Volconvo Debate Forums - View Single Post

free thinker · Aug 21, 2006, 09:25 pm

I am a practicing atheist. That is to say that, I actively do not believe in anything supernatural. This includes but is not limited to ghosts, spirits, miricles, magic, mystics, seers, angels, saints, gods, god, or any supernatural being. The foundation for my disbelief
is a total and convincing lack of any first hand evidence that anything supernatural ever occured outside of the imagination.I have been looking for 53 years so agnostic (without knowlage) is no longer an option, at this point I kinda know.
I am astounded by the lengths that otherwise intelligent people will go to in order to convince themselves and others that super natural forces are at work in their lives.
The lack of real evidence is often surplanted with shady and hard to define terms such as "spirtual" or "soul".
I generally don't reveal what I truly think of this kind of pretense but since you asked ,here goes: I feel, and have always felt that ones devotion to the supernatural is a demonstration of weak will and self serving intelectual arrested development. Let me illustrate. As children we all belived in santa claus and at some stage in our development we relised that the concept was mostly a way to controll the behavior of children for at least one month of the year. But for a while we were still willing to put up a front, pretending to believe long after the evidence would allow full belief. Free gifts and enchantment were so comforting that the evidence could be ignored . At some point it became obvious that other equally supernatural beings were also without substancial evidence but now the stakes were higher. If we didn't pretend to believe, the profound and difficult questions of life would go unanswered ...I.E. Where did we come from? Why are we here? and the big one; Where do we go when we die?? Our survival instinct is such a dominant part of our psycological makeup that the thought of no longer existing is beyond concept or at least beyond "comfortable " concept.
So when faced with the conundrum, to believe is comforting and even enchanting but is not supported by any real evidence., to not believe is intelectualy satisfying but is deeply emotionaly disturbing, admitting that existance can cease. Guess where most of us come in ??? The latter is easier to live with.as we get on with the mundane reality of every day life.The former in my opinion shows a more rational and mature view of life in the human condition. Thanks for asking.

Aug 21, 2006, 09:25 pm	#927 (permalink) (top)
free thinker Sedimentary Rock Posts: 11	I believe in not believing. I am a practicing atheist. That is to say that, I actively do not believe in anything supernatural. This includes but is not limited to ghosts, spirits, miricles, magic, mystics, seers, angels, saints, gods, god, or any supernatural being. The foundation for my disbelief is a total and convincing lack of any first hand evidence that anything supernatural ever occured outside of the imagination.I have been looking for 53 years so agnostic (without knowlage) is no longer an option, at this point I kinda know. I am astounded by the lengths that otherwise intelligent people will go to in order to convince themselves and others that super natural forces are at work in their lives. The lack of real evidence is often surplanted with shady and hard to define terms such as "spirtual" or "soul". I generally don't reveal what I truly think of this kind of pretense but since you asked ,here goes: I feel, and have always felt that ones devotion to the supernatural is a demonstration of weak will and self serving intelectual arrested development. Let me illustrate. As children we all belived in santa claus and at some stage in our development we relised that the concept was mostly a way to controll the behavior of children for at least one month of the year. But for a while we were still willing to put up a front, pretending to believe long after the evidence would allow full belief. Free gifts and enchantment were so comforting that the evidence could be ignored . At some point it became obvious that other equally supernatural beings were also without substancial evidence but now the stakes were higher. If we didn't pretend to believe, the profound and difficult questions of life would go unanswered ...I.E. Where did we come from? Why are we here? and the big one; Where do we go when we die?? Our survival instinct is such a dominant part of our psycological makeup that the thought of no longer existing is beyond concept or at least beyond "comfortable " concept. So when faced with the conundrum, to believe is comforting and even enchanting but is not supported by any real evidence., to not believe is intelectualy satisfying but is deeply emotionaly disturbing, admitting that existance can cease. Guess where most of us come in ??? The latter is easier to live with.as we get on with the mundane reality of every day life.The former in my opinion shows a more rational and mature view of life in the human condition. Thanks for asking.