Posts: 16
Threads: 1
Joined: May 8, 2011
Reputation:
1
Howdy
May 8, 2011 at 12:31 pm
Hello everyone!
I don't really fit into the atheist camp. I am rather spiritual and do have beliefs which I don't require strict scientific proof of--my own experiences can be sufficient for me until I find proper evidence against it. I believe in God, but it is probably not the God most people think of when I say that--so I find it much easier to just say that I am an atheist* even though it's a bit inaccurate.
So, there's a bit of an intro 
Posts: 4535
Threads: 175
Joined: August 10, 2009
Reputation:
43
RE: Howdy
May 8, 2011 at 12:39 pm
Welcome.
One question. Do you consider your coming to conclusions about the nature of reality based solely on 'personal experience' as rational?
.
Posts: 16
Threads: 1
Joined: May 8, 2011
Reputation:
1
RE: Howdy
May 8, 2011 at 12:46 pm
Well, for one thing, I don't come to conclusions about the nature of reality based solely upon personal experience. Rather, if the scientific evidence is sketchy or nonexistent, then I default to personal experience. Science is the underlying basis--what can be proven. But for what is inbetween--if it is neither proven nor unproven or has conflicting evidence/interpretations--then I consider what my own experience has told me.
Posts: 13900
Threads: 262
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: Howdy
May 8, 2011 at 12:55 pm
(May 8, 2011 at 12:46 pm)Dreamer Wrote: Well, for one thing, I don't come to conclusions about the nature of reality based solely upon personal experience. Rather, if the scientific evidence is sketchy or nonexistent, then I default to personal experience. Science is the underlying basis--what can be proven. But for what is inbetween--if it is neither proven nor unproven or has conflicting evidence/interpretations--then I consider what my own experience has told me.
This sounds like the very definition of the 'god of the gaps' argument.
However i shall reserve my final judgement until i've heard more of your 'personal experiences'.
Welcome.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 16
Threads: 1
Joined: May 8, 2011
Reputation:
1
RE: Howdy
May 8, 2011 at 1:02 pm
For instance, I believe in true love, soulmates type of things... No basis in science--but then science doesn't refute it either. Somewhat naive? Okay, I can grant that. There are worse things to be.
And my definition of God, what I believe in is roughly this: The interconnectedness of all people and things. I am God, you are God, my dogs, the monarch butterflies, etc. Not some judgmental asshole deeming people worthy of damnation or eternal bliss. Not a being or deity at all, really.
Posts: 13900
Threads: 262
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: Howdy
May 8, 2011 at 1:06 pm
Its all in the mitichlorians, (or however you spell it)
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 4535
Threads: 175
Joined: August 10, 2009
Reputation:
43
RE: Howdy
May 8, 2011 at 1:07 pm
(This post was last modified: May 8, 2011 at 1:09 pm by theVOID.)
(May 8, 2011 at 12:46 pm)Dreamer Wrote: Well, for one thing, I don't come to conclusions about the nature of reality based solely upon personal experience. Rather, if the scientific evidence is sketchy or nonexistent, then I default to personal experience. Science is the underlying basis--what can be proven. But for what is inbetween--if it is neither proven nor unproven or has conflicting evidence/interpretations--then I consider what my own experience has told me.
If you don't come to conclusions then why do you have such beliefs?
If the scientific evidence is sketchy or nonexistent the default should be non-judgement. You seem to have the position 'If you can't disprove it then I'll believe it until you can'. It should also be mentioned that there are good reasons for not making judgements on such experiences, that being the nature of personal experience is such that it produces a potentially unlimited number of contradictory conclusions.
Do you believe there is any practical benefit to believing what you do in the interim?
(May 8, 2011 at 1:02 pm)Dreamer Wrote: And my definition of God, what I believe in is roughly this: The interconnectedness of all people and things. I am God, you are God, my dogs, the monarch butterflies, etc. Not some judgmental asshole deeming people worthy of damnation or eternal bliss. Not a being or deity at all, really.
Interconnected in what way? And if you believe this then aren't you in fact making a judgement about the nature of reality?
Also, perhaps you should find a different word to use other than God?
.
Posts: 16
Threads: 1
Joined: May 8, 2011
Reputation:
1
RE: Howdy
May 8, 2011 at 1:13 pm
Sure I do. The beliefs I have that aren't supported by strict evidence give me comfort. My belief about God-that we are all essentially one-makes me more patient and loving with people. If I harm you, I'm harming myself. What I do for one, I do for all. So the beliefs I hold bring me comfort as well as make me a more conscientious person. There may be other benefits, but those are what come to mind.
(See why I don't fit in with the atheist? *sighs*)
Posts: 4535
Threads: 175
Joined: August 10, 2009
Reputation:
43
RE: Howdy
May 8, 2011 at 1:16 pm
Okay, so your beliefs are instrumentally rational. All good.
What do you mean by "we are all essentially one"?
.
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Howdy
May 8, 2011 at 1:20 pm
(This post was last modified: May 8, 2011 at 1:29 pm by fr0d0.)
Nice intro Dreamer. Yours seems like an uncompromised position.
<edit>
Didn't Dreamer already explain that VOID - we're all part of one consciousness/ interconnection of all things/ we're all God
|
