Even if theism is a failure, it's still superior to atheism

[The Grand Nudger]

I can imagine many useful side-effects of theism such as fostering community, providing a psychological way to deal with the unknowable, etc. I can also think of many bad side-effect of rigid dogma and intolerance. Secular ideologies also seem to have a religious feel to them, which would argue against my position but I do not see that as a major objection.

Agreed.  People sometimes wonder what the point of having an agent to bargain with is, if the agent is non existent...but it's the bargaining itself that's important to us.  

Not that I have a dog in the fight of proving that theism somehow spares one from misery. As I see Chrisitianity, the believers paths is often towards hardship and suffering, as the lives of the Saints demonstrate. For this reason, I would not try to sell religion on the notion that your life will be more pleasant. Far from...

Trouble is, that's a bad pitch.  Why the "blessed are those who feel like shit" - needed to be rewritten in the red letters in magic book from one story to the next.  We end up with "Blessed are those that..like..do decent social work for the poor and stuff".

[Foxaèr]

The explosion of explicit films production happened in your country.

That's because the U.S. has enough freedom to make porn for everyone in the world, especially for Muslims who consume it most.

Obviously, they have to click on it in order to know what to be offended about, right?

[The Architect Of Fate]

Yup Hypocrites 

https://thenextweb.com/news/who-are-the-...nline-porn

https://raseef22.net/article/1066747-por...phant-room

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33526399/

https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2015...rnography/

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news...79efa90000

[The Grand Nudger]

Closer than the joke suggests to truth. They probably do click on it, and probably do get just a little bit chubbier, precisely because they view it as offensive. Porn does that. It's kindof the point of it, sociologically. The fetishization of desire, particularly with respect to what society deems indecent. Taboo breaking.

Hence all the tabletop books about full butter "peasant" cooking and fresh baked breads produced and sold directly to religious dieters, health nuts, and no carb lunatics, for example. That's food pron.

[Foxaèr]

Which is why they keep pushing the boundaries of acceptable porn and currently simulated incest is in along with free use.

[Untethered]

In reference to God or Gods: "That which cannot be proven must be dismissed as false until proof is discovered."

Really? Limiting your objection's applicability to a specific type of entity without good reason for doing so is a version of the logical fallacy called "special pleading". Pretty sure you are aware that you believe lots of things that cannot be proven such as other people having minds or perhaps that the past is gone is some meaningful sense. Granted it sounds clever, as an atheist meme, but fallacious just the same.

Back to the OP though, if for the sake of argument we say theism is false, then perhaps it is false in the same way that ownership and solidity are - convenienct fictions grounded in strong intuitions. Atomic theory tells us the belief in solid objects, as in conguious substance, is an illusion. Rap any table! Look me in the eye and tell ell me you believe the table is mostly empty space. Your intellect may say you believe that but instinctually you know it's "solid" wood. And I dare you to argue with a two year old that his toys aren't really "his" and do not have the intangibible quality of belonging to him. So while we may have many false intuitions, theism among them, that does not mean that are not useful. I can imagine many useful side-effects of theism such as fostering community, providing a psychological way to deal with the unknowable, etc. I can also think of many bad side-effect of rigid dogma and intolerance. Secular ideologies also seem to have a religious feel to them, which would argue against my position but I do not see that as a major objection.

Not that I have a dog in the fight of proving that theism somehow spares one from misery. As I see Chrisitianity, the believers paths is often towards hardship and suffering, as the lives of the Saints demonstrate. For this reason, I would not try to sell religion on the notion that your life will be more pleasant. Far from...

[Untethered]

I specifically stated "In reference to God or Gods." Nothing at all to do with tables of wood or anything else you mentioned to sidestep what I said.

[The Grand Nudger]

The tables thing is an exceedingly poor argument, at any rate. Nothing about atomic theory told us that there was no such thing as a solid object, we just know more about solid objects than we used to.

Solidity is not a convenient fiction - though we had many fanciful beliefs about solidity. Theism, on the other hand, is a convenient fiction..and we have many fanciful beliefs about gods.

[Jehanne]

Really? Limiting your objection's applicability to a specific type of entity without good reason for doing so is a version of the logical fallacy called "special pleading". Pretty sure you are aware that you believe lots of things that cannot be proven such as other people having minds or perhaps that the past is gone is some meaningful sense. Granted it sounds clever, as an atheist meme, but fallacious just the same.

Back to the OP though, if for the sake of argument we say theism is false, then perhaps it is false in the same way that ownership and solidity are - convenienct fictions grounded in strong intuitions. Atomic theory tells us the belief in solid objects, as in conguious substance, is an illusion. Rap any table! Look me in the eye and tell ell me you believe the table is mostly empty space. Your intellect may say you believe that but instinctually you know it's "solid" wood. And I dare you to argue with a two year old that his toys aren't really "his" and do not have the intangibible quality of belonging to him. So while we may have many false intuitions, theism among them, that does not mean that are not useful. I can imagine many useful side-effects of theism such as fostering community, providing a psychological way to deal with the unknowable, etc. I can also think of many bad side-effect of rigid dogma and intolerance. Secular ideologies also seem to have a religious feel to them, which would argue against my position but I do not see that as a major objection.

Not that I have a dog in the fight of proving that theism somehow spares one from misery. As I see Chrisitianity, the believers paths is often towards hardship and suffering, as the lives of the Saints demonstrate. For this reason, I would not try to sell religion on the notion that your life will be more pleasant. Far from...

Solid objects do exist, as do liquid objects, as do gaseous objects. These differing states of matter can be specified by degrees of freedom with phase transitions between the different states of vibrational, rotational and translational energies of the atoms and molecules in any particular substance. A solid object, for instance, consists of a crystalline lattice where the only energies that are available to a molecule are virtually all vibrational; in such a state, the molecules are oscillating around mostly fixed positions in space.

And, so, yes, solid objects do exist, which is a state of matter of an object where its temperature is less than its freezing/melting point.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

In reference to God or Gods: "That which cannot be proven must be dismissed as false until proof is discovered."

Really? Limiting your objection's applicability to a specific type of entity without good reason for doing so is a version of the logical fallacy called "special pleading". Pretty sure you are aware that you believe lots of things that cannot be proven such as other people having minds or perhaps that the past is gone is some meaningful sense. Granted it sounds clever, as an atheist meme, but fallacious just the same.

Back to the OP though, if for the sake of argument we say theism is false, then perhaps it is false in the same way that ownership and solidity are - convenienct fictions grounded in strong intuitions. Atomic theory tells us the belief in solid objects, as in conguious substance, is an illusion. Rap any table! Look me in the eye and tell ell me you believe the table is mostly empty space. Your intellect may say you believe that but instinctually you know it's "solid" wood. And I dare you to argue with a two year old that his toys aren't really "his" and do not have the intangibible quality of belonging to him. So while we may have many false intuitions, theism among them, that does not mean that are not useful. I can imagine many useful side-effects of theism such as fostering community, providing a psychological way to deal with the unknowable, etc. I can also think of many bad side-effect of rigid dogma and intolerance. Secular ideologies also seem to have a religious feel to them, which would argue against my position but I do not see that as a major objection.

Not that I have a dog in the fight of proving that theism somehow spares one from misery. As I see Chrisitianity, the believers paths is often towards hardship and suffering, as the lives of the Saints demonstrate. For this reason, I would not try to sell religion on the notion that your life will be more pleasant. Far from...

I quite like the analogy made between arguing theism and arguing with a two year old child. Very apropos.

Boru