Atheism's Offer

Originally posted by twhitehead
But what is the 'we' you are referring to? Do you expect to retain your consciousness after death?

I wonder if it could be possible in the far future to have technology so advanced, (intelligent solitrons?) that your personality could be downloaded into it and thus MAKE souls. If that is possible, could it have already been done somewhere in the universe?

Originally posted by sonhouse
I wonder if it could be possible in the far future to have technology so advanced, (intelligent solitrons?) that your personality could be downloaded into it and thus MAKE souls. If that is possible, could it have already been done somewhere in the universe?

I did suggest that earlier in the thread. But the question then is whether you would still identify with what is essentially a copy of your personality. And if one copy is possible then many copies are possible. That would really make a mess of most theist concepts and would certainly make identifying which is the 'real you' quite difficult.

Originally posted by KellyJay
So you know your correct? I doubt that, your beliefs may be well rooted in your
thinking, that does not make you correct. You know I'm not correct or was that
just a cheap shot?
Kelly

I did not say anything in that post about the question of whether or not you are correct. My comment was more along the lines that I do not think you place the right demands on belief formation. Good cognizers are in the business of forming true beliefs. And cognizers in general, whether good or bad, are in the business of forming beliefs on propositions they take to be true. Because that is basically just what belief is: a propositional attitude where one takes the proposition to be true. This can proceed at differing levels of confidence in the truth of the proposition, but note that it involves taking the proposition to be true, not taking the proposition to offer a lot; or to offer more than some alternative proposition; or to be really bitchin' or cool or useful, etc.

And I took issue with how you weighted on one hand what a belief may "offer" (whatever exactly we even take that to mean) with on the other whether or not that belief is true. As one who strives to be a good cognizer, it is of importance to me whether or not my views are correct, and correctness in itself is offering enough as an end to itself in belief formation. And, anyhow, regardless of what a belief may "offer", that would not seem to have much bearing on whether or not the belief is true, and thus it cannot much rationally sway me in my deliberation about the proposition. Even if I thought a belief had lots to "offer", I do not see how I could go about believing it through deliberative belief formation in the absence of good reasons to make me think it is in fact the case. I could still feign belief or out of volition profess some allegiance to the proposition, but that is not at the end of the day actual belief is it?

As to the de facto question of whether or not one will cease to exist, it simply does not matter whether or not one desires such an outcome. In just the same way, as to the de facto question of whether or not God exists, it simply does not much matter that josephw does not care for what he takes to be an implication of the denial of that proposition; just like it simply does not matter that you think atheism is inferior in what it "offers". These considerations simply do not matter to the de facto question. To suggest otherwise is also to commit an obvious and well-known fallacy (in the vein of argumentum ad consequentiam).

Originally posted by twhitehead
But what is the 'we' you are referring to? Do you expect to retain your consciousness after death?

"We" maens us, humans. (Ok?)

Yes I believe my conciousness will continue after I die, but my focus is on the here and now.
We have some lessons to learn and if we refuse then I believe we will be sent off to other planet(s) where the conditions will be much worse than what we have here on planet Earth, now. Well the conditions for most of us, anyway.

I know it sounds like reincarnation, but I can stress enough that I dont think much about (life ) after my death.

Originally posted by sonhouse
I wonder if it could be possible in the far future to have technology so advanced, (intelligent solitrons?) that your personality could be downloaded into it and thus MAKE souls. If that is possible, could it have already been done somewhere in the universe?

==================================
I wonder if it could be possible in the far future to have technology so advanced, (intelligent solitrons?) that your personality could be downloaded into it and thus MAKE souls. If that is possible, could it have already been done somewhere in the universe?
================================

The the living personality of Jesus can be downloaded into the human heart today.

"The last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)

Then you learn to apply direct access to activate Him within you in all kinds of situations.

Jesus is downloadable.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I think you misunderstood him. He was not claiming his view was correct, he was saying that he thinks it is important to find the correct view - and implied that that was more important to him than finding a view that has something to offer.

He is countering the theme of the Thread which is that atheism should not be followed/accepted/believed because ...[text shortened]... nt that the validity of a view/belief is not equivalent to what it has to offer to the adherent.

If that was his point, I did miss it, and that'd be my bad.
Kelly

Originally posted by karoly aczel
"We" maens us, humans. (Ok?)

Well then what do you mean by 'humans' as you clearly have a different definition from me. What I am getting at is the fact that you say 'we' can outlive our bodies. If so, then our bodies are not part of the definition of 'we'. My definition of 'human' includes the body.

Yes I believe my conciousness will continue after I die, ........... but I can stress enough that I dont think much about (life ) after my death.
Well would you care to think about it for a moment for the purpose of discussion?
If you develop Alzheimers and loose all your memories and go mad before you die, then will you be mad a memory less in your consciousness after you die? Or do you get some magical cure? If you do get a magical cure, what memories are restored? From a particular moment in time, or all memories from throughout your life?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Well then what do you mean by 'humans' as you clearly have a different definition from me. What I am getting at is the fact that you say 'we' can outlive our bodies. If so, then our bodies are not part of the definition of 'we'. My definition of 'human' includes the body.

[b]Yes I believe my conciousness will continue after I die, ........... but I can ...[text shortened]... e restored? From a particular moment in time, or all memories from throughout your life?

my definition of humans also includes our bodies 😉

Ok,I'll play ball, but please dont accuse me of romanticizing my answers. They are as I percieve them and the logical conclusion, (that of transcending/losing the ego), is not a pleasant idea....

I bellieve that we will have access to all lives of humans on the planet who have lived before and more...

Yes the cure seems magical from our viewpoint but it is merely ourselves.

Look, my basic supposition is that we dont know FULLY who we are. If we discover that, we answer all that ails us. Period.
The time to do that doscovering is while we are alive, prefferably right now, not some time later when we die.

I understand your concerns with mental health issues and what kind of conciousness will be restored. All I can say is that if we understand who we are we magically transform into that.
And we see life and death and time and all that in its proper context-with no hold over us ...


edit:thnx to you and everyone else for not picking on my bad typing. I hope you get the gist.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
All I can say is that if we understand who we are we magically transform into that. .

Well my main concern is that the being/entity that I magically transform into will not be me. It will be something else. And I don't really care about it or what happens to it.

And we see life and death and time and all that in its proper context-with no hold over us ...
Again, life and death and all that have a hold over me because the 'me' I am referring to will die, and it is the 'me' that will die that concerns me.

edit:thnx to you and everyone else for not picking on my bad typing. I hope you get the gist.
You come across as speaking your honest opinion for which I give you more respect than I give to some others on this forum who write well but appear to me to be dishonest or merely trolling (talking nonsense in order to get a reaction or start a fight). You also appear to listen to others opinions whereas some here just block their ears if they don't like what they are hearing.

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"...but I dont expect it from you"

Why?


I'll explain it another way.

Atheism says "there is no God", therefore after death there is no life. For the individual that means the absolute cessation of one's own existence. Seeing that we now live, and enjoy the benefits of experiencing life, it is beyond comprehension that as thinking and feelin ...[text shortened]...

What more can be said? Who can defend atheism as being anything other than what it is?[/b]

On the contrary, your belief is focused on death and attempting to deny it. Atheism focuses simply on a belief in no gods, but as a consequence, I would argue that it focuses me on the importance and meaning of the short life I have. Certainly that's how I feel. I don't focus on my death, nor do I deny that it is coming. I focus on my life and making it as useful and meaningful as possible - perhaps through extending my influence beyond my death even, through friends, family and students.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Well my main concern is that the being/entity that I magically transform into will not be me. It will be something else. And I don't really care about it or what happens to it.

[b]And we see life and death and time and all that in its proper context-with no hold over us ...
Again, life and death and all that have a hold over me because the 'me' I ...[text shortened]... opinions whereas some here just block their ears if they don't like what they are hearing.[/b]

Yeah, look, Thnx for that. I knew we would come to loggerheads about the nature of the "I" .
I wouldn't expect anyone else to swallow my tripe. Like I said, I dont try to romanticize it. I try to explain as best as possible.
There is no substitute for experience.
Thnx for the exchange...unless you had something else... 🙂

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"...but I dont expect it from you"

Why?


I'll explain it another way.

Atheism says "there is no God", therefore after death there is no life. For the individual that means the absolute cessation of one's own existence. Seeing that we now live, and enjoy the benefits of experiencing life, it is beyond comprehension that as thinking and feelin ...[text shortened]...

What more can be said? Who can defend atheism as being anything other than what it is?[/b]

"Atheism offers nothing and contributes nothing to life. It is only about death, because that's all there is after life as far as atheism is concerned."

That is one way of looking at it. You also could argue atheism is not distracted by thoughts and fears about what happens after your death and can therefore fully concentrate on life itself.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I knew we would come to loggerheads about the nature of the "I" .

I do not think we are at loggerheads. It is true that I do not believe that anything like a soul or 'essence' will continue after my death, but that is not really important here.
Where we differ is in whether or not we are emotionally attached to what you believe may continue to exist after physical death. As far as I understand the concept you have put forward, I am not convinced I would be emotionally attached. You clearly are emotionally attached. I wouldn't really call that 'at loggerheads' but merely differences in emotional response.
It is entirely possible though that if I understood better what you believe is the entity that will continue after death that I would have an emotion response with regards to its future.

My main concern in this discussion, is that theists frequently demand that I have an emotional response to the supposed future of my 'eternal soul' but whenever I enter into a discussion with them regarding what that 'eternal soul' really is, they either don't know or won't say. I have always found that attitude remarkable.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I do not think we are at loggerheads. It is true that I do not believe that anything like a soul or 'essence' will continue after my death, but that is not really important here.
Where we differ is in whether or not we are emotionally attached to what you believe may continue to exist after physical death. As far as I understand the concept you have put ...[text shortened]... s, they either don't know or won't say. I have always found that attitude remarkable.

Yeah I am an emotional guy, you got that right.
More heart than brain, I just hope enough brain to maintain a logical consistency.

So we're not at loggerheads according to you. Great!


Why do you say its not important whether you believe a soul or essence continues after physical death? I thoought that was the whole point of your enquiry.


I understand your main concern with theists. 'Tis a dam shame that people dont understand the function of "time" in all this hub-bub.