I still can't let go...

[Kevin]

Heck, it took me until my mid-thirties to figure out what I want to do when I grow up!

Ha well I know what I want to be, but it most likely won't happen.

[Kylyssa]

I knew what I wanted to do from a pretty young age - then my parents ran away from home and such plans went into the crapper.  Plans seldom survive contact with reality.

You just need to roll with the punches land on your feet eventually then come up with a new plan.

[Hitsumei]

Some of you may remember how some while ago I made that thread about how I still have this feeling about God, and like how it seems like I can't let it go.

I still can't.

I can say to myself I don't believe in God all I want, tell others, etc, but I still just have this feeling sometimes that I can't explain.
I know logically, God can't exist. I have gone through that part, have posted some on here about it, I know that whole thing, and through logic, I don't believe in God. But at the same time, I feel as if I can't let it go. I have no idea what it is, or why.

Anyone else go through this?...

Saying that it is logically impossible that a god exist is simply false, but that isn't directly relevant to the point of the thread, so I will just note my contention, and move on.

My suggestion would be to think about the specific god concept that you have, and attempt to analyze what it is about it that gives you these feelings. If there is some aspect of the concept that you find desirable, or would like to be true, then it is only natural to feel a kind of longing, or something about the rejection of it that carries implications that you do not favor.

Bertrand Russel once said that despite the evidence, and the reasoning supporting it, he found it impossible to believe that what was and wasn't good was a matter of opinion.

I think that we all have things that we deeply care about, and the idea of their falsity is extremely hard to accept, on a visceral level. I doubt that it is god specifically that this is for you, but it very well could be something that you see as intrinsic to a god concept. This is what I would look for, if I were you. If you manage to find it, you can either attempt to find a way to separate it from the god concept (whatever it is there are probably already good arguments for it that stand by themselves), or learn to let it go, no matter what kind of grief it causes you. That is, if you are committed to your atheism to the extent that you are willing to suffer the grief.

[Kylyssa]

That is, if you are committed to you atheism to the extent that you are willing to suffer the grief.

People aren't committed to atheism, we don't think god is real and don't believe that god is likely to be real.  Belief represents commitment - to insist upon the reality of things for which there is no empirical evidence.  Feelings aren't evidence.  Wishful thinking isn't evidence.

Wishing for something to be real doesn't make it so.  Do you think that atheists don't wish for their loved ones to still somehow be alive after they are dead?  We want it just as badly as you do.  Don't you think that atheists desire some perfect justice - punishment for wrongdoers and reward for those who harm none and are loving and helpful?  Both concepts are incredibly desirable.  However, desirability has little to do with whether or not something exists.

Feelings are valid but they don't represent reality.  Feelings can, and often do, conflict with reality.  For instance, a young girl feels that she is fat.  Her weight is less than what is healthy, yet she insists that she is obese despite evidence to the contrary.  Her feeling does not represent reality.

If atheism is any kind of commitment, it is a commitment to try to look at empirical evidence as opposed to following feelings blindly.  If reality causes too much grief for one to bear, then perhaps it is better for him to return to fantasy.

[Kylyssa]

To be honest, I don't equate the presence of feelings of emptiness and unfulfillable desire with the existence of god.  We think, we feel, we imagine.  As long as those three things are true we will imagine things we desire and desire things that don't exist.

[Hitsumei]

That is, if you are committed to you atheism to the extent that you are willing to suffer the grief.

People aren't committed to atheism, we don't think god is real and don't believe that god is likely to be real.  Belief represents commitment - to insist upon the reality of things for which there is no empirical evidence.  Feelings aren't evidence.  Wishful thinking isn't evidence.

Wishing for something to be real doesn't make it so.  Do you think that atheists don't wish for their loved ones to still somehow be alive after they are dead?  We want it just as badly as you do.  Don't you think that atheists desire some perfect justice - punishment for wrongdoers and reward for those who harm none and are loving and helpful?  Both concepts are incredibly desirable.  However, desirability has little to do with whether or not something exists.

Feelings are valid but they don't represent reality.  Feelings can, and often do, conflict with reality.  For instance, a young girl feels that she is fat.  Her weight is less than what is healthy, yet she insists that she is obese despite evidence to the contrary.  Her feeling does not represent reality.

If atheism is any kind of commitment, it is a commitment to try to look at empirical evidence as opposed to following feelings blindly.  If reality causes too much grief for one to bear, then perhaps it is better for him to return to fantasy.

The above rant seems kind of pointless given how you ended it. If one has no commitment to atheism, and wants to believe in god, then why shouldn't they? You of course answer this, because they are committed to an epistemology, and methodology that they feel that they cannot properly justify the belief under, this obligates them to atheism, and commitment is a form of obligation. Thus what I said holds.

I don't know why you find the idea so objectionable. Clearly one wouldn't be committed to anything for absolutely no reason -- they must feel that something obligates them.

[Kylyssa]

The above rant seems kind of pointless given how you ended it. If one has no commitment to atheism, and wants to believe in god, then why shouldn't they?

Because they don't think it is real.  This shows the basic difference between atheists and theists.  You seem to be saying a theist can believe in any desirable thing that they want to, that desire equals reality.

The reason I am an atheist is because I am unable to believe in things that I don't think are real.  Like, no matter how desirable it is for a fairy godmother to exist who cures all disease with a wave of her wand, I don't believe in her because I don't think she is real.

Are you saying that theism is the ability to believe in things one desires regardless of their reality?

[Kylyssa]

My worldview holds that reality is what it is, that people may believe different things about it and people may not have a clear view of it but that their beliefs and desires do not affect its nature.  I don't believe I know or understand everything about reality but I don't believe I can alter what is real by believing something counter to reality.

For instance - gods.  There either are or are not gods.  What people believe, one way or the other does not affect whether there are or are not gods.  

I was not aware that this was such an unusual worldview.

[Hitsumei]

Because they don't think it is real.  This shows the basic difference between atheists and theists.  You seem to be saying a theist can believe in any desirable thing that they want to, that desire equals reality.

No, I'm not saying that. I never commented on the possible truth or falsity of the belief.

The reason I am an atheist is because I am unable to believe in things that I don't think are real.  Like, no matter how desirable it is for a fairy godmother to exist who cures all disease with a wave of her wand, I don't believe in her because I don't think she is real.

Well obviously, if you thought she was real, then you would believe in her by definition. It is logically impossible to believe something exists, that you don't think exists.

Are you saying that theism is the ability to believe in things one desires regardless of their reality?

Of course not. Belief in a god is not the only belief there is, and if it happens to be false, then it isn't the only false belief there is either. Are you implying that atheists are incapable of holding false beliefs? Or that theists are some how able to believe that something exists, yet doesn't exist simultaneously?

On a side note, I do find it rather strange that you would interject, and be ready to expatiate the "atheistic justifications" as if there is a uniformity of beliefs, and positions that atheists must share. I am always being told that this isn't the case. There is in fact a thread by the site administration on this very forum saying that this isn't so, if I am not mistaken.

It would seem that perhaps the belief that there is no uniformity of beliefs and positions among atheists is also not uniformly believed by all atheists.  

[Kylyssa]

I don't know why you find the idea so objectionable. Clearly one wouldn't be committed to anything for absolutely no reason -- they must feel that something obligates them.

It is objectionable because it is the seed behind the general Christian idea that atheists are all grief-stricken sad sacks with a giant hole in their hearts.  

It also implies that not believing in something made up requires some kind of commitment.  Thinking unicorns are not real requires no commitment.  It requires no commitment to think that things that aren't real are not real.

I just can't fathom how not believing in fake things or fantasies equates to an obligation - it seems like the default state.

[Kylyssa]

Well obviously, if you thought she was real, then you would believe in her by definition. It is logically impossible to believe something exists, that you don't think exists.

But then why are you suggesting that believing in god is a choice for someone who doesn't think god is real?

[Hitsumei]

My worldview holds that reality is what it is...

A tautology.

...that people may believe different things about it and people may not have a clear view of it but that their beliefs and desires do not affect its nature.  

And I hold that people's beliefs certainly are affected by their desires.

I don't believe I know or understand everything about reality but I don't believe I can alter what is real by believing something counter to reality.

Another tautology.

For instance - gods.  There either are or are not gods.  

You're just full of them, I guess.

What people believe, one way or the other does not affect whether there are or are not gods.

Undisputed.

I was not aware that this was such an unusual worldview.

What? That things that exist exist, and that things that don't exist, don't exist? That isn't often disputed -- though what fits into either category is a whole other story.  

[Hitsumei]

But then why are you suggesting that believing in god is a choice for someone who doesn't think god is real?

I never suggested that.

Perhaps you should read the OP again. S/he states that on some level, they are not completely convinced. They cannot completely let the belief go, they are at least somewhat undecided on some level.

[Hitsumei]

I don't know why you find the idea so objectionable. Clearly one wouldn't be committed to anything for absolutely no reason -- they must feel that something obligates them.

It is objectionable because it is the seed behind the general Christian idea that atheists are all grief-stricken sad sacks with a giant hole in their hearts.

Well, I didn't say, nor imply that, so perhaps you could aim your ire towards them.

It also implies that not believing in something made up requires some kind of commitment.  Thinking unicorns are not real requires no commitment.  It requires no commitment to think that things that aren't real are not real.

I just can't fathom how not believing in fake things or fantasies equates to an obligation - it seems like the default state.

I am a bit baffled by this... clearly theists don't agree that this is true of what they believe. You can't possibly think that theists simultaneously believe theism is both true and false?

[Hitsumei]

I should also mention that saying "I don't believe X to be true" is properly justified by saying "because there is insufficient evidential, or rational basis to warrant my credulity", while saying "X is false" is not. Insufficient rational, or evidential basis to prove X, does not prove ~X, that commits the negative proof fallacy. To quote Carl Sagan: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

"X is false" is a positive assertion, which requires positive evidence, and arguments.