Shockadelic,

I’m sorry to hear that the Witnesses hurt you. However, I’ve never suggested that anyone take their bad experiences and turn them into a lust for vengeance.

<<You … let your kids believe in Santa.
Then why can't you let them (or anyone else) believe in Jesus, Thor, Shiva, Osiris?>>

I wouldn’t dream of stopping them, or anyone else. I’d prefer people came to their senses in their own time and by their own accord. But that’s unlikely to happen if we all just shrug our shoulders and say, “Meh, whatever floats their boats.”

No matter how moderate or harmless most religious beliefs appear, they still affect us all because our beliefs inform our actions and our actions affect others. Not to mention to legitimacy they provide extremists, who find solace in the billions of their fellow travelers.

An individual’s belief (regarding anything) may not be detrimental to their wellbeing, but if they believe it for bad reasons then they run the risk of believing other things, that may be detrimental to their wellbeing, for bad reasons too.

And in case you missed it, I gave a few good reasons earlier as to why belief in mythical creatures is different to belief in gods (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5547#151315). That goes for Santa too. People don’t try to influence our laws or start conflicts based on a belief in Santa.

<<Atheism is supposedly “rational” and “sceptical”, yes?>>

Atheism isn’t an inoculation against irrationality or gullibility. It’s just a label for those who don’t hold a belief in god(s).

<<Why are you compartmentalising as if these are unrelated?>>

I never said the three were mutually exclusive.

<<[Atheism] does so by arguing there's no “evidence” or “facts” to justify faith…>>

Atheism doesn’t argue anything (and if faith was justified, then it wouldn’t be called “faith”). It’s not a doctrine or a philosophy. It’s a label. That’s all.

Regarding mathematics, it seems you’re unable to differentiate between ‘possibility’ and ‘probability’.

Taking Tony’s dice analogy, the smiley face may make up 50% of the possibilities (since there are only two) but the actual probability is only 0.16666666.

SoG,

There’s no outrage here. I’m simply pointing out the flaws and fallacies in your way of thinking in a matter-of-factly way.

<<I counter with a premise based on probability as well, but my probability is fence sitting while yours for some reason carries more weight….more probable.>>

Fence-sitting isn’t a probability, but if you meant a probability of precisely 0.5, then great. How did you reach that conclusion?

<<I take it that scientific facts would form the basis of your synopsis as to no creator.>>

Not entirely.

I reached my conclusion based on the fact that believers in gods never seem have good reasons to believe in them, their apologetics is riddled with fallacy after fallacy after fallacy (check out OzSpen’s link for examples) and the historicity of their Holy books is woefully inaccurate.

My posting history on OLO is filled with reasons why the Abrahamic doesn’t exist, here’s a recent one http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=14398#248464.

But if you want talk about some deistic god, then I would still say that it’s improbable given that every mystery, that had ever been explained by a god, was found to have had a perfectly natural explanation. So the chances that we’ll eventually find something with a supernatural explanation appears to shrink with each new discovery.

<<As I said to Dave the atheist, for past fifty years we knew what a neutron consisted off, but a few years ago we found that that model was wrong.>>

Yes, and if they ever find good evidence for a god’s existence, then I’ll reconsider my position.

But regardless of what neurons consist of, they’re still a natural phenomenon. So to take the, “Who knows what we’ll discover”, factor from that example and then try to apply it to a scenario with a supernatural component (phenomenon we’ve never had ANY evidence for) is a bit of a stretch, to say the very least.

<<You know about as much as I and all the scientists of the globe regarding this subject, and that is nothing.>>

Just because we don’t know some things, that doesn’t mean we don’t know anything.

Sorry SoG, I misread this…

<<You know about as much as I and all the scientists of the globe regarding this subject, and that is nothing.>>

A more appropriate response would be to remind (again) you that this does not make a creator any more likely. It simply means that we don’t know.

This is why your fence-sitting is fallacious.

I don't understand what all this fuss is about.
Who cares what someone believes or practices
(as long as they don't try to impose their
beliefs on others, or hurt anyone). People practice
religion for several reasons. Many follow a religion
simply because it is part of the heritage of their
culture, tribe, or family. Religion gives many people
a feeling of security because they believe that a
divine power watches over them. These people often
ask the power for help or protection. Numerous people
follow a religion because it promises them salvation and
either happiness or the chance to improve themselves
in a life after death. For many people, religion brings
a sense of individual fulfillment and gives meaning to life.

In addition, religion for some, provides answers to such
questions as "What is the purpose of life?" "What is the
final destiny of a person?" "What are one's obligations to
other people?" And finally, many people follow a religion to
enjoy a sense of kinship with their fellow believers.

Whether one follows a religion or not is a matter of personal
choice. Making judgements about what people do or don't
believe reminds me of the character in Henry Fielding's novel,
"Tom Jones," - Mr Twackum. "When I mention religion, I mean
the Christian religion and not only the Christian religion, but
the Protestant religion, and not only the Protestant religion,
but the Church of England."

I guess some people are like Mr Twackum. They believe that
what they believe is true and all others are misguided,
superstitious, even wicked... I guess that's life.

Lexi,

I’ve explained all this many times. Once even to yourself (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=13053#225549). So I’m not sure why you still don’t understand what the “fuss” is about. A response to much of what you’ve just said can even be found in my post to Shockadelic.

Our beliefs, no matter how benign, affect others in some shape or form - no matter how indirectly. So it’s important that we have good reasons to believe them.

<<Many follow a religion simply because it is part of the heritage of their culture, tribe, or family.>>

Yes, motives, no matter how pure, still do not negate the harm they can cause. Here’s a good example…

<<These people often ask the power for help or protection.>>

When energy and time is wasted doing this, rather than devoting full time and energy to actually preventing or fixing a problem, then it is potentially causing harm.

Like the problem with homeopathy. The remedies are harmless (since they are just water), but providing them and trying them wastes the time of people who could be finding real help elsewhere.

<<Numerous people follow a religion because it promises them salvation and either happiness … For many people, religion brings a sense of individual fulfillment and gives meaning to life.>>

If people can't find happiness without false promises and imaginary father figures, then that indicates a sickness in our societies, and masking it with make-believe doesn’t help anyone in the long run.

<<In addition, religion for some, provides answers to such questions as "What is the purpose of life?" "What is the final destiny of a person?" "What are one's obligations to other people?">>

And you don’t think searching for a reality-based answer would always be better?

<<I guess some people are like Mr Twackum. They believe that what they believe is true and all others are misguided, superstitious, even wicked... I guess that's life.>>

No, it’s about caring about the truth of one’s beliefs and having as few false ones as possible. I think if everyone did that, we’d be living in a much better world.

worldwatcher,

Thank you, you reply brought music to my ears. I could not resist playing the tracks you mentioned and I am grateful for the reminder.

"May peace and plenty be the first to lift the latch on your door, and happiness be guided to your home by the candle of Christmas" -with thanks to the Irish