Comments on Religion Place: Top 10 reasons to belive logic over religion.

"I have yet to meet a close minded atheists, from ...

2008-06-22T19:08:00.000-07:00

"I have yet to meet a close minded atheists, from the atheists I know, it seems the only real difference is how vocal an individual atheist is, but at the end of the day, we all think religion is bunk."

How much time have you, Nornerator spent contemplating the nature of divinity?

I'm wondering, because it takes a good deal of time to understand complicated things.

Being open-minded can be much more than judging things from the perspective you have already judged to be correct (in this case, I would assume a positive, realist materialism--though I would be interest to hear about your metaphysics some other time).

Have you considered that the nature of religious evidence is different? That it is more spiritual or mental than material? That the Being of God is likely to be different than that of a bagel (although I have had a divine bagel)? Other than that of positive, realist materialism?

What about the (non-Christian) argument for a prime mover? Is this an argument for the objective presence of an entity, or should we read it the other way around, and say, "if such a thing as a prime mover exists, of what nature would it be?" Hence, the argument would not the objective existence of God (which already assumes a mode of existence--a positivist realist mode) and instead is an argument for the existence of God is the sense of arguing the mode of Its existence--in this case, perhaps, as a necessary, transcendental consequence of thinking (I hope we can agree that existence is not only objective, but has other modes, such as the way a dream, an idea, a desire, or a hobby all exist immaterially, with no "real" correlate).

Arguments for God's existence need not be read as "*that* he exists," but could be read as "*how* he exists".

As Heidegger reminds us, even after 2,500+ years of asking the question, we do not know the meaning of Being--moreover, we have even forgotten the question. Have you considered the question of the meaning of God's Being (the question of what it means for God to be)? This is, of course, a crucial question if one wants to ask, in a meaningful as possible manner, if God exists.

I would highly doubt that if you considered these ideas in this manner that you would, at the end of the day, think that they were "all bunk."

Sorry for the long edit/post. This is just an extension of my argument that we need to pay more attention to what it means to be close-minded before we say that this group is or that group isn't.

Clearly if you say that atheists are not close-minded, you are not thinking that this current post has anything to do with open-mindedness.

I however, do. And it leads me to want to say: EVERYONE WHO IS NOT A PHILOSOPHER IS CLOSE-MINDED, SINCE ONLY PHILOSOPHERS ASK THE QUESTION OF THE MEANING OF BEING. (But of course, that would close my mind to the possibility of accepting your position--I just try to pass on idle talk on my proximal understanding of Being, but at the end of the day, I just think that the They-self and the inauthentic Being of Dasein is bunk).

People don't "believe" logic.They understand and a...

2008-06-22T18:43:00.000-07:00

People don't "believe" logic.

They understand and agree with logic.

Second, logic and religion are not mutually exclusive. Logic and open-mindedness are not synonyms. Many theologians employ strict logic to try and gain further insight into their beliefs.

Third, and relatedly, there also needs to be a discussion of "open-mindedness." Many people are open to x and not y when it comes to food, cars, sexuality and yes, of course, religion. When it comes to, e.g., the question of God's existence, pro or con, many atheists and theists alike are equally "close-minded." When it comes to seeing an accepting a position that may have different suppositions than your own, many are equally "close-minded." But let us follow something of what we preach with our science and logic, and note that whatever the correlation may be between science, religion and the openness of the mind there is no causation. Whatever causation there may be to explain one's open-mindedness is far more complex than such a metaphysical position.

I also seriously wonder just how many atheists have truly come to that position on their own, that they have carefully weighed each and every axiom, argument, and conclusion of that position. All of them? Most of them? Many of them? More than the number of theists who have come to that position on their own terms? How many people that assert that religon causes people to be close-minded have looked into these numbers? What then, would be the basis of that assertion, given the scientific and rational nature of their existence?

Oh, and the US (I'm American) is fighting and killing people in the name of a secular institution. Stalin and Mao killed millions to rid their countries of the "opium of the masses." Hitler did not need to invoke Christ or Mohammad to justify the killing of six million Jews. I am not saying they did theses things because they're "Godless" (correlation, again, not causation). I am just saying that any crazy ph*ck can kill lots of people and brainwash the masses with the most secular tools there are.

So let's all be a bit more careful when it comes to distinguishing things like "logic," "religion," "belief," "open-mindedness," "tolerance," and whatever causation we might think here exists.

Perhaps there are close minded atheists, but I hav...

2008-03-16T17:29:00.000-07:00

Perhaps there are close minded atheists, but I have never met one.

Because of the relative rarity of atheism, many atheists are brought up in religious families, and often religious communities.

Because atheists are the most mistrusted member of society in america, it is fair to say that atheists are constantly trying to be convinced by friends and family members that they are wrong. At least this is the case for many of the atheists I know.

The point is, it takes a lot of thinking, and a bit of debate and research in order to be an atheist. Atheists reject religion because it doesn't make sense, not because they are close minded.

Should I call someone close minded because they don't believe that I shit out magical conscious shit, that commands the world to do things? You might be able to get away with calling someone close minded if they didn't even consider it for a second, but the fact is most atheists have spent a great deal of time considering religion.

I have yet to meet a close minded atheists, from the atheists I know, it seems the only real difference is how vocal an individual atheist is, but at the end of the day, we all think religion is bunk.

To add one more thing, every single atheist I know, would immediately convert to a religion if they could honestly provide proof that it was true.

There are absolutely 0 theists that would be swayed by evidence, because if they could be, they wouldn't be theists, because there is exactly 0 evidence that any of the religions are true.

Atheism cannot create the closed minded approach o...

2008-03-16T15:46:00.000-07:00

Atheism cannot create the closed minded approach of a theist. Sure, some people are closed minded, but a complete lack of faith is not closed minded. It is a mind do open that it will look at all the options, use logic and above all, reason, before even beginning to postulate on how we all got here. Me, I think clay theory is the best so far...

Of course religion is silly. Actually it gives God...

2008-03-16T15:00:00.000-07:00

Of course religion is silly. Actually it gives God a bad name. BUT that doesn't mean there isn't a higher power than us in the Universe. We have to define what we mean by God before we can logically argue it. If you're talking about a man in the sky, yeah, that's pretty silly. Reading the bible literally is silly.

But I agree that Athiests can be as closed minded as a fundie X-tian, and that Atheism is a response to religion (one it deserves) rather than an honest look for a higher power. I believe science will prove the existance of this force, or whatever you want to call it, but not in our life time.

I think what ibxx was trying to say was:If god kno...

2008-03-16T13:40:00.000-07:00

I think what ibxx was trying to say was:
If god knows that you are going to choose option 1 over option 2, there is no real choice. There is the illusion of choice. You do not have the ability to choose option 2.

bluecalx2 said:
"Atheist fanatics are just as bad as religious fanatics and fundamentalists."
Uh... Atheist fanatics write articles that logically disprove religion or poke fun at the silly beliefs of people with the minds of sheep. Religious fanatics set themselves on fire, hate people based on sexuality, hijack planes & crash them into buildings.
But they are just as bad...

Oh, and are you trying to say the answer to why is because god said so? good one.

Religion is so silly. It is amazing that people actually believe it.

>How does foreknowledge contradict >free will.Beca...

2008-03-16T13:26:00.000-07:00

>How does foreknowledge contradict >free will.

Because if some entity knows beforehand what will happen, it has already happend somehow. One decision always spawns a cascade of events which all directly and indirectly influence other events and decisions.
If there is free will we can completely decide on our actions which in turn influences a very cdynamic system. Or everything is predetermined because your actions will influence others decisions now or in hundreds of years. These people have no influence on your decisions a so cannot have a free will. Unless nothing is known and events are created on the fly.

So you believe that bad things happen because ther...

2008-03-16T13:20:00.000-07:00

So you believe that bad things happen because there is no god? Or that if religion cannot explain everything that it cannot be valid?

How about if science and logic are the answers to how and not the answer to why? Atheist fanatics are just as bad as religious fanatics and fundamentalists.

Good stuff and I agree for the most part.However I...

2008-03-16T08:18:00.000-07:00

Good stuff and I agree for the most part.
However I think you missed on the 2nd reason. How does foreknowledge contradict free will.
Just because 'god' knows what we'll do doesn't mean we don't have a free will.

Other than that, right on the money!
-gojo-