This is a group for those who have broken their mental chains of religion, as well as those who have never been bound by them in the first place. There being no way to prove the existence of deities, nor anything of superstition, anything anyone says about any such superstitious notion is a guess and your guess is as good as mine.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

Intrigued by science? Want to discuss new discoveries or theories?
Science! - Moddb.com
Redirect your self to this group if you wish to discus religion or a number of other topics, rather than flooding our respective groups with constant squabbling.
Free Debate Community - Moddb.com

Social Media for free expression
Avoid Censorship of your videos on Minds.com Vids.me Lbry.io Archive.com
Avoid Censorship in social media on Steemit.com Voat.com GAB.ai Ello.co Seen.life Stumbleupon.com Diaspora.com Freenetproject.org
Anonymity with search engine: Duckduckgo.com Disconnect.me Ecosia.org
Anonymity & Avoid Censorship with browsers: Torproject.org Tails.boum.org
Wikipedia without the Censorship: Infogalactic.com


  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
Post article RSS Articles
Debates, Discussions, & Presentations

Debates, Discussions, & Presentations

News 4 comments

A collection of the debates, discussions, and presentations of well renowned outspoken Atheists.

Collection of Quotes

Collection of Quotes

News 6 comments

Share quotes that you find interesting, effective, hilarious, and so on. Feel free to edit the article and add your own, leave one in the comment section...

Comedy

Comedy

News 5 comments

If you are easily offended avoid this article like the plague.

Heresy

Heresy

News 3 comments

Adjective hijackers, professional victims, and a sexist's idea of an 'equality' movement. As the saying goes in the Imperium, "Heresy grows from idleness...

Dev Update #8 Animation Rig / Lighting

Dev Update #8 Animation Rig / Lighting

News 3 comments

As mentioned previously we're currently revamping the lighting for the different game states and ensuring performance is considered.

Comments  (0 - 10 of 2,125)
Baron Brosephus
Baron Brosephus

Well...it's been a while hasn't it? For those of you who don't remember, I used to be CrazyOldTeenager, a debater from the Christians of ModDB group. I like to think that amongst the debaters on both sides, I was one of the more reasonable ones, though I'm sure we've all had our moments of conflict. The reason I am here now is because I'm interested in your input on a philosophical question.

To make things simple, I am in the rather paradoxical position of being an atheist who believes in God. Over the years, I have become increasingly disillusioned with the logical and ethical discrepancies found in the world's religions, most notably Islam, Hinduism, and Christianity. For years I tried to hide my questions quiet from others, and especially from myself. Long story short, I eventually went full atheist, and more or less disavowed myself from any spiritual belief and what I deemed superstition.

But as time went on, I found many new questions arising, questions that neither a secular humanist or nihilist world view can answer sufficiently. The simple child's question of "What does it feel like to be a galaxy?" was enough to send even the most logical of minds back into a spiral of dogmatic assumptions on what is and isn't possible. The origins of consciousness, the existence of the self, the question of destiny, the power of belief...while religion blindly applies their interpretation to all such ideas, atheism shuts down any discussion with the stale accusation that any experiences related to the aforesaid ideas are merely the result of deception or self-delusion, all the while never once realizing the trap of homocentrism such arguments fall into.

To make a long story short...I am an 'atheist' in the sense that I am highly skeptical of just about every religion I've ever taken a look at, and I'm more than confident in my lack of belief. However, I cannot dismiss the assumptions that true atheism requires, and my various personal experiences have convinced that a higher power does indeed exist; I simply lack the tenacity to assume what it wants or how it works.

So tell me, is there anyone here with similar questions? Or are you all more or less certain in regards to your ideas about the universe?

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
Necrolifer
Necrolifer

Judging from what you've said in all the posts around here,you are either more "spiritual" than religious,or simply unsure of your faith/set of beliefs. To be honest,I think even the most die-hard atheist will eventualy ponder on the meaning of life and consciousness after death. Personally,I am more on the nihilistic side. Make the most of your life,or just waste it if you wish so. We all will end up in the ground eventually.
I will say this,however - Religions fail/or simply do not understand human nature and how to work with it. And to think,some idiots branded psychology as "satanic". Funny,right?

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
Medusa_Zenovka
Medusa_Zenovka

...The origins of consciousness, the existence of the self, the question of destiny, the power of belief... atheism shuts down any discussion with the stale accusation that any experiences related to the aforesaid ideas are merely the result of deception or self-delusion


Atheism is the lack of believe in any deity. Nothing more. So it does not shut down those questions, it opens the mind for reality and philosophy.
As for the things you mentioned: I could give you brief scientific explonation, at least for the former two. The latter two are more philosophical IMO.

As for your question, if you belong to neither religion, but believe in a deity while not being sure of it, that position is called agnostic deism, isnt it?

Reply Good karma Bad karma+2 votes
Baron Brosephus
Baron Brosephus

I can't even say I'm agnostic, as I'm equally sure of my belief in the existence of a higher power as I am in my disdain of religion. So I'm not exactly agnostic.

I could give you brief scientific explonation, at least for the former two. The latter two are more philosophical IMO.


I am quite aware of the various theories on the matter, as well as the various arguments pertaining to whether or not consciousness even exists, but thank you for the offer.

The problem with the most of the theories put forward is that in the long run, they eventually run into the problem of homocentrism, the ultimate dilemma of subjectivity. The question of whether or not consciousness originates from the brain is in truth a very pointless one, because when push comes to shove, the only practical method we have ever been able to devise for 'measuring' consciousness, if such a thing is truly possible, is by analyzing relatable behavior. Yet still, it is a faulty method at best. The slave trade was considered morally acceptable in the American Bible Belt, an otherwise deeply conservative and excessively moralistic region was precisely because they believed African people were not truly human. The combination of suspicion and mistrust of African culture coupled with the convenience that such a moral compromise offered outweighed their ability to spot that relatable human connection, and as a result the slave trade flourished.

So the question is, if our ability to assess consciousness and relatability in other humans is already iffy, how could we possibly make a reliable guess on how 'conscious' a dog is? The current consensus is that because a dog has a functioning brain, it is conscious. Okay then, what about jellyfish? Or plants, who can form memories Newscientist.com and cope with pain Newscientist.com? It is easy to fall back on the assumption that since plants no not have neural structures, they cannot possibly be conscious, but one must remember that the only practical way we have ever been able to come up with is to analyze relatable behavior. If the behavior requirements all show relatable areas, what conclusion are we supposed to reach?

Atheism is the lack of believe in any deity.


Heh. In theory, yes. In theory, Islam is also a religion of peace, meant to unite humanity once and for all. In theory, Christianity is the belief that God loves you, and that redemption is always possible. In theory, Buddhism is about transcending one's physical needs and embracing a life of simplicity. In theory, Hinduism is about aligning oneself with the will of the cosmos and finding true fulfillment.

But that's just the problem, isn't it? It's all just theory, reality rarely plays out that way. In truth, Islam has been more easily manipulated for the purpose of bloodshed than any other social or political creed on the planet, considering that its founding father was a soldier. In truth, Christianity is about accepting that one man with an extraordinary claim of divinity is qualitatively superior to every human being that ever has and ever will exist. In truth, Buddhism allows one not to not give a flying **** that your fellow man's family is starving to death, because he's probably just making up for mistakes in his past life. In truth, Hinduism reinforces the idea that it's okay for the strong to trample over the weak, because our place is not to change the laws of the universe but rather to learn from them. In truth, the atheist principle of lack of belief in any deity becomes uncomfortably ambiguous when one takes time to question what a deity would actually be.

And with the intent of continuing this fascinating dialogue, I ask you, how do you define (or perhaps not define) a deity?

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
Medusa_Zenovka
Medusa_Zenovka

So the question is, if our ability to assess consciousness and relatability in other humans is already iffy, how could we possibly make a reliable guess on how 'conscious' a dog is? The current consensus is that because a dog has a functioning brain, it is conscious. Okay then, what about jellyfish? Or plants...


Determined by the level of self-awareness? Place a mirror infront of said dog, jellyfish or plant and observe the reaction to it. I think thats how you can measure the conciosness in a scientific way.

Atheism is the lack of believe in any deity.


Heh. In theory, yes.


No, not in theory. It is the definition. There is no theory behind it. It is the lack of belief in any deity. period. THere is nothing you can expand on it, no doctrine, no dogma ect. You can base those things on the premise of atheism, but they wont change the meaning of that word.

In truth, Islam has been more easily manipulated for the purpose of bloodshed... In truth, Christianity is about accepting that one man with an extraordinary claim of divinity is qualitatively superior to every human being that ever has and ever will exist.


No. Islam is based on bloodshed. Islam was never a religion of peace and never meant to be. As it is with most religions: You either believe it or die - or be treated as lesser human that will burn in hell for all eternity at the very least.

Christianity is not far from it, but Christians around the world are mostly not stuck in the dark age like many, many moslems.

Can't say much about Buddhism and Hinduism. I heard they are not much less barbaric in their origin or their branches, aren't they? I dont know.

In truth, the atheist principle of lack of belief in any deity becomes uncomfortably ambiguous when one takes time to question what a deity would actually be.


Not at all. A deity is a being based on supernatural claims that contradict reality and that there is no clear evidence or experience pointing to its existence.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+2 votes
Baron Brosephus
Baron Brosephus

Place a mirror in front of said dog, jellyfish or plant and observe the reaction to it. I think that's how you can measure the consciousness in a scientific way.


Here's the problem though. That definition of self-awareness is still very much contingent on the ability to use human-like senses, and interpret reality in a human-like context. A parrot only has the ability to recognize its own reflection in the first place is because it has eyes to see, and a brain fast enough to process what the eyes see. The method still relies far too heavily on identifying human-like behavior for it to be truly objective.

Is consciousness merely the sum of our collective physical functions and capabilities? In that case, is a blind human any less conscious or worthy of life than a human with healthy eyes? A rock could be just as aware of it's own rock-like existence as we are of ours, yet be more or less incapable of perceiving the world around it in any meaningful way.

It is the lack of belief in any deity. period. ... A deity is a being based on supernatural claims that contradict reality and that there is no clear evidence or experience pointing to its existence.


Now this is where it gets interesting.

Firstly, much of this depends entirely on your definition of a deity. If you are using the Greco-Roman definition of a deity existing as a separate objective object that governs the fates of all life, (this is a cat, this is a tree, this is a deity) then yes, atheism rejects all notions of a deity. The problem is, the majority of the world's religions do not fall under this category. The Mayans did not believe they prayed to a separate entity who controlled the sun, they believed their offerings and prayers were directed to the sun itself. Using that definition of a deity, from the perspective of the numerous varieties of sparrows that have adapted to life in the Paris Train Station, humans could be classified as deities.

As for the supernatural...the whole greater implication of a deity's existence is that nothing is impossible, because the natural laws of the universe can be changed at any given moment by said deity. The definition of the supernatural is that which cannot be explained by the laws of nature. And so, if a deity did indeed exist, there would be no such thing as the supernatural, because the laws of the universe would be whatever changes said deity is capable of making. Thus, your argument is paradoxical in nature. :P

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
Medusa_Zenovka
Medusa_Zenovka

Here's the problem though. That definition of self-awareness is still very much contingent on the ability to use human-like senses, and interpret reality in a human-like context. A parrot only has the ability to recognize its own reflection in the first place is because it has eyes to see, and a brain fast enough to process what the eyes see. The method still relies far too heavily on identifying human-like behavior for it to be truly objective.


Conciousness is a human-made concept to begin with and we can only measure that by our own standards. It involves self-awareness and thought processes of higher level that can be found in intelligent animals like us and most other apes, octopus and a bunch more species.

Is consciousness merely the sum of our collective physical functions and capabilities?


Yes, it is. Rock and living beings that are lacking of those qualities do not count as concious beings in my understanding. Especially rocks and other unanimated objects.

The Mayans did not believe they prayed to a separate entity who controlled the sun, they believed their offerings and prayers were directed to the sun itself.


You could also ask: would that include rejecting Stalin as a deity when he was believed to be one by the people? The answer would still be yes. Same goes for the Mayans belief that the sun would be a deity among many others they had.

And so, if a deity did indeed exist, there would be no such thing as the supernatural, because the laws of the universe would be whatever changes said deity is capable of making.


Than it would be observable and even reproduceable. So far none of the supernatural claims anyone made, especially by religion, were ever true. This universe operated on the same laws for 13.4 billion years, so there is no reason to assume that there is a way to change the laws of the universe with just speaking a few words. If there is a way, it involves a technology that is far beyond our conprehension - a species that managed to do this would still be no deity though.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
Medusa_Zenovka
Medusa_Zenovka

Wow, I was absent for a year or two and just missed the "recent" storm of of brain-feces down below... What a mess.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+4 votes
Necrolifer
Necrolifer

You try to avoid ****,and **** finds you.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+2 votes
λpone
λpone

Yeah, things have really gone down the drain

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
Post a comment
Sign in or join with:

Only registered members can share their thoughts. So come on! Join the community today (totally free - or sign in with your social account on the right) and join in the conversation.

Established
Privacy
Public
Subscription
Open to all members
Contact
Send Message
Membership
Join group
Group watch
Follow
Share
Embed Buttons
Link to Atheists, Agnostics, and Anti-theists of ModDB by selecting a button and using the embed code provided more...
Atheists, Agnostics, and Anti-theists of ModDB
Statistics
Members
250
Watchers
90 members
Articles
16
You may also like
Polytheism
Polytheism Educational with 201 members
The Dark Ambient Group
The Dark Ambient Group Educational with 38 members
Level Design Academy
Level Design Academy Educational with 3 members
GamesCom
GamesCom Educational with 6 members
The Source Engine Tutorial Page
The Source Engine Tutorial Page Educational with 2 members
Atheists, Agnostics, and Anti-theists of ModDB
Atheists, Agnostics, and Anti-theists of ModDB Educational with 249 members