Atheism is Abdication

[Sophus]

Why is God always a dude?

However, this has helped at least define for me what God is: God is consciousness (volition + memory + awareness + creative capability = God).

Perhaps God doesn't understand why he exists anymore than we do. He just woke up one day and found himself staring at eternity, and from there he began to dream. Perhaps the why of it is closed into the existence of it.

So God is the very essence of consciousness yet he isn't even aware of his own inception or the meaning of his existence? How can that attain to anything godly? With this reasoning, why not just call ourselves gods and call it a day? After all I have consciousness, memory, awareness and creative capability.  

[i_am_i]

Atheism is the honest response to available evidence. No pretense, no ego, no assumptions. It's simply null hypothesis. Null hypothesis cannot be abdication, as abdication implies action. Atheism is remaining unconvinced, which means no positive action of any kind.

Interesting and I generally agree with the sentiment, but I don't agree that atheism involves no positive action. Every one of of us grew up with the idea of God and some of us thought about that idea a lot more than others did and that's positive action. I think that acting on curiosity, trying to learn more and freeing one's self from blind belief is positive action.

Now here's our Edward who very much seems to be struggling with his (g)od and his personal God. They're not the same, he has told us. He tells us that (g)od is consciousness. Capital G God is his personal God. Two different things.

Have you ever seen a donkey ride? The poor donkey has to walk in a circle around and around and around. Edward is like that poor donkey. All he sees is the ground directly before him, ground that he's walked over time and time again.

Bust out of that circle, Edward. You seem to have enough native curiosity to actually put to good use.

[The Magic Pudding]

Atheism is simply a denial that resolves existential angst

Does it?

and crucifies the intellect to make the questions easier to live with.
Atheism is abdication.

I think atheism frees the intellect from following long dead weirdos.
If you insist on answering questions, when there are no factual answers available, you end up with bullshit.

[parrotpirate]

I was watching a video on consciousness and it was a roundtable discussion with Chalmers, Wolf, and a few others who have written about consciousness, and there is no consensus as to what consciousness is. The experts simply do not agree, which means no one really knows, and yet here it is making you, you and me, me. Not one of them mentioned paramecium, by the way.

I, myself, am having a big problem with it. Because to say it is a force with awareness, volition, memory, and the creative capability to form itself into matter is really just saying it's God. But the problems get even deeper with questions like, "What was God doing before the universe?"

It's actually not that important to know what he was doing as it is to fathom why he changed to create the universe. How could God desire anything? Even if he only desires to behold himself in his creation, then why create at one point and not another? And if it was necessary for him to create, that implies that something acts as a cause upon him--a motivator. Yet if in the beginning all there was was God staring at an eternal present moment, how could he ever be motivated from that spot to be or do anything differently?

But atheists aren't off the hook here, all these difficulties apply to them as well. Why was there a singularity? Why did it sit there for all eternity and suddenly bang at one moment and not the other? Assuming the singularity was a necessary first thing, why would it ever change?

We are confounded by paradoxes and contradictions no matter what theory we try to make about cosmology.

However, this has helped at least define for me what God is: God is consciousness (volition + memory + awareness + creative capability = God).

Perhaps God doesn't understand why he exists anymore than we do. He just woke up one day and found himself staring at eternity, and from there he began to dream. Perhaps the why of it is closed into the existence of it.

When I think of God staring at eternity, what would such a consciousness think of? It would have no past to form memories from. It would have no use for will and no desires at all for which it would use its creative capability. It would have no reason or cause for change, thus no universe--no big bang, no evolution.

If in the primordial state God had any desires, or memories, then we don't have God. We have a being that has been created. I can completely understand God staring at eternity. I think I could even model that mathematically and philosophically show how that is the necessary primordial state. But I can't get to the universe from there.

But all this doesn't make me an atheist. An atheist just gives up on these questions. The questions are still there for the atheist, however. They have just as big a problem with explaining creation as the theist does. All the problems I have with "God" they have with the primordial singularity.

When the atheist says the singularity just quantumly popped into existence and banged into a universe out of nothing, they might as well just say God did it and go back to church.

Atheism is simply a denial that resolves existential angst and crucifies the intellect to make the questions easier to live with.

Atheism is abdication.

Brain barf.

[philosoraptor]

Atheism is simply a denial that resolves existential angst

Does it?

No.  The statement made by EtT couldn't be more wrong.  Existential angst arises precisely because there is no God.  Denying God does nothing to improve on this anxiety.  Angst arises because when we realize there is no God, we realize that we alone are ultimately and wholly responsible for our actions-we have no one to blame for our failures other than ourselves, and no one to pray to to fix it.  In turn, we are also responsible for making our success and creating our destiny.  Angst also arises when we are faced with making difficult decisions.  Sartre claims that the decision we chose for ourselves is the decision we chose for all others in the same situation.  When we realize we are responsible for creating ethics and morality, this also causes angst/anxiety.  Essentially, our total freedom is what causes anxiety.  If anything, the atheist is more prone to existential angst than the believer, because the atheist is responsible for him or herself in a way believers generally don't believe they have to be.

I'm guessing you were probably asking that as a rhetorical question, MP, so that response was more for the benefit of the OP, who obviously is a little confused on what existential angst actually is.

[The Magic Pudding]

Atheism is simply a denial that resolves existential angst

Does it?

I'm guessing you were probably asking that as a rhetorical question, MP, so that response was more for the benefit of the OP, who obviously is a little confused on what existential angst actually is.

In Australian politics, a Dorothy Dixer is a question asked of a government Minister by a backbencher of his/her own political party during Parliamentary Question Time.

The term is used in a mildly derogatory sense to describe a 'planted' question. Often, the question has been written by the Minister or his/her staff rather than by the questioner, and is used to give the Minister a chance to promote themselves or the work of the Government, or to criticise the opposition party's policies

Just call me Dorothy.

[philosoraptor]

Now I want to know why it's called a Dorothy Dixer.  

[The Magic Pudding]

Now I want to know why it's called a Dorothy Dixer.  

The term references American advice columnist Dorothy Dix's reputed practice of making up her own questions to allow her to publish more interesting answers. "Dorothy Dixer" has been used in Australian politics since the 1950s, and has become increasingly common in everyday usage. However, its origin is unclear; the term is virtually unknown in other countries where Dix's column was equally popular.

Hope that helps cobber.

[philosoraptor]

It does, thank you.

[Edward the Theist]

I try to be a good and honest person, to help others whenever I can, because I believe we owe it to our fellow humans to always be good to each other.  I did this as a Christian, too.  So really, I don't not need God to exist, and I'd be willing to bet no one else here does, either.

You sound like a much better person than I am. I frequently am not honest. I really don't try to help others whenever I can, and I don't feel I owe anything to anyone else, except not to hurt them. I certainly can't always be good. I'm glad you were able to accomplish all of this as a Christian, because I never could. Even now, I can't; that's the truth.

I find it better to be truthful with myself than to be good. For if I lie to myself about how good I am, I risk narcissism. I believe in God, so for that reason, I can look in the mirror and be honest with myself. I don't have to be good. God appears to be on my side anyway. Or at least that's how I see His actions in my life.

[Edward the Theist]

Edward, you sure do seem to have a great deal of time on your hands in which to ponder all this stuff you keep putting up here.

I have a very fast mind.

You also seem to have a great dislike for this imaginary well-organized group of people you call atheists.

I hate atheism. Yes. I don't hate atheists; actually I prefer atheists to the religious people I know. But I hate atheism with a rather extreme passion. Thank God it's all imaginary. Perhaps I'll wake up one day and it will all be gone.

Most of us have lives to live, we have to learn knowledge and skills and gain experience in our chosen fields in order to make money. I did all that by my own efforts. Everything I've achieved came from my effort, ingenuity and experience.

Not me. Mine all came by the grace of God.

See, my life is great. It's filled with good books, good music, good food, I have a great wife and we live in a nice house. We've invested our money well. I can look back on a very interesting and somewhat unusual career as a musician, and I have a lot of stories to tell, many great memories. My plate is full, life is great.

Great. You know I wrote a book about happiness, but that was ten years ago. I wish I would have included a chapter on how to stay happy once you get there. It would have suggested that a person not think too deeply about things. For instance, a man or woman who can truly enjoy watching sports on television and laugh at the commercials that come on in between, is truly happier than one who can't. A person who can live life and not think about the "why" of life is much, much happier. Quite often, I am deeply unhappy. That's the truth.

So for someone to come up to me and insist that there's something supernatural that is missing in my life and expect me to give them one shred of credibility, well that person is either a scam artist or is highly delusional.

That's the best way for you to think, if you want to stay happy in your life. You know, the knowledge of God doesn't bring any happiness at all, I don't think. All it brings is the knowledge that you are separated from Him in this life--at least to some degree. So, to know God is to risk great unhappiness. You can truly live happier as an atheist.

You need to go to college so you can pester the professors with all this flapdoodle instead of us.

Yeah, that's what I need: more college. Well, that and a professor I can pester with all this flapdoodle philosophy. (Try saying that ten times fast!)

[hismikeness]

Brain barf.

 

[Edward the Theist]

I am more than happy to respond with "I don't know" to any singularity based questions (which by the way, is at this point a presumption, we have not got concrete evidence for before 10^-37 seconds, as far I know). Which puts me and you in similar positions, except that I have fewer entities to explain than you do.

That's atheism!

We are both sure that the universe exists, the only thing I don't know is how/why it exists. You have the problems  of how/why your god exists, whether or not it even exists (severe lack of evidence), how/why it created the universe, all the characteristics of this god and all the continuing interactions it may or may not have with the universe. I have posited nothing that is not plainly obvious. You have posited something that just launches a dizzying array of questions. Your position is one that has far more holes than mine.

My position is one that has far more holes than yours because my position has far more questions than yours. But I think I've come to a conclusion. I think I have taken the question of God as far as I logically can from my perspective.

From my perspective, I have come to see God as a primordial conscious force that perceives only eternity. This concept of God has a major flaw. It equals nothing in its effect. This primordial (g)od has no memories of anything, has no desires for anything, has no motivation to change, and no direction in which to change if it wanted to. It never would have created the universe. It exists without any cause, because it exists eternally, but it can't change from that.

And by the way, the big revelation here is that atheism has the same problem. Take away God and you still have the same problem, only you have it with the singularity. So, today, I am somewhat happy, because today I have transcended atheism and theism. They both are fu..ed.

[Edward the Theist]

Edward the Theist, you have been around HAF more than long enough to understand that quite a bit of what you said in the OP is a strawman in regards to what atheists think/believe.  You have also been around HAF long enough to be well aware of the forum rules and your response to the first comment was uncivil and uncalled for even if the commenter didn't address what you felt was the main point of your OP.

For this reason I'm giving you a warning.

From what I have read it seems the atheist posters here are generally responding to your thoughtfully and civilly (I'm sure there have been exceptions as that happen sometimes but I haven't seen them)...no need for you to act like we are something to be attacked.

Thank you, Whitney.

[Edward the Theist]

Please give us the explanation of where God came from so we can better discuss this topic.

I think you have to be God to answer that one.

If God doesn't need to be explained or have an origin, then why does the universe need one?

For atheists, the universe needs no explanation. Atheists are not troubled by existentialistic musings. That's one of the advantages to giving up belief in God.

I could see why pondering the possible causes for the universe existing is more interesting - because we can perceive the universe.  But if it must, must, absolutely must have a creator named Yahweh, then why does Yahweh not need a creator as well?  Why aren't you tied up in knots over who created Yahweh?  Why is God an exception to the rule?  Why does God not need a creator?  If your answer is something like "because the Bible tells us He has always existed" then surely you can see that's dogma, not reason?

The furthest possible understanding we can reach without being God is that God would have to exist in an eternal state of being. "Eternal" simply means no past, no future, only the present. And, in fact, this is not such a hard concept to grasp. We live in eternity, too. Or at least our consciousness does. You know as well as I do that the past doesn't exist anymore, and the future hasn't happened yet, so...eternity.

Or you can go in the backdoor with the cosmological argument: For anything to exist, it must be caused by something prior to it. However, if there was an infinite regress of prior causes, nothing would ever get caused. So, there has to be a first cause that was not caused by anything else. We call that first cause God.

If you answer to what created God is that God has always existed then why not cut out the middle man and just admit you don't know what created the universe or if it was created at all.

Well, I know it was created, because it is here...near as I can tell. Before the theory of the big bang, we knew philosophically that the universe could not have always existed. Most people don't hold that the universe is infinitely lage, which it would have to be if it had always existed. Otherwise there would be an outside to the universe and that's absurd. But if the universe were infinite, the whole night sky would be filled with light from an infinite amount of stars, otherwise you have to explain why there aren't an infinite amount of stars and that's just as hard as explaining how the universe came into existence to begin with.

I know God created the universe; I just don't know what God is. My previous conception of God has hit a glass ceiling. And I've come to the conclusion that I'm not using the right kind of mind to answer the question. And I don't know if I can get the right kind of mind.

People have such an obsession with linear time.  What if time is not linear but is simply perceived as linear by human beings?  What if the future created the past which eventually became the future?  What if time is not linear at all?

You mean, what if time is a continuous loop?