The choise to believe in God, with no science to help.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2006-08-29 02:43pm

Why would you need scientific facts to conclude that magic, invisible people in the sky making the world go round is a bullshit idea?

I'm of the opinion that 90% of extreme behavior done in the name of religion is a cover-up for lack of belief; it's a willful delusion.

"I'll kill all these people just to convince you (me) how strongly I beleive!"

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-08-29 02:43pm

l33telboi wrote:
What i did remove was people teaching you and showing you how to do it. I.e, the term 'scientific method' doesn't exist. But that doesn't mean that someone isn't using the method.

So, basically you're telling us that we'd need to learn it on our own. Uhm, yeah, what exactly do you think most pioneering scientists of the medieval era did? They didn't exactly have anyone teaching them either. And most of the masses around them were completely ignorant about anything scientific.

Anyone with any ounce of critical reasoning and desire to understand how things work should be able to conclude that a given religion is bullshit. Especially through trial and error.

Post by **Edi** » 2006-08-29 03:03pm

Yes, I'd still be atheist. I concluded God didn't exist when I was 7 because they said in religion class that Jesus turned water into wine by willing it and I couldn't do the same nor could anyone else I knew. Ergo, they were lying to me, which meant that everything else they said about religion was bullshit too.

It doesn't take anything more than that, and that's hardly being aware of the scientific method or facts of how everything happens in the world.

Lightning and thunder obviously come from particular type of clouds we call storm clouds, and clouds appear in the sky by coming from somewhere else driven by the wind (we can ignore cloud formation from evaporation in this context, because simplistically it does not appear much different).

The magic sky pixie doesn't enter into the picture at all with these examples.

Edi

drachefly · Post by **drachefly** » 2006-08-29 03:48pm

Make any change to me that leaves me recognizably the same person, I'll be an atheist-tending agnostic.

In a society flooded with religionists who suppress other directions, I would be more discreet, though.

Pint0 Xtreme · Post by **Pint0 Xtreme** » 2006-08-29 03:55pm

Like what others have said, it's the way you think rather than the available science that makes someone an atheist. However, that means the lack of science implies the lack of critical thinking in general. And coupled with the fact that religious institutions have this nasty habit of brainwashing kids, your likelihood of growing into a fundie increases.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2006-08-29 09:25pm

If I'd been around in roman days, I'd be one of those lip service pragmatic people, but I'd still think it was archaic and silly. Epicurus and the other greeks had laid down some pretty atheistic baseline philosophy, but even without them, I would be able to understand that gods were almost painfully imaginary. I mean come on, I'm sure imaginary friends have been popular for thousands of years, if I get that concept in my head, I can apply it to others.

I didn't have any science threaten my thought as a kid, since the school I went to taught a liberal form of christianity, so I just accepted them both. However, at age 12 I understood that heaven and hell were merely bullying from beyond the grave, by 14 when I'd tried occultism I worked out it was all autosuggestive, self-fulfilling, confirmation biased nonsense, even if I didn't have those words in my vocabulary. I don't see how a different time would've changed my path much at all, apart from paying lip service to the homicidal guys in power.

l33telboi · Post by **l33telboi** » 2006-08-29 10:57pm

One lite funny thing i noticed when reading the replies was that many of you seem to be of the opinion that the question is absurd and the answer horrendously obvious.

The only thing you seem to disagree on what that answer is.

l33telboi · Post by **l33telboi** » 2006-08-29 10:59pm

Ghetto Edit: One little thing i noticed it should read, somehow my brain malfunctioned and i wrote the swedish equivalent "lite" instead.

Coalition · Post by **Coalition** » 2006-08-30 03:51am

I would figure that there might be a god, there might not, but I would not need them. I would like to think I would do help others because it is the right thing to do, rather than needing some powerful critter to reward me for doing so. If the local deity (or its followers) sees me helping others, and chooses to thank me for it, in some subtle (or obvious) manner, I would see that as courtesy as well.

If someone only does good deeds because they expect an eternity of paradise, does that make them rather greedy? They require all of eternity and perfection in exchange for a few decades of labor? Or is religion a matter of trying to suck up to the local supernatural bully?

B5B7 · Post by **B5B7** » 2006-08-30 10:53am

l33telboi wrote:
Magnetic wrote: There you go, that seems to be the key. I wouldn't be all that surprised if, a few millenia ago, people HAD no mindset that would cause them to question. It seems as though just about every culture ended up with some sort of 'the supernatural'. In fact, I believe that the christian religion is seeing it's greatest conversions in more "third world" type countries.

However, WITH a mindset that doesn't just accept something based on faith, I agree that it would be hard to convince them of something that has no proof.
Quite possible.

But what about the possiblity that the mindset is born first when introduced to a myriad of previously established facts and examples of how those conclusions were reached through critical thinking?

I mean you would have to be the one to first invent the scientific method, in order to be able to use it. Not everybody is that smart. Are you sure you would be?

It would explain why people in the olden days, as well as people in third world countries, are so much more susceptible to religion.

I didn't know the USA was a "third world country" [or has it come through a time distortion into the modern world?]

Atheism has existed in many societies, including that of the ancient Romans and Greeks [plus they also had logical thinking].
The Norse had a pantheon of Gods, but they are not worshipped now and not believed in. If all of the Viking culture truly believed in them they would still have that belief today. However their belief weakened many hundreds of years ago - so they obviously didn't buy that their gods were real.

Of course we can not say what we as individuals would have been like, as it wouldn't have been us. However, if we assume that we are actually talking about some person who actually existed back then who has similarity to ourselves [ie a kind of stand-in] then that person may have similar beliefs to ourselves [subject to obvious limitations - their life is massively different].

OmegaGuy · Post by **OmegaGuy** » 2006-08-30 11:12am

Even if people who are atheists now would believe in God in that situation, what is he really trying to say?

Anyone would believe in anything if they didn't know any better.

l33telboi · Post by **l33telboi** » 2006-08-30 12:08pm

OmegaGuy wrote:Even if people who are atheists now would believe in God in that situation, what is he really trying to say?

Some people always seem to think there's some underlying message in what i write. Why is that? Why is it so hard to accept that i just posed a question, because i was curious as to how people would answer?

OmegaGuy wrote:Anyone would believe in anything if they didn't know any better.

So, do you think you would know better or not?

OmegaGuy · Post by **OmegaGuy** » 2006-08-30 12:27pm

I thought this was something said by 'a guy you know'.

As for me, I'm not sure. I'm already a deist, I suppose that without strong evidence against it the leap to Christianity wouldn't be out of the question.

Then again, I also would probably believe the earth was flat if I had no evidence against it and everyone else I knew believed it.

l33telboi · Post by **l33telboi** » 2006-08-30 12:59pm

OmegaGuy wrote:I thought this was something said by 'a guy you know'.

Ah, then i missunderstood you. My bad.

The guy is the kind that believes that scientist are all a part of some big old conspiracy to blurr out the truth. A real nutjob. And to think, when we were in highshcool (or the American equivalent), he was still quite normal.

Basically he was trying to convince me that without the facts, there would be no reason to not believe in God.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2006-08-30 01:06pm

l33telboi wrote:Basically he was trying to convince me that without the facts, there would be no reason to not believe in God.

Except you have to remove logical thinking too.

No reason not to != a reason to.

l33telboi · Post by **l33telboi** » 2006-08-30 01:41pm

Keevan_Colton wrote: Except you have to remove logical thinking too.

No reason not to != a reason to.

Good luck convincing him of that.

OmegaGuy · Post by **OmegaGuy** » 2006-08-30 01:44pm

l33telboi wrote:
Basically he was trying to convince me that without the facts, there would be no reason to not believe in God.

So basically what he's saying is that it takes an ignorant person to believe in God.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2006-08-30 01:47pm

l33telboi wrote:
Keevan_Colton wrote: Except you have to remove logical thinking too.

No reason not to != a reason to.
Good luck convincing him of that.

Welcome to the world of Agnostic morons. What you end up with is a world full of fuckwits with the mentality of four year olds.

I suggest considering Dawkins musings on orbital teapots.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2006-08-30 01:49pm

OmegaGuy wrote:
l33telboi wrote:
Basically he was trying to convince me that without the facts, there would be no reason to not believe in God.
So basically what he's saying is that it takes an ignorant person to believe in God.

Admittedly, that person might go for Mithras, Thor, Zeus, Odin, Anasi, the fucking Easter Bunny or possibly the Nesquick Bunny...rather than the Judeo Christian god, since to be blunt, they're all on a level footing in that world.

Haruko · Post by **Haruko** » 2006-08-30 08:04pm

Keevan_Colton wrote:I suggest considering Dawkins musings on orbital teapots.

I used that hypothesis when teasing my agnostic friend, calling him arrogant for not taking the claim seriously, and for obviously thinking he must know everything about the world to simply dismiss it out of hand.

I would still be an atheist without the backing of science. I became irreligious quite young, deciding one night that prayer doesn't work and, along with it, that God doesn't exist. I was Christian in the sense that I believed in its God and prayed, but I wasn't devoutly religious. Many Christians today would call me arrogant based on the reason I became irreligious. But. . .

I was constantly assured that God answers prayers, and my prayers were rarely, if ever, ridiculous. My favorite prayer asked for a good day, or more good fortune. That aside, though. . .
I was quite young and much more naive. More recently, my critical thinking better developed, I would have certainly become agnostic or even a theist had the evidence indicated a deity.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2006-08-30 08:54pm

Zadius wrote:
l33telboi wrote:
Zadius wrote:If, in this hypothetical, all you have taken from me is facts, then yes, I'd still come to the same conclusion because my conclusion is based on the logic that explaining unknowns with god is fallacious. We don't have to have an alternate explanation to dismiss the God hypothesis.

On the other hand, if I was never taught to think critically I might believe all kinds of nonsense, but that's hardly profound.
No need to make the question any more complex then it is.

How would you turn out, in a religious respect, if you were born in the society i described. Hardcore fundie, religious but not overly so, atheist?
As I just explained, if I was born into a society where I was ignorant of everything, including logical thinking, I'm sure I'd end up believing whatever the local population believed.

Or even more interesting; if you were born into a world that critical thinking was not taught to you, BUT there was no organized religeon to 'fill the gaps' would you still jump to the conclusion that there was a supernatural being?

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2006-08-30 09:06pm

Knife wrote:Or even more interesting; if you were born into a world that critical thinking was not taught to you, BUT there was no organized religeon to 'fill the gaps' would you still jump to the conclusion that there was a supernatural being?

Isn't that how ancient man got around to worshipping the Sun?

Zadius · Post by **Zadius** » 2006-08-30 10:02pm

Knife wrote:
Zadius wrote:As I just explained, if I was born into a society where I was ignorant of everything, including logical thinking, I'm sure I'd end up believing whatever the local population believed.
Or even more interesting; if you were born into a world that critical thinking was not taught to you, BUT there was no organized religeon to 'fill the gaps' would you still jump to the conclusion that there was a supernatural being?

That's what I was getting at when I made this post:

Zadius wrote:When I said earlier that I'd end up believing whatever the locals did, that would have been the result of them 'teaching' me.

If my mind was a "clean slate" free of the teachings of others, I would never have come up with the idea of god in the first place.

In other words, the only way I'd end up believing in something supernatural is if I'd effectively been brainwashed or otherwise had my critical faculties suppressed.

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2006-08-30 10:17pm

Basically he was trying to convince me that without the facts, there would be no reason to not believe in God.

Yeah, gosh darn those facts. Facts are Satan's work you know.

Holy fuck, that what this guy is really saying?

Haruko · Post by **Haruko** » 2006-08-30 10:54pm

wolveraptor wrote:Yeah, gosh darn those facts. Facts are Satan's work you know.

There's no helping one who has convinced himself that all that is said that is not of his held viewpoint is propaganda spouted from the collective tongues of Satan and His agents. I said this to a friend of mine in regards to a member at my forum who has done just that.