Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Reverse Atheism

Mikeee
Posts: 234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2011 2:21:34 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Let's say that there is every piece of valid evidence in the world proving the existence of a god, would you believe and accept it? Now let's say that the proven god is everything that resembles evil, do you still choice to believe and accept? By believing in this god, the only one true proven truth (in this hypothetical situation),you will be condemned to suffering horrible pain for the rest of eternity, do you still believe? By choosing to deny this god, which has been proven to be the true god (100% right, no exceptions) you are guaranteed a lifetime of happiness and prosperity, and no suffering.

In this situation, do you choice to accept the truth and all of its consequences, or do you choice to simply deny it and live happily?
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2011 2:27:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/25/2011 2:21:34 PM, Mikeee wrote:
Let's say that there is every piece of valid evidence in the world proving the existence of a god, would you believe and accept it? Now let's say that the proven god is everything that resembles evil, do you still choice to believe and accept? By believing in this god, the only one true proven truth (in this hypothetical situation),you will be condemned to suffering horrible pain for the rest of eternity, do you still believe? By choosing to deny this god, which has been proven to be the true god (100% right, no exceptions) you are guaranteed a lifetime of happiness and prosperity, and no suffering.

In this situation, do you choice to accept the truth and all of its consequences, or do you choice to simply deny it and live happily?

You don't get to choose what you believe in. Belief is something that happens to your brain in the presence of stimuli; it's not a choice.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2011 2:27:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
We don't choose what we believe. If it's a fact I'll believe it whether I openly acknowledge it or not. I can't choose not to believe something, but if someone asked me if I believed I'd obviously lie to avoid eternal damnation if it got me out of it.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2011 2:40:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/25/2011 2:21:34 PM, Mikeee wrote:
Let's say that there is every piece of valid evidence in the world proving the existence of a god, would you believe and accept it? Now let's say that the proven god is everything that resembles evil, do you still choice to believe and accept? By believing in this god, the only one true proven truth (in this hypothetical situation),you will be condemned to suffering horrible pain for the rest of eternity, do you still believe? By choosing to deny this god, which has been proven to be the true god (100% right, no exceptions) you are guaranteed a lifetime of happiness and prosperity, and no suffering.

In this situation, do you choice to accept the truth and all of its consequences, or do you choice to simply deny it and live happily?

As stated, we do not "choose" what we believe in the sense that our beliefs are subject to arbitrary whim. If the evidence is convincing, then I will be convinced. This seems tautological, but I'm afraid there isn't much else I can do.

However, I do believe that we can, over time, control our beliefs. Repetition of a statement as true can, gradually, induce our acceptance of that statement as true, even if we initially rejected it as false. This is an element of brainwashing, yes, but A) can be done by a person on him or herself and B) does not always have an nefarious end.

Even Pascal acknowledged this when submitting his (fallacious) wager, that immersing yourself in a god belief can dull your criticisms to the point you will accept it. My conversations with other theists reinforces this. A Catholic aquaintence of mine has stated that belief can be attained through praying the rosary and attending mass - as long as is needed to induce belief.

More to the point: I believe I have kept an open mind such that if valid evidence was produced, I would be convinced. I could be deluding myself on this matter, but I have no way of knowing, truly. I certainly try and keep myself aware of typical cognitive biases and logically fallacies, as not to commit them. An example would be an argument from consequences. That a god may be evil doesn't make it any less true. As such I hope that I would not resort to such a fallacy in denying the existence of an evil god should evidence arise.

I find this to be an interesting conundrum. Given the situation above, I think I would try to induce a lack of belief in said god, but the success of such is unknowable. It would certainly depend on how convincing, overt, and persistent the evidence revealing such a god is. Furthermore, it would probably not be something along the lines of simply repeating to myself: "God does not exist" but rather to convince myself that the evidence is fallacious in some way or my perceptions were in doubt. If I could convince myself of that, I could introduce, and then increase, a level of doubt that could hopefully be magnified into full atheism. I don't know if I'd be successful, but I'd probably try, given the conditions above.

Even outside of those conditions, I'd probably try and disabuse myself of the belief of that god, even without the reward component, just so that I could emotionally cope with such a world where said god exists.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2011 2:58:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/25/2011 2:21:34 PM, Mikeee wrote:
Let's say that there is every piece of valid evidence in the world proving the existence of a god, would you believe and accept it? Now let's say that the proven god is everything that resembles evil, do you still choice to believe and accept?

There is no choice but to believe. He's been proven to exist, you can't deny things that are proven. However, will I accept it? No.

By believing in this god, the only one true proven truth (in this hypothetical situation),you will be condemned to suffering horrible pain for the rest of eternity, do you still believe?

Um, well I suppose I would try to lie to myself and convince myself he doesn't exist to escape suffering of course. I suppose the question is, how convincingly can I demonstrate disbelief in the God.

By choosing to deny this god, which has been proven to be the true god (100% right, no exceptions) you are guaranteed a lifetime of happiness and prosperity, and no suffering.

Yes, I'd happily deny this God, but would have trouble disbelieving in a being who poses a very real threat to my life.

In this situation, do you choice to accept the truth and all of its consequences, or do you choice to simply deny it and live happily?

If a truth is proven and demonstrated, you can't just go on disbelieving it, it's plain to see that it clearly exists and is proven.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2011 3:03:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/25/2011 2:29:26 PM, Mikeee wrote:
So what you are saying is religion is not a choice?

Religion is a choice because in most cases, each religion makes unsupported claims so you obviously have the ability to choose which unsupported claims you believe (or want to believe rather). However, if a religion were proven then you'd have no choice but to believe in the true religion as demonstrated to be the case.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2011 3:09:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/25/2011 2:29:26 PM, Mikeee wrote:
So what you are saying is religion is not a choice?

Not a conscious choice. An Atheist cannot simply choose "I believe in God" and it spontaniuosly be true that they suddenly believe in God. When people change, it is not from a conscious choice, but from a realization of a subconscious choice.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2011 8:41:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/25/2011 2:21:34 PM, Mikeee wrote:
Let's say that there is every piece of valid evidence in the world proving the existence of a god, would you believe and accept it?

Yes.

Now let's say that the proven god is everything that resembles evil, do you still choice to believe and accept?

Well then it is not omnibenevolent and so not God... but ignoring then yes. Unless it is an intrinsic property the morality of an entity has no bearing on it's existence.

By believing in this god, the only one true proven truth (in this hypothetical situation),you will be condemned to suffering horrible pain for the rest of eternity, do you still believe? By choosing to deny this god, which has been proven to be the true god (100% right, no exceptions) you are guaranteed a lifetime of happiness and prosperity, and no suffering.

You don't choose what you believe.


In this situation, do you choice to accept the truth and all of its consequences, or do you choice to simply deny it and live happily?

That is not how belief works.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2011 8:41:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/25/2011 2:29:26 PM, Mikeee wrote:
So what you are saying is religion is not a choice?

Not for the rational no.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.