One doesn’t have to be atheist necessarily. One should just reject beliefs, whether they be religious or scientific, that do not have proof and especially when there is evidence to the contrary, like there is with the existence of the soul.
If you want to believe that meditating in a field at sunrise is good for the soul, that’s fine. If you want to believe it will cure your cancer, that’s not fine. It’s straight-up false, no matter how badly you believe it.
You’re missing the point, or perhaps just dodging it altogether. The point is, your assertion that people should believe whatever makes them happy is FALSE. That leads to death and crime. People should believe in truth, not what they wish were true.
That’s not all you believe, though, is it? You also believe in NDEs. Why can’t you just stick to that topic? Saying “I believe in ethics” is in no way proof of NDEs. Having one true belief does not make all your beliefs true.
I don’t. You said everybody should believe whatever suits them, and I asked if it matters if they believe in things that are real or not. You still haven’t answered that question.
Which doesn’t have anything to do with believing in spirits, NDEs, or anything else.
The question was wether or not he should believe in souls if he never saw one.
What I was trying to say is that he is free to believe that they do not exist if that is what he believes in.
Does it matter? Matter to whom? Who is concerned on what others think? Does it matter to you if what I think is true or false? I understand that one is concerned on what others think when what they think create an action affecting themselves or others around them. If regardless of what they think is true or not, or regardless of belief or non belief, if the actions are positive, good, constructive… then I don’t think it is cause of concern and it may matter is a good way. If my belief in souls makes me strive to be kind to others, to help others, if it comforts me psychologically, does it matter to the people that surround me, I think it might. Suppose, hypothetically, that I believe in fairies, does that matter to you? Does it matter to anyone? Very unlikely. But if I believed that a UFO is coming and that we have to kill ourselves so that they can come pick us up and take us into a wonderful distant planet. Then it matters, it matters to the police, it matters to the families of those who will be killed, because I am about to kill people. If I believe that by meditating I am going to cure my (hypothetical) cancer, than it does matter because the outcome is negative, I am going to die prematurely.
That doesn’t answer the question he asked you. The question is about evidence, and why he should perhaps believe in something without evidence. We already know he’s free to believe what he wants.
In other words, our beliefs can absolutely matter because they can affect our actions.
Yes, and many times different, totally opposite actions can come from the same belief. I personally think the actions matter more than the religious belief or non belief. What do you think?
Is there any evidence for the existence of souls that might counterbalance the evidence against the existence of souls-yes or no?
If so, please present it.
There is no evidence for the existence of souls. It follows that you have no soul. So enjoy your souless existence and leave the souls to those who have them. Fair enough?
Unfortunately, some folks who believe they have souls persist in believing everybody does, and kill people who disagree with them. Not fair; not fair at all.
People kill other people for all sorts of nasty unethical and immoral reasons. Not sure what that has to do with a discussion of whether or not souls exist. Maybe you want to start a thread on why people kill other people based on their own rationalizations of their religious convictions, as an example. These two do not go hand in glove and there is no reason to suppose that a belief in souls predisposes anyone to kill any more than any other motive. I think some people kill other people for personal psychological issues and, doesnt matter what they belief, they will kill given the right circumstances allowing them to rationalize the objectivation of another being. Armies the world over depend the ability to tap into that motive and do so very successfully. There really is no need to scapegoat a belief in souls as the gateway drug to murder and mayhem.
It’s a little bit of a stretch, but it’s the same point that was being made before your post: people’s beliefs affect their actions, so it’s not quite as simple as saying ‘Everybody should believe whatever they believe, and what’s it to you?’
Sure, people’s beliefs affect their actions. Getting the nerve up to kill someone is quite an action of a different kind. Just pointing out there is an awful lot of killing going on for all sorts of rationalizations that make that killing seem appropriate to whoever is doing the killing. A favorite ploy is to claim that innocent women and children are being butchered and raped. There is nothing to whip up the frenzy for revenge quite as predictably as that right there. If you are looking for reasons why otherwise reasonalble and ethical people will kill for reason of ethics you coudln’d do better than “the innocent are being massacred.”
Nonsense. Facts are facts, reality is reality; not everything is a matter of taste or opinion. So yes, people should all believe the same way when it’s a matter of objective fact and not opinion. And yes, ideally everyone should be atheist; religion is factually incorrect, irrational, and highly destructive.
Oh, please, that’s just twisting my words.
You already said that people should believe what they want to believe; which means believing things like vaccines causing autism, that God hates homosexuals, that Allah wants them to fly planes into buildings, that prayer can cure AIDS, that their faith makes them bulletproof.
And respecting others and yourself is a principle largely in opposition to religion. A believer acts according to his or her religious fantasies, ignoring the actual people they are dealing with; they are concerned with souls and the will of their imaginary god, not the actual flesh-and-blood people around them. Ethics are also largely anti-religion, in large part for the same reason; you can’t be successfully ethical without operating according to reality, not fantasy.
Souls make it easy to both regard killing as unimportant and to convince people not to care about other people in the first place; just their souls. It reduces people to the emotional status of props; of things, since it’s the souls that matter. In fact, the concept of souls turns the ethical question of “why should i kill” around into “why shouldn’t I kill?” Not-killing becomes something that needs justification.
It’s much easier to get up the nerve to kill someone if you believe they need to be killed. Which I think is an indication that you (and Fairy Ana) are oversimplfying things when you say things like ‘let everybody believe what they want, OK?’ Belief in souls doesn’t kill people, but you do sometimes see people die because of similar beliefs or beliefs that are generally similar to that one.
Of course it will. Because as many people in this thread have claimed, every single killing ever in history was caused by people falsely believing in souls.
After all, if this weren’t the case, and only some of the killing was caused by people falsely believing in souls, it wouldn’t be worth the bother to not believe in them. Because 95% as much murder is just as bad as 100%, right?
Give me a break. People kill people because they have objectified the people they kill. “You are not human because ______” Slap in your favorite rationalization and kill the basterds.
Using this as an argument as to why a belief in souls is dangerous and should be discouraged is overreaching. It also has no bearing on why people believe in souls. You surely are not going to argue that people believe in souls so as to have a good reason to kill all the other souless basterds they couldn’t kill before.