Is it rational (for an athiest) to believe in religion?

[Phi for All]

14 hours ago, zapatos said:

So while you, Phi and others may have your own personal beliefs (sort of like most theists do), I am of the opinion that strictly speaking there is no contradiction in an atheist believing in or practicing religion, as long as they don't believe in the existence of a god or gods.

But it's not a personal belief, it's a LACK of belief, so I object to being lumped in with those who believe ("like most theists do"). And I think the rest of the problem I have with atheism being compatible with religion has more to do with my definition of "religion".

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

But it's not a personal belief, it's a LACK of belief, so I object to being lumped in with those who believe ("like most theists do").

I'm not sure we are at odds. The 'belief' of yours I was referring to was your belief that the definition encompassed your views (rejection of practiced religious beliefs). Just as a Catholic might have the 'belief' that the definition of Catholicism encompasses their views (the acceptance of the use of birth control).

[beecee]

7 hours ago, iNow said:

Nah. Already made my point clearly with those already shared. I’m not targeting perfection, just understanding. 

😊 There are a couple here who often target perfection, when it suits there agenda. I respectfully disagree with you and Zapatos for the reasons given.

[iNow]

I respect that. I can’t force you to be correct.  

[beecee]

7 hours ago, dimreepr said:

We know all the Bible's were written by people, all of which describe a different type of God/essence/way of life;

Fact: The bible was written in an obscure age, by obscure men, in an obscure manner.

7 hours ago, dimreepr said:

 let's not forget, we all stand on the shoulders of giant's; Newton is just easier to understand, despite his belief in alchemy.

Yes, I have told you that more then once.

While Isacc was somewhat astray with his obsession with alchemy and particularly the "philosopher's stone", the table of elements and nucleosynthesis, or if you like nuclear transmutation is of course now part of science. The LHC and other Particle accelerators are used to smash atoms or particles together, which can result in nuclear transmutation.....or if you like, the converting of one element to another. One could say there was a method in his madness. 😉 (Not to forget nuclear fission and fusion bombs.)

Edited April 30, 2022 by beecee

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, beecee said:

There are a couple here who often target perfection, when it suits there agenda.

Don't keep us hanging. Who are they?

[beecee]

1 minute ago, zapatos said:

Don't keep us hanging. Who are they?

😉

[dimreepr]

15 hours ago, beecee said:

Fact: The bible was written in an obscure age, by obscure men, in an obscure manner.

Like I said written by people not God: so now, instead of god, you choose the fact that you didn't know them, to irrationally dismiss the word's, your wife (and millions of others) seems to understand and is happy to live by.

15 hours ago, beecee said:

Yes, I have told you that more then once.

While Isacc was somewhat astray with his obsession with alchemy and particularly the "philosopher's stone", the table of elements and nucleosynthesis, or if you like nuclear transmutation is of course now part of science. The LHC and other Particle accelerators are used to smash atoms or particles together, which can result in nuclear transmutation.....or if you like, the converting of one element to another. One could say there was a method in his madness. 😉 (Not to forget nuclear fission and fusion bombs.)

Indeed and usually, like here, it's off topic and irrelevant.

On 4/30/2022 at 12:44 AM, zapatos said:

I think the answer is yes. Kind of like being against sugar, but still eating candy as long as the candy is made with aspartame. 

Excellent point +1

21 hours ago, Phi for All said:

But it's not a personal belief, it's a LACK of belief, so I object to being lumped in with those who believe ("like most theists do"). And I think the rest of the problem I have with atheism being compatible with religion has more to do with my definition of "religion".

It doesn't matter what one believes, if one has a rational reason to do so.

Edited May 1, 2022 by dimreepr

[iNow]

2 hours ago, dimreepr said:

It doesn't matter what one believes, if one has a rational reason to do so.

This is simplistic to the point of false. It does matter what people believe, regardless of their reasons or how it’s been rationalized. 

[Phi for All]

6 hours ago, dimreepr said:

It doesn't matter what one believes, if one has a rational reason to do so.

I reject this completely. I think what a person believes matters a LOT. 

I know humans are wired to look for simple patterns, but much of what we believe requires a greater level of sophistication and clarity. Statements like this miss the mark, and keep us from delving deeper.

[beecee]

9 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Like I said written by people not God: so now, instead of god, you choose the fact that you didn't know them, to irrationally dismiss the word's, your wife (and millions of others) seems to understand and is happy to live by.

Yes amazing isn't it? How people are so afraid of the finality of death, that they need to interpret the bible in a way to support their terror, and wrap themselves in myth. Are you one of those? you know, deeeep down?😄

9 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Indeed and usually, like here, it's off topic and irrelevant.

Your forgiven for raising it. (out of the goodness of my heart) 😉

9 hours ago, dimreepr said:

It doesn't matter what one believes, if one has a rational reason to do so.

Except the reason is anything but irrational to accept the supernatural, paranormal, karma and other such unscientific concepts.

[dimreepr]

22 hours ago, iNow said:

This is simplistic to the point of false. It does matter what people believe, regardless of their reasons or how it’s been rationalized. 

18 hours ago, Phi for All said:

I reject this completely. I think what a person believes matters a LOT. 

I know humans are wired to look for simple patterns, but much of what we believe requires a greater level of sophistication and clarity. Statements like this miss the mark, and keep us from delving deeper.

I agree completely, but it's one thing to be happy with what you believe, it's another to belittle them because you don't share that belief. 

There's a difference between a reason and an excuse.

16 hours ago, beecee said:

Yes amazing isn't it? How people are so afraid of the finality of death, that they need to interpret the bible in a way to support their terror, and wrap themselves in myth. Are you one of those? you know, deeeep down?😄

You've got it backwards (no wonder you don't understand the word's), the bible is there to allay the fears of life, if a bad man does you harm God is there to punish him (no need for revenge), if you don't do other's harm God is there, at your death, to congratulate you with a prize.

Given that, how is it rational to interpret the bible in a way to support their terror?

[beecee]

7 hours ago, dimreepr said:

I agree completely, but it's one thing to be happy with what you believe, it's another to belittle them because you don't share that belief. 

So why do you belittle?

7 hours ago, dimreepr said:

There's a difference between a reason and an excuse.

Yes, agreed...the belief in the supernatural, paranormal, etc, is the world wide excuse society in general use to avoid thinking about the fact re the finality of death. 

7 hours ago, dimreepr said:

You've got it backwards (no wonder you don't understand the word's), the bible is there to allay the fears of life, if a bad man does you harm God is there to punish him (no need for revenge), if you don't do other's harm God is there, at your death, to congratulate you with a prize.

No, I'm pretty well right on that score. The myth that is the bible, does have various interpretation, from claims of a flat Earth, to one that is supposedly only 6000 years old. Like I say, an obscure mythical book, written in an obscure age, by obscure men.

7 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Given that, how is it rational to interpret the bible in a way to support their terror?

You have it arse up my friend, (or if you like, you have it backwards 😉) It's actually totally irrational, and avoids the scientific truth of the finality of death. 

[dimreepr]

17 hours ago, beecee said:

So why do you belittle?

That would be a good question, if asked of you.

17 hours ago, beecee said:

Yes, agreed...the belief in the supernatural, paranormal, etc, is the world wide excuse society in general use to avoid thinking about the fact re the finality of death.

You still don't get it; it doesn't matter that death is the end, what matters is how one lives; BTW how do you, or science, know that death is final?

The universe tends to re-use the dead...

17 hours ago, beecee said:

It's actually totally irrational, and avoids the scientific truth of the finality of death.

What's totally irrational is an excuse made to appear like a reason...

[beecee]

7 hours ago, dimreepr said:

That would be a good question, if asked of you.

Unlike you, I won't dance around the question, I will answer it. I don't see criticising your passive unworkable philsophy as belittling. I'm expressing the feelings of most in a westernised democratic society, and more importantly, my own views, based on much evidence.

7 hours ago, dimreepr said:

You still don't get it; it doesn't matter that death is the end, what matters is how one lives; BTW how do you, or science, know that death is final?

The universe tends to re-use the dead...

Two different things, but again, I'll answer for you. I live my life by reasonable moral values, and do the best for myself, my family and friends, and toleration of others, including respect when earned. On the second rather weird question, I'll ask you one...Do you know anyone ever having come back from being dead? or come back after the total cessation of life? Evidence shows that when life ceases, the body decays, are you claiming then the unscientific concept of a soul that continues? This of course gets back to myth, doesn't it?  Or more to the point, do you know what a scientific theory is?

BTW, I'm not belittling you for your beliefs in the afterlife, karma or any other mythical concept, just that it is unscientific at best, and no alternative has ever been shown.

7 hours ago, dimreepr said:

What's totally irrational is an excuse made to appear like a reason...

Not into, nor ever was into Bruce Lee...to violent for me. 😉 Some martial art expert come poor actor was he not? sheesh! Plus I already gave you a more accurate definition of rational....

Rational = A belief based on reason, logic and evidence. 

https://www.google.com/search?q=rational+foundations+of+religion&rlz=1C1RXQR_en-GBAU952AU952&oq=rational&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0i67i131i433j0i67j0i67i131i433j69i60l3.2928j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

"Rationalism holds that truth should be determined by reason and factual analysis, rather than faith, dogma, tradition or religious teaching"

 

If I need to give you one defining irrational, it would be...."lacking usual or normal mental clarity or coherence. (2) : not endowed with reason or understanding. b : not governed by or according to reason irrational fears. c Greek and Latin prosody. (1) of a syllable : having a quantity other than that required by the meter". or if you like the irrational concept in the bible of at least two individuals coming back from the grave, or walking on water, or a flat Earth, or the three persons making up the one God, or the seven days that created the universe, or talking snakes, or burning/talking bushes, or parting seas, or turning water into wine, and it goes on and on and on and on and.......

Edited May 3, 2022 by beecee

[dimreepr]

14 hours ago, beecee said:

Unlike you, I won't dance around the question, I will answer it. I don't see criticising your passive unworkable philsophy as belittling. I'm expressing the feelings of most in a westernised democratic society, and more importantly, my own views, based on much evidence.

Indeed, which is why you spend most of your energy off topic answering question's asked 3 or 4 thread's ago; are you trolling me?

15 hours ago, beecee said:

BTW, I'm not belittling you for your beliefs in the afterlife, karma or any other mythical concept, just that it is unscientific at best, and no alternative has ever been shown.

So, you attempt to belittle me because I don't seeem to agree with you; karma, for instance is scientific, in that an action has unseen consequences even in a deterministic universe. 

Quote

the mathematician Hari Seldon spends his life developing a theory of psychohistory, a new and effective mathematical sociology. Using statistical laws of mass action, it can predict the future of large populations.

But not the individuals action.

15 hours ago, beecee said:

Rational = A belief based on reason, logic and evidence.

Do you have evidence that Karma doesn't work?

5 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Do you have evidence that Karma doesn't work?

Let me answer for you, at best karma is a soft science and therefore not worthy of consideration, only science has answer's, if not today then tomorrow; the God of the gaps argument in reverse...

 

 

[beecee]

7 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Indeed, which is why you spend most of your energy off topic answering question's asked 3 or 4 thread's ago; are you trolling me?

Not at all. I have far more interesting and logical things to do. Nice try though. 😂

7 hours ago, dimreepr said:

So, you attempt to belittle me because I don't seeem to agree with you; karma, for instance is scientific, in that an action has unseen consequences even in a deterministic universe. 

😄Whatever. You're getting quite good at playing he victim card my friend. Like I said karma is a myth, 

Definition of karma

1 often capitalized : the force generated by a person's actions held in Hinduism and Buddhism to perpetuate transmigration and in its ethical consequences to determine the nature of the person's next existence Each individual is born with karma, the residual from past lives that must be resolved 

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Actually closer to woo then even myth!!😆

8 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Do you have evidence that Karma doesn't work?

Do you have evidence that karma works exclusivey? or that there is anything scientific about karma, or are you able to tell us all what it even is?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma

Karma (/ˈkɑːrmə/; Sanskrit: कर्म, IPA: [ˈkɐɾmɐ] (listen); Pali: kamma) means action, work, or deed.[1] For the believers in spirituality the term also refers to the spiritual principle of cause and effect, often descriptively called the principle of karma, wherein intent and actions of an individual (cause) influence the future of that individual (effect):[2] Good intent and good deeds contribute to good karma and happier rebirths, while bad intent and bad deeds contribute to bad karma and bad rebirths.[3][4]

For the believers, the concept of karma is closely associated with the idea of rebirth in many schools of Indian religions (particularly Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism),[5] as well as Taoism.[6] In these schools, karma in the present affects one's future in the current life, as well as the nature and quality of future lives—one's saṃsāra.[7][8] This concept has also been adopted in Western popular culture, in which the events which happen after a person's actions may be considered natural consequences.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

8 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Let me answer for you, at best karma is a soft science and therefore not worthy of consideration, only science has answer's, if not today then tomorrow; the God of the gaps argument in reverse...

What I do suggest is avoiding your concepts that anyone disagreeing with you or your beliefs is belittling you. You have the right to believe in karma, rebirth, goblins, ghosts, or whatever you like. When you raise it for discussion on a science forum, I have the right to discredit anything that I see as unscientific, myth, or simply based on faith. OK? 😉

[dimreepr]

14 hours ago, beecee said:

Actually closer to woo then even myth!!😆

Another thing you attack without understanding; karma isn't a thing it's a way of thinking, like science (causality for people), a way to understand our world and our place in it; and like science it's a way to drill down through our prejudice and bias and hate and love, to see where "squateth the toad of truth" - Sheldon Cooper.

 

Science can't measure the infection rate.

 

14 hours ago, beecee said:

Do you have evidence that karma works exclusivey? or that there is anything scientific about karma, or are you able to tell us all what it even is?

 

I can try, but I'm not sure you even want to understand.

 

karma-sadhguru-quotes.avif

Edited May 5, 2022 by dimreepr

[beecee]

9 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Another thing you attack without understanding; karma isn't a thing it's a way of thinking, like science (causality for people), a way to understand our world and our place in it; and like science it's a way to drill down through our prejudice and bias and hate and love, to see where "squateth the toad of truth" - Sheldon Cooper.

No, I'm stating my opnion with regards to your own opinion and unworkable philsophical life stance, and as I have informed you over a few threads now. Your entitled to believe and accept whatever you like, as unscientific as it maybe, drunk or sober.

 

Edited May 5, 2022 by beecee

[dimreepr]

16 hours ago, beecee said:

No, I'm stating my opnion with regards to your own opinion and unworkable philsophical life stance, and as I have informed you over a few threads now. Your entitled to believe and accept whatever you like, as unscientific as it maybe, drunk or sober.

Off topic, please stop.

 

16 hours ago, beecee said:

 

 

Your example entirely misses the point, life isn't Hollywood, 99% of people who get attacked don't get the satisfaction of seeing karma in action; they have to use their imagination.

[beecee]

7 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Your example entirely misses the point, life isn't Hollywood, 99% of people who get attacked don't get the satisfaction of seeing karma in action; they have to use their imagination.

No, they need to stand up to such bullying, criminal activities, and if capable, give back what they get, as per  my link. That's the unscientific nature of Karma. 

Edited May 6, 2022 by beecee

[dimreepr]

13 hours ago, beecee said:

No, they need to stand up to such bullying, criminal activities, and if capable, give back what they get, as per  my link. That's the unscientific nature of Karma. 

I'm done feeding you...

[beecee]

9 hours ago, dimreepr said:

I'm done feeding you...

Forget feeding me and show that karma, like anything paranormal and supernatural is anything other then unscientific myth. 

Or if you like, a more subtle explanation as to karma I just found.....

"Science does not explain karma because karma is not a real thing. Karma is simply how humans interpret being in a certain probability range of events. Say for every decision you take there are x number of finite possible outcomes/results/consequences. Out of these some are favourable to the person, some are not favourable, while others are just insignificant. Out of the significant ones, if the probability actualizes into a favourable outcome, then you could interpret it as good karma or if the outcome is infavourable it is bad karma. But karma is not a real phenomenon, it is just a psychological bias that is justified by our need for positive or negative reinforcement. It’s just an evolutionary concept that our simple minds use to grasp the concept of probability and how vastly different things could have been.
Say you committed a crime and got away with it, that’s your luck, things just worked in your favour because of the various variables in the system. If you had gotten caught it would be because the variables happened to work out, it’s why not all cases get solved. Sometimes there’s too many variables and it takes time.

I don’t buy the whole “Newton’s Third Law” bullshit. Newton’s laws apply to physical entities and phenomena which have scientific and empirical bases. Not to ideas of mass psychology and herd mentality which have no tangible proof. Karma is an idea that was professed to keep people in line, it’s the same as your conscience pricking you when you do something wrong. Newton’s laws deal with inanimate objects and elements of the universe that have no consciousness, they have no demonstrated effect or prescription on matters of consciousness or the mind. Minds have free will and free will is what makes all the aforementioned variables.

So karma isn’t real, science is. Science can explain why you think karma exists."

Quora: