Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Someone wants us to know that it isn’t a joke that atheists might not exist

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Actually, it sort of makes sense but:

This line of thought has led to some scientists claiming that “atheism is psychologically impossible because of the way humans think,” says Graham Lawton, an avowed atheist himself, writing in the New Scientist. “They point to studies showing, for example, that even people who claim to be committed atheists tacitly hold religious beliefs, such as the existence of an immortal soul.”

This shouldn’t come as a surprise, since we are born believers, not atheists, scientists say. Humans are pattern-seekers from birth, with a belief in karma, or cosmic justice, as our default setting. “A slew of cognitive traits predisposes us to faith,” writes Pascal Boyer in Nature, the science journal, adding that people “are only aware of some of their religious ideas”.

Today’s atheists are committed to total materialism, which means that all beliefs are an illusion. Including theirs.

But that doesn’t matter, as long as they are holding the gun or the crowbar.

And they now have a fix, in case one of the crowbar thugs has doubts: “Evolution” caused him to have doubts:

“From childhood, people form enduring, stable and important relationships with fictional characters, imaginary friends, deceased relatives, unseen heroes and fantasized mates,” says Boyer of Washington University, himself an atheist. This feeling of having an awareness of another consciousness might simply be the way our natural operating system works.

All just a random dance of neurons.

That is the key reason, by the way, that most people, including themselves, don’t trust materialist atheists. They don’t believe that anything is true except that nothing is true. Not really.

Note: These comments do not apply to non-theistic religious traditions where every moral choice gets counted in the end (karma). All such traditions assume that a moral law underlies the cosmos and such traditions are non-materialist by definition. Whether they are right or wrong in their account of the universe is a conversation that theists can have with non-theists, but not with materialist atheists.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments
Freud wrote on illusion: The Future of an Illusion Wouldn't that apply to materialist and non-materialist alike?Mung
July 23, 2014
July
07
Jul
23
23
2014
07:30 PM
7
07
30
PM
PDT
illusion:
a thing that is or is likely to be wrongly perceived or interpreted by the senses.
I sincerely doubt that materialists believe that their senses are deceiving them. Are you saying that if a materialist believes that his senses are not deceiving him that this belief is an illusion, but if a non-materialist believes that his senses are not deceiving him that this belief is not an illusion?Mung
July 21, 2014
July
07
Jul
21
21
2014
10:21 PM
10
10
21
PM
PDT
bogart, don't preach to me, jackass. LOL.Mapou
July 21, 2014
July
07
Jul
21
21
2014
01:40 PM
1
01
40
PM
PDT
Mapou: The mature conversation started here:
This is chicken sh!t, man
And followed up with this:
You are the perfect example of a dishonest atheist/Darwinist who distort things to promote your private religious agenda.
Then this:
This is a lie
Followed by:
IMO, you’re a liar.
And the icing on the cake:
bogart, you can kiss my asteroid orifice, man. You’re a jackass in my book.
All this simply because I said that epigenetics is "the study of changes in gene expression caused by certain base pairs in DNA, or RNA, being “turned off” or “turned on” again, through chemical reactions." (WIKI) And that evolutionary biologists have long known that environmental factors have a significant impact on how genes are expressed.Acartia_bogart
July 21, 2014
July
07
Jul
21
21
2014
01:37 PM
1
01
37
PM
PDT
bogart, you can kiss my asteroid orifice, man. You're a jackass in my book. This is my last reply to your prevarications.Mapou
July 21, 2014
July
07
Jul
21
21
2014
12:46 PM
12
12
46
PM
PDT
Mapou:
You were not just telling a lie, it was a bold face lie and a stupid one at that. You insult my intelligence.
It is not possible to insult something that is non-existant. Again, I ask you to clarify what comment I made that was incorrect. Is epegentics the:
... study of changes in gene expression caused by certain base pairs in DNA, or RNA, being "turned off" or "turned on" again, through chemical reactions."? Wiki
If you agree with this definition then it means that genetic expression is the result of the DNA in combination with the environment. This fact has been known for many years. I can tell you that when I was being taught genetics and evolution over thirty years ago, this fact was made very clear. What wasn't well understood, and still isn't, is the detailed mechanism behind this. But it still comes down to how and/or if the genetic material is expressed in the phenotype, and whether this expression is adaptive under the circumstances. As such, natural selection can still act on it. Calling me a liar doesn't change this and only makes your position appear ludicrous.Acartia_bogart
July 21, 2014
July
07
Jul
21
21
2014
12:37 PM
12
12
37
PM
PDT
One more thing, bogart. You were not just telling a lie, it was a bold face lie and a stupid one at that. You insult my intelligence.Mapou
July 21, 2014
July
07
Jul
21
21
2014
11:26 AM
11
11
26
AM
PDT
bogart, here's what you wrote:
All epigenetics shows is that the expression of genes is affected by environment, something that we have known about for a very long time. The average hight of humans of European descent is taller than it was 400 years ago; nobody is suggesting that this is do to evolution.
This is a lie, as I explained in my reply to your comment:
Why rewrite history, hoping that nobody will notice? This is chicken sh!t, man. Darwinists have been using examples of epigenetic adaptation as evidence for evolution for centuries. Darwin’s finches are a case in point.
IMO, you're a liar.Mapou
July 21, 2014
July
07
Jul
21
21
2014
11:07 AM
11
11
07
AM
PDT
Mapou, what was dishonest about my comment? That natural selection wasn't all about death? Because it's not. That epigenetics and natural selection are not incompatible? Again, they are not. So, please tell me again, who is distorting things?Acartia_bogart
July 21, 2014
July
07
Jul
21
21
2014
10:22 AM
10
10
22
AM
PDT
bogart:
Just because atheists interpret the evidence differently than a theist doesn’t mean that they are distorting. Have you ever thought that maybe it is the theist that is distorting things?
You are the perfect example of a dishonest atheist/Darwinist who distort things to promote your private religious agenda. This comment of yours in the epigenetics thread is a case in point.Mapou
July 21, 2014
July
07
Jul
21
21
2014
09:12 AM
9
09
12
AM
PDT
Jerry:
In my experience, I have never found an honest Darwinist or an honest atheist. They always distort.
Just because atheists interpret the evidence differently than a theist doesn't mean that they are distorting. Have you ever thought that maybe it is the theist that is distorting things?Acartia_bogart
July 21, 2014
July
07
Jul
21
21
2014
08:54 AM
8
08
54
AM
PDT
In materialism, beliefs are by definition an illusion. Power over others isn't. Failure to grasp that fact has cost many fine people their lives. They seek to engage materialists at the level of belief, when that is not the level at which they are concerned.News
July 21, 2014
July
07
Jul
21
21
2014
03:16 AM
3
03
16
AM
PDT
In my experience, I have never found an honest Darwinist or an honest atheist. They always distort. Why? Actually there was one honest Darwinist that used to come here but hasn't in years.jerry
July 20, 2014
July
07
Jul
20
20
2014
11:07 PM
11
11
07
PM
PDT
Well in Romans chapter 1, Paul argues that atheists don't exist but they are suppressing the truth in unrighteousness. Secular science is about 2000 years behind, but it looks like the caught up to at least part of what Paul was saying.geoffrobinson
July 20, 2014
July
07
Jul
20
20
2014
09:11 PM
9
09
11
PM
PDT
Today’s atheists are committed to total materialism, which means that all beliefs are an illusion. Including theirs.
I don't believe this is true, illusion or not. Atheists are committed to materialism because in their thinking materialism equates to no God. Do you mean that in materialism all beliefs are illusory, or do you mean that in materialism belief itself is an illusion?Mung
July 20, 2014
July
07
Jul
20
20
2014
08:06 PM
8
08
06
PM
PDT

Leave a Reply