Rejecting religion should be easy

[Dan4reason]

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."
— Christopher Hitchens

Who needs tons of evidence to not believe in religion? if religion cannot give us evidence of its truth, then why believe it? Why shouldn't atheism be the default position?

 

[Oneatatime]

I suspect atheism would be far more common if it wasn't for the widespread childhood indoctrination, incidental or intentional ignorance, lack of self-reflection, rejection of logic and rational thought, and our species predisposition towards superstitious belief.

In addition to your quote I believe that Richard Dawkins also said something along that lines that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Well religion is big on the claims but when it comes to the evidence its usually pretty quiet or just spouts drivel.

 

[PolyHedral]

Self-replicating memes have found that the easiest way to survive is to place yourself at a higher priority than logical reasoning.

 

[Skwim]

There's more to religion than evidence and logic.

​

 

[Mister Emu]

Why shouldn't atheism be the default position?

Because people have spiritual experiences.

 

[Dan4reason]

Because people have spiritual experiences.

You mean emotional experiences?

Just because you feeling something doesn't make it true.

 

[Dan4reason]

I suspect atheism would be far more common if it wasn't for the widespread childhood indoctrination, incidental or intentional ignorance, lack of self-reflection, rejection of logic and rational thought, and our species predisposition towards superstitious belief.

In addition to your quote I believe that Richard Dawkins also said something along that lines that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Well religion is big on the claims but when it comes to the evidence its usually pretty quiet or just spouts drivel.

Carl Sagan actually said that but you were close. What is funny is that so many people have been indoctrinated to indoctrinate. They have been indoctrinated to spread the doctrine, shun doubt and even sometimes shun non-believers. As you said, this is all a result of a creation of a fantacy world while one's rational mind is not very well developed and has an incredible amount of faith in parental figures.

Soon religion becomes something one does not even think of questioning, it is made a fact based on no facts. Even the thought of questioning has been drilled into him as something bad. Faith is the untimate trap of irrationality in which the mind has been trained to cage itself.

Why constantly indoctrinate someone if you can with a little work train them to indoctrinate themselves as children?

 

[Mister Emu]

You mean emotional experiences?

No. I mean spiritual experiences.

 

[PolyHedral]

No. I mean spiritual experiences.

I can produce spiritual experiences just by messing around with magnetic fields. How can that be spiritual?

 

[Mister Emu]

I can produce spiritual experiences just by messing around with magnetic fields.

Do tell...

Are you perhaps talking about the "God-Helmet"?

 

[Dan4reason]

No. I mean spiritual experiences.

What's the difference? Hearing religious people describe religious experiences, I find them suspitiously simmilar to emotional experiences.

And... why is it that people of many contradicting faiths (Catholicism, Mormonism, Islam, Judeism, Hinduism, etc) all have so-called spiritual experiences with all their contradicting mythological figures that confirms all their conflicting faiths?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Because we believe some things should be respected a lot... I think the Sun should.

Although for metaphysical religions, they are probably have to do with illusions and coincidences.

Sometimes people like me are very attached to just a simple "label", people like labels, and atheism isn't very interesting for me, all it is is the lack of belief in God.

I want to have an interesting belief, and sometimes you can make yourself believe by tricking your mind with having faith for a certain amount of time, thus coming to know it as it is real.

 

[Mister Emu]

What's the difference?

The parts of the brain that light up.

why is it that people of many contradicting faiths (Catholicism, Mormonism, Islam, Judeism, Hinduism, etc) all have so-called spiritual experiences with all their contradicting mythological figures that confirms all their conflicting faiths?

¯\_(&#12484_/¯

Several possible explanations...

All spiritual experiences are merely based in the brain.
Genuine experience and "false" experience share the same brain functions
All religions are equal spiritual paths
etc.

 

[Dan4reason]

Because we believe some things should be respected a lot... I think the Sun should.

Although for metaphysical religions, they are probably have to do with illusions and coincidences.

Sometimes people like me are very attached to just a simple "label", people like labels, and atheism isn't very interesting for me, all it is is the lack of belief in God.

I want to have an interesting belief, and sometimes you can make yourself believe by tricking your mind with having faith for a certain amount of time, thus coming to know it as it is real.

Actually I think pulsars should be. They are awesome!

Pulsars are highly magnetized netron stars that emit a highly focused beam of electromagnetic radiation. Neutron stars are the result of a huge star that have collasped so much taht its protons and electrons have fused together into neutrons. The only thing keeping them from squeezing into a black hole is the repulsive force each neutron has on each other.

 

[gnomon]

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."
— Christopher Hitchens

Who needs tons of evidence to not believe in religion? if religion cannot give us evidence of its truth, then why believe it? Why shouldn't atheism be the default position?

While I agree with Hitchens in regards to the supernatural/theological aspects of religion it remains that much of religion as practiced by many groups is that religion is not about God but the community. In other words, religion is not always about God.

 

[Dan4reason]

The parts of the brain that light up.


¯\_(&#12484_/¯

Several possible explanations...

All spiritual experiences are merely based in the brain.
Genuine experience and "false" experience share the same brain functions
All religions are equal spiritual paths
etc.

#1 seems likely because as you said before parts of the brain do light up when so-called spiritual experiences happen.

#2 is possible but unproven.

#3 is also possible but unproven. Different religions make factual claims that contradict each other and many claim a monopoly on a spiritual path.

Based on #3 you will have to agree that just because you have a so-called spiritual experience involving a certain religion does not makes the supernatural claims it makes true.

Have you considered the possibility that "spiritual" experience is simply a unique form of emotional experience and this explains why it activates different parts of the brain than normal emotional experiences.

I argue that spiritual experience are emotional because they involve a feeling of a burning in the chest, feelings of heighted happiness and exitement, feeling of knowing or discovery, ideas popping in the head, a feeling of self-knowledge, a feeling of peace and holiness, a feeling of unconditional love and compassion for others, or a feeling of oneness with the universe or presence of a higher being.

What is a religious experience to you and how does it differ from a emotional expierence by the sensations, thoughts and experiences it creates.

 

[Dan4reason]

While I agree with Hitchens in regards to the supernatural/theological aspects of religion it remains that much of religion as practiced by many groups is that religion is not about God but the community. In other words, religion is not always about God.

Good comment. Many religions are not quite so concerned about mythological claims than others but rather about the idea of spiritually interacting together. However, to a certain extent even these "nice" religions do make factual claims about the universe or else they wouldn't be religions.

As long as these religions involve making claims about mythological beings, they are to a certain extent about God.

Indeed, I don't see why it is reasonable try to create community by brainwashing yourself and others about the natural of human life and the universe. I don't see why we have to fool ourselves for a strong sense of togetherness. Can't we do that without indoctrination?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Actually I think pulsars should be. They are awesome!

Pulsars are highly magnetized netron stars that emit a highly focused beam of electromagnetic radiation. Neutron stars are the result of a huge star that have collasped so much taht its protons and electrons have fused together into neutrons. The only thing keeping them from squeezing into a black hole is the repulsive force each neutron has on each other.

What's special about them in a way that is important to us?

Why would you worship something just because it is cool?

 

[gnomon]

Good comment. Many religions are not quite so concerned about mythological claims than others but rather about the idea of spiritually interacting together. However, to a certain extent even these "nice" religions do make factual claims about the universe or else they wouldn't be religions.

As long as these religions involve making claims about mythological beings, they are to a certain extent about God.

Indeed, I don't see why it is reasonable try to create community by brainwashing yourself and others about the natural of human life and the universe. I don't see why we have to fool ourselves for a strong sense of togetherness. Can't we do that without indoctrination?

I think we can.

Rather, I hope we can.

I work in retail so I've got first hand experience on how hard it is to get people to understand basic concepts.

 

[Riverwolf]

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."
— Christopher Hitchens

Who needs tons of evidence to not believe in religion? if religion cannot give us evidence of its truth, then why believe it? Why shouldn't atheism be the default position?

No reason. It's just that it often isn't.

Even for a person like me, who wasn't indoctrinated into any sort of religion, found a rudimentary form of theism as a default position, more or less on my own.

I think it might have to do with a natural inclination to project human attributes on non-human things, like when kids convince themselves that their toys are alive.

Since, therefore, such thinking is the default for me, I maintain it. ^_^

There's no reason why atheism shouldn't be the default, as it is for many. But I'd say that the inverse is also true.