Underlying Philosophy

So basically you are now falling back on the "God is unknowable" and "There is necessarily an absence of evidence" blah blah routine.Mankind's belief in the "unknowable" is a fact. It is an observed fact that requires explanation. Just like any other observed phenomenon. It is an observed phenomenon that can be evidentially studied just like any other. For you to insist otherwise, for you to insist that your beliefs are immune from any form of investigation or skepticism, is just blatant protectionism of your deeply held convictions. Nothing more. It is expected. Indeed it is predicted by those very scientific disciplines which you assert can say nothing about the validity or nature of your beliefs.The supernatural explanation has been posited for a multitude of observed phenomenon throughout the ages. Never once in the entire history of mankind has the supernatural explanation been borne out. In every single case where the supernatural explanation has gone head to head with the natural explanation there has only ever been one victor.The supernatural hypothesis has been discredited, humiliated and beaten into retreat at every available opportunity. And yet here you are. Once again advocating the supernatural explanation from a position of deep personal conviction and nothing more. Exactly as so many before you have done. In the face of all the evidence from multiple disciplines you stand there and tell us that despite flying in the face of all of the available objective evidence your particular gap demands that the supernatural explanation be given at least equal credence.You are a living example of the fact that "Those Who Ignore History Are Destined To Repeat It".

So how do you explain your own belief in god? Good advice. And the psychological, sociological, anthropological and historical evidence says that the best explanation for your belief in god is - what?

How does this "proof" differ from conviction exactly?
How does this "knowledge" differ from belief exactly? Not really. It is only made difficult by your innate resistance to having your cherished beliefs evidentially questioned. I simply ask you to consider mankind's recorded proclivity to erroneously invoke the unknowable in order to find explanation, meaning, purpose and comfort and to apply it to yourself and your own beliefs.Why do you think the supernatural explanation for your own beliefs will fare any better than any of the other supernatural explanations posited by humanity throughout history?Aside from your deep personal conviction that your god and your beliefs are somehow different of course.

Yes you are. You are saying that your belief in god is explained by the actual existence of a supernatural god rather than any of the empirically evidenced alternative explanations for this behaviour. Oh so you believe in one of those materially detectable gods rather than one of those ethereal supernatural ones then? Only if you apply extreme confirmation bias can you conclude that life is proof of the existence of your god. Firstly awe, wonder and "diversity" can be found in existence and the universe without recourse to invoking god. Don't assume that believers have a monopoly in that area.Secondly - Your feelings of loneliness and the desire to overcome these feelings are exactly the sort of very human needs which evidence suggests humans are prone to finding ways of resolving through conviction at the expense of truth.So remind me again - Why is your belief in god best explained by the actual existence of god rather than any of the other possible explanations?

In this thread alone you have stated that your faith has relieved you of your feelings of loneliness and provided your life with meaning and purpose sufficient to turn you away from previously drunken and violent ways. Your proof for the particular immaterial entity in which you place this life changing faith is simply existence (which could be argued as evidence for pretty much anything). You have repeatedly fallen back on defining the ultimate object of this faith as intrinsically unable to be disproved whenever I challenge your baseless assumption that the cause of these beliefs is the actual existence of an immaterial being rather than just very human psychological needs.You are a walking talking text book example of everything I have been talking about. Psychological need, extreme confirmation bias and the desperate scrabble to immunise ones cherished beliefs from any possibility of direct refutation. Everything you have said has demonstrated the deep personal requirement for utter conviction that what you believe is true regardless of actual truth. How can you not see this?I guess that question answers itself.Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

So Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists etc. etc. would basically agree with you if only they could see the light of Christianity?Confirmation bias run riot?I think so.

Except that all the evidence supports gods as being the products of the minds of men and none of the evidence supports the actual existence of gods. No. All true science points towards the Immaterial Pink Unicorn as the supreme trickster and practical-joke-inspirer-of false gods-for-a-laugh.You have been duped.

Excellent.The next time you personally experience god could you take a photograph or make a voice recording so that we can all be suitably enlightened?

My emotions and thoughts exist only in my own mind. They have no existence independently of, or externally to , my mind. If you are likewise saying that god exists nowhere but in the minds of men I can only agree. How do you prove anything? The next time I take a dump I will look into the bowl afterwards and smile for the camera.Say - "Cheese".

Well if I am going to take the piss out of theists I may as well do it with a smile on my face. Oh dear. The degree of ignorance you demonstrate is incredible. God must love stupid people. He has created so many of them. What are you talking about?How about we put a screwdriver through your head and see how well your thoughts and emotions get on without a functioning brain?

I too am an atheist. Yet I tooam bewildered as to what an "atheist philosophy" is.Can you enlighten me too?

I have a 3 month old son and a 4 year old son.Which gods do they believe in? Are they atheists? Do they have a philosophy?

And if you don't believe the Tooth Fairy exists - Is that also a philosophy?How about Santa? Easter Bunny? Gnomes?So many philosophies....... You must be one hell of a confused philosopher.

The thought processes of a plant and yourself do indeed seem to have more in common than I would have thought possible.But if listening to Meatloaf makes you feel happy all I ask is that you wear headphones. Rocks are alive?
Dead things are alive?
Have you been watching too many zombie films? It is a rather silly theory based on no evidence and a lot of wishful thinking. It is simply your attempt to shoehorn the "divine" into what you believe are gaps in scientific knowledge. I keep telling you that I am not looking for proof because evidence based investigation isn't about proof. You are the one that keeps demanding that everyone else disprove your pet nonsense whilst simultaneously dismissing out of hand a whole host of equally unprovable nonsense that you happen not to believe in.Having said all that I am willing to give the screwdriverinyourhead thing a go.All in the name of science.

I am not confused at all. There are many many things that I do not believe to exist. Yet I don't think I need a philosophy for each one.You apparently think we do need a philosophy for some but not others. Can you explain this or not? And yet it is you who is unable to answer simple questions about what you believe.Go figure.