Trivia Why don't atheists realize their world view is absurd?

[plhbg1]

How interesting that the equivalent question atheists formulate is:

When will theists finally realize that their worldview is ludicrous?

For us, the very idea whereby billions of human beings (a quarter of whom in the Western World) still worship absurd mythical entities is beyond my comprehension. It surely represents an embarrassment that our species, during the fast advancing 21st century, still worship abstract deities… Quite frankly, my heart goes to you, for I am sorry for your self-inflicted cultural blindness.

What do you think?

 

[Dreath29]

50 - 50 not all atheist is that kind, specially me I just think there's no need to worship being when you just think they are higher life form, k.

 

[XxAccursedxX]

I'm an athiest and a traditional man(I care, protect and provide), what's wrong with my world view?

 

[Watashiwabakadesu]

I'm an Agnostic person before I was an atheist...
Im my own opinion that still depends on the life of each individual...
When people gather in one faith they can create religion...
When an individual live life as it own one can be Agnostic or an atheist...
Loner like me tend to be both...
The idea that one own point of view is absurb is still base on your own opinion of the individual who said it ..
Who are we to judge others?
If we judge others base on our limited idea of that individual then the same can be said to us..

50 - 50 not all atheist is that kind, specially me I just think there's no need to worship being when you just think they are higher life form, k.

I love to read manga, manhua, manhwa and so on ...
So if I don't believe about gods and demon then reading would be boring...
but believing and worshipping are not the same...
it's just a matter of mind set..

 

[plhbg1]

When people gather in one faith they can create religion...
When an individual live life as it own one can be Agnostic or an atheist...
Loner like me tend to be both...

for me there is nothing wrong of gathering together even if i'm agnostic, like all agnostics gather together but i think agnostics would not tend to do it since most of them came from theism at sawang sawa na sa gathering together hehe

Who are we to judge others?
If we judge others base on our limited idea of that individual then the same can be said to us..

i would agree if you mean to judge the person as a whole but if you mean to include judging a specific act of that person (with a context) i would say it's a sign of incompetence being not able to judge a chunk of a person (those with specific context), just like when someone scammed you and you still not call him a scammer as you don't know more about the person hehe

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

Because it is a constant cycle.

Modern mind, is really so much affected by teachings of christianity which views the world moving from one state into another. From the beginning to an end

Like what you are putting forward, you view agnosticsm/atheism as the future, as we move out from religious practices. But that is just half of the same cycle.
Most other religions that is not based on Judaism, they view time as cycle. (Notice how most other cultures draw their calendars as circular)

If you look through history in the lens of psychology and theology, (philosophy when combined) you would notice that our time is not the first time that "atheism" is sê×ÿ, and "theism" became boring and absurd. Until it is not. Sometimes, theistic beliefs is what makes people freer, until until it becomes tyrannical in itself, then once again atheism becomes the position a free mind would crave.

It really depends on the situation of the country.

(i might make my own thread exploring more on this then i will link it here.)

Btw. Im happy for you creating your own thread.

 

[Imperial_Nuggets]

We believe there is always higher power beyond us. Yet I do not worship them, just knowing they exist its good for awareness sake. But to worship them would take our mortal time, whilst doing this do they even care or give a damn about us?

Respect people and their boundaries, give a damn with your co-mortal beings. We are the only ones who can help one another. Respect all life here on this planet. We are not the first ones nor the last.

 

[plhbg1]

Because it is a constant cycle.

Modern mind, is really so much affected by teachings of christianity which views the world moving from one state into another. From the beginning to an end

Like what you are putting forward, you view agnosticsm/atheism as the future, as we move out from religious practices. But that is just half of the same cycle.
Most other religions that is not based on Judaism, they view time as cycle. (Notice how most other cultures draw their calendars as circular)

View attachment 2443269View attachment 2443270View attachment 2443271

If you look through history in the lens of psychology and theology, (philosophy when combined) you would notice that our time is not the first time that "atheism" is sê×ÿ, and "theism" became boring and absurd. Until it is not. Sometimes, theistic beliefs is what makes people freer, until until it becomes tyrannical in itself, then once again atheism becomes the position a free mind would crave.

It really depends on the situation of the country.

(i might make my own thread exploring more on this then i will link it here.)

i would say that cycle of yours is affected by science which do not operate on a cyclic pattern, later on that cycle of yours would get deformed by non-cyclic things affecting it such as science

Btw. Im happy for you creating your own thread.

let's say a new year it's time to try something new hehe

Respect people and their boundaries, give a damn with your co-mortal beings. We are the only ones who can help one another. Respect all life here on this planet.

these statements have theistic foundation of caring for others but for a person who is a fan of science it's all about competition (survival of the fittest) and caring for others is put to a minimum level that i only help/respect a person if i think he needs it and if it doesn't interfere with my own progress

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

i would say that cycle of yours is affected by science which do not operate on a cyclic pattern, later on that cycle of yours would get deformed by non-cyclic things affecting it such as science

You think so? Not all scientist would agree with what you say..
1.the big bang could just be one pulse, then contracts to the "big squeeze", repeating over and over. You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now..
2.Creatures have life "cycles".
3. Planets revolve's around stars in cycles.

Your view of science is deeply influenced with Judeo-Christian concept of time that it might be short sighted.

This is not to say that this is "the" truth (as to it can never be proven, at least in our lifetime). But this is how society mostly operates. This is why I elaborated:

If you look through history in the lens of psychology and theology

For simplicity's sake, and to stay in the topic of religion.

To read more about the cyclic phylosophy here is a link:
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.

 

[plhbg1]

You think so? Not all scientist would agree with what you say..
1.the big bang could just be one pulse, then contracts to the "big squeeze", repeating over and over. You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now..
2.Creatures have life "cycles".
3. Planets revolve's around stars in cycles.

Your view of science is deeply influenced with Judeo-Christian concept of time that it might be short sighted.
View attachment 2443627

This is not to say that this is "the" truth (as to it can never be proven, at least in our lifetime). But this is how society mostly operates. This is why I elaborated:

For simplicity's sake, and to stay in the topic of religion.

To read more about the cyclic phylosophy here is a link:
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.

big bang is not science, they are outputs of science, they were discovered using science, i'm talking about the science itself

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

big bang is not science, they are outputs of science, they were discovered using science, i'm talking about the science itself

Ah, you meant that cycle i was talking about on the first comment?

Well, we can't be so sure. Maybe youre right, pero consider this.
What we are referring to as "religions" in the present was viewed in the past the same as we view science in the present. Who is to say that our current version of science may turn into something like a religion in the future? Maybe, pag may bago na na theory to disprove Big bang at iba pang scientific theories, meron mga grupo na kung tawagin "Big bang congregation" or "Followers of the Matrix", worshipping "quantum gods", or "the A.I. singularity" ... and everything we currently know will be classified as religious beliefs. Not impossible right?

That is one way the "cycle" can take form.

 

[plhbg1]

Ah, you meant that cycle i was talking about on the first comment?

Well, we can't be so sure. Maybe youre right, pero consider this.
What we are referring to as "religions" in the present was viewed in the past the same as we view science in the present. Who is to say that our current version of science may turn into something like a religion in the future? Maybe, pag may bago na na theory to disprove Big bang at iba pang scientific theories, meron mga grupo na kung tawagin "Big bang congregation" or "Followers of the Matrix", worshipping "quantum gods", or "the A.I. singularity" ... and everything we currently know will be classified as religious beliefs. Not impossible right?

That is one way the "cycle" can take form.

there is a possibility of cycle formation but as of the moment we don't have at least 1 cycle for that

religion in the past is also the science in the past and it was actually due to absence of science, religion existed before science

but religion is not capable of updating itself, they are stuck at their original teachings (cycling on it), whereas science continuously improves itself, it is not stuck at its original teachings (does not cycle but trending in a direction)

the only possibility of cycle formation is when science becomes the religion in the future due to absence/extermination of religion, the complete opposite of the past where religion is science due to absence of science so i agree with you on this

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

religion is not capable of updating itself, they are stuck at their original teachings (cycling on it)

On contrary, it actually did. Like we dont stone women to death anymore. That is why there are different sects which can be "updates" to the old teachings. Christianity itself is an update from old jewish traditions. Of course they would seem slow or stagnant for you because religion has the tendency to be conservative and biased towards old tradition.

whereas science continuously improves itself, it is not stuck at its original teachings (does not cycle but trending in a direction)

Trending towards a direction does not mean it is not a part of a cycle. We only have a very tiny view of time, so we see it as trending to one direction, like in this picture.

But in a greater fuller scale, we could not know or even comprehend if it is just heading back to the beginning. Like the serpent eating its tail on this symbol.

Of course, like every generation, we are inherently arrogant to think that we are the "best" and "smartest" generation, as every child think they're better than their parent.

But time will come, we will only be part of the past, who will be criticized the exact same way you just criticized the ways of people in the past. Me and you will be the "stupid" people who they will blame with all the problems in society.

 

[plhbg1]

On contrary, it actually did. Like we dont stone women to death anymore. That is why there are different sects which can be "updates" to the old teachings. Christianity itself is an update from old jewish traditions. Of course they would seem slow or stagnant for you because religion has the tendency to be conservative and biased towards old tradition.

that is not an update, it's part of the original book, without it the book cannot be called bible, after that any new not found in the book is rejected instead of being accepted

Trending towards a direction does not mean it is not a part of a cycle. We only have a very tiny view of time, so we see it as trending to one direction, like in this picture.

But in a greater fuller scale, we could not know or even comprehend if it is just heading back to the beginning. Like the serpent eating its tail on this symbol.

View attachment 2446911

i would agree on time being not always on straight line as what einstein highlighted that it can be bent but i'm talking about science instead of time

Of course, like every generation, we are inherently arrogant to think that we are the "best" and "smartest" generation, as every child think they're better than their parent.

But time will come, we will only be part of the past, who will be criticized the exact same way you just criticized the ways of people in the past. Me and you will be the "stupid" people who they will blame with all the problems in society.

that is science where the new ones are always better than the old ones, and that has been the trend from the start and moving in one direction instead of re-directing to the opposite forming a cycle

 

[JabolWock]

for me it is good

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

that is not an update, it's part of the original book, without it the book cannot be called bible, after that any new not found in the book is rejected instead of being accepted

It is really a mistake to think that the bible is the beginning of the christian thinking. You are not taking into account the old testament which existed way beyond that, starting from the Torah (first 5 books). And arguably, even the Torah is most probably based on beliefs that extends further to the past, maybe even before writing was invented.

i would agree on time being not always on straight line as what einstein highlighted that it can be bent but i'm talking about science instead of time

This is not about time travel. It is more of a "history repeating itself" concept. And viewed not from the perspective of individual people, but on a wider scale, societies, countries, humanity or as far as all sentient beings that existed.

I dont blame you if you dont get it. Just dont want you to get the wrong idea.

and that has been the trend from the start and moving in one direction

I fully agree. It is just that you are not asking the question to where is this going..

Here is an analogy:
I mean you can start walking from any where on earth to "a certain direction", ignoring the terrain, you will find yourself walking towards the very same spot you started.

 

[plhbg1]

It is really a mistake to think that the bible is the beginning of the christian thinking. You are not taking into account the old testament which existed way beyond that, starting from the Torah (first 5 books). And arguably, even the Torah is most probably based on beliefs that extends further to the past, maybe even before writing was invented.

nah i would say bible is the original teaching for christianity, those using Torah is not christianity, it's a different religion

This is not about time travel. It is more of a "history repeating itself" concept. And viewed not from the perspective of individual people, but on a wider scale, societies, countries, humanity or as far as all sentient beings that existed.

I dont blame you if you dont get it. Just dont want you to get the wrong idea.

nah i still cannot agree with you on history repeats itself thing, we don't have evidence that history is going to repeat, we can only think that history CAN repeat itself

I fully agree. It is just that you are not asking the question to where is this going..

Here is an analogy:
I mean you can start walking from any where on earth to "a certain direction", ignoring the terrain, you will find yourself walking towards the very same spot you started.

i would agree with you on the context of the earth's shape, but not on the direction that science is heading

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

nah i would say bible is the original teaching for christianity, those using Torah is not christianity, it's a different religion

nah i still cannot agree with you on history repeats itself thing, we don't have evidence that history is going to repeat, we can only think that history CAN repeat itself

i would agree with you on the context of the earth's shape, but not on the direction that science is heading

Hai.. i envy your lack of perspective. Everything is so much simpler in this tiny world of yours.

 

[plhbg1]

Hai.. i envy your lack of perspective.

it's not lacking, it's just having a different one hehe

Everything is so much simpler in this tiny world of yours.

i like simple things and i always choose which ones to learn hehe

 

[N E G A N]

I believe in "GOD", kasi para sakin lahat ng to impossible mabuo without someone like HIM. If the question is who specifically? same lang yan sila lahat iba-iba lang perspective per person o lahi, like in Muslim they also have Jesus but HE is just a prophet, they also believe in old testament. They are all related somehow.

Always remember that action speaks louder than words so before you share and fight for your "Religion/beliefs" make sure you live in accordance to it, otherwise you're just an hypocrite