To think the atheists on MN are a bunch of miserable whingers

[GothAnneGeddes]

Every bloody week it's a new thread whining on about how terrible it is that there is religion in the world.

A prominent feature of such threads is the intolerance and stupidity of religious folk, yet threads by believers insulting atheists are very rare.

Besides, aren't you all meant to be so happy to be freed from the shackles of religion, that you're too busy having fun to moan?

If you don't think that all religious people are irrational and stupid, then I wasn't accusing you of being deluded . However, your use of the term "fairy stories" and the fact that religious belief is "beyond your comprehension" would suggest a limited, how can I say this without being rude. Average, rather than limited, breadth of thought.

Wamster some people claim to have sixth sense, what say you?

I think a rational person might agree that god is not a fact that is proven without doubt. God is not a fact that can be proven. You either have faith that there remains a possibility or you don't.

Gooseberrybushes, OK, maybe I can see that there is some kind of psychological need to believe in something that cannot be explained by reason, this does not, however, the belief does not actually make that thing exist.

Tell me, why does a god that is so very wonderful and kind and forgiving design a worm that's only purpose in life is to burrow into eyeballs and cause blindness?

Faith is not just a fall back, as in Oh bugger we can't prove it, we need a backstop.

Faith is central to Christian belief at least. In that proof isn't just unnecessary, it's actually undesirable. Because if you could prove it, what's to "believe", and where's the free will.

Free will doesn't explain the existence of evil (in my opinion but others disagree, which is fair do's) but it explains the central force of faith.

Granted gooseberries. I know many intelligent lovely religious folks. Some of them are even members of the secular society because, even though they have religious belief, they see no reason why that belief should be given a priviliged place in society.

Personally, I suspect my brain simply isn't wired to be religious. Theres quite a bit of scientific evidence to suggest that religiosity, as well as having an inherited component, is hardwired into some, though not all brains. Temporal lobe seizures, for example are well known for inducing religious experiences. This poses some interesting questions. If we are, as a species, hardwired to be religious, what evolutionary reason could there be for that? And as some people demonstrably don't have the religious brain (the percentage of the poipulation with this hasn't been tested) then why, if god does exist, did (s)he make some people incapable of believing in him/her/it?

I'm an atheist.

I envy religious people their delusions faith. The certainty of death must be so much more bearable if you believe that you'll be reunited with the people you love afterwards.

And I don't agree that RE is 'a waste of time'. If religion plays a hugely important part in people's lives and in the formation of culture and politics then of course we ought to encourage children to think about it and understand it.

I think scientists and religious people do have something in common, they have suspended disbelief in favour of having an open mind.

It's a shame that atheists can not have an open mind to the possibility that something greater than they themselves may exsist.

The mind and the brain are two quite different things though Slug. Although I agree that Temporal lobe seizures might induce religious experiences.

I know from working with people who have serious mental health issues that religion is a reoccuring theme. Thats not to say that believers are all mad before I get pounced on.

Something greater than myself does exist-it's called chocolate.

It is more bearable Spud, tis true. :) Some days I think there is no continuation after physical death, but most days I believe there is, and I always have at least an inkling that it may be true. It's nice. :)

And I agree about RE, but I certainly don't think the tax-payers money ought to fund church schools.

DAMN THIS NEW ITALICS NONSENSE!

I only meant to italicize "is" and "may".

And I think child-molesting priests should be defrocked and jailed.

People already complain that Faith schools discriminate. So if people have to pay for them surely that would make them even more selective- only for the faithful and now the rich?

Really QueenBathsheba? Because you can induce a feeling of the presence of another/spirit/god by running a mild electric current across the Temporal lobe. As anyone who has ever had hallucinations will tell you, the experience is "real" even if, in the back of your mind you "know" you are hallucinating. It is the interpretation that we put on these feelings that is cultural.

I've seen it demonstrated where the researchers were trying to understand why some people experience ghosts and others don't. It turns out that some people are more sensitive to this sort of brain stimulation. A significant percentage, it appears, are completely resistant to it. In the experiment I was involved in (during my student years studying psychology) the percentage of non-responders was 40%, though this was one small experiment using a small sample of reasonably high IQ students from a variety of cultural backgrounds.

I bow to Wamster's greater knowledge. Truly there is the godlike substance that is chocolate.

Scientists believe that which they can observe with their five senses.

Religious people believe something that they CANNOT observe with their five senses.

This, to my mind, makes them like chalk and cheese.

Totally incompatible.

"I certainly don't think the tax-payers money ought to fund church schools."

I'm with you on that.

"It's a shame that atheists can not have an open mind to the possibility that something greater than they themselves may exsist".

I'm open to this idea.

Just not to the view that this 'greater than myself' phenomena would manifest itself as anything that would be in any way meaningful in terms of organised religion.

My big problem with organised religions of all types is their belief that there is some sort of 'consciousness' in charge of the universe, and that this consciousness is what ours is modelled on. It seems like the most almighty egotism to me.

Scientists can and do believe in more than they can observe with their five senses, thank you very much.

How do you think most of the hypothesis are come up, normally it's wacky ideas we try and then prove.

Also, again, there are religious scientists. We're some kind of weird part of the human race that you can generalise

Wamster you probably shouldn't speak on behalf of every scientist. There are plenty who are religious also.

Crossed posts Penguin!

Slug, that's very interesting.

I think religious belief is a human need. Most of us need to feel that there is some sort of moral order in the universe and that death isn't final - that's why religious belief and practice has always been universal and attempts to eradicate it have been about as successful as attempts to repress human sexuality.

"Religious people are generally happier than atheists because they have a belief in god and, if churchgoing, a social system to support them.

Atheists simply do not have a belief in a supernatural being to support them in life and this can actually make them unhappier"

is there a source for this bizzare theory?

you get miserable/unhappy people, period. For many people being religious or not won't change that.

I'm not suggesting that there is no possibility that God exists: just that as an agnostic atheist (Mumsnet has "forced" me to try to define my "non-belief"), I have not seen the need to give it thought.

I particularly liked Bertrand Russell's celestial teapot which I found through that Wikipedia article: I don't beleive in that either

"Spudulika Mon 21-Mar-11 17:05:39

I'm an atheist.

I envy religious people their delusions faith. The certainty of death must be so much more bearable if you believe that you'll be reunited with the people you love afterwards.

And I don't agree that RE is 'a waste of time'. If religion plays a hugely important part in people's lives and in the formation of culture and politics then of course we ought to encourage children to think about it and understand it."

I have some sympathy with Spuds position here, brought up in a CoE environment, church on Sundays till late teen etc.. but came to my own conclusions in my teens and have been ever since an atheist. I try to be tolerant of other people's views, but the "This is a Christian Country" brigade gate right on my tits. This may have been true once upon a time, and probably culturally still so (I am culturally a Christian, but still an atheist IYSWIM).

Also, my lack of belief is not a belief system.

opps there was suppose to be NOT in my last sentence

Having an idea about something is one thing, but that idea is tested in a methodical way using the five senses to support or not support that idea.

What does a religious person do when asked to provide some evidence that his god exists? Does he formulate some kind of a plan? No.

The rest of us just get told that it's all about faith.

Would any great scientist get away with saying that others must believe in something without hard evidence and that, I don't know, they just had to believe it for no good reason? I don't think so.