Atheism as a psychological phenomenon.

by BurnTheShips 105 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  BurnTheShips

  From this perspective, it is amusing to see that the "psychoanalysis of atheism" parallels many of Lacan's insights, although carefully avoiding the central one: namely, that our genuine relationship to the "Father" is neither imaginary (as in "belief") nor real (as in "experience") but symbolical (i.e., coextensive to the use of language, for religious "believers" and "unbelievers" alike).

  I have a hard time wrapping my head around this. I think I understand what you are saying.....but what realm is it in? And how is it any less real?

  BTS
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Now, can't you turn that microscope in the original post of this thread right back on religion?

  Well, that was sort of the point of the original post, that the microscope is nearly always turned on it (belief), this is pointing it in the other direction, for a change.

  BTS
• 

  BurnTheShips

  OK, I know some GREAT x-tians, BTS. But the dichotomy is messed up. Unconditional love, and forgiveness, right?

  Sounds like the subject of a different thread, Avi.

  This wasn't meant to be a discussion of the internal consistency of (some) Christian doctrine. However, I would likely argue the impossibilty of finite beings posessed of limited knowledge being able to judge what presumably are actions taken by an infinite being with omniscience.

  BTS
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Science is open to a belief in god(s) you just have to prove it with a testable theory, or some recordable phenomenon.

  "Science" doesn't believe. Science is a method. People believe. And besides, science concerns itself with the natural world. Presumably that which does not belong to this domain would likely not be testable under it's rubric. I think it was Gould that spoke of non-overlapping magisteria.

  BTS
• 

  Homerovah the Almighty

  The obvious fact remains is even if you were to strictly follow the behavior guidelines of the JWS you would still falter down,

  Two reasons for this is that they try to replicate the social behaviors and morals of people that lived 2000 years ago which in itself brings up an obvious question mark.

  Secondly there has been an established illusion that God is using the GB and the organization as his personal messengers , to sway from what is written in the bible and ignore

  or change biblical doctrine would bring down that illusion and the perceived power of which has been obtained.

  Its a decisively perplexing when you think about it, on one hand you have old and out dated social morals that do still carry some values but on the other hand you

  have evolved modern secular social values that go against what was written in the bible.

  Too bad it wasn't written in the bible that these set morals may have to be changed as social psychology awareness progresses.
• 

  Homerovah the Almighty

  Maybe where the problem arises is when man asks the spirits to guide and govern us, when man is more than capable to do it himself.

  Isn't that really the problem ?
• 

  jaguarbass

  I know you cant stereo type everybody. But humans try.

  I kind of figured many people were atheist because they were mad at God, or the concept of God that society has given them.

  And when they say they are atheist, they are looking for believers to give them good reasons not to be atheist.

  Some people give better reasons than others.

  But, then there is also the varible factor that people see what they want to see, that is the hidden center of control.

  The witnesses and other bible believers call that the heart condition, which is a manipulative phrase, as if you are an atheist, you have a bad heart condition.

  I'm angry at the concept of God I have been given.

  But I have read a lot and I cant buy that we popped up without a designer or plan and I cant get past that.

  I've read Dawkins and Darwin, I'll even read more Dawkins in the future to maintain my objectivity.

  I got Dawkins number already he is an underpaid biologist who figured he could make a lot more money being the poster boy and spokesmen for atheism.

  Thats not to say he doesnt make a lot more money than I as a biologist with his university connections.

  But a biologist is a person who couldnt make it in or through medical school. Because thats where the money is, so from an evolutionary atheistic point of view,

  I see Dawkins has always been trying to compensate for that personal failure on his part.

  And he has gone full tilt against God because he couldnt be a doctor, md.

  Which has a lot more money and prestige than being a biologist.

  I tend to agree atheism is a psychological phenonomon, just as belief is.

  We are psychological beings.

  For every action there is a reaction.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  when man is more than capable to do it himself.

  I look around me and wonder how true this is in effect.

  BTS
• 

  Homerovah the Almighty

  Burn go back and live a life time in biblical times or Medieval times and then come back and draw a conclusion on whether man has made improvements

  to the human experience or not ?

  Religion has dived and caused great harm to humanity on so many levels, one god fighting another god, one man fighting the many gods.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Burn go back and live a life time in biblical times or Medieval times and then come back and draw a conclusion on whether man has made improvements

  to the human experience or not ?

  That the seats in the movie theater are more comfortable there is no doubt, that the airconditioning has improved is also true, however, has the movie gotten any better? Are our lives more satisfying or meaningful?

  BTS