We are all delusional (yes, even atheists)

Naturally this blog post is going to be filled with my own delusional thinking, hopefully you enjoy it :)

Everyone is delusional in some way, and most people find it uncomfortable to reflect on this. We have a tendency to believe in the objective truth of believable ideas (what is "believable" is dependent on an individual's world-view). The reality is that a thought is just a thought; one thought is only thought of as being better than another thought if it believed to be representative of something that actually exists. Perhaps your thoughts are fearful of this thought, we often do not want to believe that our thoughts are nothing more than thoughts (especially if they make up part of the foundation of our world-view).

When I think of myself as being an atheist, such a thing is just a thought, and incredibily delusional in itself. First of all, being an atheist is an idea in the same way that being a Christian is an idea. We cannot be a belief, at least within my logical abilities; this is because we cannot be that which we can lose (beliefs and/or ability to think). The scary truth is that we humans really don't know what we are at all, which is why it is so easy to label people as being an idea and/or belief. We use our thoughts to represent what we believe is true - but such a thing will be lost in totality once we lose our brain (my thoughts lead me to believe that my brain will not exist forever, and that my brain is the source of my thoughts). Keep in mind, what makes a thought a belief is if we believe the thought is true, and we all have many beliefs. At the core of all beliefs is some sort of delusion (typically that our thoughts have an existence outside of our own subjectivity, which they actually don't).

However, I would say given the reliability of believing that the objective world exists on some level, it can be believable that some thoughts are better than others; i.e. closer to a true representation of the way things work [albeit typically superficial, and is hardly ever (never?) totally represented]. We become delusional the moment we believe our thoughts are more than thoughts (which itself is a thought). While it is impossible to lose our needed delusional thinking, attempting to be aware of it can bring us to a more dynamic representation of the way things function.

In closing, don't get too excited theists, atheists are able to recognize the wide-spread delusional thinking you possess. However, I suppose we all have a difficult time accepting that our thoughts are nothing more than poor representations (some more-so than others) of "objective reality". That said, I suppose it can be believable that certain atheists are more delusional than certain theists (in their day-to-day thoughts), but I believe atheists are overall more aware of this phenomena. While it is impossible to escape our thoughts, trying to be objective about them certainly creates some intriguing thoughts and hopefully a greater awareness. 

never let yourself get consumed with your imagination of what you want your bf/gf to be.....just get to know who they actually are....be objective

Response to a creationist on this blog.

The post this response was made - click me.

I find creationists to be very interesting creatures :)

They are some of the best bullshitters in the world. This response was written up quickly, I thought I would throw it up for those interested in reading it.






"Your failure to understand theistic arguments does not, in itself, invalidate theistic arguments."

I perfectly understand their arguments and I see the problems with them.

"“God provides the best explanation for…” so and so phenomena."

The origin of the universe is unknown, how can anything be an explanation for an unknown? How can you claim that God is responsible for an unknown, when we don't even know that God exists. You must first prove that this being exists to be able to claim that the being is responsible for something. This is such basic logic, I really hope you are not that stupid.  You cannot use ignorance to explain ignorance. This is a very real hole in your argument, and I find it hilarious that you refuse to except it.

"Let’s be clear, philosophy does not make any scientific claims. "

Of course it does, philosophy makes claims about the way things are. Philosophy is the religion of the pseudo-intellectual. Sociology, psychology, biology, physics, chemistry, etc. is where real truth is found. In other words, truth can only be found utilizing observation.


"Philosophers need only demonstrate - through sound argumentation - that their conclusions are “more probable” than their alternatives. "

This shows a failure in the reasoning ability of such philosophers. You cannot access how probable an unknown is - something that is unknown is unknown. There is no probability with past events, only with unknown future events (that which quantum physics is concerned with). If we knew it all, there would be no probability, probability is a reflection of human ignorance.

"Philosophy makes no attempt to “prove” that God or any god exists – the existence of a god is self-evident to anyone with an open heart and mind."

Nice contradiction. Do you mean the same people that believe in talking snakes and virgin births? Yeah, real open minds, lol (irony at its finest).

" Individually, theistic arguments do not “prove” the existence of God, but collectively, they make a cumulative case that God is the best explanation (given the alternatives) for what we know about the world. "

Not at all :)

Why do you think most scientists are atheists? Those that actually know the most about the world do not typically believe in God.

"scientific naturalism has yet to demonstrate (philosophically or scientifically) that scientific naturalism is more (or even modestly) reasonable than it’s alternative (theism). "

In YOUR opinion.

"Furthermore, since scientific naturalism is the foundation of atheism, it also follows that atheists (proponents of scientific naturalism) are just as religious (if not more so) as theists. "

There is a clear difference between observable reality and imagined reality. You probably have zero idea of what I am referring to. But science (or more specifically the scientific method) is based on observation. The theistic realm is based on the imaginations of the ignorant (those that don't understand the big questions).

"if you have an argument you would like to refute, the burden of proof IS on you to demonstrate that the argument is unsound (a premise is false, or more improbable than an alternative) or invalid (i.e. the conclusion does not follow from the premises)."

Backwards logic. As I said, I do not believe you are truly this unintelligent. Sadly, you will warp logic to maintain an illogical belief. God only exists in your imagination, if you want to keep him there, I would avoid objective reality.

Objectification of women is harmful to men

a world view is the product of our imagination in which we combine what we experience with our senses coupled with how we believe the world outside of our senses is. 

mutual imagination vs. delutional imagination.

Osama Bin Laden is dead!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_bin_laden

Took them long enough, karma is a bitch. Apparently they used a woman as a human-shield and she was killed, aren't they brave. It's a shame there's no hell for these scumbags to go to.