Richard Dawkins: The God Delusion.

[pilcrow]

1. Humans haven't existed since the beginning of time. At a certain point in history, none of our ancestors believed in anything supernatural (perhaps we'd have to go back to our common ancestor with the chimp.. or maybe we could find universal lack of supernatural belief much more recently).

I should've said "since the beginning of human history."

2. The deities that people have believed in through the ages aren't 'One god' (who just wears different outfits), far from it. Consider the polytheistic religions. Consider Baal, Thor, Zeus etc etc. these are quite distinct intentional objects. The old gods have fallen out of fashion, the judeo christian god is very much in vogue now. Same omnipotence maybe, but different guys.

My point was that the majority of humankind has always had some notion of a creator or God in mind. Local cultural influences have resulted in that God or that force being imagined in an almost infinite variety of ways. That doesn't mean there's no creator.

3. Since there was a time in which a large number of people believed in the literal existence of Thor. should we take "Thor exists" seriously as a truth claim? Thor presents the same problem to theists as the FSM does (with the difference that people did really believe in thor).

We covered that in the previous paragraph. He's a localized, culture-bound attempt to explain or portray the one, ineffable source of everything.

DUDES! We're gonna make it!

[BoimB son of BoB]

(3) The Spaghetti Monster "problem" is not a problem. Human society has never, to my knowledge, posited the existence of the SM--whereas the majority of humans have, since the beginning of time, believed in some form of creator, prime mover, or God. A first cause that stands outside of nature. That wide-ranging and pervasive belief, I think, is what needs to be explained away by atheists. And I've never heard or read an argument that does that to my satisfaction--Dawkins included.

You assert that humans have believed in god since the beginning of time. This is problematic in a couple of ways:

1. Humans haven't existed since the beginning of time. At a certain point in history, none of our ancestors believed in anything like a god (perhaps we'd have to go back to our common ancestor with the chimp.. or maybe we could find universal lack of belief in gods much more recently).

2. The deities that people have believed in through the ages aren't 'One god' (who just wears different outfits), far from it. Consider the polytheistic religions. Consider Baal, Thor, Zeus etc etc. these are quite distinct intentional objects. The old gods have fallen out of fashion, the judeo christian god is very much in vogue now. Same omnipotence maybe, but different guys.

3. Since there was a time in which a large number of people believed in the literal existence of Thor. should we take "Thor exists" seriously as a truth claim? Thor presents the same problem to theists as the FSM does (with the difference that people did really believe in thor).

The God Delusion doesn't attempt to explain the existence of religion for that you'll need to take a look at 'Breaking the Spell' by Daniel Dennet, a fascinating read.

yeah D Dennet. this man probaly one of the biggest philosophers alive today. although very fascinating read, also very boring in times... it goes on and on and on in such detail ... haven't read his last book you mention but have seen it in store recently.

[pilcrow]

yes, of course, people don't believe in the SM, because it is a ridiculous thought. but so is believing in god. the only difference being GOD been taking as 'serious' and the spaghetti monster as not being serious. although the belief in god is evenly well fundamented as believing in the SM.

I just don't see it that way. It's not inherently "ridiculous" to think there could've been a creator. The majority of mankind has seen it that way. It explains a lot of things. What does the SM explain?

we don't neeeed a first mover /creator. and there is no indication for there being a necessity for a creator anywere.

All I can say is that many (most?) people see and feel it differently. Why is there something rather than nothing?

i like to be amazed by te comlexity of nature. and i'm always even more amazed by the pure genius explanation scientist come forth with after years of hard work. exlanations that are so elegant and well underbuild, that those creationist seem like retarded morons.

Anyone waiting on science to disprove God, or a Creator, or the Ground of Being, or whatever you want to call it, has a long wait ahead. First, the essence of science is that it’s continually open to revision. That’s why science no longer considers the earth the center of the universe and doctors don’t make diagnoses based on imbalances of the body’s four “humours.” It’s also why the consensus about the health effects of eating eggs has changed about four times in the past twenty years. Second, there are just many, many questions that science is never going to get near. See my points 4 and 5, above.

[JACKAL & HYDE]

(3) The Spaghetti Monster "problem" is not a problem. Human society has never, to my knowledge, posited the existence of the SM--whereas the majority of humans have, since the beginning of time, believed in some form of creator, prime mover, or God. A first cause that stands outside of nature. That wide-ranging and pervasive belief, I think, is what needs to be explained away by atheists. And I've never heard or read an argument that does that to my satisfaction--Dawkins included.

yes, of course, people don't believe in the SM, because it is a ridiculous thought. but so is believing in god..

So, you put the "Spaghetti Monster" on the same line with a thing that might have created the Universe?


Of course, nothing created the Universe because you rip at Xbox and Xbox is so cool along with all of our other inventions that its obvious theres no God. We're all too smart. We're all such geniuses that the notion of a Supreme Being is totally absurd and beneath us. In a 15 Billion year old Universe filled with a trillion mysteries, a bunch of apes that were riding horses around only 100 years ago think they're qualified to make that call with conviction? Talk about closed minded self righteous arrogance.

[andydes]

(3) The Spaghetti Monster "problem" is not a problem. Human society has never, to my knowledge, posited the existence of the SM--whereas the majority of humans have, since the beginning of time, believed in some form of creator, prime mover, or God. A first cause that stands outside of nature. That wide-ranging and pervasive belief, I think, is what needs to be explained away by atheists. And I've never heard or read an argument that does that to my satisfaction--Dawkins included.

yes, of course, people don't believe in the SM, because it is a ridiculous thought. but so is believing in god..

So, you put the "Spaghetti Monster" on the same line with a thing that might have created the Universe?


Of course, nothing created the Universe because you rip at Xbox and Xbox is so cool along with all of our other inventions that its obvious theres no God. We're all too smart. We're all such geniuses that the notion of a Supreme Being is totally absurd and beneath us. In a 15 Billion year old Universe filled with a trillion mysteries, a bunch of apes that were riding horses around only 100 years ago think they're qualified to make that call with conviction? Talk about closed minded self righteous arrogance.

Care to tell us what you believe in? All you seem to say is how f*cking stupid we are for not believing in God or how f*cking stupid we are for believing in God. No proof either way, end of discussion, we're all f*cking stupid. Great, cheers for that. No point in thinking about it then.

btw, I think the point people are making is not that science can disprove the existence of God, but if science can provide a reasonable explanation of the universe without a God, then why believe in Him? Whether you think it has is entirely up to you. But somehow, I doubt proof one way or anyother is a major factor in peoples belief systems.

And yes, in the past hundred years, we've come a hell or a long way technologically. Horse riding to xbox in that time is pretty impressive, if you think about it.

[cbit]

We're all such geniuses that the notion of a Supreme Being is totally absurd and beneath us. In a 15 Billion year old Universe filled with a trillion mysteries, a bunch of apes that were riding horses around only 100 years ago think they're qualified to make that call with conviction? Talk about closed minded self righteous arrogance.

consider for a moment which of these positions seems the more arrogant/absurd to you:

1. "Theres an invisible all powerful being governing the universe, and he made me in his image"

2. "I don't know why there's something instead of nothing"

[JACKAL & HYDE]

We're all such geniuses that the notion of a Supreme Being is totally absurd and beneath us. In a 15 Billion year old Universe filled with a trillion mysteries, a bunch of apes that were riding horses around only 100 years ago think they're qualified to make that call with conviction? Talk about closed minded self righteous arrogance.

consider for a moment which of these positions seems the more arrogant/absurd to you:

1. "Theres an invisible all powerful being governing the universe, and he made me in his image"

2. "I don't know why there's something instead of nothing"

A person saying they think there might be a God is in no way being closed minded, self righteous & arrogant. But if a person exclaims that "they know there's no God", and "if you think theres a God, your an idiot" - that is being self righteous & arrogant.

[Machinate]

A person saying they think there might be a God is in no way being closed minded, self righteous & arrogant. But if a person exclaims that "they know there's no God", and "if you think theres a God, your an idiot" - that is being self righteous & arrogant.

You're so right. There is ignorance in any case where someone:

1) claims to know that there is/isn't a god
2) thinks less of people for thinking that there is/isn't a god.


Can we really know if there is/isn't a god? No. Can we believe that there is/isn't a god? Most certainly, it's a pretty tough one to simply ignore. And there is room to believe either.

[Tone Deft]

A person saying they think there might be a God is in no way being closed minded, self righteous & arrogant. But if a person exclaims that "they know there's no God", and "if you think theres a God, your an idiot" - that is being self righteous & arrogant.

You make no sense whatsoever.

You make point A about group 1, then make the opposite point about group 2 but add the word "idiot". All you said was "people who call people idiots are self righteous & arrogant." I can agree with that.


self righteous - confident of one's own righteousness, esp. when smugly moralistic and intolerant of the opinions and behavior of others.
Religion lays out for people in black and white what their morals should be. To religious people, atheists have no morals. SELF RIGHTEOUS RELIGIOUS PEOPLE look down on atheists for this reason. Do you think a religious person respects atheists? Would most religious people let an atheist babysit their kids? No.

Arrogant - whatever, there's no basis for arrogance in any of this. The argument of which side is stupid, or arrogant is total bullshit. That's just bad n00b internet manners. You can't debate without name calling.

Atheists get pissed off because religious people use their religion mixed in OUR government. Arrogant, self righteous people who push their views onto us, they make decisions that affect ME based on THEIR religion. Total bullshit.





A little Negativeland anyone?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5GmJjYB3mc

[JACKAL & HYDE]

A person saying they think there might be a God is in no way being closed minded, self righteous & arrogant. But if a person exclaims that "they know there's no God", and "if you think theres a God, your an idiot" - that is being self righteous & arrogant.

You make no sense whatsoever.

You make point A about group 1, then make the opposite point about group 2 but add the word "idiot". All you said was "people who call people idiots are self righteous & arrogant." I can agree with that.


self righteous - confident of one's own righteousness, esp. when smugly moralistic and intolerant of the opinions and behavior of others.
Religion lays out for people in black and white what their morals should be. To religious people, atheists have no morals. SELF RIGHTEOUS RELIGIOUS PEOPLE look down on atheists for this reason. Do you think a religious person respects atheists? Would most religious people let an atheist babysit their kids? No.

Arrogant - whatever, there's no basis for arrogance in any of this. The argument of which side is stupid, or arrogant is total bullshit. That's just bad n00b internet manners. You can't debate without name calling.

Atheists get pissed off because religious people use their religion mixed in OUR government. Arrogant, self righteous people who push their views onto us, they make decisions that affect ME based on THEIR religion. Total bullshit.



A little Negativeland anyone?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5GmJjYB3mc

A. I think we were talking about if a God/Omnipotent being existed/created the Universe etc etc Not about mans religions being intolerant of atheists...! ? lol

Alot of speculation in your post apparently as it doesnt even fit in the latest dialogue. But I'm glad you got your point across...

[zordon]

Well just to clarify my point of view. I cant prove that there is/isnt a god, I can however choose not to follow a religion. Because i believe that following and organized religion closes your mind and is therefore pointless. I also believe religion has done more negative things throughout human history than positive. Im not going to say i have irrefutable evidence that disproves gods existance, but I find it pointless to pray or worship something I dont know is there for sure. On a side note what is all this talk of arrogance, no one said they know there is/ isnt a god for sure. Atheism is not believing in a god because there is no evidence to support it, and because there is a high probability that he does not exist. If evidence or proof is presented the opinion can change, that is the beauty of science. It doesnt claim to be right all the time..

[pilcrow]

New tangent to explore.
I'm curious to hear some thoughts about where atheists theorize certain drives come from. I'm talking about drives or feelings that I would say have been placed in our minds and hearts by a creator but atheists would not. Stuff like right and wrong. A couple examples will help me ask the question.

hypothetical A:
If I find I can get ahead in my job by telling a lie about a co-worker, resulting in my getting the promotion instead of him, is it OK for me to do that? If not, why not?

hypothetical B:
A sweet-natured mentally retarded woman lives on my block. She's always out on her front porch and she calls out hello to me and waves like mad every day when I pass on my way home from the bus after work. If anyone else is around, I wave back and say hi. If there's no one else about, I give her the finger and say something rude--usually because I've had a crappy day at work. Is it OK for me to do that? If not, why not?

I'm not trying to slay anyone with my reasoning skills...they're not the best. I am just genuinely curious what you guys think about this. Basically, my question comes down to this: Can we do whatever we want? And if not, why not?

MY own belief is that we are born with a certain moral awareness written into our natures. I believe those things are written there by a creator. That is to say, goodness and badness are very real things, and we're meant to work at shaping our lives in the one direction and away from the other.

[Angstrom]

So if God implants morality into the human, when morality fails - who takes the blame?

Not the human surely, if I make a song and the middle 8 is all out of key is it the songs fault? No, it's mine .. I made it.

So is God at fault for humans with 'bad morals'?
That can't be right eh.

As regards Atheists morals, giving the finger to old ladies - it is about accepting the social mores of the society you live in. Do you think that if you were left to be brought up by apes and were presented with an old lady and a tray of cookies that Gods morality would prevent you from snatching them?
Sadly no.

It is society that implant morals, they are the rules of interaction of your society. They are installed most likely in the form of parents and schooling which educates you as to your duty in relation to other members of your society. And how that society relates to other societies - Christians to Islam, Crips to Bloods. Etc. How you tip your hat to old ladies, how you help timmy across the street - that's not God, that's your society.

Does the universal God implant this morality in everyone? then every single person would share the morality held true by Christians. This is plainly not the case, every society makes its own morality laws and makes grand claims for their origin.

Zardoz says - the gun is good , the penis is evil!

[JACKAL & HYDE]

New tangent to explore.
I'm curious to hear some thoughts about where atheists theorize certain drives come from. I'm talking about drives or feelings that I would say have been placed in our minds and hearts by a creator but atheists would not. Stuff like right and wrong. A couple examples will help me ask the question.

hypothetical A:
If I find I can get ahead in my job by telling a lie about a co-worker, resulting in my getting the promotion instead of him, is it OK for me to do that? If not, why not?

hypothetical B:
A sweet-natured mentally retarded woman lives on my block. She's always out on her front porch and she calls out hello to me and waves like mad every day when I pass on my way home from the bus after work. If anyone else is around, I wave back and say hi. If there's no one else about, I give her the finger and say something rude--usually because I've had a crappy day at work. Is it OK for me to do that? If not, why not?

I'm not trying to slay anyone with my reasoning skills...they're not the best. I am just genuinely curious what you guys think about this. Basically, my question comes down to this: Can we do whatever we want? And if not, why not?

MY own belief is that we are born with a certain moral awareness written into our natures. I believe those things are written there by a creator. That is to say, goodness and badness are very real things, and we're meant to work at shaping our lives in the one direction and away from the other.

Are our default moral codes not arbitrary?

Hmmmm

Theres def two sides to this one.

The God people would say >

If we are indeed human animals that have naturally evolved, "Values" & "Morality" would certainly not be biologically necessary so why do we have them? And they'd have a real good point.
.

The Athiests would then say >

"Values" and "morality" are an evolutionary imperative. Athiests would point to the shunning of misbehaving animals from animal packs in the wild making comparisons. If a behaviour negatively impacts the group then that behaviour is frowned upon by that group of animals. Like in the ape world. If a weak ape screws one of the Alpha males females, the other apes will steal his food away for weeks. What are they doing? Punishing the weak ape? Who knows..


Then the God people would say >

You cant prove that animals have Values and Morality its all instinct.


Then the Athiests would say >

You cant prove theres a God.

[knotkranky]

Who thinks god is a being that does things?

Humans made the god interpretation. There is no out there god, there is only the internal god and it don't care what you call it or think of it. The spaghetti monster can bring just as much fulfillment and morals if you believe it to the core. As far as values and morality, it's been driven by survival right down to the microbe level in which we have a great similarity to. Fucking, eating and domination/survival is the driving force of all life. Shit happens too. I find that more comforting than this all powerful god who lets all this human carnage go unabated while his omnipotent ass could be fixing it all up in an eye-blink.