Is the Mind Too Insecure or Frightened to Know that There Is No God?

[Kilgore Trout]

Really? Explain to me, then, how the threat of eternal hell assuages fear of death.

Are you really saying that you are not commiting a logical fallacy here?

 

[Storm]

Are you really saying that you are not commiting a logical fallacy here?

If you take it completely out of context, it looks like one, sure. Of course, taking things completely out of context is rather dishonest.

Are you going to address my points?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

If you take it completely out of context, it looks like one, sure. Of course, taking things completely out of context is rather dishonest.

Are you going to address my points?

It's either a logical fallacy or it isn't. You are not admitting that it is?

As to how many people historically believed in an afterlife, neither of us really know, so discussing the current demographics of the world is the only meaningful observation we can make on the matter.

 

[ChristineES]

I have to admit that when I first read the title of this thread, I found it to be an arrogant question. And not just a little arrogant, very arrogant. I made this judgment before I read the OP.

Reasons:
1. the words "To know there is no god" which is insinuates that someone knows for a fact that there is no god.
2. For the insinuation that the only reason the majority of people worship God is because they are afraid of death.

Sorry, I just had to say this. Go back to debating.

 

[Storm]

It's either a logical fallacy or it isn't. You are not admitting that it is?

In context? No.

As to how many people historically believed in an afterlife, neither of us really know, so discussing the current demographics of the world is the only meaningful observation we can make on the matter.

I don't think so. The motivations for God-belief are so deeply buried in history that no meaningful observations can be made outside of that context.

But lets back up a bit. It doesn't matter how many people believed in these less-than-comfortable visions of the afterlife. One is enough to show that fear of death is not the only motive for belief - entire cultures reveals the argument as ignorant, at best.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

In context? No.

Context is irrelevant.

I don't think so. The motivations for God-belief are so deeply buried in history that no meaningful observations can be made outside of that context.

But lets back up a bit. It doesn't matter how many people believed in these less-than-comfortable visions of the afterlife. One is enough to show that fear of death is not the only motive for belief - entire cultures reveals the argument as ignorant, at best.

Nobody is saying it's the only motive for belief, but going by the number of people who believe they are going to some sort of heaven, it is a major, and wide-spread motive for belief.

 

[Storm]

Context is irrelevant.

Never.

Nobody is saying it's the only motive for belief, but going by the number of people who believe they are going to some sort of heaven, it is a major, and wide-spread motive for belief.

Only if you rely on artificial limitations on whose beliefs are worthy of consideration, which is blatantly dishonest.

I repeat the question, why do unbelievers cling so determinedly to this obviously false notion? Ignorance is one thing, but when you completely dismiss science and history, not to mention the plethora of believers who politely inform you that it's not the case, you become no better than any YEC.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I repeat the question, why do unbelievers cling so determinedly to this obviously false notion?

I'll repeat the answer. It's not a false notion. Most people in the world who are religious believe in some type of afterlife paradise.

Ignorance is one thing, but when you completely dismiss science and history, not to mention the plethora of believers who politely inform you that it's not the case, you become no better than any YEC.

Ah, engaging in more logical fallacies I see. I'll assume it's alright somehow because of the context.

P.S. - content from online storage sites are blocked at my job, so I don't know what the picture was.

 

[Storm]

I'll repeat the answer. It's not a false notion. Most people in the world who are religious believe in some type of afterlife paradise.

You want to talk fallacies? You're counting the hits and ignoring the misses.

Ah, engaging in more logical fallacies I see. I'll assume it's alright somehow because of the context.

How is pointing out willful ignorance a fallacy? Oh, I get it.... "logical fallacy" to you means "point I don't want to address."

 

[Kilgore Trout]

You want to talk fallacies? You're counting the hits and ignoring the misses.

You disagree that most people in the world belong to a religion that contains the idea of a paradise in the afterlife? What logical fallacy am I commiting? Where am I incorrect?

How is pointing out willful ignorance a fallacy? Oh, I get it.... "logical fallacy" to you means "point I don't want to address."

I'm not being willfully ignorant. I have addressed each point you have raised. Of course, I don't see the need to respond to accusations equating me to a YEC, since this is blatantly false, and has no rational basis.

 

[Willamena]

Context is irrelevant.

Only if you want to invalidate everything. Nothing exists without context.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Only if you want to invalidate everything. Nothing exists without context.

This wasn't a general statement. It was in regards to employing a logical fallacy - context doesn't make it okay to use one.

 

[Storm]

You disagree that most people in the world belong to a religion that contains the idea of a paradise in the afterlife? What logical fallacy am I commiting? Where am I incorrect?

To make your point, you have to throw out at least four thousand years of history, as well as every continent but Europe. As I said, counting the hits and ignoring the misses.

I'm not being willfully ignorant.

You're dismissing the science and history that prove you wrong, what do you call it?

I have addressed each point you have raised.

No, you haven't. You've just whined about how I made them.

Of course, I don't see the need to respond to accusations equating me to a YEC, since this is blatantly false, and has no rational basis.

No rational basis except the willful disregard of science and history that I've pointed to at least twice, that is.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

To make your point, you have to throw out at least four thousand years of history, as well as every continent but Europe. As I said, counting the hits and ignoring the misses.

You're dismissing the science and history that prove you wrong, what do you call it?

Please cite your source(s) of information which provide the historical demographic data which illustrates that most people, at any point in time, did not believe in some type of afterlife with positive attributes.

No, you haven't. You've just whined about how I made them.

Actually, I haven't whined at all. Please point out where I've done this.

No rational basis except the willful disregard of science and history that I've pointed to at least twice, that is.

Please point out the science and or history which proves me wrong, or proves you right.

 

[Storm]

Please cite your source(s) of information which provide the historical demographic data which illustrates that most people, at any point in time, did not believe in some type of afterlife with positive attributes.

Moving the goalposts and shifting the burden. You made the claim that most people believe in God due to comforting visions of the afterlife. Support or withdraw.

Actually, I haven't whined at all. Please point out where I've done this.

Just about every post you've made in response to me.

Please point out the science and or history which proves me wrong, or proves you right.

Science: neurotheology, which studies the neurological states that people interpret as experiences of God. The final nail in the coffin of the "God was invented" arguments, including this one.
History: Greek religion. Norse religion. Native American religion. Just off the top of my head. Of course, none of them count, because they don't support your assertion. (That's where the intellectual dishonesty comes in.)

 

[Runewolf1973]

As some others have pointed out, it is not necessary to believe in a god to know that everything that exists is eternal. Matter and energy can not "cease to exist". Even that which we know as "consciousness" is an energy and as such is eternal.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Moving the goalposts and shifting the burden. You made the claim that most people believe in God due to comforting visions of the afterlife. Support or withdraw.

Over half the people in the world are just christian or muslim, both who have as a primary attribute, the idea of an afterlife paradise:

Major Religions Ranked by Size

Just about every post you've made in response to me.

Sorry, I don't see where that occurred.

Science: neurotheology, which studies the neurological states that people interpret as experiences of God. The final nail in the coffin of the "God was invented" arguments, including this one.
History: Greek religion. Norse religion. Native American religion. Just off the top of my head. Of course, none of them count, because they don't support your assertion. (That's where the intellectual dishonesty comes in.)

It doesn't logically follow from any of these things that you mentioned that most people don't find comfort in the idea of an afterlife contained within their religion.

You'll have to make a coherent, cogent, and specific argument, and not just throw out a list of random things if you want to persuade me of something.

 

[Storm]

Over half the people in the world are just christian or muslim, both who have as a primary attribute, the idea of an afterlife paradise:

Major Religions Ranked by Size

And we're back to throwing out the majority of history.

It doesn't logically follow from any of these things that you mentioned that most people don't find comfort in the idea of an afterlife contained within their religion.

You'll have to make a coherent, cogent, and specific argument, and not just throw out a list of random things if you want to persuade me of something.

Review the thread.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

And we're back to throwing out the majority of history.

I never left it. I never made an argument other than most people, now and in recent history, find comfort from believing in an afterlife. I don't think anyone did. Again, if you have specific demographic information on any point in the past which illustrates this data, please post it.

Review the thread.

I have, a few times. I haven't found anything convincing to counter my assertion.

 

[Seven]

Alternately, "matter" is a label a conscious mind has attached to a particular set of conditions that it recognized; so it could be said that "matter" arises from a complex idea that consciousness reconstructs moment to moment in memory. Who of us (ghosts) can say that it ceases at death or (as Vi suggested) "moves on" to localize itself around another combination of "matter"?

As romantic as the notion may be, it's no less far-fetched than that "death" equates to a part of the universe that, unlike matter, is capable of abruptly ceasing to exist.

Experiments have shown the strong connection between changes in physiological brain states and changes in states of consciousness. For example, people have had their personalities dramatically changed by strokes. So from this I go a step further and say that consciousness is a product of the brain and dies when the brain dies. I'll admit that it's definitely and assumption, but it seems like a reasonable one.

What I don't understand is what leads people to the assumption that consciousness is eternal?