Atheism=cope

[Cigarette]

Did you see getting your house build?

yes. theres pictures and videos. i was 2

 

[Deleted member 10913]

Humans also have the natural tendency to disbelieve.

anything to backup this claim?

but its not more natural than atheism

Is it more natural then theism? don't think so. The point is that one is learned and the other isn't

Its nothing more than a product of evolution and no indication of a higher power.

Even if you believe this, from an darwinist perspective you should regard it as truth. Being evolved that way means it's neseccary for survival.

Its the mind of infants we are talking about here after all. This will change when they grow up.

from external factors. Need to remind you the Japanese kids where from 4 to 6. way past the age where you question things.

about atheists. You dont know all so stop doing this nonsense. You imagine this to be the way they are.

Okay, I assume it like you assume your views of theists. Is it however a false statement to say that atheists don't see the universe as their god? If they did they would describe it as such, yet they attribute infinity to it.

There is only order in the sense that there are laws of nature.

well you just stated it. What kind of order where you expecting that isn't already there?

We cannot own the laws of physics or the universe.

If we could we already did it, from what I know is that most atheists are hopefull science will bring humankind there. Atleast those in Turkey fully believe in this dogma.

 

[Deleted member 10913]

yes. theres pictures and videos. i was 2

let's assume there wasn't any footage would you say that your house created itself?

 

[lurkingTard]

morality can only come from divine intervention, if it wasn't the case geography would detirmine it

Why do you think it's not determined by culture. People from different regions and different eras had different ideas of what was moral. Buddhists and a lot of sects of Hinduism believe it's wrong to kill any animals, regardless of purposes. There's also so many other examples.

Also atheism isn't a very modern concept. Charvaka was a popular belief system in ancient India (6th century BCE) that rejected supernaturalism. There were also other schools of thought in that time that were categorized as "nastika" (non belief) in Hindu texts.

 

[Deleted member 10913]

Why do you think it's not determined by culture

because this is a product of geography.

different regions

Indeed

Buddhists and a lot of sects of Hinduism believe it's wrong to kill any animals

and they lived in places with vegetation so they didn't need meant

Charvaka was a popular belief system in ancient India (6th century BCE) that rejected supernaturalism

It definitly wasn't popular and i doubt it was anything like modern atheism. Why does anny of this matter? Wether divine intervention happened or not is another subject. It certainy happened for I am muslim. There were countless of prophets throughout history. You can't simply reject them.

 

[lurkingTard]

Bro you said morality comes from divine intervention? Because if it wasn't then morality would be geographic (WHICH IS THE CASE).

 

[Deleted member 10913]

Bro you said morality comes from divine intervention? Because if it wasn't then morality would be geographic (WHICH IS THE CASE).

what?

 

[lurkingTard]

morality can only come from divine intervention, if it wasn't the case geography would detirmine it

You said morality can ONLY come from divine intervention. Doesn't matter what you believe is moral, people had different ideas of what was good and bad depending on their time and location. Your morality isn't the objective truth if that's what you mean.

 

[Deleted member 12234]

there's a reason atheists tend to have higher IQs. Need I say more?

 

[Deleted member 10913]

You said morality can ONLY come from divine intervention. Doesn't matter what you believe is moral, people had different ideas of what was good and bad depending on their time and location. Your morality isn't the objective truth if that's what you mean.

Yes but no. Morality of people can only be subjective and what God states can only be objective. Any command from God can't be subjective. Do you get the point?

 

[lurkingTard]

because this is a product of geography.

Indeed

and they lived in places with vegetation so they didn't need meant

It definitly wasn't popular and i doubt it was anything like modern atheism. Why does anny of this matter? Wether divine intervention happened or not is another subject. It certainy happened for I am muslim. There were countless of prophets throughout history. You can't simply reject them.

Also Nastikya(non belief) vs Astikya(belief) was a popular debate in ancient Indians societies. And Chakrava was the most popualr Nastik school. You said atheism was a modern idea, which it's not.

There were prophets of other religions too and there are people claiming to be prophets right now. What does any of these have to do with the argument?

 

[Deleted member 10913]

there's a reason atheists tend to have higher IQs. Need I say more?

No. because it has nothing to do with it. Atheism is something learned not inherited.

 

[lurkingTard]

Yes but no. Morality of people can only be subjective and what God states can only be objective. Any command from God can't be subjective. Do you get the point?

Your first message was poorly worded. I see the confusion. But your religious moralities are also culturally based. You can't prove yours are objective truths.

 

[Deleted member 10913]

Also Nastikya(non belief) vs Astikya(belief) was a popular debate in ancient Indians societies. And Chakrava was the most popualr Nastik school. You said atheism was a modern idea, which it's not.

Man okay we get it. They seem to have lost the debate because India is majority Hindu and minority Islamic.

There were prophets of other religions too and there are people claiming to be prophets right now. What does any of these have to do with the argument?

Yes indeed prophethood has signs and knowledge that is revealed. We have Sikhs that have 10 prophets. What of it? Wether someone is a prophet or not isn't something you and I determine

 

[Deleted member 10913]

You can't prove yours are objective truths.

aaah you mean that prophethood can't be detirmined??

 

[HumidVent]

Humans bleed when they are stabbed. It's simply human nature for them to bleed when stabbed. Therefore not being stabbed is unnatural and major cope.

 

[Deleted member 10913]

Humans bleed when they are stabbed. It's simply human nature for them to bleed when stabbed. Therefore not being stabbed is unnatural and major cope.

man is this even a response worthy?

 

[Deleted member 5185]

Infants are also hard wired to not understand anything at all. Knowledge is an acquired position.

 

[lurkingTard]

aaah you mean that prophethood can't be detirmined??

Bro wtf are you talking about? And who cares who "lost" the debate, you said atheism was modern when it's clearly not. And many previously religious countries are now atheists or non religious. And what the living fuck are you saying about prophets?

 

[Deleted member 10913]

Bro wtf are you talking about? And who cares who "lost" the debate, you said atheism was modern when it's clearly not. And many previously religious countries are now atheists or non religious. And what the living fuck are you saying about prophets?

man last time I answer you greycels. Atheism as we know it is modern. IDC if some fool from the gangas river also taught that something 'infinite' can't be God. Look the atheist movement is something that is recent. The movement itself and the supossed 'scientism' behind it is RECENT

 

[Deleted member 10913]

Infants are also hard wired to not understand anything at all. Knowledge is an acquired position.

What do you mean by infants? In the study it meant children from 4 to 6. Humans start to question at the age of 2.

 

[Deleted member 5185]

What do you mean by infants? In the study it meant children from 4 to 6. Humans strat to question at the age of 2.

Sorry, my bad. Didn't read it fully. My point still stands though - children has no inherent knowledge about anything, in fact they are much, much less intelligent than fully grown human beings. To say that atheism is an acquired position is the same as to say that understanding mathematics and physics is an acquired position - it is true, yet it has no meaning on what is true or not.

 

[Deleted member 7901]

Sorry, my bad. Didn't read it fully. My point still stands though - children has no inherent knowledge about anything, in fact they are much, much less intelligent than fully grown human beings. To say that atheism is an acquired position is the same as to say that understanding mathematics and physics is an acquired position - it is true, yet it has no meaning on what is true or not.

I don't think you understand the difference between hardwired instincts and brain plasticity, its why animals
can survive without learning anything and having virtually no free though

 

[datboijj]

there's a reason atheists tend to have higher IQs. Need I say more?

savants (the people who out process computers)
Tend to be mostly agnostic and theist

 

[Deleted member 5185]

I don't think you understand the difference between hardwired instincts and brain plasticity, its why animals
can survive without learning anything and having virtually no free though

Not exactly sure how this relates to my comment. Do you disagree that while both atheism and understanding advanced topics like physics might not be hard wired into humans to understand, that doesn't make them any less true?

 

[lurkingTard]

man last time I answer you greycels. Atheism as we know it is modern. IDC if some fool from the gangas river also taught that something 'infinite' can't be God. Look the atheist movement is something that is recent. The movement itself and the supossed 'scientism' behind it is RECENT

Atheism is a concept of non belief. You're defining atheism with your own fucking words.

Why are you brining up "infinite" here. They rejected all forms of supernaturalism. You're a fucking tard who keeps bringing up irrelevant information.

STFU about the greycelism. You don't know how to fucking write a sentence. You just spent all your fucking time on a site about looks.

 

[Deleted member 7901]

Not exactly sure how this relates to my comment. Do you disagree that while both atheism and understanding advanced topics like physics might not be hard wired into humans to understand, that doesn't make them any less true?

I have never said that it doesn't make them less true, but it does show that it a psychological need to some extend, religious people are usually far happier then none-religious people and suffer from less mental issues, and while as much as it hurts to hear, religion is a necessary for a normal and healthy society, if religion was still mainstream, this site wouldn't exist in the first place, and we wouldn't have needed to understand the nature of women
also you said before that infants are hardwired to not understand anything, which is not true.

 

[Deleted member 5185]

I have never said that it doesn't make them less true, but it does show that it a psychological need to some extend, religious people are usually far happier then none-religious people, and while as much as it hurts to hear, religion is a necessary for a normal and healthy society
also you said before that infants are hardwired to not understand anything, which is not true.

So we know for a fact that religion is a result of evolution simply because a) evolution is true and b) religion has dominated humanity for thousands of years.

To say that religion, because it exists, is a "psychological need" doesn't make a lot of sense. A lot of pathological behaviors exist in humans, that are clearly not a need nor a good thing. Personality disorders, irrational thinking and so on comes to mind.

Religion being necessary for a normal and healthy society is obviously not true. Atheism rates are high in the most prosperous nations on earth. That religious people are happier than non religious people is an interesting observation, however correlation does not equal causation. Perhaps the close-knit community through religion is the cause, not the belief in God?

Infants do not understand anything in relation to older humans. This is simply a fact.

 

[Deleted member 10913]

To say that atheism is an acquired position is the same as to say that understanding mathematics and physics is an acquired position - it is true, yet it has no meaning on what is true or not.

I don't think that mathematics that concerns with numbers that you can observe is the same as your hardwired understanding. The moment a kid is two years old he can question and understands what value is so he can basically know anything regarding math. While math is not hardwired logic is if I am correct.

Let's say that humans acquired logic what does it change? tbh. You need math for human survival not atheism. Theism does and what benefits your survival is the truth from an evolutionary point of view. I don't accept darwinist evolution but many atheist do, they are contradicting themselves with this. Like I stated previously if anything is a cope it's atheism not theism.

nfants are hardwired to not understand anything, which is not true.

Indeed as I was writing math is learned the logic to use math is hardwired. Kids at age 2 start to show logical thinking

 

[Deleted member 7901]

So we know for a fact that religion is a result of evolution simply because a) evolution is true and b) religion has dominated humanity for thousands of years.

To say that religion, because it exists, is a "psychological need" doesn't make a lot of sense. A lot of pathological behaviors exist in humans, that are clearly not a need nor a good thing. Personality disorders, irrational thinking and so on comes to mind.

Religion being necessary for a normal and healthy society is obviously not true. Atheism rates are high in the most prosperous nations on earth. That religious people are happier than non religious people is an interesting observation, however correlation does not equal causation. Perhaps the close-knit community through religion is the cause, not the belief in God?

Infants do not understand anything in relation to older humans. This is simply a fact.

I don't understand how you can say that the west is prosperous and happy mentally while also being registered here
marriages fail more then 50% of the time, and it only gets worse, depression rates get higher, suicides and etc...

Also being an atheist does not necessarily mean being richer and smarter, the soviet union and the communists states it controlled, were for the most part atheist and religion was oppressed, but it was extremely poor, meanwhile the west was pretty religious for the time and richer, also don't forget on what the west was built and who the people who built it, it was religion, and until the 20th century it was very uncommon to be an atheist

 

[Deleted member 5185]

[1]I don't think that mathematics that concerns with numbers that you can observe is the same as your hardwired understanding. [2]The moment a kid is two years old he can question and understands what value is so he can basically know anything regarding math. While math is not hardwired logic is if I am correct.

Let's say that humans acquired logic what does it change? tbh. [3]You need math for human survival not atheism. Theism does and what benefits your survival is the truth from an evolutionary point of view. [4]I don't accept darwinist evolution but many atheist do, they are contradicting themselves with this. [5]Like I stated previously if anything is a cope it's atheism not theism.

Indeed as I was writing math is learned the logic to use math is hardwired. Kids at age 2 start to show logical thinking

[1] It doesn't matter if its the same or not - the key is that whether or not something is hard wired into your brain biologically speaking isn't relevant to whether it is true in any objective sense
[2] Try teaching a two year old even the most simple algebra. You will fail. Or even better, try teaching him advanced calculus.
[3] Whether or not humans "need" something isn't relevant to whether it is true or not. For instance, lets say humans does not "need" to know whether or not aliens exist. One day, an alien colonization visits us. Is it then not true simply because we didn't need to know it? Of course not. It is true because it is true.
[4] If you do not accept darwinist evolution, it is likely because you simply haven't understood it and done the proper research - likely because of your indoctrinated religious bias.
[5] The reality is that we have no logical reason to believe an abrahamic God exists in the same way we have no logical reason to believe a norse god or an egyptian sun god exists.

 

[Deleted member 10913]

To say that religion, because it exists, is a "psychological need" doesn't make a lot of sense. A lot of pathological behaviors exist in humans, that are clearly not a need nor a good thing. Personality disorders, irrational thinking and so on comes to mind.

We talk about the believe in God since my original post not any religious doctrine. Religious people tend to be more happy this is a fact.

Infants do not understand anything in relation to older humans. This is simply a fact.

they understand logic at age two. In theory they could learn anything at that point.

Atheism rates are high in the most prosperous nations on earth

what of it? did they prosper after the people turned atheist or was it a result of it?

A lot of pathological behaviors exist in humans, that are clearly not a need nor a good thing.

Like what? Irrational thinking is needed. idk how you came up to the conclusion that it isn't. Idk about personality disorder.

 

[Deleted member 5185]

[1]I don't understand how you can say that the west is prosperous and happy mentally while also being registered here
marriages fail more then 50% of the time, and it only gets worse, depression rates get higher, suicides and etc...

[2]Also being an atheist does not necessarily mean being richer and smarter, the soviet union and the communists states it controlled, were for the most part atheist and religion was oppressed, but it was extremely poor, meanwhile the west was pretty religious for the time and richer, [3]also don't forget on what the west was built and who the people who built it, it was religion, and until the 20th century it was very uncommon to be an atheist

[1] There are many issues in society and life in general. Just because young men are struggling with not getting sex because of hypergamy doesn't really change the fact that I would a) rather live in a rich, atheistic nation than a religious nation like say Malaysia and b) that atheism is the logical worldview, not any religion

[2] I never said being atheist necessarily means that. To say that the issues with communism derives from atheism is absurd.

[3] society was also build while having little to no understanding of medicine, physics or psychology. Do you doubt those disciplines because of that?

 

[Deleted member 245]

water, humans need to be able to explain things which they don't understand so the brain conjures up certain beliefs, all groups of people no matter how advanced or primitive had religious beliefs for this reason, also religion offers comfort because it tends to assure life after death, none of this can be empirically proven though it's just a coping mechanism our brain creates.

High IQ BBC mogger

 

[Deleted member 5185]

[1]We talk about the believe in God since my original post not any religious doctrine. Religious people tend to be more happy this is a fact.

[2]they understand logic at age two. In theory they could learn anything at that point.

[3]what of it? did they prosper after the people turned atheist or was it a result of it?

[4]Like what? Irrational thinking is needed. idk how you came up to the conclusion that it isn't. Idk about personality disorder.

[1] Belief in God is certaintly a result of religios indoctrination. If you are born in my country (Norway) the chances are massive that you will be atheistic, while if you are born in Saudi Arabia, the chances are massive that you will be a muslim. Again, correlation does not equal causation - that religious people are happier can be from other factors, for instance the close-knit community religion brings.

[2] 2 year old children cannot understand advanced calculus, it is as simple as that.

[3] The sort of rational, logical thinking that made them prosper is the same rational, logical thinking that made them atheists. They could of course be highly intelligent while also believing in God, such as the ancient muslim mathmaticians or Rene Descartes.

[4] What irrational thinking is better than its rational counterpart?

 

[Deleted member 7901]

[1] There are many issues in society and life in general. Just because young men are struggling with not getting sex because of hypergamy doesn't really change the fact that I would a) rather live in a rich, atheistic nation than a religious nation like say Malaysia and b) that atheism is the logical worldview, not any religion

[2] I never said being atheist necessarily means that. To say that the issues with communism derives from atheism is absurd.

[3] society was also build while having little to no understanding of medicine, physics or psychology. Do you doubt those disciplines because of that?

Because its much deeper then just not having sex, this forum and looks theory is partially a cope for other stuff missing in life,
self-improvement sky rockets in general and is come even among people who have a decent sex life
Also poor nations are not really religious anymore, they got access to the internet and have phones (because its so cheap)
majority of them are secular at most

Yes, I believe that all of those are terrible, it gave birth to people who shouldn't have been born and destoryed the social fabric and purpose in life, I guarantee you that one day some wacky charismtic individual come into power and nuke the world at one point or another, humans as a specie would have lasted much longer if not for our advances, life as a peasent was far more fulfilling then the life of the modern person, and even more then the life of the elites back then

 

[Deleted member 5185]

Because its much deeper then just not having sex, this forum and looks theory is partially a cope for other stuff missing in life,
self-improvement sky rockets in general and is come even among people who have a decent sex life
Also poor nations are not really religious anymore, they got access to the internet and have phones (because its so cheap)
majority of them are secular at most

Yes, I believe that all of those are terrible, it gave birth to people who shouldn't have been born and destoryed the social fabric and purpose in life, I guarantee you that one day some wacky charismtic individual come into power and nuke the world at one point or another, humans as a specie would have lasted much longer if not for our advances, life as a peasent was far more fulfilling then the life of the modern person, and even more then the life of the elites back then

OK but the thing is this:

Lets say that you are correct, and that atheism, physics, medicine - all forms of advancing humanity is bad, because we are evolutionarily wired to just fuck, eat and fight in the wilderness. Even if that is the case, that doesn't change the fact that atheism, medicine and physics are objectively true.

 

[Deleted member 2205]

if atheist could prove with science god doesn't exist , they would have done it

Shit tier argument. Prove to me that santa doesn't exist. Or that the avengers don't exist.

The burden of proof is on the person who claims something is real. No kid is born a Christian or Muslim.

 

[Deleted member 7901]

OK but the thing is this:

Lets say that you are correct, and that atheism, physics, medicine - all forms of advancing humanity is bad, because we are evolutionarily wired to just fuck, eat and fight in the wilderness. Even if that is the case, that doesn't change the fact that atheism, medicine and physics are objectively true.

Medicine and physics are objectively true for the most part
but both Atheism and the belief in god are subjective, you can't prove that God is real or fake

 

[Deleted member 5185]

Medicine and physics are objectively true for the most part
but both Atheism and the belief in god are subjective, you can't prove that God is real or fake

It isn't subjective - that is like saying that you not believing that my pants are the creators of the universe is your subjective opinion, and holds no objective value.

What is freely asserted is freely dismissed.

 

[Deleted member 7901]

It isn't subjective - that is like saying that you not believing that my pants are the creators of the universe is your subjective opinion, and holds no objective value.

What is freely asserted is freely dismissed.

No its not the same thing, you know who manufactured the pants and there is no thousands of years of people believing in it and calming its true and seeing they saw things, books and etc... there is no objective theory which goes against the existence of god because all science theories are theories, they have evidence to back it up but not enough that we can say its true (the big boom, evolution etc..), same thing with god.

 

[Deleted member 10913]

the key is that whether or not something is hard wired into your brain biologically speaking isn't relevant to whether it is true in any objective sense

It

Try teaching a two year old even the most simple algebra. You will fail. Or even better, try teaching him advanced calculus.

obviously everyone starts with numerals but idk why the complexity matters. You use the same inherit logic. Even in the study the children also didn't understand complex theological aspects of God rather it was that he is a 'necessary being' tp exist. The onlything that was understood is God being omnicient and omnipresent. There was honestly not much complexity then the basics.

Whether or not humans "need" something isn't relevant to whether it is true or not

From an evolutionary perspective it is tho

For instance, lets say humans does not "need" to know whether or not aliens exist. One day, an alien colonization visits us. Is it then not true simply because we didn't need to know it? Of course not. It is true because it is true.

don't know what you try to argue here. Humans need to know that something can't come out of nothing or make itself. You can go on and on but somewhere you need to accept that God which is infinite created the finite. The study argues that this thinking is fixed in your brain. You can point out about the religious and atheist societies but the study was taken in ATHEIST JAPAN. Atheism is the social pressure there and despite of that kids at the ages 4 to 6 showed theistic views. If you read the study you can't deny this

The reality is that we have no logical reason to believe an abrahamic God exists in the same way we have no logical reason to believe a norse god or an egyptian sun god exists.

The logical reason is that we need to believe in God. Like i said you can go on and on in what created who but you have do end up at what's infinite, meaning God. Your brain is hardwired on this, man i won't repeat this anymore. The study is there to look at.

[1] Belief in God is certaintly a result of religios indoctrination. If you are born in my country (Norway) the chances are massive that you will be atheistic, while if you are born in Saudi Arabia, the chances are massive that you will be a muslim. Again, correlation does not equal causation - that religious people are happier can be from other factors, for instance the close-knit community religion brings.

[2] 2 year old children cannot understand advanced calculus, it is as simple as that.

answered this.

If you do not accept darwinist evolution, it is likely because you simply haven't understood it and done the proper research - likely because of your indoctrinated religious bias.

no need to divert the topic

[3] The sort of rational, logical thinking that made them prosper is the same rational, logical thinking that made them atheists. They could of course be highly intelligent while also believing in God, such as the ancient muslim mathmaticians or Rene Descartes.

[4] What irrational thinking is better than its rational counterpart?

this is a big statement. Most people didn't become atheist more like oblivious to religion. I argue that it is bad but it's not the same as being atheist. How can the second exist then? Rene Descartes was more logical then most atheists are. Doesn't make sense right? It is because wether you are highly logical or not your belief in God is not something that's affected it seems.

Any irrational thinking might or might not be better then the rational counterpart. It takes less time to come to a conclusion. For example you don't 'rationally' walk you do that dogmatically.

 

[Deleted member 10913]

atheism

can't be objectively true.

 

[Deleted member 10913]

that is like saying that you not believing that my pants are the creators of the universe is your subjective opinion, and holds no objective value.

The point is that something finite in the end can only be created by which that is infinite, meaning God. We are hardwired to think like this

 

[Deleted member 10913]

High IQ BBC mogger

no lol, atleast read my responses too

 

[Deleted member 10913]

Atheism is a concept of non belief. You're defining atheism with your own fucking words.

Why are you brining up "infinite" here. They rejected all forms of supernaturalism. You're a fucking tard who keeps bringing up irrelevant information.

STFU about the greycelism. You don't know how to fucking write a sentence. You just spent all your fucking time on a site about looks.

No im not defining anything. Atheism is the lack in believe of God. Infinite is an attribute we give only to God while atheists seem to give it to the universe or multiverse idc which it is. In the end the study wrote the most sentences, go read that again before writing anything. I don't even know what you try to critique at this point..

 

[Deleted member 10913]

savants (the people who out process computers)
Tend to be mostly agnostic and theist

most scientists themselves where matter of fact religious or atleast holded theistic views

 

[Deleted member 2205]

can't be objectively true.

What?

most scientists themselves where matter of fact religious or atleast holded theistic views

Yeah you're just lying or talking out of your ass at this point. Most scientists aren't religious.

 

[Deleted member 10913]

Yeah you're just lying or talking out of your ass at this point. Most scientists aren't religious.

no man for what should I be lying jfl, especially the scientists in early history.

right now most scietists in Turkey atleast are religious. Looking at America they used some vague term of 'universal spirit'

maybe it is related to deism, counting that to theists side they are the majority.

 

[lurkingTard]

No im not defining anything. Atheism is the lack in believe of God. Infinite is an attribute we give only to God while atheists seem to give it to the universe or multiverse idc which it is. In the end the study wrote the most sentences, go read that again before writing anything. I don't even know what you try to critique at this point..

First you claim atheism is a modern concept. Then you said it wasn't popular even though you know nothing of it. Then you said you don't give a shit about people of gangas. You can't decide on what you're talking about yourself.

Also children claiming god is a necessary deity is understandable. They see everything around them being created somehow. So they draw the conclusion that even we must have been created by someone. But when you ask them how do you think God came to be, or who created god, they can't answer it, because they can't think critically.