Delusions in a Godless Universe

Here are some assumptions, for an Atheistic naturalism world view:

• Life & the universe happened spontaneously, with no intelligent purpose or design.
• There is no God..no spaghetti monster, or sky fairies. The universe was not a plan of some Higher Power.
• Life is a cosmic accident. It just 'happened' one time, for no reason, & with no deeper purpose.
• Morality is a human construct. There is nobody there, to make it Absolute. Natural Law is a fantasy.
• 'Meaning' is a meaningless concept, in the naturalistic world view. You live. You die. There is no 'meaning'. Any declared or presumed 'meaning' is an individual construct, with no objective basis.
• Terms like 'Hope, Purpose, Heaven, Hell, Morality, Destiny, etc', are empty platitudes. Those can only have a basis in a theistic belief system. Atheism has no use for these terms, other than for sappy sentimentalism.

If life is ONLY a brief interlude between birth & death, with no eternal significance, what possible 'meaning' can be ascribed to it? That is an irrational conclusion, based on nothing. 'Hope, Meaning, Destiny' are theistic concepts requiring a Higher Power, who makes moral judgments about the lives of human beings. Atheism has no such concepts. You have life, death, & no possible purpose for any of it.

I do not understand why this is so hard for some atheists to accept. That is the rational conclusion of this belief system. To try to compete with a theistic worldview, & pretend, 'We have hope, too! We believe in Morality! We have deep meaning & purpose for our lives!' are just empty platitudes..

 

False. Each item in you list is a premise. No rational argument has been offered for them. They are assertions.

 

More to the point in the present context, it's also an essential element in the survival of despotic regimes.

Never happened to the y-man, and you bloody well know it.

 

Here are some conclusions, i have heard on this forum.. repeatedly.. from the assumption of a godless universe:

Believers in God are deluded, superstitious. Sky fairies! Flying Spaghetti Monster! Weak minded people who can't face hard reality. Easily deluded. Self deceived. Ignorant. Hate science! See everything through 'religious!' Indoctrination. Attack Atheists! Cause all wars! Christians want to force their beliefs on everyone!
..I'm sure there are more.

So, under the assumption of a godless universe, these would be plausible explanations, for the deluded thinking of people who believe such fantasies.

AND, if indeed this is a godless universe, one would expect there to be remnants of delusion, even among those who have become enlightened to Reality.. that is, a godless universe.

THEREFORE, believers in other delusive concepts, like morality, meaning, significance, Natural Law, etc, are merely reflecting remnants of the human delusion of a God ordered universe.

The outrage and indignation from those claiming to be living in a godless universe, yet still clinging to abstract, metaphysical concepts, that have no meaning in a purely material universe, are just normal human reactions of dogmatism of belief, defending their irrational religious beliefs with ideological loyalty, not reason.

 

So you keep saying, yet you have offered nothing to back up this premise. You have simply declared it some kind of religious truth, you've ignored the contradictions it creates, and you have offered no line of reasoning to support your premise. It is simply an article of faith. Feel free to cling to it, but if you would like it to enter the realm of reason and debate, you'll have to start actually discussing your assumptions.

You are trying to repackage what I can only refer to as "usfanism" (the religious dogma that there can be no morality, purpose, meaning, etc. in a Godless universe), but repackaging it won't magically make it logical. To make it logically valid, you'd have to show the intervening steps. If A then B (if there is no God then these things are delusions) is just a premise. To make it logically valid, you'd have to show the steps between A and B. As it stands now it is, logically speaking, useless.

 

You can believe whatever you like.. whatever makes you feel better.

But you have no rational basis for, 'Meaning!, Morality!', 'Significance!', 'Love!', 'Beauty!', 'The Soul!', etc. Those are abstract, non-material concepts rooted in supernatural or metaphysical assumptions.

They are remnants of human delusion, in a godless universe. That is the only naturalistic explanation that makes sense.

..probably better for me to continue to pass over your posts.. most of them are pretty snarky and hostile. You seem to blame me for your remnants of delusion...

 

You can do whatever you like. Your assumptions above are based on the same kind of "I haven't seen evidence for it, so it doesn't exist" logic that you've derided elsewhere. People find purpose and meaning and morality and beauty in the natural. They do it every day. No matter how impossible you BELIEVE it to be, reality says it is perfectly possible.

 

Exactly. Delusion is a common human trait.

People also believe in God, gods, and no God.

Everybody gotta believe something. Everyone has to do their own believing and their own dying.

 

You have offered nothing to demonstrate that it is a delusion. Just your faith that it must be so. You are demanding evidence while offering none. It is the exact same form of argument that you've derided as invalid, yet you adopt it here.

 

..sigh..
I am 'demanding!' or 'deriding!' nothing. Your indignation is misplaced. I am extrapolating rational conclusions from the assumption.

What possible source is there for abstract, metaphysical concepts, like, God, the soul, morality, meaning, or significance?

You can assert you 'believe!' in such things, but that does not make them real. And, in a godless universe, they are not real, but delusions.



Merely asserting, 'Is so!' does not make an argument.

 

Rational conclusions would involve a line of reasoning from point A to point B. You simply jump from A to B as an assertion and offer no rationality for your conclusion, except for an argument that you've already identified as invalid.

Your inability to think of one is not proof that it doesn't exist. You are using the exact same argument you've called invalid. It is the same invalid argument you say others have used to "disprove" God, and yet you have adopted it.

So you assert, but you provide no rationality or evidence that leads you to that conclusion.

Then you have not made an argument. All you've done is offer an assertion.

 

I don't see that you've made any argument here at all.

I've never heard of an atheist who would accept your list.

So, what are you trying to accomplish in this thread?

 

Argumentum ad absurdum

So seriously. No atheist would accept any of the conclusions/extrapolations in this list?

You believe, then, as an atheist that there WAS 'intelligent design' for the universe.

You believe there IS a God, sky fairy, or flying spaghetti Monster.

You believe there WAS a cosmic reason for the universe, and it was not a random accident..

The absurd replies from the irrational atheists here make me think reason really is dead, in Progresso World..



At least the old time existentialist philosophers had reason...

 

That's not a valid argument.

You may be able to pick something out of your list that sounds like something someone else WOULD agree on.

But, that doesn't save you. Your list is still garbage, because you do NOT have agreement on you statements concerning what other people believe.

And, until you make an honest attempt to understand the beliefs of people you want to draw as cartoons, you're list won't be any better.

 

No rebuttal of my points, but deflection with ad hominem.

Par for the course..

"Your indignation is misplaced. I am extrapolating rational conclusions from the assumption.

What possible source is there for abstract, metaphysical concepts, like, God, the soul, morality, meaning, or significance?

You can assert you 'believe!' in such things, but that does not make them real. And, in a godless universe, they are not real, but delusions.



Merely asserting, 'Is so!' does not make an argument."

 

You missed the point entirely.

You tried to position atheists by proposing a list of beliefs that AREN'T ACTUALLY HELD by any atheist I've ever known.

I'm not saying "is so".

I'm saying that your misunderstanding is evident in your list of false assumptions.

 

Amazing. No logical response, just ad hom.

"Your indignation is misplaced. I am extrapolating rational conclusions from the assumption.

What possible source is there for abstract, metaphysical concepts, like, God, the soul, morality, meaning, or significance?

You can assert you 'believe!' in such things, but that does not make them real. And, in a godless universe, they are not real, but delusions.



Merely asserting, 'Is so!' does not make an argument."

 

That's what we've been telling you about your OP this entire time.

 

Rather than just insult why don’t you give some intellectual logical arguments

 

I wouldn't call them delusions, only incorrect beliefs. A lot of people see the complexity in the universe and assume design, even when science has a lot of naturalistic explanations for them. We are also disposed to see design and purpose in things that happen. We find that nations and people who are less educated and technologically advanced are more religious. Most developed nations have very large non-religious populations and some even have a majority who don't believe in God, and the number of developed nations like this are rising.

 

I really wish someone would get usfan a dictionary for his birthday, and highlight the word ad hominem so he stops getting it wrong in every other post.

 

Supernatural/paranormal anomalies do exist, but they are not necessarily concomitant with the existence of a Creator/God. Destroying the assertion of a naturalistic assumption is not all that impressive, since the latter is limited to a rather confined mindset.

Mostly only if under the spell of scriptural propaganda. I can conceive of God being an absentee landlord, the programmer who is invisible and undetectable to the program, evident only from the fabulous works of design that surround us and the presumable scope extendable beyond ongoing processes.

Black and white, no grey in between. Your machinations appear to conform to imbedded indoctrination. When commitment to a prescribed source of belief becomes wholesale, the rigidity becomes subconscious. I suspect that you are following what I consider a mindset that is at least partially a product of religious brainwashing. I apologize for such a caustic appraisal, especially if it is not fitting in your case.

 

Progressive Indoctrinees..

No reason, just fallacies. No logical rebuttals, just personal jabs.

It does confirm the theory that Reason is dying, in Progresso World ..

Not much more to do here.. just bicker with irrational indoctrinees, who can't reason.. my points are made, and ignored. I don't know why I bother.

..maybe its time for me to abandon reason, with everyone else. I can just watch sitcoms, and listen to soul numbing music all day, and bombard my senses with constant lies and propaganda. Then i can fall in line and find acceptance and approval, from all the progressive bobbleheads.

..too bad I'm not willing to sell my soul for the approval of indoctrinees...

 

Yet you manage to try to re-enforce and try to enforce your beliefs even when claiming that this is not what your doing. Classic theology Nazi.

As for you being, as YOU claim, a philosopher, try again. You are nothing but a mouthpiece for your own narrow views.

 

Are you speaking of the truth that you just wrote?