Thread: Another video: "Atheist Life vs. Religious Life" - Let's Hear Your Thoughts!

That's all fine and good, but personally I think we should ignore the "benefits" of either and focus more on what's actually true and why.

Well, just look at Norway!

Originally Posted by Mark75

That's all fine and good, but personally I think we should ignore the "benefits" of either and focus more on what's actually true and why.

Those things are true though, aren't they?

The video paints a negative picture of Christianity. I'd be interested in someone arguing it.

I mean, the factuality of the claims themselves "god exists"/"god does not exist" rather than arguing the hypothetical advantages of each in the event that they were true.

Originally Posted by Mark75

I mean, the factuality of the claims themselves "god exists"/"god does not exist" rather than arguing the hypothetical advantages of each in the event that they were true.

God clearly exists--we're talking about it right now. One has the option of viewing the universe through god-colored glasses, and this video examines the pragmatism of doing so. It makes the atheism vs. dogmatic Christianity case pretty well, I'd say, though that's no case for atheism unless you're a dogmatic Christian. And of course the benefits only apply if you're a well-adjusted atheist--I've known plenty who weren't.

Originally Posted by Taosaur

And of course the benefits only apply if you're a well-adjusted atheist--I've known plenty who weren't.

What are some examples of not well-adjusted atheists?

Originally Posted by Mark75

I mean, the factuality of the claims themselves "god exists"/"god does not exist" rather than arguing the hypothetical advantages of each in the event that they were true.

Ahh, I see your point.

I think the creator of that video has a very narrow view of religion, and perhaps you do as well. The video is not representative of religious beliefs as a whole, and really only applies to a select few, mainly the Judeo-Christian religions. Not only that, it also presents a very idealistic view of atheism and is not necessarily the norm among those with atheistic beliefs. All in all, it is a very black and white depiction of the topics it tries to address.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

I think the creator of that video has a very narrow view of religion, and perhaps you do as well. The video is not representative of religious beliefs as a whole, and really only applies to a select few, mainly the Judeo-Christian religions. Not only that, it also presents a very idealistic view of atheism and is not necessarily the norm among those with atheistic beliefs. All in all, it is a very black and white depiction of the topics it tries to address.

Ah, thank you! Exactly the analysis I was looking for.

And why, please tell me, did you have to say that perhaps I have a very narrow minded view as well? Was that really necessary?

Well, one would assume that the reason you posted the video was because you thought it had merit. I was merely pointing out that if you agree with what he had to say, perhaps you should broaden your perspective on the topics it addresses.

Both atheism and theism are extremes. Neither life style has the most advantages because both are restricting. The religious life style provides the disadvantages stated in the above video but the atheist mind frame also provides limitations to one's potential and wisdom.

As long as you either accept something without knowing it or deny anything from being possible, you're limiting yourself.

You say that like restrictions are a bad thing.

^ Ahh, yes, true (to Merlock)!

However, I really think that it's a misconception that all atheists deny the possibility of a god. It's just that they think it's really improbable. I might be wrong though... I might be holding atheists in higher regard that I should be. I think a survey needs to be taken.

Originally Posted by Mark75

You say that like restrictions are a bad thing.

They are...?

We have infinite potential. No matter what god may or may not exist in this world, he is just another conscious self-aware being just like any one of us. The only thing that separates us (or...would separate us if there is a god) is our level of knowledge and power (ability) at any given moment.

Besides, there is no reason to side with either extreme. Being completely open-minded relative to the possibility of anything is the best way to go about anything. It doesn't conflict with morals and ideals but it does provide for a wholesome mind frame to live life as optimally as possible: both not deluding oneself and not restricting oneself from anything.

No one who is the least bit intellectually honest ever believes anything with 100% certainty. But the idea that you shouldn't accept something that you strongly believe to be true is nonsense. Atheism isn't a life style. What you said makes no sense. You don't lack belief in god because you decided to become an atheist, you become an atheist when you realize that you don't believe in god. Nothing here is "restricting" you.

But atheists don't "not believe" in God. No one forces anyone to believe in God or in any particular god -- it's not a given. Atheists deny the existence and possibility of a god (and typically of the mind, the spirit, everything beyond the physical and so on).

Not believing and denying are different things.
And atheism is "the belief that God doesn't exist". Belief or not, it's still denying it.
Someone with an open mind doesn't care whether a god exists or not because that god has no relation and no direct influence on people (not moral but actual effective influence).

Blah, Merlock, atheists gather all of the data that we do know and conclude that the possibility of a god existing is very small. Hence they go their lives without fearing his wrath. What is the problem with this?

Originally Posted by Merlock

Besides, there is no reason to side with either extreme. Being completely open-minded relative to the possibility of anything is the best way to go about anything. It doesn't conflict with morals and ideals but it does provide for a wholesome mind frame to live life as optimally as possible: both not deluding oneself and not restricting oneself from anything.

Exactly. I agree with everything you said Merlock. This is why I hate defining myself as one of the "extremes."

"Atheist" doesn't have to imply "extreme."

Originally Posted by Merlock

Atheists deny the existence and possibility of a god (and typically of the mind, the spirit, everything beyond the physical and so on).

Right... Because they do not believe in those things... Like I said. I don't see the contradiction here. To not believe something is true is to believe it is untrue. The only other possibility is to not have a belief about its truthfulness.

Originally Posted by Merlock

Someone with an open mind doesn't care whether a god exists or not because that god has no relation and no direct influence on people (not moral but actual effective influence).

That's not open mindedness, that's just not caring. Despite your 100% certainty of the things you say, it is possible for people to hold some things to be true while still acknowledging that they may be wrong.

That aside, what you've said about god not having a relation or effect on people is wrong beyond the ability for words to describe. If you haven't realized how powerful people's belief in their respective gods can be, then there is something very, very wrong with you. Don't ever say anything that stupid out loud; they're likely to stone you.

Originally Posted by Xox

Exactly. I agree with everything you said Merlock. This is why I hate defining myself as one of the "extremes."

The belief that god doesn't exist is no more extreme than the belief that anything else does or does not exist. This statement makes no sense.

Originally Posted by Mes Tarrant

Blah, Merlock, atheists gather all of the data that we do know and conclude that the possibility of a god existing is very small. Hence they go their lives without fearing his wrath. What is the problem with this?

The problem is that a god doesn't concern us, at all. If there is no evidence, then why mention it at all? Why search to disprove something that has no sway over us at all?

I could do the same thing: I could think up a completely original concept, such as...the flying spaghetti monster, and then become a Flying Spaghetti Monster Atheist.

There's no difference between the God of various world religions and a god made up on the spot. It's just an idea of an ultimate being but one that has no connection to us directly and doesn't affect us directly in our lives, thus being completely irrelevant to us.

Originally Posted by Xox

Exactly. I agree with everything you said Merlock. This is why I hate defining myself as one of the "extremes."

Aye, I don't like the concept of agnostics either. Because agnostics still care about this topic. They care about the existence of a god but find it impossible to prove whether one exists or not.

Originally Posted by Mes Tarrant

"Atheist" doesn't have to imply "extreme."

But it does. Denying anything is an extreme. It's not the kind of "extreme", such as, punishing someone overly severely for a light crime, but rather an extreme "side", an absolute, one of two: either God definitely exists or definitely doesn't. To those that are neither theist nor atheist (nor agnostic or anything related to religion), the matter of a god doesn't matter due to there not being any direct influence upon us from a god.

What I meant was that I'd rather not define myself as a "theist" or "atheist."

Originally Posted by Merlock

Aye, I don't like the concept of agnostics either. Because agnostics still care about this topic. They care about the existence of a god but find it impossible to prove whether one exists or not.

Yeah, I don't like the concept either, so basically I can't really define myself with any of those. So when people ask me about my beliefs there is no one term to describe myself.

Originally Posted by Mark75

That aside, what you've said about god not having a relation or effect on people is wrong beyond the ability for words to describe. If you haven't realized how powerful people's belief in their respective gods can be, then there is something very, very wrong with you. Don't ever say anything that stupid out loud; they're likely to stone you.

I said no direct effect, not moral. The above is moral effect. It's people that cause stoning and such, people that cause such effect. But until a god appears amidst all of us and does something, affecting us and our world directly, the god doesn't concern us at all.

So you're basically saying that if we truly don't care about the non existence of god, we shouldn't have to resort to labeling ourselves as atheists? I like what you are saying, but these labels are pretty necessary, I think, in a world where so many people are from one religion or another. It just makes conversation less confusing.

Originally Posted by Xox

What I meant was that I'd rather not define myself as a "theist" or "atheist."

Something like that, for example, just makes things confusing, no?

Originally Posted by Merlock

The problem is that a god doesn't concern us, at all. If there is no evidence, then why mention it at all? Why search to disprove something that has no sway over us at all?

I could do the same thing: I could think up a completely original concept, such as...the flying spaghetti monster, and then become a Flying Spaghetti Monster Atheist.

There's no difference between the God of various world religions and a god made up on the spot. It's just an idea of an ultimate being but one that has no connection to us directly and doesn't effect us directly in our lives, thus being completely irrelevant to us.

What's that you say? God is made up? Such words could only come from an atheist's mouth. Good question, though. Why should we be so affixed on a god that isn't real? Could it be that because the vast majority of the human race is convinced that it is real? Could it be that virtually every decision made by many of these people is due to what they think their god wants them to do? Yeah, you're right, I'm just being petty.

Merlock, if you really think religion doesn't affect the world, just die.

Originally Posted by Merlock

I said no direct effect, not moral. The above is moral effect. It's people that cause stoning and such, people that cause such effect. But until a god appears amidst all of us and does something, affecting us and our world directly, the god doesn't concern us at all.

You'd almost think I didn't know that. Do you not understand that those people believe in that god, and do things because of that god they believe in? Do you really not get that?