Atheists without fathers

[FireGarden]

Most Atheists come from a family where the father was missing, dead, weak or abusive. Paul C. Vitz has written a very interesting book entitled Faith of the Fatherless: The Psychology of Atheism (Spence, 1999).

How one views God is directly related to how your relationship with your father was. If your father was distant than God will feel distant. If you hated your father, you will most likely have hatred for God. This is the case with Madalyn Murray O'Hair and many other Atheists.

from the Institute For Biblical and Scientific Studies (http://www.bibleandscience.com/godexists.htm)

[arcticpenguin]

My father was none of the above. He was a terrific guy.

But technically, he died my last year of high school and I didn't convert to atheism until a couple of years at college. And my conversion was intellectual, not emotional, so I don't see how it would be relevant.

The premise is absurd on the face of it, because it leaves out the entire body of atheists who reached that decision intellectually as an adult.

My dad was a great guy, and none of my glaring faults are his fault. :)

[Skeptical Greg]

I did not have a post fertilization dad in my life, but this reasoning is absurd!


How come this idiot did not address God's apparent lack of concern for fatherless Atheists?

Doesn't look like he made any extra effort to reveal himself to those in need of some extra care..

[headscratcher4]

Interesting reasoning. I note that Jesus' "dad" was missing, and his "step" father could never live up to the "real" father's image. Amazing Ol' J-man didn't become an atheist.

[Stimpson J. Cat]

headscratcher,

Interesting reasoning. I note that Jesus' "dad" was missing, and his "step" father could never live up to the "real" father's image. Amazing Ol' J-man didn't become an atheist.

Maybe he did. After all, theists are constantly claiming that atheists believe that they are God. :p

Dr. Stupid

[Fade]

Ridiculous.

[Dub]

Is it me or do all the arguments for the existence of God run "A is ____, B is _____; therefore, God must exist" Fill in the blanks with whatever takes your fancy.

On a side note. The 'Institute' was recently given a 14.9 arce park. They nicknamed the park 'Triassic Park'. Quite ironic that some christian believe that the Earth isnt even as old as the triassic period. :)

[c4ts]

I suppose that makes me a statistical anomaly. :rolleyes: Why don't they do a survey relating intelligence quotient to atheism? They might find more consistent results.

[Cecil]

Originally posted by c4ts
I suppose that makes me a statistical anomaly. :rolleyes: Why don't they do a survey relating intelligence quotient to atheism? They might find more consistent results.

Oh, but they have. Many times. http://www.objectivethought.com/atheism/iqstats.html

[Mr. Skinny]

My father wasn't missing, nor was he weak or abusive. I got along with him very well. Unfortunately he died about five years ago. I think it was that stuff they tried to teach me in Catholic grade school about the communion host and wine becoming the actual body and blood of christ that got me started on the road to skeptical thinking.

Cecil, that was an interesting link. Thanks for providing it.

[Hypocolius]

My dad was a fantastic guy, and I loved him to bits. In addition he was the only even slightly religious member of my family, my mother is, and always was an atheist. She and Dad (a la carte Catholic) agreed to let me and my brother make up our own minds about theism (neither of us ended up believing in god at all). This "study" is an attempt to liken atheism to a psychological illness, and is an insult to free-thinking people, and their fathers.

[Franko]

This "study" is an attempt to liken atheism to a psychological illness, and is an insult to free-thinking people, and their fathers.

A-Theists are also far far less likely to make dontaions to charity then a Theist.

I guess -- so much for empirical evidence??? "Empirical evidence" is only useful when it proves your point, but as soon as it starts to work against your religion, then it is time to fall back on good'ol reliable Dogma.

A-Theism is a psychological illness ... deal with it.

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by Franko


A-Theists are also far far less likely to make dontaions to charity then a Theist.



Well, I can agree that I don't give a lot of money to churches.

How do they compare in terms of giving to non-religious charities?

While my (religious) parents give more money to charity overall than I do, all of it goes to the church, while mine goes to public education.

[Franko]

Well, I can agree that I don't give a lot of money to churches.

Charities <> Churches

How do they compare in terms of giving to non-religious charities?

Theists tend to donate at least 3 times more (per individual) then A-Theists.

While my (religious) parents give more money to charity overall than I do, all of it goes to the church, while mine goes to public education.

Your “donations” go to public education? Yeah … I pay property taxes too.

Look, it’s not as if there is an omniscient “god” watching and keeping an account of your “good deeds”. You have “free will”, so you don’t really need to worry about consequences for your actions like a Theist does.

[hard_head]

My dad still is a great guy. We go fishing every chance we get.
Despite the fact that he dropped out of school at an early age (around 6th grade) to go to work during the depression he has always been fascinated by science. I can remember watching Cosmos with he and my mom. He used to have me tape shows off the Discovery Channel for him, and space and the space missions fascinate him no end.

So pfffftt to the arse who thinks we all had abusive absent fathers, mine has been a great guy for my first 46 years of life, I hope he is around for my next 46.

[Franko]

So how’s the weather in B’more today?

So pfffftt to the arse who thinks we all had abusive absent fathers, mine has been a great guy for my first 46 years of life, I hope he is around for my next 46.

Other than pessimism, what is your evidence that you will cease to exist when you die?

Let me ask you this, when your character gets killed in the computer game QUAKE, are you also dead? Why is it that the best option you have been able to conceive of for your ultimate Fate is “ceasing to exist”?

To me that sounds like a psychological problem? Is you Dad an A-Theist (pessimist/cynic)? Maybe you inherited it from him?

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by Franko


Charities <> Churches




While not all charities are churches, all churches are charities.




Theists tend to donate at least 3 times more (per individual) then A-Theists.


Does that include their contributions to churches?


Your “donations” go to public education? Yeah … I pay property taxes too.

[/B]

Nope, I give money directly to academic programs of the local university every year.

I also pay a bunch of property taxes, but that is not what I am talking about.

I know you can't stand it when people do things that shake your misguided world view, but that's the way it is.

[Franko]

I know you can't stand it when people do things that shake your misguided world view, but that's the way it is.

When you have some evidence that people who don’t believe in Rewards & Punishments (positive ad negative reinforcements) behave as morally as those who do, then I’ll believe your religion is the “One True Faith”. Until then, it’s your misguided worldview that is being shaken – not mine.

[CWL]

Originally posted by Franko


When you have some evidence that people who don’t believe in Rewards & Punishments (positive ad negative reinforcements) behave as morally as those who do, then I’ll believe your religion is the “One True Faith”. Until then, it’s your misguided worldview that is being shaken – not mine.

Franko,

Who exactly are you claiming doesn't believe in "positive and negative reinforcements"?

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by Franko


When you have some evidence that people who don’t believe in Rewards & Punishments (positive ad negative reinforcements)

As CWL notes, this is a strawman.

If you get your head out of the hole, you might learn something. Instead of denying that I might do such a thing, why not ask _why_ I would do such a thing?

[Franko]

CWL: (A-Theist/Lawyer)
Who exactly are you claiming doesn't believe in "positive and negative reinforcements"?

Jesus Christ CWL after months and months of debating this point you are suddenly gonna pretend that you haven’t been claiming what you have obviously been claiming? You had better be careful with me Hellspawn, or I am going to trick you into admitting that you never actually had any “free will”.

pgwenthold:

As CWL notes, this is a strawman.

CWL is a strawman.

If you get your head out of the hole, you might learn something. Instead of denying that I might do such a thing, why not ask _why_ I would do such a thing?

It’s simple pgwenthold, do you ever walk around your house in your underwear? Ever go out in public like that?

By the same token I believe that my Goddess is ALWAYS watching me, ALWAYS keeping a tally of my good deeds and misdeeds. I behave accordingly. You on the other hand don’t think that anyone is watching, and you are parading around in your underwear like a fool.

[Yahzi]

My dad was gone for most of my life (divorce and Vietnam).

But he came back when I was an adult and tried to convert me to fundiesm.

Ironically, he was given up for adoption as a child. But he was adopted by fundies, so I guess that evens out.

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by Franko

It’s simple pgwenthold, do you ever walk around your house in your underwear? Ever go out in public like that?

By the same token I believe that my Goddess is ALWAYS watching me, ALWAYS keeping a tally of my good deeds and misdeeds. I behave accordingly. You on the other hand don’t think that anyone is watching, and you are parading around in your underwear like a fool.

I gotta admit, I haven't a friggin clue about what you are talkig about.

As far as I can tell, you get some sort of thrill out of parading around in front of your goddess in your underwear. Do you have some other point?

[CWL]

Originally posted by Franko
Jesus Christ CWL after months and months of debating this point you are suddenly gonna pretend that you haven’t been claiming what you have obviously been claiming? You had better be careful with me Hellspawn, or I am going to trick you into admitting that you never actually had any “free will”.

What's up with this "Jesus Christ" business, Franko? Have you reverted to your old beliefs? What does your Goddess think of you having other gods beside herself? And what do you think Christ would think of you Goddess?

All jokes aside. You can demonstrate that you are not a liar by linking to any specific statement of mine that shows that I now "pretend that I haven’t been claiming what I have obviously been claiming".

Of course you won't. Because you can't.

CWL is a strawman.

I can assure you I am neither a strawman nor a figment of your imagination, my solipsistic little friend.

It’s simple pgwenthold, do you ever walk around your house in your underwear? Ever go out in public like that?

By the same token I believe that my Goddess is ALWAYS watching me, ALWAYS keeping a tally of my good deeds and misdeeds. I behave accordingly. You on the other hand don’t think that anyone is watching, and you are parading around in your underwear like a fool.

"Always watching you" eh? Scary stuff (http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/s1/schizoph.asp).

[Franko]

I gotta admit, I haven't a friggin clue about what you are talkig about.

As far as I can tell, you get some sort of thrill out of parading around in front of your goddess in your underwear. Do you have some other point?

yeah, my point is that when you don't think your being watched you behave differently. But I don't expect YOU or any other A-Theist to concede this obvious fact ... and that is my real point.

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by Franko


yeah, my point is that when you don't think your being watched you behave differently. But I don't expect YOU or any other A-Theist to concede this obvious fact ... and that is my real point.

Why does your goddess care whether you walk around in your underwear when you are at home?

[Franko]

Why does your goddess care whether you walk around in your underwear when you are at home?

She doesn't. She thinks I look "studly" in my underwear. ;)

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by Franko


She doesn't. She thinks I look "studly" in my underwear. ;)

OK, so apparently you have the shades closed and are not disturbing _anyone_, not even indirectly.

So tell me why it's wrong?

[Wile E. Coyote]

The Roman Catholic church is the biggest charity in the world, and what do they do with their money? They build ornate cathedrals, shower the upper clergy with riches, and generally waste it on non-charitable activities.

Perhaps atheists are just smart enough to give money to where it will be used towards a known, specific purpose. I would bet a lot of theists give money to charity to buy their way into heaven.

It is probably better for those in need of charity if you buy some product, stimulate the economy, and give some poor unfortunate a job. Churches employ a very small percentage of the population, after all.

Of course, this is all baseless speculation.

[arcticpenguin]

It seems clear that the source of Mr. Vitz's data was not the JREF board.

[Franko]

It seems clear that the source of Mr. Vitz's data was not the JREF board.

What makes you assume that all of the A-Theists here are answering honestly?

It is fairly obvious that the majority of A-Theists in this thread don't want this to be True. Are you saying that will not manifest itself in any way in the poll results?

Are you really that naive, or do you actually have a non-dogmatic line of reasoning for your Faith?

[FireGarden]

What I find strange is that the argument actually strengthens the atheistic point of view. It's the same with the section they have on "the God-part of the Brain", where they say that "Michael Persinger stimulates the temporal lobes with a magnetic field to produce spiritual experiences. He can seemingly change an atheist into a theist"

If either argument had been true, it would not have been evidence for God. It would be a mundane, materialistic explanation for why some people believe in God. (Especially when they add that these experiences can be triggered by stressful events, oxygen deprivation and sleeplessness etc.)

Was that their intent?

[Franko]

What I find strange is that the argument actually strengthens the atheistic point of view. It's the same with the section they have on "the God-part of the Brain", where they say that "Michael Persinger stimulates the temporal lobes with a magnetic field to produce spiritual experiences. He can seemingly change an atheist into a theist"

If either argument had been true, it would not have been evidence for God. It would be a mundane, materialistic explanation for why some people believe in God. (Especially when they add that these experiences can be triggered by stressful events, oxygen deprivation and sleeplessness etc.)

Was that their intent?

Ohhh, it's all Fated by the Laws of Physics Goodpropoganda (whether you are a Theist or A-Theist).

What else could it be?

Surely you weren't suggesting its magic???

[Ian Osborne]

Originally posted by Franko
I believe that my Goddess is ALWAYS watching me, ALWAYS keeping a tally of my good deeds and misdeeds. I behave accordingly. You on the other hand don’t think that anyone is watching.

OK, you get the chance to steal a wallet. No chance of getting caught in the act - none at all. And there's no one watching who would think any less of you. There are no secular consequences to this act, beyond getting a little richer. Do you do it?

You would (if I've read you correctly) say 'no', fearing ultimate retribution from your Goddess. I would not do it because I *personally* think it's wrong - I don't need a deity to tell me so. Doesn't this make me more moral than you?

[Franko]

Ian Ozborne,

OK, you get the chance to steal a wallet. No chance of getting caught in the act - none at all. And there's no one watching who would think any less of you. There are no secular consequences to this act, beyond getting a little richer. Do you do it?

No, because ultimately it would be no different then me borrowing the money and then having to pay it back with interest later.

You would (if I've read you correctly) say 'no', fearing ultimate retribution from your Goddess. I would not do it because I *personally* think it's wrong - I don't need a deity to tell me so. Doesn't this make me more moral than you?

The one of us who doesn’t actually steal the wallet is more moral.

But why won’t you steal the wallet Really? If you have everything to gain, and nothing to lose, then either you are being naïve, or you are lying to me.

If you live your life as if there might be a god, then why not just be honest and state that you live your life as if there might be a god? Why not just call yourself an Agnostic???

[c4ts]

I can't argue with the statistics, but I'm not sure I understand why studies of a correlation between atheism and theism are brought up in the conclusion, when the statistics presented are about a correlation between atheism and intelligence.

According to the Skeptic magazine vol.6 #2 1998, in multiple studies, there is a negative correlation between theism and morality. By Franzblau's 1934 study, there's a negative correlation between religiousity and honesty. Ross 1950 shows atheists and agnostics are more likely to express their willingness to help the poor than the deeply religious. 1969 Hirschi and Stark found no correlation in lawbreaking by churchgoing children and non-churchgoing children.

It could be the reason there are more honest theists than atheists is becasue there are more theists than atheists, which would explain why Hirschi and Stark said there was no correlation, but there are no statistics demonstrating a majority of either atheists or theists in the statistics presented by the study, except in the fields of science where atheists are a majority. So all we really have are quantity x of theists and quantity y of atheists, and we don't know anything about the sets other than the portions that are talked about, which are without a proportion between sets (x:y) or the portions to their respective sets (a/x:b/y, where a is the quantity of honest theists and b is the quantity of of honests athiests). So why include these results? Is there an implied correlation between intelligence and morality or something?

[Ian Osborne]

Originally posted by Franko
But why won’t you steal the wallet Really? If you have everything to gain, and nothing to lose, then either you are being naïve, or you are lying to me.

I wouldn't steal the wallet because I consider theft to be immoral. You wouldn't steal the wallet out of fear of the consequences. I am neither naive or lying. Hard as it is for you to grasp, morals are NOT the sole preserve of the theist.

If you live your life as if there might be a god, then why not just be honest and state that you live your life as if there might be a god? Why not just call yourself an Agnostic???

Once again, I don't need a god to make me behave in a moral way. I would leave that wallet alone not on the off-chance that I'm wrong about there being a god, but because it isn't mine and I don't steal.

[hard_head]

Originally posted by Franko
So how’s the weather in B’more today?



Other than pessimism, what is your evidence that you will cease to exist when you die?

Let me ask you this, when your character gets killed in the computer game QUAKE, are you also dead? Why is it that the best option you have been able to conceive of for your ultimate Fate is “ceasing to exist”?

To me that sounds like a psychological problem? Is you Dad an A-Theist (pessimist/cynic)? Maybe you inherited it from him?
The weather is cold and windy
What pessimism?
Absence of evidence to the contrary
Ultimate Fate? gimme a break, life is about living, it's the journey not the destination.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Ian Osborne
Once again, I don't need a god to make me behave in a moral way. I would leave that wallet alone not on the off-chance that I'm wrong about there being a god, but because it isn't mine and I don't steal.

As would the vast majority of us.
What you need to realize is that Franko has no concept of empathy. We had best hope that he never loses his belief in cosmic punishment, because without it, he would be instantly off on a crime spree. It is obvious to all that he cares nothing for humanity, but only for his own miserable graviton.

[Megalodon]

Originally posted by Franko
The one of us who doesn’t actually steal the wallet is more moral.

But why won’t you steal the wallet Really? If you have everything to gain, and nothing to lose, then either you are being naïve, or you are lying to me.


Man, you're so wrong that it hurts... If you steal a wallet, you have something to gain, but not the owner of the wallet. The simple fact that someone is going to be hurt by our actions is deterrent enough for a moral person. If the thing that holds at bay is the fear of your Logical Bimbo, and not the respect for the next person, then you are a dangerous, immoral and profoundly hypocrite person

[Franko]

Man, you're so wrong that it hurts...

I’m just a figment of your imagination, maybe you should have created me differently?

If you steal a wallet, you have something to gain, but not the owner of the wallet.

the “owner” of the wallet is also simply a figment of your imagination. He doesn’t really exist.

The simple fact that someone is going to be hurt by our actions is deterrent enough for a moral person.

No one else will be hurt, because You are the only entity who actually exists.

If the thing that holds at bay is the fear of your Logical Bimbo …

I’m simply a figment of Your imagination I fear nothing.

… and not the respect for the next person

There is no “next person”. I don’t even exist.

… then you are a dangerous, immoral and profoundly hypocrite person.

… or maybe you just imagine me that way?

[Keneke]

As an agnostic, I am not sure if God exists. Not too sure about my Dad either. I could have been a virgin birth, right? That "Joe" guy just doesn't look like me. Yup, the guy's so right.

:rolleyes:

[whitefork]

I keep reading this dang thing as "atheists without feathers".

Pluck a duck!

[MRC_Hans]

Quack!

Hans

[Tricky]

Q: What did the duck say when he bought a tube of Chapstick?

A: "Just put it on my bill".

**************
Q: How do you turn a duck into an R & B singer?

A: Put it in the microwave until it's Bill Withers.

[whitefork]

Quick/quack, get Pillory over here.

[Ignatius]

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/commentprint050100b.html

The report also found that illegitimate-birth rates "vary considerably by race and Hispanic origin." The percentage of out-of-wedlock births for non-Hispanic whites is 21.9 percent, but for non-Hispanic blacks it's 69.3 percent. For Hispanics it's 41.6 percent, and for American Indians 59.3 percent. For Asians and Pacific Islanders overall the number is 15.6 percent, but this varies from 51.1 percent for Hawaiians to 6.4 percent and 9.7 percent for Chinese and Japanese Americans, respectively.


Illegitimate birth rates among blacks is higher than the rates among whites. If the premise that atheism is linked with not having a father in ones life is true wouldn't you expect that there would be a hell of a lot more black atheists out there?

Where are they?

[Franko]

Illegitimate birth rates among blacks is higher than the rates among whites. If the premise that atheism is linked with not having a father in ones life is true wouldn't you expect that there would be a hell of a lot more black atheists out there?

Where are they?

The prisons are full of Black A-Theists. Men who didn't believe there would be any consequences for their actions. Men who believed they had "free will".

[Ian Osborne]

Originally posted by Franko
The prisons are full of Black A-Theists. Men who didn't believe there would be any consequences for their actions. Men who believed they had "free will".

If they haven't got free will, what does it matter what they believe about the consequences of their actions? You haven't thought this through very well, have you?

[Franko]

If they haven't got free will, what does it matter what they believe about the consequences of their actions?

Yeah, but you can’t believe in “free will” without denying the existence of God first. And if God exists, and you act like She doesn’t, it may end up mattering quite a bit ultimately.

It is kind of like being a Surgeon, and pretending that germs don’t exist.

But please … don’t let me stand in the way of your incredible short-sightedness.

You haven't thought this through very well, have you?

Coming from a guy who claims that no evidence for “god” means NO GOD EXISTS, while simultaneously claiming that no evidence for “free will” means that “FREE WILL” DEFINITELY DOES EXISTS, I’d say that one of us hasn’t thought this through very well ...

[Finella]

Hmmm...

Actually, it seems the fundies are super off-track in their effort to pump up ::ahem:: "family values"....

I'm religious, rather seriously. My dad was about as distant as Pluto while still living in the same house. Many psychotherapy models (Jungian and Freudian) allude to God being representative of one's father (or authority figures from an early age in general), true. But I would think that if you were to follow this line of thinking, one would become more religious in the hope of resolving the stuff one missed having from one's father/authority figure. So it would make sense to me that if you have had a really decent relationship with your dad, that you don't feel you need another decent relationship with God -- you have all your authority stuff worked out.

But that's being really reductionistic, of course.

---,---'--{@

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Franko
Coming from a guy who claims that no evidence for “god” means NO GOD EXISTS, while simultaneously claiming that no evidence for “free will” means that “FREE WILL” DEFINITELY DOES EXISTS, I’d say that one of us hasn’t thought this through very well ...
But Franko, you have admitted that free will exists. Surely you're not going back on your promise?

[MRC_Hans]

Yeah, but you can’t believe in “free will” without denying the existence of God first. And if God exists, and you act like She doesn’t, it may end up mattering quite a bit ultimately.

Mmm, quite a few theists will disagree with you on the free will issue. The way I understand them, God has granted us free will in order for us to be able to seek the Truth. Obviously, God must be able to grant humans free will. But you could discuss that with muscleman, I gather he has some rather stron opinions on this.

Hans

[Ian Osborne]

Originally posted by Franko
Yeah, but you can’t believe in “free will” without denying the existence of God first. And if God exists, and you act like She doesn’t, it may end up mattering quite a bit ultimately.

No - as someone else has pointed out, a god could grant free will. In the Christian tradition, that's exactly what they claim - God gave humanity the ability to choose between good and evil.

Coming from a guy who claims that no evidence for “god” means NO GOD EXISTS, while simultaneously claiming that no evidence for “free will” means that “FREE WILL” DEFINITELY DOES EXISTS, I’d say that one of us hasn’t thought this through very well ...

Where did I say any of this? I think you're confusing me with someone else. My argument is that it's possible to be moral without a belief in god. I didn't discuss whether or not god actually exists, and didn't mention free will at all, though I assume you inferred my positon on the subject from my point about not stealing a wallet because it's wrong, not because of divine retribution.

[thaiboxerken]

Where did I say any of this? I think you're confusing me with someone else. My argument is that it's possible to be moral without a belief in god. I didn't discuss whether or not god actually exists, and didn't mention free will at all, though I assume you inferred my positon on the subject from my point about not stealing a wallet because it's wrong, not because of divine retribution.

You didn't, but as you will soon learn, Franko will tell you what you really believe, what you really said and will simply turn you into a strawman.

[CWL]

Originally posted by Megalodon


Man, you're so wrong that it hurts... If you steal a wallet, you have something to gain, but not the owner of the wallet. The simple fact that someone is going to be hurt by our actions is deterrent enough for a moral person. If the thing that holds at bay is the fear of your Logical Bimbo, and not the respect for the next person, then you are a dangerous, immoral and profoundly hypocrite person

This is spot on. Let's all hope that Mr. F never stops believing in his Goddess. I shudder at the thought of what he would be capable of otherwise.

It is interesting to note that Mr. F still hasn't explained how he actually gained knowledge of his Goddess. I just hope it wasn't through his neighbor's lab...

[CWL]

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Mmm, quite a few theists will disagree with you on the free will issue. The way I understand them, God has granted us free will in order for us to be able to seek the Truth. Obviously, God must be able to grant humans free will. But you could discuss that with muscleman, I gather he has some rather stron opinions on this.

Hans

To my understanding of many theologists you are correct Hans. We are "made in God's image" and therefore God has granted us free will as you point out. Surely an omnipotent God would be capable of this (is not like he's created a rock to heavy for him to lift or anything).

In this context I would like to remind the posters in this thread of this discussion on the historical origin of the concept of "free will". (http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=10623&perpage=40&pagenumber=2)

[Megalodon]

Originally posted by Franko


I’m just a figment of your imagination, maybe you should have created me differently?

the “owner” of the wallet is also simply a figment of your imagination. He doesn’t really exist.

No one else will be hurt, because You are the only entity who actually exists.

I’m simply a figment of Your imagination I fear nothing.

There is no “next person”. I don’t even exist.

… or maybe you just imagine me that way?

UAU!! That' original... Someone says something that even you, in your profound lunacy, cannot refute, and you hide behind a hollow solipsism argument...

Never seen that before :rolleyes:

[FireGarden]

Hello, Finella.
Welcome to the forum.

I noticed your post amongst the flood.
Vitz was apparently trying to turn Freud's theory on it's head. From a book review at the Institute for Religious Research (http://www.irr.org/fatherless.html), it seems that his research was even less thorough than mine!! Atleast I had more than 40 participants :D

A good part of the book consists of_ 20 biographical sketches of prominent post-Enlightenment atheists, focusing on their relationships to their fathers or father figures. This group includes Friedrich Nietzche, David Hume, Bertrand Russell, John-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, and H.G. Wells. As a control group, the book provides biographical sketches of a similar number of prominent theists from the same period, including Blaise Pascal, Edmund Burke, Moses Mendelssohn, Soren Kierkegaard, G. K. Chesterton, and Dietrich Bonhoffer. Vitz finds that characteristically, the atheists had weak, bad or absent fathers, while the theists had good fathers or father substitutes.

The review does admit that the above is a simplification of the research. But why not conduct a modern day poll instead of picking and choosing amongst historical figures? Paul Vitz works in the department of psychology at NYU, so I would expect that he would have the resources to conduct a better survey than I have. He may have done, but the book reviews I read and a google search did not turn up any such research.

If the atheists reading want to work themselves up, read this: Why Atheists Hate God, by Charles Colson (http://members.iquest.net/~macihms/Christian/faithfather.html) They have a copyright notice that prevents me from quoting.

I think that by finding a mundane reason for atheism, they find a mundane reason for theism. They are implying that no supernatural entity is required, just the right kind of parenting.

[Franko]

Tricky:
But Franko, you have admitted that free will exists. Surely you're not going back on your promise?

You really need to start doing your own thinking instead of relying on me and others to do it for you.

---------------------------------

MRC:
Mmm, quite a few theists will disagree with you on the free will issue.

Apparently not muscleman, or gentlehorse.

Name a Non-A-Theist in the forum who supports your point of view MRC …

The way I understand them, God has granted us free will in order for us to be able to seek the Truth.

but If you are already Fated (programmed, preordained) to seek the Truth, then why do you need “free will”? “Free will” sounds more like a defense mechanism created by people who aren’t programmed to find the Truth.

Obviously, God must be able to grant humans free will.

Obviously?!?!?

How on Earth can you make that claim??? You have already stipulated that God doesn’t even exist, so how can you say that it is “obvious” a non-existent entity can grant you an incomprehensible, incoherent magic power?

But you could discuss that with muscleman, I gather he has some rather strong opinions on this.

I’ll leave you for the muscleman, I don’t think he needs my help.

---------------------------------------------

Ian Oz…:

No - as someone else has pointed out, a god could grant free will. In the Christian tradition, that's exactly what they claim - God gave humanity the ability to choose between good and evil.

So Christianity is your evidence for your magic powers now?

So much for your Skepticism.

Ian Oz…: Where did I say any of this? I think you're confusing me with someone else. My argument is that it's possible to be moral without a belief in god.

Possible, just far less likely.

What you are telling me is that the crime rate would remain unchanged if we stopped prosecuting people and punishing them for crimes. If you actually believe this then you really are insane. Regardless, I doubt you have the perception to actually concede this point.

I didn't discuss whether or not god actually exists, and didn't mention free will at all, though I assume you inferred my positon on the subject from my point about not stealing a wallet because it's wrong, not because of divine retribution.

There is one reason that people act – Positive and Negative reinforcements. If you want to pretend that we all move because of magic – go right ahead. How you have deluded yourself into believing this makes you “Scientific”, “Non-Religious”, or “Skeptical” is beyond me???

-----------------------------------

CWLiar:

This is spot on. Let's all hope that Mr. F never stops believing in his Goddess. I shudder at the thought of what he would be capable of otherwise.

You don’t believe in the Goddess. Supposedly You don’t believe in Rewards and Punishment either, yet that didn’t stop you from being a huge f*cking hypocrite in choosing a career as a Lawyer!!! Yeah, people like you who don’t believe in consequences for their actions make me shudder. Fortunately your type doesn’t last very long in the grand scheme of things.

To my understanding of many theologists you are correct Hans. We are "made in God's image" and therefore God has granted us free will as you point out. Surely an omnipotent God would be capable of this

What do you call an Atheist who tries to wax philosophic to “prove” the existence of his magic “free willy” powers? … I’d call him a two-faced hypocrite.

----------------------------

Megamoron: (#4)
UAU!! That' original... Someone says something that even you, in your profound lunacy, cannot refute, and you hide behind a hollow solipsism argument...

So you are claiming to have refuted the Truth of Solipsism A-Theist??? I must have missed it?

Why not re-post your proof that Solipsism is False? … or are you too busy trying to hide behind the hollowness of your lack-o-belief system?

[Megalodon]

Originally posted by Franko

So you are claiming to have refuted the Truth of Solipsism A-Theist??? I must have missed it?

Why not re-post your proof that Solipsism is False? … or are you too busy trying to hide behind the hollowness of your lack-o-belief system?

I never claimed such a thing. What I said was "...Someone says something that even you, in your profound lunacy, cannot refute, and you hide behind a hollow solipsism argument...".

Solipsism is unrefutable, and thus of no use to me. But let's not get sidetracked. I would like for you to try to refute my original statement:


...If you steal a wallet, you have something to gain, but not the owner of the wallet. The simple fact that someone is going to be hurt by our actions is deterrent enough for a moral person. If the thing that holds [you] at bay is the fear of your Logical Bimbo, and not the respect for the next person, then you are a dangerous, immoral and profoundly hypocrite person...

Want to give it a try?

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by GoodPropaganda
Hello, Finella.
Welcome to the forum.

....snip ...

If the atheists reading want to work themselves up, read this: Why Atheists Hate God, by Charles Colson (http://members.iquest.net/~macihms/Christian/faithfather.html) They have a copyright notice that prevents me from quoting.

I think that by finding a mundane reason for atheism, they find a mundane reason for theism. They are implying that no supernatural entity is required, just the right kind of parenting.

I will probably read the link, out of curiosity, but suggesting that " Atheists hate God ", is a definite clue as to how inane it must be..:rolleyes:

[arcticpenguin]

Originally posted by GoodPropaganda

If the atheists reading want to work themselves up, read this: Why Atheists Hate God, by Charles Colson (http://members.iquest.net/~macihms/Christian/faithfather.html) They have a copyright notice that prevents me from quoting.

Charles Colson? Of Watergate fame?

"But now a psychologist is arguing that it is atheists who suffer from psychological defects -- and his evidence is compelling."

Translation: 'He's telling me what I want to hear.'

[Franko]

MegaA-Theist:

I never claimed such a thing. What I said was "...Someone says something that even you, in your profound lunacy, cannot refute, and you hide behind a hollow solipsism argument...".

No … I just lack-o-belief, in what you pretend to believe.

Solipsism is unrefutable, and thus of no use to me.

Kind of like when a Christian claims:

A-Theism is irrefutable, and thus of no use to me.

Tell me Religious Fanatic, why is it that you believe there are Two varieties of TRUTH? Why is it that you believe in a regular truth, and then for things like Solipsism there is a ”non-useful truth? What exactly is a “non-useful” Truth (Religious Dogma), and how do I recognize a “non-useful” truth from the regular, garden variety truth? Why can’t a Hindu claim that Reincarnation is True, because if it weren’t True this would be a “non-useful” truth?

Why do you consider an A-Theist double standard not a logical fallacy (or less of one)?

[Dymanic]

Do you still beat your wife?

If you hated your father, you will most likely have hatred for God.

I suggest that anyone who equates atheism with "hating God" open a dictionary and read slowly and carefully over the definition of Atheist.

[Alaric]

Hmm. I have a great Christian father and an effectionate christian battleship for a mother. My descision to become an athiest happened in my early 20s


As an athiest-I dont hate God- I simply see no need for or example of divine planning or direction. Only a moron or a South Park<the movie> character would hate god

[Franko]

I suggest that anyone who equates atheism with "hating God" open a dictionary and read slowly and carefully over the definition of Atheist.

My dictionary says that an A-Theists is someone who Fears the truth. It says that an A-Theist is a person who can't deal with the reality that there will be consequences for their actions, so instead of accepting this fact they pretend that they have magic "free will" powers, and that everyone --regardless of whether you are Saint, or Sinner -- ends up with the exact same Fate.

But the second definition listed is "A Person who Hates God" (and ultimately (hates) themselves, and everyone else!)

[CWL]

Originally posted by Franko
You don’t believe in the Goddess. Supposedly You don’t believe in Rewards and Punishment either, yet that didn’t stop you from being a huge f*cking hypocrite in choosing a career as a Lawyer!!! Yeah, people like you who don’t believe in consequences for their actions make me shudder. Fortunately your type doesn’t last very long in the grand scheme of things.

Franko (B-Theist),

You bet I don't believe in your Goddess, nor do I need any mystical tarts in order to act moral. You obviously do. Please keep on believing - again, I shudder at the thought of what you would be capable of otherwise.

What do you call an Atheist who tries to wax philosophic to “prove” the existence of his magic “free willy” powers? … I’d call him a two-faced hypocrite.

What do you call a B-Theist (a non skeptical, anti-intellectual theist) who spends his days arguing with his "free willy" strawmen and obfuscating historical facts? Just that.

[Franko]

You bet I don't believe in your Goddess, nor do I need any mystical tarts in order to act moral. You obviously do. Please keep on believing - again, I shudder at the thought of what you would be capable of otherwise.

I know you don't believe in God CWL. That is why you are an immoral lying piece of sh*t who has nothing but religious dogma to back up his absurd claims about how reality works.

TLOP (God) makes/controls YOU makes/controls CAR

Explain how something less conscious then you are can be controlling you?

Your CAR is less conscious then YOU CWL, does your CAR really control YOU ... is that what you are claiming now?

Trixy claims TOAST controls him.

A-Theists! :rolleyes:

[CWL]

Originally posted by Franko


I know you don't believe in God CWL. That is why you are an immoral lying piece of sh*t who has nothing but religious dogma to back up his absurd claims about how reality works.

TLOP (God) makes/controls YOU makes/controls CAR

Explain how something less conscious then you are can be controlling you?

Your CAR is less conscious then YOU CWL, does your CAR really control YOU ... is that what you are claiming now?

Trixy claims TOAST controls him.

A-Theists! :rolleyes:
About your views on morality:

Morality begins and ends with believing in God? Does this mean that believers may do as they please but are blessed notwithstanding? Does this mean that non-believers are damned notwithstanding how virtuous they may be? Is this your idea of morality? Please.

About your CAR-TLOP argument:

What exactly is your evidence that something "less conscious" cannot control something that is "more conscious"? On which empirical study do you base this assumption? The mere observation that "you control your car"?!? Ever had a common cold? Is the virus controlling you through an infection "more conscious" than you are? Let's see you "control your car" when you are doing 100 and the steering system breaks down. Did your car at such point in time suddenly become "more conscious" than you are? Please.

All you sensible believers in a supreme being out there, I may disagree with you as to your belief in a god, but rest assured I do not judge you by this particular...

...B-Theist! :rolleyes:

[Finella]

Hi, Good Propoganda... thanks for replying... :)

Oh, certainly Vitz is a moron for doing such a study. Thanks for elaborating on it... I didn't have time to check it out properly. I agree, celebrity study subjects are hardly good subjects. I don't think a poll would even do the deed, either. some good, proper, well-controlled research would really clear things up.

And the fundies always forget that Jesus did say that he would pit family members against each other (and I can't say I know the book and verse exactly). I don't think Vitz could possibly claim, therefore, that the Bible is on his side, either, which should really slam the door on this one as far as the fundies are concerned.

::yawn:: good Lord, do people usually bicker like this on these religion and philosophy threads? I need to learn how to hide certain posters who can't hold a civilized discussion...

---,---'--{@

[Megalodon]

I really don't know why I bother, but

Originally posted by Franko
Kind of like when a Christian claims:

A-Theism is irrefutable, and thus of no use to me.


Atheism is not irrefutable. Actually is very refutable. Just show one evidence of God (or your L-Bimbo), and I will no longer be an atheist. As simple as that...

Originally posted by Franko
Why do you consider an A-Theist double standard not a logical fallacy (or less of one)?

There is no double standard. I cannot prove that solipsism is true or false, or that there is or not a god, so I just waste my energies in far more significant questions like, which brand of toilet paper to buy :rolleyes:

Now, once again:


If you steal a wallet, you have something to gain, but not the owner of the wallet. The simple fact that someone is going to be hurt by our actions is deterrent enough for a moral person. If the thing that holds at bay is the fear of your Logical Bimbo, and not the respect for the next person, then you are a dangerous, immoral and profoundly hypocrite person

Want to give it a try. If you don't even try to refute this, our conversation is terminated, and I will be convinced (even more) that you are a dangerous, immoral and profoundly hypocrite person. Your call, Franky boy...

[FireGarden]

Finella,
I don't think that Jesus meant he would intentionally destroy families, just that such a thing would result. But you raise a good point: How many converts to Christianity (and there must have been many converts in the beginning) had to defy their parents to convert? Does that defiance indicate weak parenting?

[Finella]

GP...

wow, good question. I would say such defiance is not due to weak parenting, because such defiance would be considered (in most psychological models) normal individuation from the parent.

Although the fundies might consider it weak parenting... it probably depends on who you ask. :) After all, OT Bible says, "Honor thy father and mother..."


---,---'--{@

Franco ain't got no feathers! He probly ain't got no teef either!

-Just a smart ass comment from Jimmy-

[MRC_Hans]

MRC:
Mmm, quite a few theists will disagree with you on the free will issue.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Apparently not muscleman, or gentlehorse.

Name a Non-A-Theist in the forum who supports your point of view MRC …
I don't think Muscleman supports very many of my views, but he DOES believe in free will. Although from different reasons than I.

Since I dont know for sure what an A-Theist is, I'm gonna have some difficulty naming a Non-A-Theist.

Edited to add:
Ahh, here's one more: http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=328169#post328169

Hans

[MRC_Hans]

The way I understand them, God has granted us free will in order for us to be able to seek the Truth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



but If you are already Fated (programmed, preordained) to seek the Truth, then why do you need “free will”? “Free will” sounds more like a defense mechanism created by people who aren’t programmed to find the Truth.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously, God must be able to grant humans free will.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obviously?!?!?

How on Earth can you make that claim??? You have already stipulated that God doesn’t even exist, so how can you say that it is “obvious” a non-existent entity can grant you an incomprehensible, incoherent magic power?
About the first: Don't ask me, ask a theist. I'm just relating what I hear theists say on this subject.

Frank, I have NEVER stipulated that God doesn't exist. And even if I had, how should that keep me from acknowledging that IF an omnipotent God exists, then of course that God has the power to grant free will?

Hans

[Franko]

MRC:
Frank, I have NEVER stipulated that God doesn't exist.

If you are claiming to be an Agnostic, then why don’t you call yourself an Agnostic? If you really believe that their might be a god, then why do you misrepresent yourself as an A-Theist and claim that NO GOD EXISTS?

Or are you conceding to Agnosticism MRC???

And even if I had, how should that keep me from acknowledging that IF an omnipotent God exists, then of course that God has the power to grant free will?

Define “omnipotent”, and then explain how an “omnipotent” god could make a four sided triangle? Explain how an omnipotent god could make you move up and down at the same time. Are you actually stupid enough to believe that Omnipotent means “able to defy logic”? No wonder you call yourself A-Theist, religious fanatic.

[Megalodon]

Originally posted by Megalodon

Want to give it a try. If you don't even try to refute this, our conversation is terminated, and I will be convinced (even more) that you are a dangerous, immoral and profoundly hypocrite person. Your call, Franky boy...

Well, as I thought, only the sound of crickets...:rolleyes:

See you around A-Hole