*trigger warning* What if atheism's not all it seems?

[Crossless2.0]

If only we could arrange some sort of play date for Rik, MysticKnight, and Huggy whenever a somewhat interesting thread is made . . .

[Amarok]

Not atheism as such but atheists in general follow a typical set same same as an organized religion.  
No question about it.  
None of whatsoever.  
Their dogmas are totally different but dogmas are indeed.  
Just to mention fews.  
When we die is all over.  
The consciousness is a product of the brain.  
NDEs are the product of a brain devoid of blood and oxygen.  
Nobody created the universe and it can run without a God. 
And the list of unproven claims taken as full truth goes on and o

Then you just refuted your own point . If it can't be an inherent idea of atheism . Then it can't be an atheist dogma . And  may i point out none of these are treated the way you claim .So you either dishonest or delusional.

---

You are welcome too brother Khem. 
Unfortunately you are dead wrong. 
By believing in all those dogmas that i mentioned in my previous post plus many others you guys fall automatically in the trap of 
dogmatic believers which means that you and religions share the same world of fantasies. 
Different fantasies of course nevertheless fantasies.

Nope that's just a empty amount of projection .

[The Grand Nudger]

Some people are under the impression that anything they're too dense to comprehend is a fantasy, while everything they're just dense enough to believe in is reality.

[Minimalist]

If only we could arrange some sort of play date for Rik, MysticKnight, and Huggy whenever a somewhat interesting thread is made . . .

Make sure the walls are padded.

[Pat Mustard]

Two things I notice in the OP. Appeal to emotion and treating atheists like some monolithic group adhering to some sacred creed and finding Richard Dawkins to be so cool (man, you do not know me at all then).

He's cool for cats.

[Neo-Scholastic]

I'm curious, PhilosophicalZebra, if it were shown that believing that 2 + 2 = 5 led to improved mental well-being, would you commit yourself to believing that 2 + 2 = 5?

You seem more concerned with the consequences of believing than you do with whether or not the belief is true.

Interesting example. At the same time it is not unreasonable to note that ideas have consequences. If someone did believe 2+2=5 he would probably have difficulty managing his finances, etc. Similarly many anti-theists on this forum seem to feel (contrary the empirical benefits of belief) that theism results in various personal and social ills. While Appealing to Consequences is technically a logical fallacy there are two very good reasons to take consequences into account.

First, at least half of the brain processes information with intuition. I don't think this should be discounted. Intuition is a useful check on the logical side of our brain that just as often errs by rationalizing some desire rather than providing a truly objective analysis. Personally, I think it is wise to view strongly counter-intuitive conclusions with suspicion. Examples of these would be notions like solipsism and eliminative materialism.

Second, making note of consequences is one of the foundations of empiricism. The consequences of a purely rational analysis, particularly with respect to questions of value, are often disastrous in practice. Examples include the Cultural Revolution in China, the Reign of Terror in revolutionary France, and Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal". If any rational analysis forces us to abandon basic concepts like human dignity and personal autonomy, we might want to view that analysis with suspicion also.

My personal opinions about the relationship between atheism and nihilism are well-known and need no elaboration; however, I would suggest that people treat the Argument from Consequences the same way we should Occam's razor, not as a definitive rule, but rather as a cautionary guide.

[pocaracas]

I'm curious, PhilosophicalZebra, if it were shown that believing that 2 + 2 = 5 led to improved mental well-being, would you commit yourself to believing that 2 + 2 = 5?

You seem more concerned with the consequences of believing than you do with whether or not the belief is true.

Interesting example. At the same time it is not unreasonable to note that ideas have consequences. If someone did believe 2+2=5 he would probably have difficulty managing his finances, etc. Similarly many anti-theists on this forum seem to feel (contrary the empirical benefits of belief) that theism results in various personal and social ills. While Appealing to Consequences is technically a logical fallacy there are two very good reasons to take consequences into account.

First, at least half of the brain processes information with intuition. I don't think this should be discounted. Intuition is a useful check on the logical side of our brain that just as often errs by rationalizing some desire rather than providing a truly objective analysis. Personally, I think it is wise to view strongly counter-intuitive conclusions with suspicion. Examples of these would be notions like solipsism and eliminative materialism.

Second, making note of consequences is one of the foundations of empiricism. The consequences of a purely rational analysis, particularly with respect to questions of value, are often disastrous in practice. Examples include the Cultural Revolution in China, the Reign of Terror in revolutionary France, and Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal". If any rational analysis forces us to abandon basic concepts like human dignity and personal autonomy, we might want to view that analysis with suspicion also.

My personal opinions about the relationship between atheism and nihilism are well-known and need no elaboration; however, I would suggest that people treat the Argument from Consequences the same way we should Occam's razor, not as a definitive rule, but rather as a cautionary guide.

On the opposite side of the super-counter-intuitive, but highly rational notions that do work:
- Einstein's Theory of Relativity
- Quantum Physics

The consequences of these working are the screen, computer and network that you're using to access this forum, the server on which it is hosted, along with every other IT related tech in the world.
When you say these things "are often disastrous in practice"... well... I have to think you're trying too hard to impart "empiricism" on historical events that are borne out of complex social situations.

[Minimalist]

Similarly many anti-theists on this forum seem to feel (contrary the empirical benefits of belief) that theism results in various personal and social ills.

And wherever do we get that idea, Chad?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...eport.html

Christian militias in Central African Republic 'burnt witches at stake', says UN report

[Cyberman]

Nigerian 'witch' children.

[Amarok]

Similarly many anti-theists on this forum seem to feel (contrary the empirical benefits of belief) that theism results in various personal and social ills.

Their are no benefits that come from belief only benefits attached to it after the fact . There is nothing religion offers that people need or could live without . And their is tons of evidence that belief lead to all manor social ills.And Wooters moronic scare mongering is just that.And comparing a good logical rule to a fallacy that's epic level derp. And yes you have yammered on your baseless "opinion " link between nihilism and Atheist and it has been soundly thrashed .