What best describes your beliefs in religion, God, and the afterlife?

[GhostWriter16]

Well it's pretty easy...

Our minds are the product of nature like anything else. They are made of particles and stuff that follow the same laws of physics as anything else. There is only one way to follow the laws of physics, and so there is only one way our minds will operate.

So I had to reply to you? It was scientifically impossible for me to ignore you? That doesn't make any sense.

But certain people would put you on their ignore list, to prove that they had free will. Others would not, since if some did, you would say that was how the human mind had to operate.

If there is no God, free will definitely exists. If there is a God, free will probably exists.

 

[RedRalph]

So I had to reply to you? It was scientifically impossible for me to ignore you? That doesn't make any sense.

It does, as a theory. The only thing that could happen is what did happen. Not saying that's how it is, but it makes sense.

 

[civver_764]

So I had to reply to you? It was scientifically impossible for me to ignore you? That doesn't make any sense.

Makes total sense.

But certain people would put you on their ignore list, to prove that they had free will. Others would not, since if some did, you would say that was how the human mind had to operate.

Different minds operate in different ways obviously...

If there is no God, free will definitely exists. If there is a God, free will probably exists.

Wrong on both counts.

 

[GhostWriter16]

So I am unable to do anything other than to reply to you, Hitler was unable to do anything other than to kill 6 million Jews, and Thunderfall had to pick the exact moderators he did?

I don't get it. It doesn't make any sense.

 

[SuperJay]

I don't think scientists "believe" in theories, with all the implications of the word. They merely accept them based on the evidence available.

I think this is the crux of Dom's problem re: evolution. He takes "theory" in the literal sense, so to him it's not "proven" and thus isn't "real science," and is in that way completely equal to creationism. The way he talks about it, evolution really is something you either choose to "believe in" or not - rather than a scientific theory that rests on observation and evidence rather than faith.

 

[civver_764]

So I am unable to do anything other than to reply to you, Hitler was unable to do anything other than to kill 6 million Jews, and Thunderfall had to pick the exact moderators he did?

Yeah, that's just how things turned out. If we went back in time Hitler's birth and didn't change anything he would still kill 6 million Jews.

I don't get it. It doesn't make any sense.

You're obviously not trying hard then.

 

[RedRalph]

So I am unable to do anything other than to reply to you, Hitler was unable to do anything other than to kill 6 million Jews, and Thunderfall had to pick the exact moderators he did?

I don't get it. It doesn't make any sense.

It does. you can never ever prove anything else could have happened, but we can always prove that anything else didnt happen. It makes perfect sense.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Yeah, that's just how things turned out. If we went back in time Hitler's birth and didn't change anything he would still kill 6 million Jews.

Well yes, because there would be no reason for him not too. Yes, everything would have happened the same way, because everyone would make the same choices.

However, if I went back in time and told Hitler, "If you kill all those Jews, the result will lead to your suicide and virtually everyone looking at you as a moron" he'd then have a choice to make to still do it or not.

 

[civver_764]

Here's the wiki article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism

 

[civver_764]

Well yes, because there would be no reason for him not too. Yes, everything would have happened the same way, because everyone would make the same choices.

However, if I went back in time and told Hitler, "If you kill all those Jews, the result will lead to your suicide and virtually everyone looking at you as a moron" he'd then have a choice to make to still do it or not.

That's not free will.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I guess that makes sense. Still don't agree, but I think I understand it now.

 

[SuperJay]

I don't believe in heaven or hell because really... what would be the point of such phenomena?

 

[Tani Coyote]

-Free Will doesn't exist.

I don't know about that. My mind tells me to be greedy, but I can easily defy it and give if I so desire.

I'd say we moreso have instincts that we're inclined towards, but you can defy them if you try to. That sounds like free will to me - you can defy your programming, that is, the biological instincts your brain gives you.

Taniciusfox- I do not understand your religious system. You don't know if there's a God or not, but you believe in Heaven, Hell, AND reincarnation? How does this work?

I'm arguing from the theoretical. If we have a structured afterlife with a God at the top of the hierarchy, then of course I believe in Heaven, Hell, and reincarnation as a possible means for people who didn't really choose between good and evil.

If we do not, then it would merely be a belief in the spiritual where we still live on even after our bodies wither - the energies of our soul and mind allow us to exist even without a body. It's very possible it's an energy that science cannot measure, yet at least.

The less set in stone your beliefs are, the less likely you are to be disappointed.

I don't believe in heaven or hell because really... what would be the point of such phenomena?

Easy. If there is a God, sole arbiter of truth and justice, he has different places in his society for the pure and for the guilty, just as we do.

Heaven is a reward for remaining good despite the temptation towards evil this world provides in abundance.

Hell is a punishment for those who fall to temptation and will not change for the better.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Interesting.

Well, I know one thing you didn't vote that you believed in macroevolution

 

[Murky]

I think most religious beliefs are based on ancient writings that themselves were the products of imagination rather than divine influence. That said, there still had to have been a beginning to everything. If you want to call the big-bang a divine spark, I don't have a problem with that. However, I don't think fantasies are going to solve our problems in the real world. If anything they will only serve to distract people from doing what is needed at a critical moment. If your child is sick, you take them to the doctor not a priest. You can always pray on the way if it makes you feel any better.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

I refuse to answer the macroevolution questions in the poll for two reasons:

1.) I believe evolution is what happened because there's enough evidence for it, but it's not a religious "belief" and I'll drop it if it's ever disproven in a convincing way.
2.) I take issue with the term macroevolution. It's used to decouple natural selection, (for which there's irrefutable evidence) and evolution (which is a the logical consequence of natural selection), and it's primarily used by people who understand neither.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Interesting.

Well, I know one thing you didn't vote that you believed in macroevolution

I did.

I once explained evolution to my grandmother, and said that evolution's charts postulate something called the "universal common ancestor" and she said that was God. When I said humans came out of Ethiopia, she said that's where the Garden of Eden was. I must say, I am impressed that despite her religious leanings, she's willing to merge science and faith quite well.

I think most religious beliefs are based on ancient writings that themselves were the products of imagination rather than divine influence. That said, there still had to have been a beginning to everything.

Precisely why I think age attributed to religious views is meaningless. Why is a view made up today any less valid than one proposed thousands of years ago?

Never mind that if God is inside everyone, logically, everyone can find him if they try hard enough. That tiny connection links us all but also links us to him.

...so God is the internet.

If you want to call the big-bang a divine spark, I don't have a problem with that. However, I don't think fantasies are going to solve our problems in the real world. If anything they will only serve to distract people from doing what is needed at a critical moment. If your child is sick, you take them to the doctor not a priest. You can always pray on the way if it makes you feel any better.

Science should always be taken first in everything due to how everything is rationally explained and tested. What science can't touch is where faith should be. We know all about the immune system, and should take drugs that assist it. But if we think faith will help the process even more, by all means, use that as a supplement and not an alternative.

 

[GenMarshall]

I know there is a God. Though still having difficulty grasping on his goodness, dispite my bad luck and unsure if it's just God punishing me just for his own amusement.

Free Will Exists. Most defenately.

Though on the afterlife. I might be unique since I believe in the concept of Heaven and Hell. Yet also believe in Human Reincarnation.

Some religions have a generally positive effect, others negative (*cough* Scientology *cough*)

Freedom of Religion is important and should be carefully protected

My religious convictions do not affect my political views

Of couse I accept the idea of evolution

Another that (I am disapointed with the poll option) belief. Is that I also believe in the concept of Karma.

And accoring to the Belief-O-Matic
1. Eastern Orthodox (100%)
2. Roman Catholic (100%)
3. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (98%)
4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (90%)
5. Seventh Day Adventist (88%)
6. Orthodox Quaker (88%)
7. Hinduism (81%)

 

[SG-17]

I know there is no god, free will exists, there is no heaven or hell, there will be no natural afterlife, religion in general has a negative effect on society, freedom of religion isn't that important when it comes to radical and dangerous sects, my lack of religious convictions do affect my politics, I accept evolution for the fact that it is.

 

[carlosMM]

Why can't religiounists not wrap their minds around the simple fact that both religious and nonreligious people can judge things on merit instead of just blindly believing or disbelieving them?


If you "believe in" evolution you're just as stupid as if you "believe in" green men from mars or Jehova from "The Paradise", or whatever your personal version of possibly nonsensical, counterfactual and illogical thing is.

The last two questions should thus be:
"I believe in creationism"
"I am convinced that macroevolution happens"

:sigh: