Atheism is abnormal human behavior

[Solitary]

Alright,  I'm pissed they swiped my  AF short hand of APA and shrinks as far as I'm concerned are a bunch of flakes hell bent on making money selling people on the cure for living..  I've dealt with plenty of shrinks in my life and have yet to meet one who knows didly jack squat about dealing with their own lives much less mine..

There's a word for all this gibberish, HOKUM..

I'm with you on this from my experience with them. Solitary

[Solitary]

Mike, I am enjoying our little conversation.   Would you like to continue?  I will take that as a yes.  So if I understand correctly, you believe or hypothesize that the universe is entirely random and likely infinite and therefore without purpose.  You may not agree with that entirely but for the sake of discussion let's assume that is the truth.  So let's start at the big bang.  We then assume that the big bang was a purely random occurrence.  So in order for our universe to coagulate into what followed there had to be at least one law, we call it the law of gravity.  Were it not for the law of gravity, the universe may have continued in a pure state of energy or until some other law came into effect.  But since these laws had to have all came into effect randomly as well that would also imply that there would have been an infinite number of laws that could have came into effect.  So let's pause and see if we agree on that.

You are using slick maneuvers and hypotheticals, and the assumption the universe was created like so many cosmologist do. Stephen Hawking has already said the universe just is, with no beginning or end, and nobody is listening. And Penrose has gone off the deep end with his nonsense sounding like Deepak Chopra on acid. I'm done posting at the drivel I see here and hypothetical Bull shit to show the possibility of a God by using science to back it up. Astronomers have looked into the deepest parts of space we can see, and there is no evidence of a supernatural world, but overwhelming evidence that the laws of physics are the same everywhere, even in the quantum would that is composed of particles proving the world is a material world. Even energy and space is composed of particles, just like space time is and electromagnetic fields are. Solitary

[Munch]

So atheism is considered 'abnormal behavior' huh?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2hf4GLAMzg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW2eTE8b1tE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4zg_uaizts

[Fidel_Castronaut]

As almost everyone else has posited, atheism is not a behaviour, and neither can it be defined as 'ir/rational' - it's the null.

[Mike Cl]

Mike, I am enjoying our little conversation.   Would you like to continue?  I will take that as a yes.  So if I understand correctly, you believe or hypothesize that the universe is entirely random and likely infinite and therefore without purpose.  You may not agree with that entirely but for the sake of discussion let's assume that is the truth.  So let's start at the big bang.  We then assume that the big bang was a purely random occurrence.  So in order for our universe to coagulate into what followed there had to be at least one law, we call it the law of gravity.  Were it not for the law of gravity, the universe may have continued in a pure state of energy or until some other law came into effect.  But since these laws had to have all came into effect randomly as well that would also imply that there would have been an infinite number of laws that could have came into effect.  So let's pause and see if we agree on that.

Sure, let's continue.  It was random in that the when and the where were not pinpointed.  It could have happened anywhere or anywhen.  But the content was not random, and that includes the physical laws.  What the universe would look like is random;  what it contained then is the same as it is now.  It is a closed system and self contained.  Apparently it is still unpacking and moving away from the center.  I hope I did not imply that there is an infinite number of laws; that would imply that some were being created as we age.  No, the physical laws came with the physical universe; and that is all there is, physical laws and physical material.  It's sort of like the buildup of a thunderstorm.  All the elements are there for one, it's just not possible to determine precisely where or when; it's happening is random--but it will happen.  So, no, not an infinite number of physical laws, and not a random effect of those laws.  They operate as they should all the time and don't deviate from how they act.  The material of the universe acts and performs as the physical laws allow; and neither the physical material or the physical laws care one way or the other how you like it or how you react.  They are the same.  So, it seems we do not agree on this last bit.

[Brian37]

The realization there is no God is not really very profound.  And identifying as an atheist is not either.  It is usually a transient view for most of us on the way to believing something else just as ridiculous.  So the real issue is not god but just us.  And atheists often reach their views not because of rational observation but because we are still looking for something to believe in. The reason we are here is so we can still retain some sense of belonging while behaving just like the religious do.

"Researchers who study the psychology and neuroscience of religion are helping to explain why such beliefs are so enduring. They’re finding that religion may, in fact, be a byproduct of the way our brains work, growing from cognitive tendencies to seek order from chaos, to anthropomorphize our environment and to believe the world around us was created for our use."

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2010/12/believe.aspx

Um no, atheism is NOT abnormal, theism is a result of our flawed perceptions. Humans evolved to seek patterns, the problem in that is we guess at what we observe far more than we test and falsify what we observe and end up gap filling.

The neurology behind that is that when we think of warm fuzzy things, or fear boogiemen, those false beliefs can have a real electrochemical reaction in our brains. Our species lack of understanding of what they are really perceiving is why god claims and religions exist. The placebo effect can cause humans to group and create safety in numbers which gives that group more opportunity at resources and attempts at offspring.

Dawkins "The God Delusion" explains this as "the moth mistaking the light bulb for moonlight". And Victor Stenger's book "The New Atheism" explains why you cannot split the baby and say religion is merely a separate but equal way of measuring nature like science. He also goes into detail in the later chapters as to why our morality is evolutionary and not label based.

The belief is "enduring" because it is easier to market a fantasy which makes people feel good, than it is to actually have a claim tested and falsified and peer reviewed.

[Givemeareason]

Um no, atheism is NOT abnormal, theism is a result of our flawed perceptions. Humans evolved to seek patterns, the problem in that is we guess at what we observe far more than we test and falsify what we observe and end up gap filling.

The neurology behind that is that when we think of warm fuzzy things, or fear boogiemen, those false beliefs can have a real electrochemical reaction in our brains. Our species lack of understanding of what they are really perceiving is why god claims and religions exist. The placebo effect can cause humans to group and create safety in numbers which gives that group more opportunity at resources and attempts at offspring.

Dawkins "The God Delusion" explains this as "the moth mistaking the light bulb for moonlight". And Victor Stenger's book "The New Atheism" explains why you cannot split the baby and say religion is merely a separate but equal way of measuring nature like science. He also goes into detail in the later chapters as to why our morality is evolutionary and not label based.

The belief is "enduring" because it is easier to market a fantasy which makes people feel good, than it is to actually have a claim tested and falsified and peer reviewed.

I only realized just now that you and others think I am actually pro-religion.  This is so absurd it is hilarious.  I am going to have to think on this once I stop laughing.  I have been pro-athiest as long as Dawkins!!!

[Mike Cl]

I only realized just now that you and others think I am actually pro-religion.  This is so absurd it is hilarious.  I am going to have to think on this once I stop laughing.  I have been pro-athiest as long as Dawkins!!!

Giveme, I have part of me that does wonder if you are atheist or theist.  How can that be, you ask???  I'll try to explain.  Look at your first post in this thread : "The realization there is no God is not really very profound.  And identifying as an atheist is not either.  It is usually a transient view for most of us on the way to believing something else just as ridiculous.  So the real issue is not god but just us.  And atheists often reach their views not because of rational observation but because we are still looking for something to believe in. The reason we are here is so we can still retain some sense of belonging while behaving just like the religious do."  Let's take this apart.

You suggest: The realization there is no God is not really very profound.  And identifying as an atheist is not either.
Me--I'm not sure what you mean.  Considering the history of religion on this world, it is, indeed, a profound thought; it goes against the grain of all organized religions.  And identifying as an atheist may not seem profound to you, but to me it does.  It can be life changing and life ending to id youself atheist.  But, I'd admit, I'm not sure what you meant by 'profound".

You go on:  It is usually a transient view for most of us on the way to believing something else just as ridiculous. 
Me:  This is very puzzling.  First, why do you view atheism as 'ridiculous'?  I don't.  For me it is the only view that makes sense.  Why do you think atheism is 'transient'?  For me, the search for god occured in the middle of my atheist leanings.  So, theism was clearly transient.  Atheism was the end.

You say: So the real issue is not god but just us. 
Me:  Since god is not real, it cannot be an 'issue'.  Of course it is about us--what else could it be about?????  This smacks of theism in the extreme. 

You say: And atheists often reach their views not because of rational observation but because we are still looking for something to believe in.
Me--How many atheists have you talked to?  Read?  I reached my views from a rational point of view, not a view that incorporated faith or belief.  I'm not an atheist because I am missing something in my life and use atheism as another set of beliefs.  That isn't even possible.  If you have a set of beliefs, then you are not an atheist.  It seems as though you are saying that it impossible to be fulfilled in your life if you are an atheist.  You have to continue searching for something else or some purpose.  Is that what you are saying?  If not, please enlighten me.

You say: The reason we are here is so we can still retain some sense of belonging while behaving just like the religious do.
Me:  Wow!  ????  what do you mean by "here'--this world or this board?  And atheists can't have a sense of belonging, as though only religion allows one to develop this feeling?????  Behaving?  How do atheists behave?  Is there some mold atheists are stamped out of?   And how do the religious behave?  What are the 'samenesses' you allude to????

this entire paragraph could easily have been written by a theist.  And one who is not all that familiar with atheistic thought.  I find it rather off-putting, to say the least.  I could be wrong, of course.
But would you care to reply and clarify that entire paragraph???  And this is why many, I'd guess, on this board think you could be a 'wolf in sheep's clothing', so to speak. 

[Givemeareason]

Giveme, I have part of me that does wonder if you are atheist or theist.  How can that be, you ask???  I'll try to explain.  Look at your first post in this thread : "The realization there is no God is not really very profound.  And identifying as an atheist is not either.  It is usually a transient view for most of us on the way to believing something else just as ridiculous.  So the real issue is not god but just us.  And atheists often reach their views not because of rational observation but because we are still looking for something to believe in. The reason we are here is so we can still retain some sense of belonging while behaving just like the religious do."  Let's take this apart.

You suggest: The realization there is no God is not really very profound.  And identifying as an atheist is not either.
Me--I'm not sure what you mean.  Considering the history of religion on this world, it is, indeed, a profound thought; it goes against the grain of all organized religions.  And identifying as an atheist may not seem profound to you, but to me it does.  It can be life changing and life ending to id youself atheist.  But, I'd admit, I'm not sure what you meant by 'profound".

You go on:  It is usually a transient view for most of us on the way to believing something else just as ridiculous. 
Me:  This is very puzzling.  First, why do you view atheism as 'ridiculous'?  I don't.  For me it is the only view that makes sense.  Why do you think atheism is 'transient'?  For me, the search for god occured in the middle of my atheist leanings.  So, theism was clearly transient.  Atheism was the end.

You say: So the real issue is not god but just us. 
Me:  Since god is not real, it cannot be an 'issue'.  Of course it is about us--what else could it be about?????  This smacks of theism in the extreme. 

You say: And atheists often reach their views not because of rational observation but because we are still looking for something to believe in.
Me--How many atheists have you talked to?  Read?  I reached my views from a rational point of view, not a view that incorporated faith or belief.  I'm not an atheist because I am missing something in my life and use atheism as another set of beliefs.  That isn't even possible.  If you have a set of beliefs, then you are not an atheist.  It seems as though you are saying that it impossible to be fulfilled in your life if you are an atheist.  You have to continue searching for something else or some purpose.  Is that what you are saying?  If not, please enlighten me.

You say: The reason we are here is so we can still retain some sense of belonging while behaving just like the religious do.
Me:  Wow!  ????  what do you mean by "here'--this world or this board?  And atheists can't have a sense of belonging, as though only religion allows one to develop this feeling?????  Behaving?  How do atheists behave?  Is there some mold atheists are stamped out of?   And how do the religious behave?  What are the 'samenesses' you allude to????

this entire paragraph could easily have been written by a theist.  And one who is not all that familiar with atheistic thought.  I find it rather off-putting, to say the least.  I could be wrong, of course.
But would you care to reply and clarify that entire paragraph???  And this is why many, I'd guess, on this board think you could be a 'wolf in sheep's clothing', so to speak.

I am so obtuse!!!  I am just so unaccustomed to talking about these things with people that don't know me.  And I can now see how anyone might think that.  There should be some kind of profile here so people don't have to guess about each other.  The realization there is no God is not profound because it is obvious.  I have always thought that.  I remember being laughed at on a school bus long ago when I stated I did not believe the bible.  So professing to be athiest is nothing special either rom my point of view.  I see also now that I am being arrogant from that point of view.  It is often a transient point of view for those who leave religion simply because it is not fulfilling.   And since many of those still have supernatural or spiritual views they migrate right back another religion.  And nearly anyone who claims to be searching for the truth is nearly always just looking for something they can comfortably believe in.  "They can't handle the truth!!"  And then once we find a small truth from transitioning over to atheism we start congregating and proclaiming and proselytizing it just like the religious do.  So in essence it even starts looking like another religion.  We cannot escape human behavior.  I just can't believe I was so obtuse not to see that earlier.  Now I see why I was getting strange responses to my posts.  And as for all my posts I was only trying to stir up some mental stimulation.  I am not the sort who sits around in smug complacency laughing at all the irony in the world.  Sometimes I like to jump in and make a complete fool of myself as I have surely now done.  But I am no religious troll or any such nonsense.  I am just another human being still trying to understand all that is.  On that note I am ending my day.  Enough!

[Mike Cl]

Thank you for your reply.  Well, you got your wish--you did stir the pot, so to speak. :)  BTW, I don't care if you are theist or atheist, I'll talk to anybody if they will reply.  Maybe you could start another post and explain who and what you are in a little more detail?  This is a forum where we only have words to communicate with.  So, words are important.  I have to watch carefully how I word certain of my thoughts so that I don't give the wrong impression.  For example, your use of the word 'profound' was used in a personal way--it made sense to you, but maybe not to most of us here.  I was fortunate in that my parents did not push theism on me, but allowed me to explore that world on my own and in my time.  So, my first exposure to god was through the lens of the southern baptist and assembly of god churches.  So, along my journey, the realization that there is no god was profound.  So, I was reading 'profound' through that lens.  Anyway, I'd encourage your starting another post.

And to continue where we left off in our conversation on this thread.

[Givemeareason]

Thank you for your reply.  Well, you got your wish--you did stir the pot, so to speak. :)  BTW, I don't care if you are theist or atheist, I'll talk to anybody if they will reply.  Maybe you could start another post and explain who and what you are in a little more detail?  This is a forum where we only have words to communicate with.  So, words are important.  I have to watch carefully how I word certain of my thoughts so that I don't give the wrong impression.  For example, your use of the word 'profound' was used in a personal way--it made sense to you, but maybe not to most of us here.  I was fortunate in that my parents did not push theism on me, but allowed me to explore that world on my own and in my time.  So, my first exposure to god was through the lens of the southern baptist and assembly of god churches.  So, along my journey, the realization that there is no god was profound.  So, I was reading 'profound' through that lens.  Anyway, I'd encourage your starting another post.

And to continue where we left off in our conversation on this thread.

Explaining myself in a new post would detract from the post but I certainly will need to make my viewpoints more clear.  However I will say a bit more about myself right here.  I grew up on a farm in a more isolated environment.  However since my parents were not well educated nor heavily involved in church, they made no attempt to indoctrinate me either.  So my development formed me into a more independent thinker.  And that is how I have always been.  I would sum up my other than the more mundane things as having been a quest for understanding.  I became deeply interested in Science at an early age and though I did attend college pursuing related things I am by no means a scientist.  But I do look at things from a rather detached scientific viewpoint much of the time.  I am still gaining understanding and I have an insatiable curiosity that feeds it.  I am here for mental stimulation and I love to assimilate ideas of interest to see how they might affect or alter my own.  I have certain ideas I may want to express here also but I will certainly need to do a better job of explaining.

[Givemeareason]

Oh!  And I am a true liberal... not the stereotyped political one.

[Mike Cl]

Oh!  And I am a true liberal... not the stereotyped political one.

Okay, I'll bite.  What is a true liberal as opposed to the 'other' kind?

[stromboli]

How the fuck is making a rational choice based on evidence abnormal behavior? You are presupposing that believing in a god is therefore natural, which it isn't. You are confusing spirituality with religion, two different things. It is no more abnormal than choosing between reruns of I Love Lucy and Game of Thrones. This whole thread is idiotic.

[Deidre32]

The realization there is no God is not really very profound.  And identifying as an atheist is not either.  It is usually a transient view for most of us on the way to believing something else just as ridiculous.  So the real issue is not god but just us.  And atheists often reach their views not because of rational observation but because we are still looking for something to believe in. The reason we are here is so we can still retain some sense of belonging while behaving just like the religious do.

"Researchers who study the psychology and neuroscience of religion are helping to explain why such beliefs are so enduring. They’re finding that religion may, in fact, be a byproduct of the way our brains work, growing from cognitive tendencies to seek order from chaos, to anthropomorphize our environment and to believe the world around us was created for our use."

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2010/12/believe.aspx

Not really. Atheism isn't a learned ''behavior'' as you refer to it. But, religious ''life'' is.