Topic: Why I'm an atheist - page 86. (Read 89022 times)

How does the OP know that nature is indifferent to our individual existence? What makes him the authority? Has he experienced what he is talking about? And how can the OP possibly claim that something (awareness) came from eternal nothing?

During an unexpected moment of clarity Tuesday, open-minded man Blake Richman was suddenly struck by the grim realization that he's squandered a significant portion of his life listening to everyone's bullshit, the 38-year-old told reporters.

A visibly stunned and solemn Richman, who until this point regarded his willingness to hear out the opinions of others as a worthwhile quality, estimated that he's wasted nearly three and a half years of his existence being open to people's half-formed thoughts, asinine suggestions, and pointless, dumbfuck stories.

"Jesus Christ," said Richman, taking in the overwhelming volume of useless crap he's actively listened to over the years. "My whole life I've made a concerted effort to give people a fair shake and understand different points of view because I felt that everyone had something valuable to offer, but it turns out most of what they had to offer was complete bullshit."

"Seriously," Richman added, "what have I gained from treating everyone's opinion with respect? Nothing. Absolutely nothing."

According to Richman, it was just now hitting him how many hours of his life he's pissed away listening intently to nonsense about celebrity couples, how good or bad certain pens are, and why a particular sports team might have a chance this year. The husband and father of two said that every time he's felt at all put out or bored by a bullshit conversation—especially a speculative one about how bad allergy season was going to be—he should have just turned around, walked away, and gone rafting or rappelling or done any of the millions of other things he's always wanted to do but never thought he had time for.

At various points throughout the day, Richman could be heard muttering to himself that he couldn't believe he was almost 40 years old.

"Twenty minutes here, 10 minutes there. It all starts to add up," said Richman, who sat down and figured out that between stupid discussions about favorite baby names and reviews of restaurants in cities he'll never visit, he'd wasted 390 hours of his life. "And you know what the worst part is? It's my fault. Here I thought being considerate to others by always listening patiently to what they had to say was the right thing to do. Well, fuck me, right?"

According to Richman, he started thinking about how much time he's flushed down the toilet being an approachable person after a work meeting in which he let a coworker, David Martin, ramble on and on with an idea everyone knew was "total shit" the moment the man opened his mouth. Richman said that a single glance at the clock made him realize he had just spent 14 minutes of his finite time on earth not playing with his kids or being with his wife, but listening to garbage.

"It was like I stepped out of my body and saw myself actually listening to this man's worthless drivel—but it wasn't him who looked like a moron, it was me," Richman said. "I was nodding my head like an asshole and saying ridiculous things like, 'Right,' and, 'I see your point, Dave,' when I should have just said, 'Dave, your idea isn't good and you are wasting our time and you need to shut up right now.'"

By his estimates, Richman's receptiveness has resulted in 160 irreplaceable hours of listening to grossly uninformed political opinions, 300 hours of carefully hearing out both sides of pointless arguments, and at least a month of listening to his parents' bullshit about how important it is to be open-minded.

Eighty days have been wasted on the inane blather of his college friend Brian alone.

"All those hours I could have been relaxing, or reading all these great books, or getting into shape, or working on side projects that I'm really excited about," Richman said. "But instead I've been listening to overrated albums recommended to me by my asshole friends."

"Did you know that in my life I've listened to five days' worth of people talking about their furniture?" he added. "It's true. That's a trip to Europe right there."

While Richman has vowed to cease being open-minded to absolute horseshit, acquaintances reflected on his approachability.

"I love Blake," coworker David Martin said. "He's such a good listener. A lot of people are closed-minded and self-absorbed, but Blake always makes an effort to hear where I'm coming from. The world could use more people like him."

Once again -- any statement about the nature of the world that can cannot be falsified is not worth considering, and can contain contradictions within itself.

   Sorry to tell you, but everything seems to force to conclude that you were nothing (you didn't exist as an aware person, so you were like dead before you were conceived) for an eternity and are going to be nothing again (you are going to die and stay dead) for another eternity.

   You are going to return to our natural state, our only real "permanent home", where we already spent an eternity, before being born: nothingness

Please follow your own advice:


Stop making bullshit claims without backing it up with evidence... if you have no evidence to support your opinion... why would anyone listen/care?

It is NOT a destiny. God leaves open a little part of every heart to accept Him or reject Him. Based on how a person feels about God, God controls the rest of the person's life.

It always needs to be backed up by something else before it can be known to be factual.

choose a faith is a person's choice. one can not impose the will of others. and if you have been born like that so it was a destiny. everyone has a way of life and destiny, respectively.

Actually, it is impossible for "something to come from nothing" (that's what you support), but this cannot be proven because "intuition is not proof; it is the opposite of proof. We do not analyze intuition to see a proof but by intuition we see something without a proof."

So it is with the hypothesis of "something from nothing" which you support--it is not suitable for logical inference because it is not falsifiable and is also repugnant to the intuition.

When you write "a thing is literally unthinkable by us humans does not mean that it is impossible" you're implying that things you support could exist, but humans cannot think of them. In the same way, just because you cannot think of a way in which this might happen, it doesn't mean that it can't happen.

If your analysis depends on things that we -- by definition -- cannot analyse, then your hypothesis in unfalsifiable and is not suitable for logical inference.

But it isn't that. Most people don't really believe on the god tale or, at least, they have serious doubts.

They play it for social reasons (especially in countries where is a bad idea to say you are an atheist).

For all purposes, almost all believers live this life like if it was the only one they are going to have.

They are ready to sin for petty reasons, and then, at most, show some "contrition" to the priest or to "god" (but they will sin again soon for the same earthly reasons).

They aren't really ready to sacrifice nothing important for their believe. Clearly, they don't love their neighbor as themselves or are going to sell their goods (not even 5% of them; not even churches do that) and give them to the poor.

I disagree. The principle that everything has a cause holds up all of science. You can't rationally think of qualia as having no cause and no origin. You say that you can think of things as having no origin. How so?

OK, so you are saying that anything is thinkable, including self-causation (which is absurd) and "no causation" (which is unscientific), so therefore YOU are NOT using logical inference. Correct?

If anything is thinkable, then it is thinkable that things do not need to come from somewhere.

You can't have it both ways - either you can use logical inference or you can't. If you aren't using logical inference then anything is thinkable.

I could write that most people prefer to live in a fairy tale than wake-up to reality.

if you are atheist then it is your problem because you did not believe in any religion.
first you need to believe in any religion.
without believing you can not say you are an autheist.

I already posted what I think about your "scientific studies".

At best, they could be anecdotal cases suggesting the surviving and limited function of the neurons for some time more even without blood flow.

Only believers (that want to believe no matter what) see these cases as evidence of a "soul".

If anything is thinkable, then it is thinkable that things do not need to come from somewhere. You can't have it both ways - either you can use logical inference or you can't. If you aren't using logical inference then anything is thinkable.