...Truth?

[Alex K]

When theistogians want to refute atheism, it's always COLD, MINDLESS evolution they argue about. Always cold and mindless. You can see them struggling with what they know the evidence leads to, but which they cannot accept on an emotional level.

[Whateverist]

Hey guys. I'm trying to find truth. I feel like it's worth finding. 

..

- Caleb

[brewer]

Under atheism, the brain is the product of cold and mindless natural processes and there is no mind driving them. How atheists can believe their brain is reliable for ascertaining truth while also believing the above is mind boggling. Often atheists respond to this charge by saying our brains are good at ascertaining truth because we wouldn't have survived if they weren't. That may sound like a good response at first, but it isn't. False beliefs can increase survivability. Evolution may give me the false belief that the boogeyman is inside every McDonald's Big Mac, causing me to stay away from Big Macs. This would save me from harming my health by eating Big Macs, increasing my survivability, but through the power of a false belief. This is a comedic example, but there are multitudes of other examples you could conjure up that are more serious. Even if evolution alone gave people true beliefs when it came to things like "don't go near that animal or it'll eat you," or "don't touch fire because it harms you," what about more abstract things like mathematics or philosophy? Does being good at math or metaphysics increase or decrease survivability? Probably not or probably by not much. So maybe our mind is good for basic things like "fire is hot" but it isn't good for complex ideas.

However, under something like Christianity, the brain is the product of an omniscient, omnipotent, and all-good immaterial mind. So the Christian has good reason to believe their brains are good at ascertaining truth.

god is all good, pa-lease. Read much? If the product of god they should be pretty good at killin and rapin also.

[Whateverist]

Rhetorical, right?

[ManofYesterday]

However, under something like Christianity, the brain is the product of an omniscient, omnipotent, and all-good immaterial mind. So the Christian has good reason to believe their brains are good at ascertaining truth.

That should read "the brain is *claimed* to be the product of..."

That is not a good reason automatically, it merely would be a good reason if the premise were true, which is begging the question. Nothing can be concluded from this statement about Christianity.

That's the point I was making, obviously. I was comparing two world views. First I followed where atheism leads and then I followed where Christianity leads. I also explained how it would be difficult for the atheist to reconcile their belief that the brain can be trusted to produce true beliefs with their belief that their brain is the product of merely cold and mindless natural processes. Christianity doesn't have this same difficulty.

That being said, if this is all you have in response to my previous post (a strawman/misunderstanding), then I must have done an amazing job.

Is there anything else that you'd like to add?

---

When theistogians want to refute atheism, it's always COLD, MINDLESS evolution they argue about. Always cold and mindless. You can see them struggling with what they know the evidence leads to, but which they cannot accept on an emotional level.

Wait, so you don't think your brain is the product of cold and mindless evolution?

---

Under atheism, the brain is the product of cold and mindless natural processes and there is no mind driving them. How atheists can believe their brain is reliable for ascertaining truth while also believing the above is mind boggling. Often atheists respond to this charge by saying our brains are good at ascertaining truth because we wouldn't have survived if they weren't. That may sound like a good response at first, but it isn't. False beliefs can increase survivability. Evolution may give me the false belief that the boogeyman is inside every McDonald's Big Mac, causing me to stay away from Big Macs. This would save me from harming my health by eating Big Macs, increasing my survivability, but through the power of a false belief. This is a comedic example, but there are multitudes of other examples you could conjure up that are more serious. Even if evolution alone gave people true beliefs when it came to things like "don't go near that animal or it'll eat you," or "don't touch fire because it harms you," what about more abstract things like mathematics or philosophy? Does being good at math or metaphysics increase or decrease survivability? Probably not or probably by not much. So maybe our mind is good for basic things like "fire is hot" but it isn't good for complex ideas.

However, under something like Christianity, the brain is the product of an omniscient, omnipotent, and all-good immaterial mind. So the Christian has good reason to believe their brains are good at ascertaining truth.

god is all good, pa-lease. Read much? If the product of god they should be pretty good at killin and rapin also.

Yeah, I read a lot. Do you read at all?

[Whateverist]

That should read "the brain is *claimed* to be the product of..."

That is not a good reason automatically, it merely would be a good reason if the premise were true, which is begging the question. Nothing can be concluded from this statement about Christianity.

That's the point I was making, obviously. I was comparing two world views. First I followed where atheism leads and then I followed where Christianity leads. I also explained how it would be difficult for the atheist to reconcile their belief that the brain can be trusted to produce true beliefs with their belief that their brain is the product of merely cold and mindless natural processes. Christianity doesn't have this same difficulty.

That being said, if this is all you have in response to my previous post (a strawman/misunderstanding), then I must have done an amazing job.

Is there anything else that you'd like to add?

---

When theistogians want to refute atheism, it's always COLD, MINDLESS evolution they argue about. Always cold and mindless. You can see them struggling with what they know the evidence leads to, but which they cannot accept on an emotional level.

Wait, so you don't think your brain is the product of cold and mindless evolution?

---

god is all good, pa-lease. Read much? If the product of god they should be pretty good at killin and rapin also.

Yeah, I read a lot. Do you read at all?

May I say, and I'm just being completely honest here ..

.. you sound just like some really angry believer who just can't believe anyone would deliberately turn away from God.  Welcome anyway, no hard feelings?  Can't say that I'll pray for you but at least I'll stop preying on you now.  How's that?

[ManofYesterday]

That's the point I was making, obviously. I was comparing two world views. First I followed where atheism leads and then I followed where Christianity leads. I also explained how it would be difficult for the atheist to reconcile their belief that the brain can be trusted to produce true beliefs with their belief that their brain is the product of merely cold and mindless natural processes. Christianity doesn't have this same difficulty.

That being said, if this is all you have in response to my previous post (a strawman/misunderstanding), then I must have done an amazing job.

Is there anything else that you'd like to add?

---

Wait, so you don't think your brain is the product of cold and mindless evolution?

---

Yeah, I read a lot. Do you read at all?

May I say, and I'm just being completely honest here ..

.. you sound just like some really angry believer who just can't believe anyone would deliberately turn away from God.  Welcome anyway, no hard feelings?  Can't say that I'll pray for you but at least I'll stop preying on you now.  How's that?

That's bizarre because every point I've made in this thread is from pure reason and evidence. Nothing to do with emotion. I think you got emotional after reading my post because you're unable to offer a rebuttal and so you've devolved into pop psychology and projection. Do you actually have anything substantive to add to the discussion?

[Whateverist]

Strictly speaking I don't think hilarity is classified as an emotion.

[Definitely Disillusioned]

I'm sorry that all you guys feel offended by my questioning. I don't get offended by ideas and I guess I just assume other people are the same. I see that's not fair to believe on the internet.

I also see that these forums aren't where I should be expecting to find worthwhile philosophical discussion. I entered assuming people were ready and willing to talk cooly and logically about philosophy in the context of the history of ideas and the rules of logic in general. I assumed atheists believed themselves to be intelligent and willing to question. I see now that, with this experience at least, these were unfounded assumptions and I made them unfairly. So far the only thing I've found is defensiveness, a denial of the things most philosophers would think ludicrous to deny (the validity of two of the greatest philosophers of all time, for instance), and a complete lack of desire to accept real questioning in the name of seeking truth. I see now that the atheists who are willing to reply to me on this forum are no better than the Christians I've engaged with in the past who also committed what seems to me like intellectual suicide of a pretty low form.

I don't think this is productive and it's definitely not achieving my original goal of finding intelligent conversation about the things I hold to be important. I thought you people wanted to find truth and understand reality. Maybe I was wrong. Or maybe it's just the internet. Regardless, this has become pointless. I don't appreciate that.

Anyhow, you guys have a fantastic life (to quote the Doctor). You won't see me again. And to anyone who reads the train of posting, I hope you can figure out what prompted the returns I got for my efforts to find truth. Honestly now I just feel sad and more alone than ever in my search.

[Alex K]

My brain is a product of evolution. Your statement that it is 'cold', that's your emotional response. Mindless, in the sense that it is not teleological, maybe.