Thought Addiction

[New Age United]

Government is just as important as religion in the fact that every civilisation ever has had a definition of and/or. As this is shown to be true across most of humans developed history then it is wise to draw the conclusion that they are an extension or manifestation of biological hierarchy. I'm not trying to be rude here, but brushing either of them to the side so readily shows a lack of understanding on human history.



See I have this countered already, we are going over old ground. If buckteeth were advantageous to human survival then we would see more buckteeth, since we don't lets assume it's a low rate variation. If you're going to force breed something then sure, changes may occur. Problem I have with this is you are actually trying to apply that to all humans/history using one specific religion in one specific time. Do you really think all religions have been systematically wiping out none believers across all of humanity.. for the sole purpose of breading ''religious'' people who can't ''think for themselves''. If you suggest that you are extremely delusional. More to the point, even if you were right then my simple answer would be ''the strongest survived''.. in this case, religious people. Strongest isn't just about physicality and surviving isn't just about your definition of what should survive. It's harder to survive alone, cooperation has been shown across most of human history, if the cooperation comes in the form of religion yet increases the survival of the species, guess what gets selected?. I don't think you've accounted for the cultural benefits/effects on evolution, you think to singularly. You also speak oblivious to hindsight and from a position of extreme comfort, science back then knew less and people also died in awefull ways on top of living in very bad conditions. Something had to be done to make some peace with that, but you don't seem to have the empathy at this point to relate to this, or else you would see religion in another light.



Again you pick the most rare and extreme people as a means to paint all with the same brush. It's truly ignorant. It's also highly insulting to schizophrenics on a number of levels, I'm not using this to gain any moral high ground, just trying to make you see how blinded by biasness you've become.

''So what if we don't actually know what happens after death''

I hope you consider what I'm about to write here. Have you ever been to the edge of nothingness?, where you truly contemplate eternal darkness. It is a terrifying place to visit, a one that may even have the potential to send a person crazy, most certainly able to send them into the realms of extreme anxiety. This is bad enough.. and this is the reason a lot of people never go near it. I truly believe a lot of people don't have the mental/emotional resilience to spend much time in this realm at all (I seriously mean no offence by this). Some could learn it no doubt.. but I beleive many are simply limited in this area of life much the same way some people are academically limited, physically limited or what ever else. Essentially, no amount of food is going to make you grow 7 foot tall if it isn't in your dna. For people limited in the mental capacity of dealing with death, religion is a band aid at the very least. That is, keeping an open mind in that an after life may exist.

I've spent more time than is healthy visiting that cliff edge. The conclusion I drew is that if no after life exists and we goto eternal darkness, then our children and children's children are going the same way. Eventually the planet will end, maybe we get off, maybe not.. but one day, man kind will also end. Since we all go to nothingness, then eventually our very existence as a specie will not matter. Theirs NO POINT in life. So you take that conclusion literally one of two ways. If theirs no point then why follow the rules and why be good, why not go and do all the crimes and darkest desires of a human, why not. Other way this pans out, if theirs no point, then what's the point of acting out those bad desires... they won't mean anything. Why do anything from this point, it has no meaning?.. I might as well kill myself but theirs also no point in that?.. I'll just lie here and do nothing, eventualy dying of thirst.

What stopped me from taking those conclusions literally (and that would be the logical thing to do if you are a true atheist) was instinct. Self preserving instinct at that (includes reproduction). Go do bad things or live a selfish life sure... but I'll end up in jail and that won't be much fun. Kill myself before I get to jail?.. well sure but I'm instinctively scared to die.

Is this the mental space you would like adolescence/young adults, the insane, depressed or otherwise potentially ''hindered fear of death'' people to visit?. I don't think you've understood me if so. You don't just ''teach'' people to handle the fear and conclusions drawn by true atheism.

Finally we arrive at the other end of the spectrum. Strip people of all belief and should they have no fear of death, the conclusions of true atheism will result in violence of the same magnitude as a ''schizophrenic believer''. You should understand, those who no longer believe in religion are now on track to understanding the conclusion of atheism. I hope they don't get there, it serves no good.



Let me ask you a personal thing. My Gran occasionally mentions that her dead son communicates with her late in the night. I personally have never experienced this kind of thing so I assign it to the bucket of ''never happened to me but it could be possible''. I typically just nod along when she speaks of this. For the sake of argument, lets agree it is categorically untrue, no ghosts exist 100% proven. She does not offend me or other family by beleiving this and she does not hurt anybody by beleiving it. With the context that she hurts nobody to beleive this, what purpose does it serve to make her understand that she is not hearing her sons voice?.

What Daleke said was not offensive to me in any way he was simply trying to make a point. I was dead for billions of years and it didn't phase me in the slightest, it's just like sleep, lose of consciousness, not even black, no Eternity absolute nothingness, yes life is pointless, there is nothing important in this world, nothing really matters. Is it ok if there is no point? is it ok just to be alive in this beautiful paradise?

 

[Flowki]

What Daleke said was not offensive to me in any way he was simply trying to make a point.

Using a mental illness in such a stereotypical and derogative manner is a questionable form of debate. I'm not about to demand you into feeling offended though, you have your opinion.

I was dead for billions of years and it didn't phase me in the slightest, it's just like sleep, lose of consciousness, not even black, no Eternity absolute nothingness,

I assume you are pointing toward the time before you were born?. I'm not being a dick but if so, you can't really be considered dead unless you were once alive. Maybe it makes a difference, It might well phase you.

yes life is pointless, there is nothing important in this world, nothing really matters. Is it ok if there is no point? is it ok just to be alive in this beautiful paradise?

I tend to think of harder leaning atheist believers these days as the ''cool kids'' along the line of anti parent, anti school or anti establishment. They claim to detest said group but don't have the guts to leave.. they just protest for attention yet stay within the safe boundaries of society. The same applies to the current trendy anti religion atheists. They look down on religion yet refuse to live as if they believe in true atheism... they are clearly not people acting as if life is pointless. On the simplest level, if they were, why would they have a problem with religion?. If religion kills people, who cares?, religion is pointless but also life and thus death is pointless, so who cares?. Such ''Atheists'' do care but are at that anti-religious adolescence stage in the context of processing the ultimate life question.

As you also claim, life and everything in it is pointless, asserted as fact. But then you say ''is it ok just to be alive in this beautiful paradise?''. You don't attach words such as ''beautiful'' and ''paradise'' to something that is pointless. You simply do not go through life thinking it is pointless yet come out with words like that. People who spend a small amount of time going through life truly believing it is pointless have an astronomical chance of ending up dead, some form of suicide or self sabotage. Those who pretend or naively believe in true atheism are a walking contradiction for as long as they choose to par take in ''pointless'' life. This leads to a hilarious conclusion, other than the irony of atheists pointing out contradictions in religion.

If you believe in religion, the take home message is that it attempts to morally ground you, pushes you to live a better life and offers access to an after life if you do a good job. If you believe in true atheism, you will kill yourself.

Logic will take you to true atheism, instinct stops you staying there. Only the mentally sick (such as depression) can bypass instinct in this way, one only hopes they are not in the realm of true atheism at that point.

Do you know what is shown to demote instinct via enxiety and stress?, believing in true atheism. So, it would seem logic and atheism don't play well together unattended, while instinct is the watchful force of ''life is not pointless''. What is instinct?, we can start with that as it's a constant over sight. My personal take is that instead of people saying they are atheist, the correct term should be ''I am instinctive''. Atheism I would quntify as the arsehole of negativity, not the place to be if you feel like shit.

Sorry to ramble but I've just had a thought. We have no proof of an after life, yet we do have proof that having a beleif can significantly lower stress levels, increasing life. We have proof that we die, we also have proof that true atheism increases stress levels and the chance of dying. Apply logic to this for a second, betting on religion is the clear winner out of the two.

Maybe add another horse (instinct) to the race. This is what I actually believe in. In a nutshell the purpose of instinct is to reproduce. So you do that. Since that was important according to instinct, take care of offspring is the next logical step. How do you do that?, raise them, that would mean provide and care for , cooperate with others, ensure they have a chance to also instinctively reproduce. It seems like a productive way to live on a belief system that is right in front of your eyes, more proof of it than religion and more productive than the pointlessness assertions of atheism.

True atheism isn't a belief system that can objectively be lived out, instinct will stop you succeeding, yet you will die if you do succeed. It would not suprise me if atheism as a word eventually morphs into a descriptive medical/psychological term in the realms of a condition or effect.

 

[New Age United]

Using a mental illness in such a stereotypical and derogative manner is a questionable form of debate. I'm not about to demand you into feeling offended though, you have your opinion.



I assume you are pointing toward the time before you were born?. I'm not being a dick but if so, you can't really be considered dead unless you were once alive. Maybe it makes a difference, It might well phase you.



I tend to think of harder leaning atheist believers these days as the ''cool kids'' along the line of anti parent, anti school or anti establishment. They claim to detest said group but don't have the guts to leave.. they just protest for attention yet stay within the safe boundaries of society. The same applies to the current trendy anti religion atheists. They look down on religion yet refuse to live as if they believe in true atheism... they are clearly not people acting as if life is pointless. On the simplest level, if they were, why would they have a problem with religion?. If religion kills people, who cares?, religion is pointless but also life and thus death is pointless, so who cares?. Such ''Atheists'' do care but are at that anti-religious adolescence stage in the context of processing the ultimate life question.

As you also claim, life and everything in it is pointless, asserted as fact. But then you say ''is it ok just to be alive in this beautiful paradise?''. You don't attach words such as ''beautiful'' and ''paradise'' to something that is pointless. You simply do not go through life thinking it is pointless yet come out with words like that. People who spend a small amount of time going through life truly believing it is pointless have an astronomical chance of ending up dead, some form of suicide or self sabotage. Those who pretend or naively believe in true atheism are a walking contradiction for as long as they choose to par take in ''pointless'' life. This leads to a hilarious conclusion, other than the irony of atheists pointing out contradictions in religion.

If you believe in religion, the take home message is that it attempts to morally ground you, pushes you to live a better life and offers access to an after life if you do a good job. If you believe in true atheism, you will kill yourself.

Logic will take you to true atheism, instinct stops you staying there. Only the mentally sick (such as depression) can bypass instinct in this way, one only hopes they are not in the realm of true atheism at that point.

Do you know what is shown to demote instinct via enxiety and stress?, believing in true atheism. So, it would seem logic and atheism don't play well together unattended, while instinct is the watchful force of ''life is not pointless''. What is instinct?, we can start with that as it's a constant over sight. My personal take is that instead of people saying they are atheist, the correct term should be ''I am instinctive''. Atheism I would quntify as the arsehole of negativity, not the place to be if you feel like shit.

Sorry to ramble but I've just had a thought. We have no proof of an after life, yet we do have proof that having a beleif can significantly lower stress levels, increasing life. We have proof that we die, we also have proof that true atheism increases stress levels and the chance of dying. Apply logic to this for a second, betting on religion is the clear winner out of the two.

Maybe add another horse (instinct) to the race. This is what I actually believe in. In a nutshell the purpose of instinct is to reproduce. So you do that. Since that was important according to instinct, take care of offspring is the next logical step. How do you do that?, raise them, that would mean provide and care for , cooperate with others, ensure they have a chance to also instinctively reproduce. It seems like a productive way to live on a belief system that is right in front of your eyes, more proof of it than religion and more productive than the pointlessness assertions of atheism.

True atheism isn't a belief system that can objectively be lived out, instinct will stop you succeeding, yet you will die if you do succeed. It would not suprise me if atheism as a word eventually morphs into a descriptive medical/psychological term in the realms of a condition or effect.

You have some great insights, but "beauty" and "paradise" are devoid of purpose and meaning, the next time you observe nature ask yourself, is there any meaning to its beauty, or is it just beautiful as it is, just observe, meaning exists only in the mind.

And death is non existence not dependent on having already lived, I "believe" that death is no different than sleep, it is only the logic in your own mind that can differentiate between the two.

And when I say life is pointless, I'm not saying that we should believe so, we of course have the instinct to survive, but to think objectively on the matter you should realize that any meaning or purpose you put on life is a construct of the mind, meaning and purpose have no real existence, out there, beyond the mind.

 

[Flowki]

You have some great insights, but "beauty" and "paradise" are devoid of purpose and meaning, the next time you observe nature ask yourself, is there any meaning to its beauty, or is it just beautiful as it is, just observe, meaning exists only in the mind.

And death is non existence not dependent on having already lived, I "believe" that death is no different than sleep, it is only the logic in your own mind that can differentiate between the two.

What you are essentially chipping at is if conciousness has any point. Conciousness is one thing, one entity, it can only do one thing, give us conciousness. To expect any more than that is asking the moon to do the job of the sun, then call it pointless for not being able to. We know what the moon does and we know what the sun does, but we didn't always. I'd like to think we are in that realm in regards to conciousness. Maybe we have no afterlife but that doesn't mean we have no point, perhaps the self determined goal is toward living for ever. Sure that's us lot fucked.. but at-least we serve the point of aiding the species survive so that our descendants may live for ever. It's a very tangible reason for us to care. Why would one want to live for ever?. Well, why would you not want to live for ever in a world where you define what is beautiful?. I don't see any better ideas.