Evidence of what? A higher power?
You do have a boss, right? That’s perfect evidence that at least one higher power exists. Now, if it’s details (or attention) you seek – try the evening news. Or read some tea leaves. Or curl up with a book, whether it’s a holy text or a science magazine. Whatever works best for you, and you alone – I’m not psychic, nor have I ever claimed to be. 
Here’s what you said back on page one:
“No, atheism is the assumption that there’s no higher intelligence beyond human intelligence, a self-delusion enabled by ignoring the evidence of higher intelligence.”
When you say that atheists are deluded because they ignore the evidence of a higher intelligence, what evidence are you referring to?
You don’t need a divine mandate to commit crimes against humanity. But I’ll grant that delusional people inspired by GOD are far more dangerous, and can potentially cause far greater damage, than any lone nutcase who’s only being guided by the voices in his head.
Meh…kinda pointless to demonize an old nun who at least tried to help people living in squalor, when you consider all the crimes against children committed (and covered up) by the Catholic Church, which has been happening for hundreds of years. (At least they don’t burn witches anymore!)
Lack of religious faith and selfishness are not mutually exclusive.
It’s everywhere. Look around, with open eyes and mind, and you’ll see it – or, more accurately, the evidence will eventually reveal itself unto you.
And for crying out loud, don’t expect any holy man (or some random Internet junkie…heh) to grant all the answers you seek. The path to genuine enlightenment is different for every living soul, which is why you must do your own research. If you’re not comfortable with that answer…well, perhaps it’s best that you remain in the dark, for now.
Good job, Hamster King, in refusing to let fuzzypickles shift the goalposts and self-servingly redefine his/her terms again.
So, fuzzypickles, you claimed that we are ignoring “evidence” of “higher intelligence” above that of human beings.
I and many others have kept asking you for it, and I won’t stop 'til you provide it or admit that you have nothing.
So, yet again…
Where is this evidence that we’re deliberately “ignoring”?
Eventually? You said that we are deluded and we ignore the evidence. Now you’re saying if we’re open minded we can wait for it and it will be revealed. Goal post shifting indeed.
Don’t tell us to “look around and we’ll see it.” That’s vague, dismissive, obfuscatory, and disingenuous bullshit.
You MADE A CLAIM. Now back it up with specific evidences.
Unless you don’t mind not being taken seriously. Which no one will, unless you can substantiate your claim.
We’re waiting.
Also, I note that you conveniently glossed over the key implications of my dissection of your English-major analysis of the AHD def. of “religion”.
So I’ll ask THAT again, too:
How can atheism be a “religion”–even according to the limited (main clause) definition–when it does not address any PURPOSE of the universe? Remember that the definition used the conjunction “and”!
And if that “and” doesn’t really matter, why wouldn’t physics also be considered a religion?
Or will you finally admit that you’re just making shit up to basically impugn atheists’ ideas and motives?
We’re not talking about me. We’re talking about what you meant when you said:
“Atheism is the assumption that there’s no higher intelligence beyond human intelligence, a self-delusion enabled by ignoring the evidence of higher intelligence.”
What, specifically, did YOU mean by “evidence of higher intelligence” when you typed those words? I’m not seeking enlightenment, just clarification.
I didn’t realize that a patronizing tone was part of being enlightened.
I submit to you that you’re the one who’s in the dark. And that your refusal to clearly state your meaning is the result of an uncomfortable realization that if your theology were spelled out plainly for all to see, it would evaporate like mist in the dawn.
Religions love obscurity and mystery. It makes it easier to overlook their gaping holes.
Aren’t you just dismissing yourself as an authority with this statement?
You made a direct claim that atheists were ignoring evidence. Name the evidence we are ignoring.
You brought her up, not me. And since she’s so often used in the attempt to pretend that religion is benevolent, yes there’s a point to “demonizing” her.
Nor did I say they were. A lack of religious faith is nothing; it is an absence and neither good nor bad in itself. Which makes it better than religion, which is bad in itself. Not being religious does not automatically make you good, but it does mean you have less reason to be evil and are more capable of being a good person if you try. Religion cripples both morals and judgment.
I do look around, having been trained in science. I see a universe operating purely by natural principles, which get more and more interesting the closer you get to the basics of matter and energy. In particular, I see a universe which is mostly empty space, and then stars, and then dead planets. I see the rare planet that supports life make tectonic adjustments without worrying how many buildings and people get wiped out. I don’t see any sign of a higher intelligence. If there is one, it is indistinguishable from not existing at all.
My way has led to understanding of the world and the computer you type on. Your way, which seems more or less like “awesome dude, there must be something behind this beautiful sunset but I’m too lazy to find out what” has led to nothing.
Humans having a reaction of wonder at the beauty and complexity of the universe is hardly acceptable as evidence for a supernatural “higher power” of any kind.
My Lord, a post in equal and stunning levels of both arrogance and ignorance.
How so?
Actually, you’ve described precisely what I mean. Remember, we’re not necessarily discussing human-like intelligence; except to the extent that we’re all segments of the whole.
Clearly, whether something exists or not is easily determined. Can you see the stars? Can you view the moon rising over the horizon? If so, then you’re awake to the fact that existence does exist, and you are witness to the evidence so many others ignore. (Whew…took long enough!)
I’d rather think of Mother Teresa as the exception that proves the rule. She wasn’t perfect, but at least she devoted her life to help people. When you commit to that level of self-sacrifice, your faith or creed no longer matters. I think most rational people already recognize that, despite the colors she wore.
For every Hitler, there’s an Oskar Schindler. You don’t demonize Oskar Schindler…or do you, Der Trihs?
No; she devoted her life to propping up her own religious fantasies no matter how many people suffered for it. She wasn’t about self sacrifice; she was about sacrificing others for her fantasy. And yes, her “faith or creed” does matter because without it she would likely either have done less harm or chosen methods of helping people that actually worked.
I won’t deny there are some women do exactly that, especially those who play the martyr during times of tragedy, or some other human rights crisis. But unless you’re aware of some metaphysical knowledge I’m not privy to, methinks you’re painting too wide a brush in this specific case. (Hate the sinner, not the sin…oh wait, is that how it goes?)
Can you provide a cite for the wrongs she purportedly committed, or a statement from anyone claiming that was her motive?
How utterly disappointing.