Question for atheists that are materialists?

Question

I`m not trying to prove a point, I want to know if this is logically consistent. If you`re a materilists then you believe that matter is the only element in living things and throughout the universe.

You think that all matter follows determinsitic natural laws therefore free will is just an illusion. There is no mind there is only the physical brain which is predetermined by genes and enviornment. We have no choice all of our actions are set in motion by the clockwork of the Universe.

If this is true, then Christians are not really superstitious and you`re not rational. Nobody can say for sure whether or not God exists because the mind is just an illusion. All thoughts are pre-determined.

If you`re a materialists then ur disbelief in God is not rationally justified. If the mind is matter and all matter is determined then you`re disbelief in God is not valid.

But by definiton of materilism in that physical matter is all there is God does not exist.

Even in light of the fact that nobody can ever now whether or not God exist - agnosticim and theim is still wrong and atheism is still right.

Am I right or wrong?

Answer 1

Hmm,

I was on board until the free will bit. Admittedly I first thought the other kind of materialist... the greedy type.

I'll need a moment...

IF...THEN
looks odd... let me try to interpret... IF you are "materialist", you do not believe in energy, fundamental forces, charge carrying particles with zero mass... virtual particles.. only matter...

Ok, well, there's nothing logically wrong there. If you say that's the definition.

- free will illusion... check.

- brain... check

Is this still your defintion, or are you already extrapolating on your earlier findings? There appears no mention of it... and predetermined isn't explained...

Guesswork?

Ah, so this is still the setup... interesting structure, looks a bit like a rant. and doesn't seem to flow logically from earlier suppositons...



Ok, so, If you are a "materialist", which means you're predetermined and all the rest... your disbelief is not valid. Hmm, seems a bit of a moot point, under those assumptions, all action and thought is invalid.

As to god...I don't see how that follows.... unless you assume the universe would conform to the materialist view "just because"... And I can't really see how it would logically prove anything really....


Oh well, I'd have to say it's consistent to some degree... but I wouldn't turn it in as a logics termpaper :)

Answer 2

I don't believe that Matter dictates the future anymore than I believe that God dictates the future.

Pre-determination requires someone/something to pre-determine and dictate outcomes.

I don't believe such a force exists.

It is likely that the laws of physics have changed at some point in /or outside of time. If this is the case, then nothing can be pre determined.

Edit --

No, there is an infinitely small chance that theism or agnosticism could be correct, but based on observance of the results of faith based belief systems, atheism becomes rationally acceptable and reliable. The fact that every faith based belief system in Human history ends up as myth or in violent, civilization threatening events, shows us that faith based belief systems are consistently unreliable, and consistently bad for mankind.

If I get electrocuted every time I lick an outlet even with rubber shoes on, it is reasonable to draw an observance based conclusion that licking light sockets is harmful to mankind even with rubber boots on.

If every faith based belief ends in myth and violence then is is reasonable to draw an observance based conclusion that all religions based on faith, and not supported by measurable evidence are myth, like the rest, and have the potential of being harmful to mankind.

Answer 3

You start with a question that becomes spread out with your pre determined ideas before anyone can take on just one question.

Therefore, I will take on the question of Free Will.

Is it a religious delusion or is it scientific?

I believe we have free will in the confines of our consciousness which is a malleable progression that is still evolving.

Meaning, neurons are constantly re routing themselves according to knowledge and belief and destroying pathways that no longer serve us. Thus, a micro evolution is taking place every moment we eat and breath or hold a thought.

Science has shown that its not all predetermined as to how our DNA expresses itself. That, in fact, nothing is static. Thus, matter is not a solid. It is not a particle. It is vibrational energy that comes and goes like thought itself, however... Predetermined laws of physics makes us appear to be solid when we are not.

Science has shown that the inside the brain, you can actually change its structure simply by telling yourselves how to think.

In other words, to a certain extent, we create the software that runs the brain!

That's a revolutionary discovery.

The software that runs the body is the autonomic nervous system, the things you don't tell yourself to do. Which is to digest, pump your heart, etc. But, with biofeedback, to a degree, we can influence those responses as well. We can actually train our brain to reconstruct reactive responses to the same thing in an entirely different way.

The part of the nervous system that responds to how we think is the part many people need to be "hyper" aware of, as Dr. Wayne Dyer and other teachers of how we can change our perception to change our future is proven over and over again.

Science has indeed shown empirical measurable results consistently, that we can create the neurological responses that tell us how to think and change the chemical pathways (peptides between neurons); and choose not to be reactive to what is thrown at us to a specific degree.

Science has shown how neurons will literally disassemble and reassemble pathways according to what we tell ourselves to believe. The brain structure will alter and the hormonal signals will also, alter.

There is this old Hans Christian Anderson children's story of this worm on a flower talking about all the Universe and how he believes his domain is his Universe (The flower).. He was not aware of the bird looking down at him who snatched him up for breakfast.

Well, in the grand scheme of things, the analogy of the story is that we have limited consciousness. Like, a dog cannot decipher E = MC squared, we cannot comprehend specific dimensions until we evolve to do so.

So, our brain is merely a quantum mimicry of the laws of physics in a gravity well in space, if you study the structure of the brain, you would agree that it is profoundly and remarkably similar to the laws of the expanding Universe.

Eventually, the more conscious or hyper aware we are, the more choices we can perceive (like the big bang). The more we can perceive, the more we can act upon until we explore the unknown and move on to another leap of consciousness in which we can fold space/time just like we can drive a car, today.

Therefore, In the scientific realm, I take a stand that free will implies that the actions of the body, including the brain and the mind, are not "wholly" determined by physical causality.

There is still a percentage, though it be small, that we are acting on free will because it is a necessary tool to create leaps of consciousness in evolution.

God does not have to be a part of this equasion to make physical matter as we perceive it.

Just because there are still things we do not comprehend, you don't have to conveniently slap God into the equasion until there is a scientific explenation. That's really stupid and has nothing to do with logic.

Answer 4

I really think you fail to understand the word atheist. Why do people think it is some group understanding. That is Christianity. I am not even an Atheist and I know that their dis-belief is just that, period. There is no rhyme nor reason to it, you are speaking like you have some imperial proof that God is real and counters your argument somehow. Which is fine, for you. But there is no reason to feel there is no free will. I don't get that conclusion at all. And its not a disbelief in God, it's just a waiting for tangible proof he exists.

I get why you conclude this, religious types think in a group mind sort of thing. But Atheism is not organized, nor communal on any level. It is just a personal decision.

Answer 5

once you're claiming that evolution by utilizing organic decision is a "random technique", you the two have not understood it or are intentionally using a straw guy argument. Evolution isn't random. The mutation and recombination of genes in each technology is particularly random, however the potential of organisms in each technology to proceed to exist and reproduce isn't random. All evidence shows that intelligence progressed very progressively. the only reason it exists in any respect is that it facilitates particular animals, alongside with people, proceed to exist and acquire buddies. It did no longer seem "out of no longer something", yet exchange into formed by utilizing the ambience wherein it developed. we've an mind-blowing style of evidence to signify that human intelligence and understanding are emergent residences of the innovations's activity. To postulate a non-actual intelligence is pointless, on the grounds that's unfalsifiable -- there can by no skill be evidence to help the form of proposition. To further declare, as many theists do, to have particular understanding of an intelligence that's no longer in basic terms non-actual yet omniscient is patently absurd. i might desire to declare to comprehend that the 5th planet orbiting Tau Ceti is inhabited by utilizing unicorns. it would be a much greater sensible declare, as a results of fact it A) violates no actual rules, and B) is falsifiable in theory. the main undertaking might lie in explaining how I knew. If I stated i concept it on faith, might that make the declare greater achievable, or much less?

Answer 6

Freewill seems to be an emergent behavior of advanced brain activity. The "higher" a mammal, the more it seems to be governed less by instinct and more by its own mind. Humans are the ultimate example.

The rest of your "question" is twaddle. Show us good evidence a god exists; don't try to poof it into existence with semantics and bad logic.

Answer 7

Your premise is confused and doesn't make any sense. As for quantum physics giving room for free will, totally disagree. If that were the case, we would have random will, not free will, which is meaningless. One day we will have a computer that will be able to determine the momentum and position of particles precisely, but just because we don't have the technolology doesn't mean we can infer free will.

Answer 8

"You think that all matter follows determinsitic natural laws therefore free will is just an illusion."

No I don't. I think science is currently uncovering a very random element in quantum mechanics which does leave room for free will.

Answer 9

The word "materialist" means several different things.
The definition you're using is idiosyncratic to your question. You've put so many conditions on it that it probably doesn't really describe anyone, and the claims in your second, third, and fourth paragraphs do not follow from the definition of "materialism" that you're using.

It all looks consistent, in that there's nothing incompatible between materialism and those other things, but they don't logically follow from materialism (of any sort).

Answer 10

"You think that all matter follows determinsitic natural laws therefore free will is just an illusion."

Matter at its most basic level (the quantum level) follows probabilistic, not deterministic, laws. Therefore, free will is not necessarily an illusion.