eharper256
Member
Yay, contraversial. But before anything else, I will say this: This topic is NOT about flaming religion. Whether a person believes, and what they believe in is up to them; and them alone. I don't want or need to see flaming, or 'god suxxors', or 'atheism is pants' or anything to that matter.
No, as the title suggests, this topic is meant to question NOT the whats or hows of belief, but rather, the weird phenomenon of WHY we believe. It is an age old question that even modern society frowns upon trying to answer, even if it is no longer blasphemy. Basically, I would like to shake the foundations of belief.
To use examples that are popular now:
If you hold that there is a one true god and that creationism is correct, why do you do so? Similarily, if you consider yourself a true atheist, and consider that evolution is the only way, why is that?
The simple answer to the above is 'faith' for the former and 'evidence' for the latter. But neither are paticularily convincing answers.
If you say we're here today because god clicked his fingers and said 'make it so!', how can you sweep all of the lovely evidence against that theory dug up under the rather large carpet? Is it really so difficult to think that we were once slobbering rats and communal apes? Humankind is typically convinced of their own superiority, and it is typical to think that, because we are clearly superior to all other species on the planet, there MUST, by standard logic, be something that is superior to us. But to think we are clearly destined for the top spot is a narrow and conceited opinion. If you don't understand that, go back and read 'The Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy'.
Similarily, if you say we're here today thanks wholeheartedly to evolution, I then present you with the wonderful Permian Extinction. Had this terrible event not have occured, we could possibly be here today stroking our long green tails, shouting 'look at the scales on that!' to beautiful passers-by on the streets. So its terribly convienient for small mammals to have survived and eventually brought about humans. There are still many things we cannot begin to understand in science. It is easy to think, by good 'ol standard logic, that we Will eventually fill those holes without fail. But to think we can catalogue and understand all again assumes our own superiority.
--------------------------------
To put it yet another way:
When quizzed about religion, my good friend once told me: "I'm an agnostic. I'll believe in god when pulls the roof off and says hello."
This, or a derevative thereof, is easily the most common answer I hear.
But, I am often puzzled over that answer. Surely, to say such a thing is self defeating.
It is also a narrow viewpoint, because it is assuming that god has a form that can be percieved in the physical. And this is the obvious faith counter: as the believer will reply "God has no need to grant such a selfish request merely to prove his existance." But to counter with this logic is just as selfish an answer as the request. One defining god as 'something omnipotent, natural, sublime and beyond definition' is bound to find god in all he/she sees. If you say that something cannot NOT be god, then god obviously exists to you.
And a true atheist will also frown upon this viewpoint, because he/she believes that there cannot exist something that cannot be percieved. They know that this is true, and all of their belief is seated upon it. They will reply "Then you live in falsehood, for god cannot exist and therefore can never say hello."
But then, for some reason, there are apparently far more people in camp A (the believers) than camp B (the atheists), so I'm told. Again, why? Both are equal and opposite denouncements of one another. I guess its easier to follow the flow and power that religion holds over society, which, while nowhere near at its heyday, is certainly still fairly impressive, especially (so I'm told) in America. Perhaps the iron fist is merely a velvet glove on this side of the atlantic, but us Brits can't help but look quizzically at america, and its 'crusades'.
-------------
Anyhow, I've rambled far too long. In a nutshell, what is belief, why do people hold it so zealously in the face of opposition, and why does it hold such a strange sway over humanity? Discuss.
To finish, I'll leave you with my favourite quote from Richard Dawkins (whose excellent book is obviously the muse for the title of this topic):
"There is certainly no reason to suppose that, just because God can be neither proved nor disproved, his probability of existance is 50 per cent."
No, as the title suggests, this topic is meant to question NOT the whats or hows of belief, but rather, the weird phenomenon of WHY we believe. It is an age old question that even modern society frowns upon trying to answer, even if it is no longer blasphemy. Basically, I would like to shake the foundations of belief.
To use examples that are popular now:
If you hold that there is a one true god and that creationism is correct, why do you do so? Similarily, if you consider yourself a true atheist, and consider that evolution is the only way, why is that?
The simple answer to the above is 'faith' for the former and 'evidence' for the latter. But neither are paticularily convincing answers.
If you say we're here today because god clicked his fingers and said 'make it so!', how can you sweep all of the lovely evidence against that theory dug up under the rather large carpet? Is it really so difficult to think that we were once slobbering rats and communal apes? Humankind is typically convinced of their own superiority, and it is typical to think that, because we are clearly superior to all other species on the planet, there MUST, by standard logic, be something that is superior to us. But to think we are clearly destined for the top spot is a narrow and conceited opinion. If you don't understand that, go back and read 'The Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy'.
Similarily, if you say we're here today thanks wholeheartedly to evolution, I then present you with the wonderful Permian Extinction. Had this terrible event not have occured, we could possibly be here today stroking our long green tails, shouting 'look at the scales on that!' to beautiful passers-by on the streets. So its terribly convienient for small mammals to have survived and eventually brought about humans. There are still many things we cannot begin to understand in science. It is easy to think, by good 'ol standard logic, that we Will eventually fill those holes without fail. But to think we can catalogue and understand all again assumes our own superiority.
--------------------------------
To put it yet another way:
When quizzed about religion, my good friend once told me: "I'm an agnostic. I'll believe in god when pulls the roof off and says hello."
This, or a derevative thereof, is easily the most common answer I hear.
But, I am often puzzled over that answer. Surely, to say such a thing is self defeating.
It is also a narrow viewpoint, because it is assuming that god has a form that can be percieved in the physical. And this is the obvious faith counter: as the believer will reply "God has no need to grant such a selfish request merely to prove his existance." But to counter with this logic is just as selfish an answer as the request. One defining god as 'something omnipotent, natural, sublime and beyond definition' is bound to find god in all he/she sees. If you say that something cannot NOT be god, then god obviously exists to you.
And a true atheist will also frown upon this viewpoint, because he/she believes that there cannot exist something that cannot be percieved. They know that this is true, and all of their belief is seated upon it. They will reply "Then you live in falsehood, for god cannot exist and therefore can never say hello."
But then, for some reason, there are apparently far more people in camp A (the believers) than camp B (the atheists), so I'm told. Again, why? Both are equal and opposite denouncements of one another. I guess its easier to follow the flow and power that religion holds over society, which, while nowhere near at its heyday, is certainly still fairly impressive, especially (so I'm told) in America. Perhaps the iron fist is merely a velvet glove on this side of the atlantic, but us Brits can't help but look quizzically at america, and its 'crusades'.
-------------
Anyhow, I've rambled far too long. In a nutshell, what is belief, why do people hold it so zealously in the face of opposition, and why does it hold such a strange sway over humanity? Discuss.
To finish, I'll leave you with my favourite quote from Richard Dawkins (whose excellent book is obviously the muse for the title of this topic):
"There is certainly no reason to suppose that, just because God can be neither proved nor disproved, his probability of existance is 50 per cent."
