We have all heard you explain how ‘religion’ is just a way for simple minded people to comfort themselves.
Well, why isn’t your materialistic view of the world the same thing?
Could there be anything more comforting then a belief that there is nothing after death (peace, nothingness, all your actions disappearing into a great void…)?
Or, how about a mechanistic view of reality… everything is a chain of physical events…. all measurable, predictable, knowable… sounds comforting to me…
So, could it be that you too are only seeking comfort? Your views are so… easy, what else can I learn from them?
2007-09-30
18:40:28
·
32 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Yeow, as expected the atheists here assume I am something I'm not (this way they (you) can make assumptions about me and avoid the question). In this case you assume I'm a theist....
You're WRONG. Get a clue, the question is about you, not me...
But something tells me you're not interested in 'you'... so be it.
2007-09-30
19:03:50 ·
update #1
Being an atheist, I agree. I don't want to live forever, be it an enjoyable existence or not. I do like the thought of not existing anymore. I like believing that the only thing that matters is how you've made your life better for you, those you love and hopefully as many other people as possible.
At the same time, though, there are so many mysteries to the Universe that it's also sad to know that I'm never going to see them all. For instance, is time-travel possible by the current theory that if you create a reference point with a machine and then run that machine from that point to some other chronological point in the future that you will then be able to travel between those two points? Far-fetched, but who knows for sure?
How many other sentient lifeforms are there in the Universe and what are they like? Could we get along with them? Is there already a universal government that keeps itself secret from undeveloped intelligences until such a time that said intelligences develop to a point where they could interact beneficially with the rest of the universal community? Is there general peace and contentment in the future for the human race?
Will nanotechnology eventually have the capability to not only cure all disease but also eliminate malignant genetic abnormalities?
So, yes, atheism can be comforting, but it isn't just for the sake of comfort. The truth is, a lot of atheists used to be Christians. These people believed that humanity was inherently bad and sinful but that ultimately everybody would be judged according to their thoughts and actions. Now, being atheist (and this particular example applies to me), that feeling that humanity can be generally selfish, uncaring, self-destructive, etc. hasn't gone away. Why should it? It's true. The evidence is all around us every day. The only difference is, we know that the people that profit from their immoral, "evil" ways are probably going to enjoy themselves and then die consequence-free. We know that people can be basically malevolent and actually have full, happy lives.
Does that sound comforting?
We also know that no matter how good we make our lives; no matter how good we make the lives of others it will ultimately be for naught.
So who has the more pleasant view of life? (not considering Hell, for those who believe that it is eternal torment)
Now, while it's true that Christianity is a comforting thing to believe in, I don't believe that's evidence of its improbability. I have my own reasons for that.
So, yes, it's easy to be an atheist. It's easy to be a Christian. It's hard to be an atheist. It's hard to be a Christian. It's comforting to be an atheist. It's comforting to be a Christian.
There is no evidence for either group in any of these facts. Anybody who thinks so is either ignorant, immature or, to put it indelicately, just stupid. And I'm sorry that either group has to have these people called by the same name.
2007-09-30 19:27:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
I think we all believe whatever best helps us make sense of the world. For some people that is religion, for some it's not. As a few others have pointed out, not all atheists are materialists.
I'm not sure the thought of personal annihilation is particularly comforting, though I suppose it's no more uncomfortable than the state we were in before coming into the world.
As for mechanistic, far from it. The universe is so mind-bogglingly huge, and the experience of it so strange, that I can only hope that mankind lasts long enough and evolves far enough to make some real sense of it. I always thought people turned to religion because they couldn't take the uncertainty and ambiguity of reality straight up.
2007-09-30 19:33:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by injanier 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
No, I actually would find more comfort if there were some type of reward or justice to each individual depending on their actions. The simplicity of religion makes everything seem more soothing.
Sometimes it's so hard for me to be an atheist. It isn't because I believe in god or that my view point is wrong. It's simply hard because I believe my views are right and the world and reality are hard to face. I think it really takes a lot of a person to be able to face reality. What can be harder than to know than those you love you will simply never see anymore?
2007-09-30 18:50:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by Resonance Structure 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
My view is simply an evidence based view. I fully understand humans desire to escape death, I just don't accept that we can. I had a beginning of consciousness and I will have an end.
I feel my actions are relevant here and now, and that every day is an opportunity to enjoy of the finite amount I have. I don't choose to accept evidence for comfort reasons I just see the path of blind faith as an empty one - the quote about the drunk man being happier than the sober one, does not mean that being drunk is the answer.
As a byproduct the views of life provide comfort, I feel this is different to choosing a view only because it provides comfort, even in the face of opposing evidence and logic.
2007-09-30 19:49:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by nicelyevolve 3
·
3⤊
0⤋
Aetheists are realists. It's not correlated to materialism necessarily. Many aethiests do not concretely believe in a doctrine, but they can tell what is good in the world and they are just as good as anyone else at being loving and kind and giving. Whatever religion works for you is fine. I'm not an aethiest. I just love all people coming to be brothers and sisters and givers to one another regardless of what beliefs are in their head. Want to know something? I am not a very religious person, never was. One of the best friends I ever had is a devout Baptist and so I don't care about religion at this point. If I want to hang out and have fun, I'm calling my best Baptist friend and I don't have to talk religion with her. I'm not gonna let religious nonsense restrict the kind people I come across in life. I care about what makes each and every person happy, regardless of what religious formula he/she uses. I don't know what religion you call this, but this is what I decided I believe.
2016-05-17 22:34:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
When you learn to live your life with rationality,not many life situations are comfortable as compared to the life of a believer who can assign,handover or leave all trying and difficult situations to a God .Thus,an atheist had to work harder to make life situations suitable for himself .Atheists seek truth based on logic and rationality and not a comfort zone ,since they know that a comfort-zone doesn't define or confine a whole gamut of life events and therefore is impertinent.As far as the scope of your learning is concerned,you can learn from what ever station of life you are in and being an atheist or a believer does not make much of a difference.l
2007-09-30 19:19:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by brkshandilya 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
Comforting is the fable of heaven, but then it's explained that it is a place for one's "spirit".
The concept of spirit is conjectural.
One does not know if consciousness is included in the package.
Would I like to believe that if I'm a good boy and do all the things prescribed by those with "faith", that then I'll be forever able to experience some type of ecstasy beyond conception?
Well duh.
But there you have it: living now with a full knowledge I'm deluding myself.
In order for me to accept an afterlife I would need the same experience necessary for me to believe an alien being came and showed me another existence.
2007-09-30 19:03:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by B C 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
Atheism is not some belief in non-existence after we die (comforting or not). Atheism is a logical conclusion based on observation and evidence of what exists and what does not.
Reality cannot be commanded or ordered - not by Atheists and not by believers. Reality is indifferent to what you and I think of it. It remains the same regardless whether we are comforted or not about it. It's up to us DISCOVER what it is. If you say that you have discovered that there is another life after this one, that our soul (memories, ideas, identity, emotions, etc) can LIVE without a functioning brain and nervous system in some ethereal form, bring forth the proof of such "discovery". If you say that you have faith, than anything is up for grabs. I can make reality be whatever I wish, too. I just find that trick of the mind too silly.
2007-09-30 18:58:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by DrEvol 7
·
8⤊
0⤋
I would never say that religion is 'just" a way for people (simple-minded or otherwise) to comfort themselves. "Comfort" is certainly one of the most benign and beneficial aspects of religion, and I have no problem whatsoever with believers feeling that way.
There are no large, abstract concepts that I turn to for comfort--I have neither a "materialistic" nor a "mechanistic" world view, so what comforts such views may offer are not available to me either
For myself, my friends, family, music and reading are what give me "comfort". To each their own.
2007-10-01 00:52:02
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because this is the only life we have, we shouldn't fritter it entirely away, bit neither should we work ourselves to death. Moderation in all things.
Because this is the only life we have, we should be focusing on what we can accomplish here and now, not some imaginary next life. And we shouldn't devote too much thought to how we should be remembered.
Because this is the only life we have, our personal goals should be practical and bound to this life, but with the understanding that it will end. Our greater obligation is to humanity and ensuring its survival and quality of life. This means environmental stewardship, economic and social justice, and scientific inquiry to better understand and live in our world. We are on our own, but we are all in this together.
2007-09-30 19:16:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by skepsis 7
·
3⤊
0⤋