Question for the Atheists.

[_mentalgymnast]

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.

Grasp on reality.

Do you have a full understanding of reality? Anyone else here have a full understanding of reality?

And all that "reality" may entail/embrace? Seen and unseen?

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

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.

To observe the universe, to observe the planet earth, to observe human kind in all their variety, to observe the animal kingdom, plant kingdom, etc., causes wonder. We can agree on that. That wonder can either be placed in the mechanics and operations of these kingdoms exclusively, or that wonder can be placed in the mechanics and operations of these kingdoms and the very real possibility (although not able to be proven through observation using the five senses) that there is a creator/god responsible for the universe and its operations, mechanical underpinnings and biological diversity and purpose.

Wishful thinking? More than that.

It just makes common sense.

Why does it make any more sense to disbelieve in a creator/god responsible for human beings on earth? Simply because you don't have the observational tools to see the "man behind the curtain?"

Regards,
MG

[_beastie]

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

My point is in regards to your pointed use of the word "choose". You keep accusing atheists of "choosing" to disbelieve. Despite your assertion, in this reply, that you CHOOSE to disbelieve in Santa Claus, the truth is that you didn't choose to disbelieve at all. You couldn't believe in Santa Claus if you tried.

To be able to believe in Santa Claus, you would have to be able disregard the mountain of evidence that demonstrates that Santa Claus is an unnecessary, miraculous proposition. To be able to disregard this mountain of evidence, there would have to be enough evidence supporting the existence of Santa Claus to make his nonexistence more miraculous than his existence.

I hope you now get my point.

I didn't "choose" to disbelieve in god, no more than you "chose" to disbelieve in Santa Claus. I simply don't believe. I can't force myself to "choose" to believe in god any more than you could force yourself to "choose" to believe in Santa Claus.

[_beastie]

To observe the universe, to observe the planet earth, to observe human kind in all their variety, to observe the animal kingdom, plant kingdom, etc., causes wonder. We can agree on that. That wonder can either be placed in the mechanics and operations of these kingdoms exclusively, or that wonder can be placed in the mechanics and operations of these kingdoms and the very real possibility (although not able to be proven through observation using the five senses) that there is a creator/god responsible for the universe and its operations, mechanical underpinnings and biological diversity and purpose.

Wishful thinking? More than that.

It just makes common sense.

Why does it make any more sense to disbelieve in a creator/god responsible for human beings on earth? Simply because you don't have the observational tools to see the "man behind the curtain?"

Regards,
MG

It does not just make common sense. The only reason you think it does is due to cultural training and influence.

Analysis of living beings reveals organisms that are, so to speak, gerrymandered together. If there was some sort of godbeing creator behind the scenes, it was drunk while creating.

[_thews]

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. If one believes in a creator, then one in turn would most likely believe that they are accountable for their lives to that same creator.

You make it sound like the choice to choose to believe in something is a conscious one. You can't choose to believe in anything... you either do, or you do not. The choice to abstain from choosing is where I find the most common ground in my observations of Atheism. If the payday in choosing "correctly" is rejected as a human requirement (not of God) and is not then somehow rewarded by eternal happiness, then the Atheist and the most devout "correct" chooser in religion is rewarded the same. Personally, I don't believe there is one universal "correct" choice. Conversely, I do believe there is one universal incorrect choice, and that would be one that is known to be untrue. The choice to follow the teachings of a false prophet of God is, in my opinion, much more relevant than choosing to abstain from making that choice... it's why I can't understand the motives of a NOM.

[_beastie]

I think that when people "choose" to believe, what that likely means is that they came to a point in their lives when they recognized, on some level, that they no longer believed - and they were uncomfortable with that. They wanted to believe. So they "chose" to disregard what their own inner voice was telling them, and decided to fake it until they could make it. Given how susceptible human beings are to this type of engineering, it is quite likely they eventually will believe again.

I have witnessed this process firsthand with my sister. To be frank, MG, I think that's what you've done, as well. In watching you over the years, it appeared to me you were never comfortable with your growing disbelief and made a conscious choice to find a way to squelch that disbelief. So you chose to believe. Today, you may genuinely believe again, but I'd bet money that, at one point in your journey, you actually recognized what you were doing. You were trying to make yourself believe again because you were never comfortable with nonbelief.

That's why you think atheists have chosen to disbelieve. You're projecting.

I could no more believe in a godbeing than I could believe in Santa Claus. I'm sure you think I'm being dramatic, but I'm not. I have been through some incredibly painful experiences in connection with health issues of dear friends and family members, one of which resulted in a long, slow, painful death. If I could have CHOSEN to believe in a godbeing during those times of extreme duress, I would have. I even tried praying once, prior to the death of my dear friend after a five-year battle with cancer. It just didn't work. I couldn't muster up the slightest belief that there was a godbeing out there to hear my pleas to save my friend.

Nonbelief is not always comfortable or easy, despite the imaginings of some believers (hey, atheists no longer have a moral foundation and can do whatever they want, right?). Nonbelief sometimes means facing, without any buffer at all, the full cruelty of life. It's not for the faint of heart.

[_Fence Sitter]

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

Lets make it a little less silly then.

Do you choose to disbelieve in Brahman or any of the Eastern religion deities?

Perhaps God is just some alien(s) that stopped by earth a long time ago. threw a little organic material into a pond and left, some sort of galactic Johny Appleseed.

What is it about an all powerful being that some how make the story more believable than a child's fairy tale?

[_Mad Viking]

Wishful thinking? More than that.

It just makes common sense.

Why does it make any more sense to disbelieve in a creator/god responsible for human beings on earth? Simply because you don't have the observational tools to see the "man behind the curtain?"

Regards,
MG

OK MG, what evidence is it that I have missed because I lack the observation al tools? Please be specific about this evidence and the direct implications of your evidence.

[_mentalgymnast]

Despite your assertion, in this reply, that you CHOOSE to disbelieve in Santa Claus, the truth is that you didn't choose to disbelieve at all. You couldn't believe in Santa Claus if you tried.

I believed in Santa Claus in my childhood because I didn't have the mental maturity to do/think otherwise. I later, after having developed the mental maturity to do so, chose to disbelieve in Santa Claus. The choice was based upon having the mental maturity to do so.

To equate process this with choosing to believe in God is a silly comparison. For one thing, choosing to believe in God, and understand the why's and wherefore's, came after developing a degree of mental maturity, not before.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

You can't choose to believe in anything... you either do, or you do not.

What the heck? That's bunk.

Regards,
MG