hey guys what do you think of this?
-
Actually, the impression an atheist can get from exposure to scientific truths, can be very spiritual (Richard Dawkin's words).
Yes, their words and research may contain spiritual truth. But there is no spiritualism in the atheists. They are materialists.
Dont just dismiss atheists reasoning, u can learn a lot from them ) Lots of them are 'clean slates', in contrary to most religious people who are bigotted and brain washed.
Yes, we all can benefit maaaaaaaaany from them. For example I can create a bedtime story which is inspired from the theory of human evolution ;D
Yes, the highly genius atheists (just like any educated genius people, since religious fanatics are far away from being intelligent) are not dangerous.
But atheists on Yahoo Answers make no difference from Sunnis in sunniforum PTake care, it was nice to have briefly communicated with u, ur cool )
Are you (in this quote) talking to me?
-
Shalom Aleikhem ,
If you did not intend to refute anything I've said, you should not have dedicated your entire post in criticizing me. It makes very little sense. It's like saying " Sorry, I am not here for name calling but you are a son of a b*tch!! ".
Is commenting you wrong? I didn't say my post to you was a refutation either. Just enjoy freedom of expression. peace
A I set this username BEFORE I stopped believing. So for obvious reason, my username may reflect my philosophical inclination at the time I made my account.
Just contact the moderator to change your nickname since you believe that God is useless.
B A belief in God and Science or evolution are not necessarily mutually exclusive. A person believing in God does not necessarily refuse to accept Science/Evolution/Big Bang. In the same way, a person who accepts science does not necessarily reject God. So I don't see why you even thought about those options. I do not necessarily need an alternative of God when I stop believing in God. Much like we don't look for alternative of cancer when we get rid of cancer in a cancer patient.
I didn't say all science lovers reject the existence of God.
Another irrational part of what you said is that you are assuming things about me. To be an atheist you do not have to be a believer of philosophical naturalism. The only thing you must do is not believe that there is a God. Then you can go on and believe in infinite number of supernatural things. As long as you are not believing in a "God/Goddess", you are an atheist.
Because atheists become materialists when it comes to proving the existence of God. peace
Just like all Muslims are terrorists and all Muslims are illiterate bigots? No, I do not believe that all Muslims are that way. I am just giving you an idea of how irrational and asinine your assertions are. In my case, I never believed in a traditional spirit even when I was a Muslim. Now, spiritualism, without you defining what that is, I don't know if I believe in that or not.
Spritualism = Immaterialism
The main reason why atheists reject God is because they don't see, hear or physically feel God. So that's why I said they lack spiritualism.And here is a link for you to learn more about philosophical naturalism (click me). I think I am probably into methodological naturalism. But in any case, you shouldn't act like you have provided some kind of evidence for the existence of supernatural things/beings and I am rejecting that. If you can prove that, I will believe it. It is that simple. But until the time you actually come up with evidence, please stop making it sound like one is stupid/lesser for not readily accepting your unfounded belief in immaterial-supernatural things.
The existence of God, as well as inexistence of God has been proven for a countless time.
Unfortunately the people who prove the existence of God don't prove it the way the materialists people expect because God cannot be seen.I never said it does, at least not in that post. I was merely pointing out a general trend I have seen and these researches complement my observation. There are other studies too where it was demonstrated that an average atheist in general knows more about religion than an average religious person. There are many such studies that complement the observation that I was talking about. I never said that believing in Gods/Goddesses will worsen your education, please don't put words in my mouth.
No I wasn't putting words in your mouth. The phrase "Having faith in God does not affect or worsen education" was just a statement. The atheists who are smart are smart not because of their atheism, but because of their willing to learn, analyse and rationalize. The same goes with theists.
Anyway let's see who will be the victors and losers on JD. Ooops sorry you disbelieve and reject this
-
Shalom Aleikhem,
Is commenting you wrong? I didn't say my post to you was a refutation either. Just enjoy freedom of expression. peace
I never said commenting on something I said is wrong. I have no problem with your freedom of expression either. You started your post stating that you have no intentions of refuting me but then went on criticizing me. I was merely pointing out the inherent lack of logical consistency in your post. I even provided an example so that you better understand how silly you sounded when your opening line was rendered a lie due to what followed.
Just contact the moderator to change your nickname since you believe that God is useless.
I think I am fine with my username. Not to mention that a lot of people already associate this username with me. And, on top of all that, I don't mind having fictional characters in my username. And, as long as I am fine, you don't have to worry.
I didn't say all science lovers reject the existence of God.
In that case, in the future, please refrain from suggesting irrational meaningless things based on false dichotomy. Is it not apparent to you that you are only saying that now that I have called you on your fallacy?
Because atheists become materialists when it comes to proving the existence of God. peace
It seems like you didn't get my point when I said all Muslims are terrorists in my last post. Let me put it in a different way so that you may understand what I am talking about. Please, for the love of your God, stop that over generalizing thing. The only thing you can be certain of when it comes to an atheist is that he/she doesn't believe in the theistic claim that there are Gods/Goddesses. An atheist can believe in spirits, astrology, magic, healing crystals etc. These things have no evidence for their truth. Yet one can believe in them and be an atheist. So please, do not keep asserting this evidently wrong idea that an atheist has to be materialistic (which I believe you mean to be taken on a philosophical way, that is to say that you are talking about philosophical naturalism).
Spritualism = Immaterialism
The main reason why atheists reject God is because they don't see, hear or physically feel God. So that's why I said they lack spiritualism.By that definition of spiritualism, you will find many atheists who are spiritual.
I can't speak for all atheists. The reason I don't believe in the theistic claim that there is a God is because the theists have not met the burden of proof. You may have the evidence, but until you present that to me, I don't know if I would believe in that. Direct observation using eyes and ears for validation are not the only ways of testing the truth of something. And feelings are too subjective and can be disputed. One may feel like Thor is divine while I strongly believe that you would not accept their "feelings" for Thor.
The truth is, I am still not sure that you are stating clearly what you mean by spiritualism. Don't get mad at me right now, please keep reading and I shall clarify myself. From your explanation for why you said atheists lack spiritualism, I get the feeling that you are probably saying that there are other forms of evidence which atheists in general do not accept. Can you please provide me that evidence? Let me see what problem I have with that. I can assure you that I will go to great length if necessary to point out and explain why I do not except your "evidence". I am proposing this because we can beat around the bush all day long, but unless you actually present your case, its all pointless.
The existence of God, as well as inexistence of God has been proven for a countless time.
I am not sure I understand what you meant there. Are you saying that we have proven that God exists and also proven that God doesn't exist many times over? Can you please elaborate on that?
Unfortunately the people who prove the existence of God don't prove it the way the materialists people expect because God cannot be seen.
Probably this is your explanation of my previous question. I don't know what specific "evidence" or "proof" you are talking about. But I can assure you that I believe in a lot of things I have never seen with my naked eyes. I did not refuse to believe in their existence/truth simply because my naked eyes can't see them. So, can you please share with me your "proof/evidence"? May be in a complete different thread on this site. I would love to discuss your "proof"/"evidence" and see if its justified for me to believe in that. I can guarantee you that I won't walk away without justifying my stance. It will be mutually beneficial no matter what the outcome is.
Anyway let's see who will be the victors and losers on JD. Ooops sorry you disbelieve and reject this
Oh, and let one thing be clear. Disagree with me all day long, refuse to believe in everything I say, but I can guarantee you one thing. That thing is that I will never ever even remotely try to threaten you and try to intimidate you like a terrorist. I will present my case and defend it. I will accept only that which is reasonably justified and reject that which isn't. But unlike a terrorists, I won't make this dialogue about some kind of ultimate consequence where the person disagreeing with me must be tormented for eternity for that.
Yes, in short, I do not give threats for I defend/promote my case for intellectual reasons. Not to mention that the pursuit of truth to me is infinitely more important and meaningful than to wait and see someday if I've accidentally won some kind of arbitrary cosmic lottery.
Peace
------------- Student of Allah -
Typical atheist reply.
They would say religious or theistic people irrational as usual.
213 And if they are told "Believe, as the people have believed," they say "Shall we believe like the foolish have believed?" No, they are the foolish but they do not know.
-
Salaam,
If you believe in things like spirits then you are somehow religious and not the kind of atheist who does not believe in supernatural beings. If one believes in a spirit it is not far away from believing in a god. It is an ethereal being when in spirit form. Most of these people may believe in two of three parameters of the criteria according to the religion Islam, ie eternal life and being good people (if they are). Strangely they believe in spirits but not God.
But we cannot force anyone to believe in something. If they do not believe in the supernatural being called God it is up to them. They have to hope they were not wrong when they die.
Not believing in the supernatural is strange for me but perhaps not for someone else. Considering the complexity of the universe I see it as illogical that the world itself exists without one fixed superpower. That is if not every atom in the world has some sort of advanced intelligence on its own. There is an ultimate design and it seems far-fetched to believe it developed itself. I mean, look at the initiation of this world. From what did everything come from?
Evolution, according to clear evidence, happened over a very long time, but the probability that it occured without a clear intention is non-existent. There is an intelligence unknown to us humans, whether it is an invisible intelligence in nature or not, but those cells that started developing must have known what they were doing. Personally I believe in a mastermind, commonly referred to as God, but which power is more like the Force in Star Wars. God has no physical form but can control things that it may seem like God was that entity.
It was these philosophies and not Quran that led me onto the religious path in the beginning. Quran is a book made of paper (or energy in case of digital Qurans) which has God-inspired words on it, but it is not what is most important here in this life. You can believe and live your life well without it. God is not limited to a book, His guidance and power is above everything and He interacts with the world as He pleases. God chooses and He is with the one that He decides to support. Doubt, "blindness", bad personalities and arrogance are among things He frowns upon as there are so many signs of His existence in this world if you just contemplate it.
God is not what a majority of people believe God to be and most people conjecture about Him and attribute lots of falsehood which is not true and twist the meaning of the signs He plays with.
Yeah. Things like Quran are just signs, just like the prophets. It is all a test and God is "hiding" although you can see His marvels quite clearly.
God could make everyone believe if He wanted but He does not. It is part of His plot.
The world is just an illusion and will cease to exist in the future and replaced by something else. It could just cease to exist any second should God want. It is like clicking the delete button on a computer. Souls are like data files on a storage media too.
God said "be" and it was, but not without making a very thorough story first. All science is true according to observation. That is part of the game rules. God created the system. God made the laws of physics. God is above the laws of physics too.
God is not some kind of neanderthal being needing to be satisfied by stone age sacrifices or things like that. Simple good behavior and belief is sufficient.
God bless you
-
Salaam,
But if it is not convincing to believe in God then do not do so. No one is forcing anyone and I can understand it is easy to lose faith in God for some people. But I guess you were not convinced from the beginning and never managed to "feel" God and for that I am sorry. It is painful to hear. Sorry for your failure to attract God's attention so that you established a bond between the two of you.
I worry about your destiny, but there is little I can do. Enjoy your time here while you still can. Be a good person and perhaps you might experience something that makes you change your mind.
Being a good person is the most important thing here on Earth no matter if we are theists or atheists. We need to be friendly and respectful.
God bless you
-
Typical atheist reply.
They would say religious or theistic people irrational as usual.
213 And if they are told "Believe, as the people have believed," they say "Shall we believe like the foolish have believed?" No, they are the foolish but they do not know.
The gauntlet has been thrown down. I think you should take SoA up on his offer and "the truth shall prevail!"
-
No, it is not because I don't want reply to him/her but it takes so much time to reply to God rejectors.
I also never intended to refute or debate this God rejector. I just commented ;D
What is the purpose of atheists' lives by the way? I mean what do atheists think the purpose of their lives is?
Regards,
Yuliana -
Yes, the highly genius atheists (just like any educated genius people, since religious fanatics are far away from being intelligent) are not dangerous.
They may not be dangerous but anyone who doesn't believe in God is dumb. I find it truly fascinating that people can be atheists, it's absolutely unbelievable. Being a witness to all the magnificent laws of nature in the cosmos and the trillions of incredibly complex systems in our own body, and yet, assuming everything happened by chance. I'm not sure of course, but sometimes I suspect that atheists also believe in God, but that they just don't want to admit it out of arrogance. They are trying to delude themselves. They just don't wish there was a Creator because they hate the idea of being responsible. They wish they were God themselves.
-
I'm intrigued on how come this thread evolved to be a discussion about 'atheist'.
Atheist is a label, a tag which has different semantic / meanings to many people.
Example
- Christians used to label 'non-christian' as atheist.
- In many surveys, those who do not state a specific religion which he/she belongs to (a.k.a the non-religious) are automatically labeled as "Atheist".
- Soviet Russia claimed to have systematically eliminate "Religion" and promote "Atheism". In all reality the state is actually promoting a new religion called "Atheism". This is actually correlate with number 2.
- Those who has different view on 'how this entire cosmo works' are automatically being labeled as Atheist. (The buddhist might fell into this category as Siddhartha stayed silent on the topic of "Deity" or "a being called God", thus it's common to find people labeling Buddhist as Atheist)
The "Yahoo article" at the start of this post fell to the category number 2.
I don't believe that "Deity" or "Deities" exist, thus my "Theist or Atheist" really depends on my conversation partner's perception of "Theos".
Nonetheless I agree with Siddhartha
Atheist/Theist actually doesn't really matter, it's the DEED that actually matter the most.."Religion is an insult to human dignity. Without it, you'd have good people doing good things, and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes a religion."
-- R. DawkinsSalam / Peace
-
Salaam,
It is too true that religion makes people stupid. As soon as it comes to religion no reason or logic apply anymore. Very few people understand this and remain believers without these elements although some people around here have.
What people fall on is behavior instead which seems to be the most important aspect of God's system. It is relatively easy to understand that this is what God's religion is truly about.
As I have repeated myself countless times; the only criteria to reach salvation is belief in the One God (without assigning partners to Him), eternal existence and being a good person. Yet people need lots of hocus pocus in their religion.
Lots of prohibitions themselves are only advised against because they are harmful to our behavior such as alcohol. God will not doom someone to Hell simply on this point.
God bless you
-
What people fall on is behavior instead which seems to be the most important aspect of God's system. It is relatively easy to understand that this is what God's religion is truly about.
As I have repeated myself countless times; the only criteria to reach salvation is belief in the One God (without assigning partners to Him), eternal existence and being a good person. Yet people need lots of hocus pocus in their religion.
Totally agreed.
Thank you for reminding us of that.
peace -
Off topic I think )
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. Without it, you'd have good people doing good things, and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes a religion."
-- R. DawkinsI think I understand what Dawkins is saying... namely that religion is twisting the minds of people and making them do things they otherwise wouldn't do if they were "themselves". And this happens, and it seems to be just like this.
However, I also disagree with it, because Dawkins' mission is to destroy religion as a system of belief in God, therefor he ends up blaming religion itself for the stupidities of people. This is inaccurate. The stupidities of religion has come about BECAUSE OF PEOPLE, and religion is blindly and emotionally followed BECAUSE OF PEOPLE and their emotions and they way the brain and mind works. It starts with people, not religion. People invent religion. Religion is not a separate entity that has struck humanity.
But yes, we can blame religion for being a potent drug that compels us to do and say things, out of fear of excommunication from the herd, or divine punishment or guilt, or foremost and especially, loss of identity. In this way, religion is like a drug, however, it all STARTS with people themselves. Had there not been religion, then people would have expressed the stupidity in other ways. The stupidity doesn't origin in the specific painting (religion) but rather in the artist (people) who created and maintains the painting. Even tough it seems like religion has taken on a life of its own, and acts on people, religion is still something that came out of people's minds and this is where religion got it's stupidity from. Let's not mix this up.
People also have the responsibility to use their minds and see the consequences of drugs, and religion, and then approach it and relate to it in proper ways that will not let them lose control and do harmful things to others and themselves. Just like we cannot blame rape on the ethanol in the booze, we should not blame oppression on religion. The one who willingly ingests alcohol and the commits a rape must be fully responsible. It doesn't matter that "they didn't know what they were doing". Everyone knows what alcohol does to the mind/body. It is however more difficult to show (or rather for people to accept) that religion often works like a drug too. Religion is like to most socially accepted drug of all times, and we don't even know it acts like a drug. So, atrocities should not be blamed on religion as the cause of it. A sane and stable person with a normal conscience, would not commit atrocities in the name of religion. "God said so" is not an excuse. So, to navigate on the wholesome path of God and life and prosperity, it is required that we are AWAKE, mindful and attentive. Alcohol and other drugs, and religion, makes us fall down into a highly suggestive and vulnerable half-unconscious mode. This can lead to no good. This kind of fall only brings misery. Just like there are stories of angels falling, we too fall, into blindness and darkness, when we willingly give up our control, whether it be through physical or mental/emotional drugs.
So although I may be wrong, but to me it seems that Dawkin's main objective is to refute the existence of God, mainly because he himself is unable to believe in such a Power, and only secondarily because of what religious people bring forth on Earth. I think it is better to focus on the factual and practical consequences of religion, the actual output, and not on whether or not we as judges of religion believe in God or not. We should be very clear and honest about our motives behind believing or not believing in God. Also, there are lots of religious people of all sorts of religions that do marvelous good work, like charities and other kinds of social aid work. Does Dawkins think they too represent and live an insult to the dignity of humanity? Where is the insult? Is it in the held belief or in the practical output.
Peace
-
Hi Everyone,
My guess is that this is suspect. They did a meta-analysis which is an analysis of analyses. While sometimes useful, these are difficult to interpret accurately since the conditions vary across each of the sub analyses. They looked at the % atheist in the population and the mean IQ score. If you look at the graph the distribution of IQ is the same for 10% atheist populations is it is for higher percentage populations. The main action in the data is near the 0% atheist populations. There is a shift in the distribution downward here. This leads one to question what are the characteristics of those populations? Are those populations homogeneous to the higher atheist populations?
The conclusions are broad and they try to make it about individuals. Which it isn't. It is about populations. Why would a population have a higher IQ than another? Access to education? Better nutrition? We should remember that there are lurking variables in this study that the authors choose not to deal with.
Just my crazy thoughts,
JewishDude
peace Salam, Shalom, Peace peace -
The conclusions are broad and they try to make it about individuals. Which it isn't. It is about populations. Why would a population have a higher IQ than another? Access to education? Better nutrition? We should remember that there are lurking variables in this study that the authors choose not to deal with.
IQ was a metric to measure the capability for "Pattern recognition and logical thinking". In generalized term it closely correlate to "Mathematical Ability".
Based on the data, countries / cultures which commonly uses "Complex Pictorial Script" (e.g. North and South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, China, Macau etc..) have higher average IQ score.
Take Chinese alphabet for example, the simplified version contains thousands of different pictorial characters.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplified_Chinese_charactersYou need to have the ability to recognize, at the minimum, 3000 pictorial characters in order for you to conveniently read chinese newspaper.
Mind you that the "Simplified Version" is the "Mandarin Script" which is the "National Language", if you count the 'local language and script" in China then the total number might reach 300 - 400 thousands of characters.Thus it's no brainer since everyone on that region are able to 'instantly recognize' thousands of "Pictorial Pattern" as a symbol to audio sounds inside their brain, their IQ tend to be higher. Given "Geometric pattern recognition" is among the main capability being measured in the IQ test.
Coincidentally, majority of the people living in the north eastern Asia are "Buddhist" and/or "Taoist", and Buddhism / Taoism doesn't have any conception of Deity or God, at least the Deity/God as perceived in the West (Middle East included). If we use the "western perception of Deity/God", definitely Buddhist and Taoist are Atheist.
Salam / Peace
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
Actually, the original post/link reminds me of another study...one linking autism and atheism.
http//www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2039690/Atheism-autism-Controversial-new-study-points-link-two.html
However, so long as one accurately makes use of all available data--is this not part of the Deen?
1736 And do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and heart, all these you are responsible for.
People, let's be polite to each other. This is also a requirement of the Deen.
Further
3918 The ones who listen to what is being said, and then follow the best of it. These are the ones whom GOD has guided, and these are the ones who possess intelligence.
486 And if you are greeted with a greeting, then return an even better greeting or return the same. GOD is Reckoning over all things.
To say/write/convey unkind things is the exact opposite of inviting others to the Deen. Is there anybody who actually wishes to actively go counter to Qur'anic instructions; obstructing rather than inviting?
A common aphorism is "If you have nothing nice to say, then don't say anything at all."
Personally, it reminds me of AQ 7193.
7193 And if you invite them to the guidance they will not follow you. It is the same whether you invite them or simply keep quiet.
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi