Question for the Atheists.

[_Simon Belmont]

If souls are separate and unique from each other, and sequestered to a certain amount of space, a capsule, resembling roughly the shape of their mortal body. With a definite separation line between them and the objective environment they inhabit.....How do they interact with that environment?

How does spirit interact with it's environment....I guess it would have to be the same way we interact with ours..... Our senses input data into the nervous system, and the brain paints a picture of what it thinks is out there. We are not in direct physical contact with the objective environment we inhabit. All we know is the picture our brain is painting for us. And, the majority of that picture is based on memory.....

Okay... this is solipsism. It basically means we don't know whether anything actually exists including ourselves. I've long advocated solipsism.

[Guest]

If souls are separate and unique from each other, and sequestered to a certain amount of space, a capsule, resembling roughly the shape of their mortal body. With a definite separation line between them and the objective environment they inhabit.....How do they interact with that environment?

How does spirit interact with it's environment....I guess it would have to be the same way we interact with ours..... Our senses input data into the nervous system, and the brain paints a picture of what it thinks is out there. We are not in direct physical contact with the objective environment we inhabit. All we know is the picture our brain is painting for us. And, the majority of that picture is based on memory.....

Okay... this is solipsism. It basically means we don't know whether anything actually exists including ourselves. I've long advocated solipsism.

Yeah...well, to a certain extant I guess. And that is why my journey has meandered toward some form of oneness theory, as I'm still not wanting to give up on the belief that there must/oughtta be some underlying awareness/intelligence at the core of existance.

[_mentalgymnast]

Any god that created me has to know that I will accept nothing less from him than absolute proof he exists. He has chosen not to disclose it; therefore, he leaves me no choice but to conclude he doesn't exist.

Schmo, I think you've nailed it. Time to turn out the lights and go home.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

Knowing that we are limited to our five senses in determining what is real and what is not, what is true and what is not, what we can know and what we cannot, and so forth, how can you know for a fact that a God doesn't exist? The evidence that you rely on is restricted/limited by the filtering system of your five senses.

So what we all seem to agree on is that we are not able ascertain whether a creator God exists through the use of the five senses. If there is any way to ascertain whether a creator God exists it would necessitate using some other means of receiving the information necessary to know that God lives.

And this is where things get a bit dicey and unpredictable.

Regards,
MG

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Okay... this is solipsism. It basically means we don't know whether anything actually exists including ourselves. I've long advocated solipsism.

You'd think this fool would do a cursory search of the Googles before he opens his mouth, and removes all doubt that, indeed, he's a fool.

[_MrStakhanovite]

I've long advocated solipsism.

Dude...

[Tator]

MG -

I really would like you to answer my question.

Did you choose to disbelieve in Santa Claus?

by the way, I don't require absolute proof. All I ask is that the nonexistence of a godbeing be more miraculous than the existence of a godbeing. In other words, I ask that there exist questions to which the only reasonable answer can be the existence of a god.

As you admit, the world with a god looks just like the world without a god, and god has chosen to hide itself, so obviously there are no such questions. That means the existence of a godbeing is an unnecessary proposition.

The majority of the human species clings to an unnecessary proposition for various reasons. One is that our minds are not programmed to think logically and rationally. We normally make decisions and form beliefs in a manner unrelated to logic and even conscious thinking. We then fool ourselves into believing that these same decisions and beliefs were the result of logical cognition.

In addition to the challenges of our mental wiring, most humans have been taught to believe in a godbeing since childhood. That belief is then tied to familial and social acceptance. Thereby, it assumes heightened importance, which makes it even more unlikely that conscious reasoning is involved in the belief.

Our mental wiring has also resulted in the human capacity for numinous events. Not possessing the medical and scientific background that explains these events, humans then attribute them to an external source, the godbeing.

So widespread belief in a godbeing is unsurprising and predictable. But it's still a completely unnecessary proposition.

[_Dr. Shades]

To choose disbelief or lack of knowing rather than hopeful/plausible belief, to me, seems to be rather fruitless/pointless. The only thing that one has to lose by choosing the default of a god/creator responsible for humans on earth, that I can see, is a personal sense/code of operational ethics where "anything goes" or "I can do or think whatever I want" without any consequences except for those that occur naturally/randomly.

What do you lose by believing in Santa Claus into adulthood?

Your answer to my question is my answer to your question.

[_Mad Viking]

MG STATED

But on the assumption that God has his reasons for remaining hidden

You haven't established that your god exists so you aren't justified in making assumptions about his cognitive reasoning for remaining hidden. It's all wishful hoping on your part.

[_mentalgymnast]

MG -

I really would like you to answer my question.

Did you choose to disbelieve in Santa Claus?

You're really serious about this question, aren't you? I bypassed the question because I saw it as being ridiculous and ultimately uncorrelated with the question at hand. Let's do a bit of reverse engineering. The world is here. So are we. How did we get here? With god, or without? This answer to these questions doesn't have anything to do, directly or indirectly, with a mythical figure called Santa Claus. Santa Claus is a mythical figure that is part of our Christmas celebration. When you bring up fairies and Santa Clause figures you are not referring to a creator/god who is responsible for human beings on this earth.

Can you see the difference?

So yes, I choose to disbelieve in a literal Santa Claus or tooth fairy or easter bunny. But I do choose to believe in a creator/god who is responsible for human beings on the earth.

There is a difference here. Again, can you see it?

Oh, and I also don't believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

To compare Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, easter bunny, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster with the creator/god of human beings who live on the earth is silly.

Regards,
MG