(February 11, 2019 at 8:22 pm)bennyboy Wrote:

(February 11, 2019 at 8:11 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: That works for children.

Relative to the realities of the Universe and even of our society, I'd say we're all children.

Dismissive of you.

(February 4, 2019 at 10:04 am)GODZILLA Wrote: I understand that this may sound like a stupid question. However this is something I really never understand. Why do we give so much credence to a belief surrounding a single man? I have read accounts that the actual man Jesus Christ did exist. However, is "powers" or whatever were severely exaggerated. This question goes for Islam and Judaism as well. You know, the big three. And I do know these 3 do stem from each other. But why? Why are these so widely practiced?

What's the alternative?

Non-religious worldviews are not particularly very believable, that even most atheist seem to be more inclined to believe in nothing in particular, than any of them. And most people prefer to believe in something, rather than nothing. People are more inclined to believe that life has some purpose, a moral order, meaning, etc.. than not, and religious views house such concepts. 

Secondly there's a relationship between religion and community, the more inclined people are to be a part of deeper community, that resemble extended families in way, who share in each other's lives, etc.... the more inclined they are to be religious, and the less inclined people are the more inclined they are to be non-religious. Hence why welfare states, which often take on many of the functional roles of communities, have the highest levels of disbelief. 

For me personally as a Christian, I find it to be a pretty rich tradition, that it far more easier to identify with christian writers, thinkers, people, than non-christians and atheists. I've been privileged in living a life among believers who were positive role modes, positive influences, with very little of the negative types many here seem to have encountered. People who seem to be honest with themselves, authentic, and real, loving, and kind. All these things add to making me more inclined to be believer, than an unbeliever.

One would think that after all that practice one of the religions would have gotten it right by now...

(February 12, 2019 at 8:51 am)Acrobat Wrote: What's the alternative?

The alternative to not believing in fairy tales?  I don;t think you have a solid grasp on how believable fairy tales are, even as a relative measure.  The religious -themselves- discount the vast majority of fairy tales.   All but one, in nearly every case.

Quote:For me personally as a Christian, I find it to be a pretty rich tradition, that it far more easier to identify with christian writers, thinkers, people, than non-christians and atheists. I've been privileged in living a life among believers who were positive role modes, positive influences, with very little of the negative types many here seem to have encountered. People who seem to be honest with themselves, authentic, and real, loving, and kind. All these things add to making me more inclined to be believer, than an unbeliever.

LOL..you are one of the "negative types". Here's something to consider..what about what a bunch of people do, or how you perceive those people..has anything to do with gods? Why would or should the one inform you as to the other?

96% of all of the time since full modernity there have been honest, authentic, real, loving and kind human beings..who believed in some other god, or no god at all. Your god is an artifact of only the most recent 4%, and those people from before still exist in that 4%. Full on secular humanism is older than christianity, even. Why does this immense mass of people and time not inform you, similarly, of the validity of their beliefs (or lack thereof), beliefs explicitly in contradiction to your own?

(February 12, 2019 at 10:04 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: The alternative to not believing in fairy tales?  I don’t think you have a solid grasp on how believable fairy tales are, even as a relative measure.  The religious -themselves- discount the vast majority of fairy tales.   All but one, in nearly every case.

lol, i think the billions of people who believe in “fairy tales”, the near universality of such beliefs, reveal how easily we are susceptible to believing them.

And yes while everyone doesn’t believe the same exact fairy tale, everyone seems to believe in one fairy tale or the other. They’re more susceptible to believe in one, than not believe in any.

Quote:Here's something to consider..what about what a bunch of people do, or how you perceive those people..has anything to do with gods? Why would or should the one inform you as to the other?

A lot actually. It’s just as important as role models, are in the shaping of our identify. What you believe, and who you are, your sense of identity are linked quite tightly. If i want to be like my mom, I have to share in some of her fundamental beliefs that comprise who she is.

If you wanted to be like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Neil Tyson, Dennett, Hume etc.. if they exists as model you seek to emulate, then it shouldn’t be surprising why this would make your more susceptible to being an atheist than a theist. You’re not going to find many theists who idolize such figures, the way many atheists do.

Quote:Full on secular humanism is older than christianity, even. Why does this immense mass of people and time not inform you, similarly, of the validity of their beliefs (or lack thereof), beliefs explicitly in contradiction to your own?

The image of secular humanism to me, is some bourgeois white man in an ivory tower, uttering cringey platitudes, patting each other on the back. There’s none I view as models or aspirations, and none that would ever inspire me to join a humanist gathering.

If there is anything appealing to me about secular views, it would be nihilism and cynicism, and not the dewey eyed optimism of humanism. If I were to ever become an atheists, the last thing I would ever be is a humanist.

The disgust alone would keep me quite far from it.

(February 12, 2019 at 11:01 am)Acrobat Wrote: lol, i think the billions of people who believe in “fairy tales”, the near universality of such beliefs, reveal how easily we are susceptible to believing them.

And yes while everyone doesn’t believe the same exact fairy tale, everyone seems to believe in one fairy tale or the other. They’re more susceptible to believe in one, than not believe in any.

Well..yeah, sure.  We're very susceptible.  That's more a con than a pro.  A reason to take extra care, not a reason to believe or assume that there is some validity to the belief.  

Quote:A lot actually. It’s just as important as role models, are in the shaping of our identify. What you believe, and who you are, your sense of identity are linked quite tightly. If i want to be like my mom, I have to share in some of her fundamental beliefs that comprise who she is.

Sure.  Though it's unclear what fairy tale beliefs are fundamental to some other positively valued concept, or even how they would be so.  

Quote:If you wanted to be like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Neil Tyson, Dennett, Hume etc.. if they exists as model you seek to emulate, then it shouldn’t be surprising why this would make your more susceptible to being an atheist than a theist. You’re not going to find many theists who idolize such figures, the way many atheists do.

: shrugs :  

I've never been a theist.  I think that this might be an issue of believers trying to find idols such as those idols they themselves worship?  

Quote:The image of secular humanism to me, is some bourgeois white man in an ivory tower, uttering cringey platitudes, patting each other on the back. There’s none I view as models or aspirations, and none that would ever inspire me to join a humanist gathering.

Your image of secular humanism is thoroughly inaccurate.  That you arrive at inaccurate conclusions by starting with an inaccurate premise is hardly surprising..but it's a common habit of the religious...so...seems like another con.  

Quote:If there is anything appealing to me about secular views, it would be nihilism and cynicism, and not the dewey eyed optimism of humanism. If I were to ever become an atheists, the last thing I would ever be is a humanist.

That has nothing to do with secularism, you're only indicating that nihilism and cynicism are already appealing to you..as a religious person.  That, if you lost your faith, you'd become a complete dirtbag. Well, as before, that only indicates that you already are. Religious beliefs seem to have been incapable of improving you in this regard.

Quote:The disgust alone would keep me quite far from it.

Case in point. What value or fundamental belief of your mothers leads you to present yourself as you do on these boards, or to make the statements you post?

(February 12, 2019 at 11:17 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: Well..yeah, sure.  We're very susceptible.  That's more a con than a pro.  A reason to take extra care, not a reason to believe or assume that there is some validity to the belief.  

The OP was about why people believe, not about the validity of those beliefs. Susceptibility is a pro and not a con, when it comes to the believing vs non-believing.

Quote:Sure.  Though it's unclear what fairy tale beliefs are fundamental to some other positively valued concept, or even how they would be so.  

It depends on what you mean by fairy tale beliefs. Beliefs in eternal values, life anchored in intrinsic purpose and meaning, in a love that can transform even the most dire of situations, a sense of something sacred, in a hope the can’t be taken away, are fundamental to who my mother is. Someone absent of such beliefs wouldn’t resemble my mother all that much.

Quote:Your image of secular humanism is thoroughly inaccurate.  That you arrive at inaccurate conclusions by starting with an inaccurate premise is hardly surprising..but it's a common habit of the religious...so...seems like another con.  

Who is an accurate reflection of a humanist? Would Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Neil Tyson, Carl Sagan in your view be good representatives of humanist?

Quote:Case in point. What value or fundamental belief of your mothers leads you to present yourself as you do on these boards, or to make the statements you post?

None really, my mother wouldn’t be the type to be on internet boards. Though I tend to bust people’s ball on here, and be harsh on some of them their cherished beliefs, I try and avoid making it personal. I don’t harbor any real dislike for anyone here, including you. I’m sure you’re a decent dude, who I could tolerate getting a beer with.

Yeah..... but I couldn't turn my back on you for fear of getting a shiv to the kidneys if you suddenly found yourself faithless as you stared into the bottom of a bottle, like people do..... to hear you tell the tale, lol.  

Here we have an example of the failure of those fundamentals.  You tell us that you engage in a sort of idol mimicry, but for whatever reason fail to mimic that idol.  This is on top of the complete disconnect between the actions of some idol and the underlying validity of whatever belief in fairy tales motivates them.  That's an impressive failure on both counts.

Religion was a placeholder for science. Unfortunately it became vacuum-welded to society.

(February 12, 2019 at 3:30 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Religion was a placeholder for science. Unfortunately it became vacuum-welded to society.

No, religion never was a placeholder for science, anymore so then great novels, art, poetry are placeholders for science. 

People cling to religions for questions regarding meaning, how one ought to live life, how things ought to be. Religions are about dealing with suffering, our desire for community, about the values and virtues we ought to embody. None of which are scientific questions, since all science provides us is answers to how things are.