Are Atheists Mentally Ill?

[Black Rose]

Everybody is different
different isn't wrong

 

[Hawkeye]

Everybody is different
different isn't wrong

if everybody is different, doesn't that make us the same?

 

[Black Rose]

if everybody is different, doesn't that make us the same?

We are part of each other. —Simba and Kiara

 

[Jennywocky]

Well, I just read back far enough to find House's original "3 atheists" post.

PLLLLEEEEEASE, Dad -- can't I feed the troll just a LITTLE? It's so tempting.

We are part of each other. —Simba and Kiara

It's a small world after all. -- Zazu

"All I need to know I learned from watching Lion King"?

 

[Black Rose]

Cog probably hates me. I love Disney.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

I find myself agreeing with the absurdity of claiming the Bible = proof that God exists.

Spider-man, though cool, is hardly an appropriate comparison to the Higher Power from whence comes Life itself.

Let me put faith this way, though:

just because 500 years ago (and lets assume and before all time before that > though Archimedes or one of those old school dudes has been shown to have already known calculus whereas 'modern' (yeah right every generation thinks its modern and assumes the generation(s) before it were ignorant cavemen) man always assumes our predecessors knew nothing)

the principles of nuclear physics weren't discovered and revealed to the world doesn't mean they didn't exist before that.

Same thing with the influence of this Higher Power.

Just because most people can't presently appreciate the mechanisms by which this Higher Power operates doesn't mean It/ He/ She/ Whatever doesn't exist.

I have faith that teleportation will become a possibility at some point in the future (like on those old school Star Trek episodes)...including so many more possibilities we currently dismiss as impossible due to ignorance (like time travel)...all of this is only possible according to humankind's faith to strive forward and probe into the dark recesses of our understandings.

Humans have only scraped the surface of this Higher Power's capabilities. We'd be capable of so much more if we'd lose the doubt in It/ He/ She and have faith in this Power from which the ability to overcome entropy is derived.

Doubt in this Providential Higher Power (which exists independent of our own typically humanoid misunderstandings) is an anchor.

Who knows someday if humankind expresses enough faith and therefore puts in enough effort, immortality may be achieved (perhaps the mechanism will be related to unraveling the continuing mysteries of telomeres).

Faith is a light in the darkness. Yes the first few steps into the dark it is dark but faith gives one the confidence to take the risk. Faith is not necessarily a 501c3 handed out by the IRS either. A man's or woman's daily/ weekly/ monthly/ yearly/ lifetime faith is determined by what motivates them every day of their lives to act in whatever particular capacity that man or woman does. Without faith, one wouldn't even be able to get out of bed in the mornings. If you get out of bed and move towards something/ anything: Boom> you have faith.

"Blind faith" is an oxymoron.

Just because a certain interpretation of the Bible lacks that certain something to "prove" God exists, doesn't mean God doesn't exist. At most it just means that the bible and/or the reader and/or the interpretation of God is false.

Even Spider man may exist someday: but only through the intervention of this Higher Power I speak of. The irony is that the "no Higher Power" position makes nothing possible. Not God, not Spider man, not nuclear physics, not DNA, etc etc etc. Its a black hole spiraling into an infinity of entropy (lesser and lesser order) eventually culminating in nothing.

 

[Jennywocky]

Humans have only scraped the surface of this Higher Power's capabilities. We'd be capable of so much more if we'd lose the doubt in It/ He/ She and have faith in this Power from which the ability to overcome entropy is derived.

That's a pretty utilitarian view of a Higher Power that might not even exist or might not even have an interest in you if it does exist.

Doubt in this Providential Higher Power (which exists independent of our own typically humanoid misunderstandings) is an anchor.

Anchors are what keeps ships from being crushed to pieces against rocky shorelines and kites from being blown away to oblivion in a gale.

We can play the analogy game all day... and it means nothing except that we can make analogies.

Faith is a light in the darkness. Yes the first few steps into the dark it is dark but faith gives one the confidence to take the risk.

I don't think that's really a question. The question is more, how do you evaluate risk of faith vs benefit of faith. IOW, when you step out in the dark, will you eventually come out in a better-lit world, or will you fall to your death in a chasm you were unable to see?

Your post answers none of these questions, it simply asserts, "Be brave! Walk ahead!"

Let me tie this rope to you. (I saw it work in this Stephen King novella called, "The Mist.")

Ps. Assuming that I categorize myself as an atheist would be a mistake.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

That's a pretty utilitarian view of a Higher Power that might not even exist or might not even have an interest in you if it does exist.

(by the way I updated my previous post a little, esp the part defining my view on the definition of faith, hope you get a chance to digest that part)

The fact the highly ordered brain of a single human being exists, well the few which exercise the abilities of the prefrtonal cortex anyways -the rest are zombies- (and there are perhaps 6 billion+ zombies and exponentially counting on planet earth!), proves that this Higher Power has the highest interest in Human Beings, collectively and potentially individually.

(the overpopulation bit is definitely the lower ordered part of collective and individual humanity operating...i.e. not engaging the prefrontal cortex. That is, this particular problem, like so many others, is completely derived of the zombie humanoids wandering around amongst the Living Thinkers. I would love to get up in a typically 501c3 contemporary Christian church and preach a sermon condemning them for misapplying and misinterpreting the scripture "multiply and REPLENISH the earth". That is, nowhere does it say, and I must have missed the memo, to OVERPOPULATE the earth)

The Human Brain (and the ability to reason towards an ever increasing higher order) is the crowning achievement of the Higher Power (at least in the universe as far as we know thus far...who knows what else is out there).

 

[SpaceYeti]

Just because most people can't presently appreciate the mechanisms by which this Higher Power operates doesn't mean It/ He/ She/ Whatever doesn't exist.

What are these mechanisms? I mean, if you define God as "that which allows thermodynamics and gravitation to function" then cool. That god totally exists. I would call that god "mass" instead of "God", but it's real either way.

Everything else was just an argument from ignorance. A god (a more classic idea than the one presented above) very well could exist. Why would we presume one does, though?

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

this Higher Power has the highest interest in Human Beings, collectively and potentially individually.

What is "human," and what is "you?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3twwafch4g

 

[Hawkeye]

"Blind faith" is an oxymoron.

No it isn't; to think otherwise is simply delusional.

You said yourself the first few steps are dark; this is blind faith.

 

[SpaceYeti]

I think he meant "redundant".

 

[Hawkeye]

Isn't blind faith about taking a risk?

 

[Black Rose]

Isn't blind faith about taking a risk?

faith without works is dead.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

What are these mechanisms? I mean, if you define God as "that which allows thermodynamics and gravitation to function" then cool. That god totally exists. I would call that god "mass" instead of "God", but it's real either way.

Whatever the definition, my primary point is that whatever it is, it must first be established that a Higher Power exists (whatever else that is or is not either in addition to or subtraction of) is for the next iteration of debate.

The term "God" is horribly loaded with all kinds of limitless burdensome semantic problems.

If somehow this Higher Power/ Influence can be proven to be a universal influence then yes at some point I suppose the meaning of this Power will transcend the concept of what "God" is. But then again, as I alluded to in a previous post, gods exist whether or not they are denied that is for example the devoted Darwinist's god is evolutionary theory (which I am refuted as a force in and of itself independent of an input of energy per the laws of thermodynamics). And yes though not thought of in terms of a "religion" they are just as 501c3 as any organized church around (universities, public education system ad nauseum).

Everything else was just an argument from ignorance. A god (a more classic idea than the one presented above) very well could exist. Why would we presume one does, though?

I thought I've been explaining several reasons why gods do exist whether one believes they do or not. Hell, even the mere idea of it exists because if it did not you wouldn't be reading and writing the word if there wasn't an idea of such a thing as god...and ideas certainly exist.

I don't see how I've displayed any ignorance. I know the things I have stated are true and I've cited plenty of examples. I see the atheists point of view but the die hard ones can't see the point of view typical of my position. I would say that atheists are the ignorant ones generally.

In summary: those with faith in a higher power (and can explain it using the laws of thermodynamics) have no issue understanding and believeing in both evolution + the necessary existence of a Higher Ordering principle/ power/ influence to input energy/ matter/ time into any given system.

Yet where atheists are half ass about their explanation of life & "god" is they only understand and see half the equation, i.e. evolution/ entropy.

The chicken & the egg coexist: evolved by the influence of Higher Ordering Providence (what that is exactly remains to be defined and is not in the scope of my interest in this thread at this time).

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

No it isn't; to think otherwise is simply delusional.

You said yourself the first few steps are dark; this is blind faith.

I'm sorry, then I must have not been clear. Yes the first few steps are into the dark but not without the light of faith to illuminate them.

I think he meant "redundant".

clever. see above

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

Isn't blind faith about taking a risk?

Personally I don't care about blind faith. Never will be able to stomach it, much less act on it.

In terms of risks all of us know the basics (weighing costs vs. benefit ratios).

Faith is not a significant risk because it builds on what one already knows. If any portion of faith acted upon ends up not being profitably (costs lead to costs instead of net benefit) then one can simply backtrack to what they knew before they attempted faith (in whatever) and try something else.

Sort of like a bear following the scent of a yummy carcass it can smell but not see over several hills a few miles away. The bear will waste some time zig zagging back and forth getting and losting the scent but eventually it will reach its destination.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

faith without works is dead.

Yes indeed.

In terms of the laws of thermodynamics (less the Bible):

Life without acts of faith (even things as simple as eating a meal) is death (equilibrium as opposed to a steady state and homeostasis).

 

[Hawkeye]

What if you have a "magic" bulletproof potion and smear it over your body, then ask your friend to shoot you because you have faith?

How do you backtrack this unprofitable scenario?

[This actually happened]

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

What if you have a "magic" bulletproof potion and smear it over your body, then ask your friend to shoot you because you have faith?

How do you backtrack this unprofitable scenario?

[This actually happened]

Actually, from a holostic perspective this is a win-win. Higher Order wins because thats one less moron wasting O2 on planet earth and their elements go back to the ooze for recycling. Entropy wins because it gets to eat what was temporarily taken from it.

Darwin award winners are humanoids being called up for an expedited return to a state of entropy. What dopes. Obviously and good riddance to bad rubbish. Goodness knows the planet could use fewer mouthbreathers and bipeds. Less hordes of low order zombies and more thinkers please. Next.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Whatever the definition, my primary point is that whatever it is, it must first be established that a Higher Power exists (whatever else that is or is not either in addition to or subtraction of) is for the next iteration of debate.

You're going to have to define "higher power", then. I don't like talking about ambiguous blobs.

gods exist whether or not they are denied

If they exist, sure. I have no reason to suppose any do, though. So I don't.

for example the devoted Darwinist's god is evolutionary theory

Just because you've been so nonsensical so far, I'm going to refute that in both the literal and figurative ways you could mean it.

If you mean evolution is literally someone's god, they worship it and have rituals and etc, and they consider it meaningful far beyond it's basis in biology and medicine, then they're assholes and wrong to do so, and I've never met anyone who did this.

If you mean figurative, then I still don't agree. More accurately, Creationists/IDers/anyone else who, for some reason, is against the theory have been assaulting the theory, building straw-men of it, etc, and then taking offense when the more scientific/rational minded folks call them assholes and idiots for the foolery they've been doing. Thus, the faithful see this reaction and project their own reasons for defending their faith onto the people who are mostly just sick of people arguing against something they don't even understand in the first place.

they are just as 501c3 as any organized church around (universities, public education system ad nauseum).

Projection, pure and simple.

I thought I've been explaining several reasons why gods do exist whether one believes they do or not. Hell, even the mere idea of it exists because if it did not you wouldn't be reading and writing the word if there wasn't an idea of such a thing as god...and ideas certainly exist.

The idea of unicorns exist, that doesn't mean unicorns do. Further, if you define a god as some force of nature, then I'm forced to agree that god exists, I'll simply call it the force of nature it is instead of "god". If we're calling thermodynamics a god, then it sure does exist, there's just no reason to dress the concept up in the clothes of "god". Other, unknown, gods may exist... but they're unknown... thus we don't know about them, and cannot come to any rational conclusion based on them, just like with any information you don't have.

I don't see how I've displayed any ignorance.

You claimed thermodynamics are evidence of a god, you claimed the theory of evolution contradicted thermodynamics, you said people were atheists for reasons I don't know any atheist to be an atheist for. You're wrong on basically every single statement of fact you've come to the table with. Either you're trolling, or you're sincerely ignorant. You don't even attempt to support your claims with any evidence or reason, you just say them and assume they're then carved into stone.

I see the atheists point of view

If you see the atheist point of view, explain it to me.

but the die hard ones can't see the point of view typical of my position. I would say that atheists are the ignorant ones generally.

You can say anything you like. Can you demonstrate your beliefs as true, somehow, though?

In summary: those with faith in a higher power (and can explain it using the laws of thermodynamics) have no issue understanding and believeing in both evolution + the necessary existence of a Higher Ordering principle/ power/ influence to input energy/ matter/ time into any given system.

So what? What can be demonstrated as true? Epistemology, dude. How do you know what's actually correct?

Yet where atheists are half ass about their explanation of life & "god" is they only understand and see half the equation, i.e. evolution/ entropy.

Do you not suppose that an atheist could have spent the majority of his life looking for god, and simply never discovered it... thus is an atheist because he has no evidence of a god such that forming a belief in one is irrational? It's not half-assed to explain a thing with only the information you actually have about that thing. It's half-assed to presume you have information you actually don't have.

The chicken & the egg coexist: evolved by the influence of Higher Ordering Providence (what that is exactly remains to be defined and is not in the scope of my interest in this thread at this time).

Yet there's no need for this providence in order to explain anything, nor is there independent evidence of the providence itself, thus I don't presume it's actually a thing. There might be something, but I need evidence it exists before I actually believe that it does.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Actually, from a holostic perspective this is a win-win. Higher Order wins because thats one less moron wasting O2 on planet earth and their elements go back to the ooze for recycling. Entropy wins because it gets to eat what was temporarily taken from it.

Darwin award winners are humanoids being called up for an expedited return to a state of entropy. What dopes. Obviously and good riddance to bad rubbish. Goodness knows the planet could use fewer mouthbreathers and bipeds. Less hordes of low order zombies and more thinkers please. Next.

Superiority complex much?

 

[redbaron]

The concept of a higher power is as much of an intellectual dead-end as god is.

Why does the universe expand? Higher power did it.
Diversity of life? Higher power did it.
How did the moon form? Higher power did it.

 

[Hadoblado]

Dr. Gregory House was mentally ill and an atheist.

Halflife3 confirmed.

 

[BigApplePi]

The idea of unicorns exist, that doesn't mean unicorns do.

What if your mind* is filled with unicorns? Then their evidence is much more filling than their non-evidence.

There is the old story of you being permitted to think of anything in the world except a large elephant. You must remember not to think of that else you will die. Now will you succeed?

Rich thoughts, intuition, and feelings, whether religious or atheistic when socialized tend to persist. In their persistence one might as well give up and say, "I believe."

I've attended in NYC at least a half dozen meetings of a group completely devoted to atheism. They are quite articulate, have dinners together, and show atheist-Christian debates on film for the evening. They appear to be normal mentally healthy people. (You may have seen some of these debates on TV or utube.) Yet none of these people are analytically philosophically studied IMO ... or if they are they do not say so. Instead they are a social organization devoted to enjoying themselves with a theme. Kill that theme and you kill their social organization and enjoyment. Therefore killing their theme is a no go.

This thread is an example of what one gets when opposing themes enter the same room. This thread is filled, if not with believers, then with beliefs. Every time you assume something, it is a belief although it may not be called that and may be transient.

I will have to read on to discover if this thread went to Siberia because the room was too small to contain that many people and the debate went south.

I read to the thread end. It doesn't appear any specific post caused the this thread to go to Siberia. Perhaps the thread ran out of steam and got too cold. Hence Siberia.

I will have to garner faith and believe a higher power made the decision. Such higher powers reserve the right not to give explanations to those unable or unwilling to absorb them.
_______________________________________________________
*Via some story not intellectual, but sensory. Didn't Philip Seymour Hoffman (the actor) say "If I can't convince people viewing a flat screen where nothing is happening that I'm really there, I'm not doing a good job as an actor." (Paraphrase).

 

[Anktark]

I don't really understand why is there an assumption of some higher power? Why couldn't our universe be caused by some 8th dimensional bacteria that neither intended to do that nor could ever comprehend us, much less care about us? So maybe it was a lower power? Or a sidelong one?

Let's say there does exist a higher power. Now what? It seems to have as much significance as favourite colour. My modus operandi is not affected by my affinity to #000000.


Also, if theists do live longer, good for them. Just that a portion of most of their lives seems to be spent talking to an imaginary buddy. I would rather die sooner than do that.

I am content to be mentally ill by this definition.

 

[BigApplePi]

I don't really understand why is there an assumption of some higher power? Why couldn't our universe be caused by some 8th dimensional bacteria that neither intended to do that nor could ever comprehend us, much less care about us? So maybe it was a lower power? Or a sidelong one?

That is an excellent thought. While there could be a higher power, there could be a lower "power" which causes the emergence of higher things ... like planets and people.

Also, if theists do live longer, good for them. Just that a portion of most of their lives seems to be spent talking to an imaginary buddy. I would rather die sooner than do that.

I am content to be mentally ill by this definition.

That's more than one idea. I believe I read that married people do better (I forget in what way) than non-married. The reason could simply be that a married person gets support when something breaks. Same thing with people of religion. What if I kicked the bucket? Would my wife say, "Take him to Potter's Field and dump him? No. She'd go to the nearest church that we'd never been to and ask what to do. As a matter of interest we got married in a church we'd never been to. Everybody came to the wedding because they knew what a church was. Religion tends to provide a supportive social structure. All one has to do is say, "Hello religious organization", and they will support you. When atheists get this social support, atheism will flourish. Let atheism do its thing until it gets grounded. But I just hope if it gets power it won't beat up on theists claiming they are crazy. They aren't.

You mentioned an imaginary buddy. I don't but I could cook up some computer buddy who sits along side me to help me fix problems. It would be a fantasy. "God is an imaginary companion for adults" someone said. That doesn't sound too crazy to me. It's just an entity to lean on. Now one can go hard materialistic materialism. But that's the low level conception you mentioned. Kind of boring wouldn't you say? I say people of religion are not necessarily fools. But not all people of religion are socially ept with those who don't partake ... as everyone well knows.

Indirectly I'm here in Siberia because I rubbed noses with an inept person of religion and got a little poisoned. Now whom should I pray to that out of self-interest I recover?

 

[Anktark]

But I just hope if it gets power it won't beat up on theists claiming they are crazy. They aren't.

There will always be people trying to convert others. There are already plenty of atheists doing just that. I mean those who call theists retarded, not those who defend their beliefs argumentatively because they want to live.

You mentioned an imaginary buddy. I don't but I could cook up some computer buddy who sits along side me to help me fix problems. It would be a fantasy. "God is an imaginary companion for adults" someone said. That doesn't sound too crazy to me. It's just an entity to lean on.

Interesting idea. I do argue a lot inside my head and sometimes the arguments come from different perspectives. Now does that mean I can sustain several distinct threads of thought at once or is there more than one entity in my head? I decided that I can never figure that out, because I would either need to go out of my mind to some much wider place or to the place before my thoughts. So, I can't provide any proof that I do not have an imaginary friend. And four of us are pretty content with that, except for one, who thinks we are losers and gave up too fast.

Now one can go hard materialistic materialism. But that's the low level conception you mentioned. Kind of boring wouldn't you say?

Either I don't understand what "hard materialistic materialism" is or we have different perspectives on it. To me it seems much more exciting and fun- c is the limit!

I say people of religion are not necessarily fools. But not all people of religion are socially ept with those who don't partake ... as everyone well knows.

Indirectly I'm here in Siberia because I rubbed noses with an inept person of religion and got a little poisoned. Now whom should I pray to that out of self-interest I recover?

Can't recommend any one specifically, but Thor looks like the guy who can get things done. I don't recall him being nailed to a tree either. Or just relax and chill, mods won't you keep here for a prolonged period of time. It would be irrational.