being sane is over-rated
In my last post, I pondered the evidence for and against the existence of any of the many gods that humans have believed in down through the ages. In the discussion that followed, I suggested that people who hear the voices of gods could submit their evidence to a YouTube channel, so that the general public could evaluate which gods are likely to be true, and which gods are likely to be delusions.
My best Christian blogging buddy, Insanitybytes, didn’t like the idea of giving her evidence via video, but she was kind enough to provide in written text her rather poetic proof (or should that be delusional evidence?) for the existence of her god, the Christian god God:
God speaks to me, Violet. He speaks to me with the lyrics of love songs gently whispered in my ear. He paints me the most beautiful sunrises, pinks and oranges that dance off the water. Sometimes he bathes me in soft and liquid moonlight. He sings to me with the breeze in the trees and the softly falling rain.
Sometimes I can see Him knocking at the door of people’s lives and His footprint on those who have healed from great atrocities. God is an artist, like a potter and we are the clay. In Japan there’s an art form called Kintsugi, where pottery is broken and fused back together with gold, spider webbing all over the piece, always creating something far more beautiful then the original. God is like a Kintsugi artist, often breaking our hearts so they can be transformed into something even more beautiful.
God is like a love story, the most beautiful love story ever and we are the object of His affection. He speaks to me constantly, in bits of scripture, in His Still Quiet Voice, in the mystery and magic and wonder of the universe. A few times He has spoken to me in ways you would probably dismiss as non-supernatural psychological phenomenon.
If this is what it means to be delusional, then fear not. This is about being wonderfully and fearfully made, about being gloriously in love with all of creation and our Creator, and being completely bedazzled with the wonder of it all. God speaks to me in the synchronicity, in the music, the math, the interconnectedness of us all. Ah Violet, if this is insanity, being sane is highly over rated.
Says it all, really.
All sounds very romantic, doesn’t it?
LikeLike
I was waiting for the lobster dinner….
LikeLike
A little candlelight and wine?
LikeLike
Of course, and some Barry White….
LikeLike
Makes me nostalgic for the good old days when I used to believe it. And the good old days when I thought I was probably endowed with superhero magic powers like the ones described in my favourite fantasy books. Makes me nostalgic for the good old days when I’d believe in anything outside this reality. In a weird way, because it’s a relief life makes sense now.
LikeLike
We relate to God (or not, as the case may be) on all levels of our personality: reason, emotion, will and actions. Insanitybytes’ piece is about the emotional side of religious experience – OK, it’s inevitably rather subjective, but nevertheless it’s an important aspect of the whole.
Being of a more rational, logical personality type, I would find it really difficult to describe my relationship with God in such ‘romantic’ terms. There are times when God has spoken to me directly (like words coming into my head) and told me to do things: ‘Be baptised’ ‘Phone that person now’ for example. I find it easier to talk about this kind of thing because they are more ‘concrete’ – and the ‘proof’ that they are from God is in the good outcome of following His instructions.
LikeLike
Thanks for your comment Deborah. How do you think you would interpret those instructions if you’d been born in India or China, or some other country where Christianity is not the default religion? Hearing voices, feeling the feelings that Insanity describes, are universal experiences. Why would one god ‘plant’ these in humans but only give a tiny proportion of humanity access to a ‘true’ message? It’s a highly illogical approach to interpretation.
LikeLike
Hello Violet
Actually, Christianity is not my ‘default religion’ – I was brought up as an atheist. I first ‘met’ God in this way while casually reading the Bible, and I find the God that I know in the Bible, so the one confirms the other. The inner voice experience has been relatively rare for me in the 40 years since I became a Christian, so please don’t assume that it is normative.
There are of course many millions of Christians in India and China. God is able to make Himself known to anyone, but usually does so through the agency of Christians. The ‘inner voice’, on its own, could come from anywhere (or be generated by our own subconscious); it has to have a context in order to be recognised for what it is.
LikeLike
Oh well, that’s given me some interesting text for a future post. You may not personally have been brought up in a Christian household, but I get the impression the default religion, the most easily accessible caricature of a god, is that of the Christian religion. Why else would you have your hands on a Bible in the first place? Regardless, I’m talking about the millions of people, nay billions, who have lived throughout history and still live today without the slightest access to anything related to the Christian message. I’m talking about how most people in most cultures blindly continue in the default belief system of their culture, sure it’s the ‘true’ one.
LikeLike
“the most easily accessible caricature of a god, is that of the Christian religion.”
Interesting comment. Because ‘the most easily accessible caricature of a god’ that I grew up with (mainly through school RE lessons, which is also where my Bible came from) is of an old man with a white beard sitting up on a cloud in the sky and maybe going ‘tut-tut’ at what human beings might be getting up to, but never actually doing anything. And ‘caricature’ is a very good description of that picture, because it is a distortion. When I met the REAL God, the whole thing was blown away from my mind. I had to rebuild my whole concept of God over again, from scratch.
LikeLike
Why is it I imagine I hear the song, “What If God Were One Of Us?” being sung softly in the background –?
LikeLike
So, Deborah, no “Cluck like a chicken!” I take it, or anything like that? What kind of god has no sense of humor?
LikeLike
“In a weird way, because it’s a relief life makes sense now.”
It didn’t make sense before?
LikeLike
Have you ever asked Insanity if she’d kill someone if the voice in her head told her to?
I’d like to hear the answer.
LikeLike
I expect she’d say the god God would never ask her to do that. I’m sure she balances the voices with her discretionary evolved sense of morality (like all believers, subject to their society).
LikeLike
But, but, but her god God has ordered people to kill, lots of people, and they have obeyed. Would she? Please ask her. She doesn’t like me after proving Jesus didn’t know basic regional history, and never said anything new or useful. That one really struck a nerve…
LikeLike
Like I said, our sense of morality is evolved and is subject to where we are in history and geographically. That tempers what the voices say for all but the most insane. But just to make you happy, I’ll pop over and ask her. (She’s a busy blogger these days, doesn’t always engage.)
LikeLike
You’re a gem
LikeLike
Just in case you’re not refresh lurking, she’s answered your question:
LikeLike
I know, but as I told her, I’m not interested in diving into another post of hers, or even reading it, and duly requested her to answer the question where it was asked. She refused.
LikeLike
Did you? I missed that. My mistake then because I posted the question over there. I’m sure you can click on the link to the comment where she answers your question – you’re not one of those petty Aussies are you? 😉
LikeLike
Not the new question, the old question, which she says she wrote a post on. That was after dodging an answer for dozens of rounds.
LikeLike
I like Insanity, and this is not intended to demean her, but much of the phenomena she mentioned, whispering leaves, moonlight baths, are purely natural phenomena, capable, obviously, of being subjectively interpreted as something other than that. It is an evolved human survival technique to assign agency where there is none – better to think there’s a sabertooth in the brush and there not be one, than to think there isn’t, and provide its main course.
“God is like a Kintsugi artist, often breaking our hearts so they can be transformed into something even more beautiful.”
That’s a lovely thought, and as you say, very poetic (it would not surprise me to learn that Insanity actually DOES write poetry, and good poetry at that), but based on the assumption that the biblical god is real, scripture indicates that when the Jewish people strayed away from him – breaking his heart, essentially – he didn’t seem to view it as Kintsugi, rather he had Judea overrun by Babylonians, thousands killed, the temple razed, and more thousands carried off in captivity to Babylon, all because we were trying to transform him into something more beautiful – where’s the love?
I can’t help wondering if this child feels himself “bathed in moonlight,” or being broken so that he can be “transformed into something even more beautiful“?
LikeLike
Maybe she’ll pop over to address that point. But I expect she’ll ignore it because it’s just a little uncomfortable.
I hope you’re following her, she does some cracking posts and most days. Saying that, her last one was so awful it was too much for my diminished energy reserves – a three-pronged attack on homosexual marriage, abortion and birth control, allegedly with no bias from her cultural religious norms. Victoria will vomit if she sees it …
LikeLike
Thanks for the link, Violet, but I think I’ll pass – I’m already involved with enough blogs to keep me from getting any honest work done, and after all, that was my goal. I’ll probably run across her on Knowledge Guild.
LikeLike
Never mind Victoria vomiting, I just chucked up the whole Mediterranean.
LikeLike
Glad I could share the feeling. 🙂
LikeLike
It does. I don’t think most aspects of religious thought are inherently destructive. The notion that calling something a “non-supernatural psychological phenomenon” is dismissive, is. The way I feel about my kids is a non-supernatural psychological phenomenon. It doesn’t need to transcend anything to command my complete devotion.
LikeLike
Although we are slaves to it, do you not interpret it in a purely physical manner though? We just need to look at the devotion that almost every species shows to its offspring to understand that without it, humans could never have survived. We have so many instincts that we just follow, but we need to recognise where they come from and not sprinkle magic dust on them.
LikeLike
Ah, but a Christian would say that those instincts are put there by God; that God is why we have them. Magic dust and all.
LikeLike
Dammit, maybe they’re right after all …
LikeLike
I don’t think we are slaves to it; it is us. Such a ‘non-supernatural phenomenon’ therefore has an immediacy which theory wasn’t meant to represent. There’s the mistake, I think: taking our representations of the world as having a universal perspective (a religious habit).
It is physical, through and through. The idea that saying it’s physical drives a wedge between ‘us’ and ‘it’ is mistaken and what I see as the one real harm in religious thought.
LikeLike
I think I see what you mean. Yes, these instincts are intrinsically us, but so is logically analysing situations, and coming to the conclusion that acting on any given may not be in our best interests (even if they served us evolutionarily). So, loving and looking after our offspring served us in terms of the continuation of the species, but it also does so logically – can be one of the most fulfilling aspects of life, minimises suffering etc. But hitting annoying people over the head with a hammer can also be an instinct that comes from keeping us alive, having sex with random attractive strangers also comes from an instinct that served the species – yet we most often choose not the follow those instincts because logically they usually don’t serve our best interests in the long term. So Christians classify the ‘good’ instincts as given by the god God and the ‘bad’ ones as coming from an evil fairy – even stooping to take their classification framework from an alien and ancient society. It’s moronic. (Sorry if I’ve gone off on a wayward tangent there, your comments still confuse me a bit, although thankfully I can just about deal with your vocabulary at the moment …)
LikeLike
“God is like a love story, the most beautiful love story ever and we are the object of His affection.”
Wow, a perfect post/example that serves to confirm the neurological studies of attachment, e.g. romantic and maternal love.
God belief will do the same thing to the brain. No neurochemical reward for InsanityB, no god belief. It’s that simple.
The comprehensive study shows fMRI scans of deactivated regions in the brain associated with romantic love (maternal, too).
Yeah, I know I sound like a broken record regarding these studies, but I share them to make a point that people who are in love with their god of choice tend to be blinded to, or justify the inhumanity of their god. Violet, that was a powerful closing to your post with that image and comment.
LikeLike
Now you’ve taught him to post images, there’ll be no holding him…
LikeLike
“there’ll be no holding him…” – not so, in fact I’m looking for volunteers.
LikeLike
LOL
LikeLike
😀
LikeLike
Yeah, I got tired of hearing his ranting.
fixingtheeconomists.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/ranting-man.jpg
LikeLike
“Yeah, I got tired of hearing his ranting.”
Ladies, I’m crushed, devastated. I may actually cry.
Naaaaaahhh!
LikeLike
Better watch it — I’ll pull out the clippers and ground you.
LikeLike
Well, let’s try this again, lol
LikeLike
LikeLike
“Violet, that was a powerful closing to your post with that image and comment.”
Dammit, maybe I’ll edit the post and the comment so I can take the credit. 😉
LikeLike
You post was awesome! I had a huge grin on my face. 😀
LikeLike
“God belief will do the same thing to the brain. No neurochemical reward for InsanityB, no god belief.”
This is kind of interesting because much like falling in love, the first few decades of my faith were rewarded with nothing but bad romance and a broken heart. So much for those oxytocin bliss hits they promise you.
So how about those men who lay down their lives for another? Oxytocin addiction? Maternal instinct?
Also, isn’t it awesome how women’s behavior can always be explained away hormonally, while men never need to have their behavior explained at all?
LikeLike
“Also, isn’t it awesome how women’s behavior can always be explained away hormonally, while men never need to have their behavior explained at all?”
What do you mean IB? Men get the same hormonal buzz. But if you think that suffering isn’t rewarding, the research shows otherwise. So did your actions.
Did you not experience a lot of pain when you gave birth? Did you not experience a lot of discomfort while pregnant. Yet, what did you do? You spread your legs and got knocked up again. Right?
LikeLike
“Did you not experience a lot of pain when you gave birth? Did you not experience a lot of discomfort while pregnant. Yet, what did you do? You spread your legs and got knocked up again. Right?”
Oh I might make a post out of this – it’s just hits every nerve …
LikeLike
Violet, my point was that nature has to deceive us in order to keep our species going. You might get medical treatment when you have a baby, but for most of human history, childbirth was the number # 1 cause of death and injury for women. Even today, a woman dies every 90 seconds from pregnancy and childbirth complications. And for every woman who dies, 20 more get infections and injury.
LikeLike
Oh I know. Your comment is too funny for me at the moment – still deceived in spite of recognising all that …
LikeLike
(and I have to say it’s not the oxytocin that brought me back …)
LikeLike
“What do you mean IB? Men get the same hormonal buzz.”
You cite a study performed exclusively on women? Like hello, how come we only study women’s hormones, as if women’s hormones tell the whole story about human behavior? I suppose we have no need to ever study the hormonal reasons for male behavior since male behavior is always presumed to be rational and in no need of study?
To dismiss this you try to allege, “Men get the same hormonal buzz.” On what planet do men and women share the same hormonal soup, get buzzed off the same oxytocin?
LikeLike
InsanityB — were you aware that men can bond to women and children, too? That they can be romantic and when they orgasm, it parallelsto a heroin rush? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14534252
Yes, men and women do have the same hormonal soup. We are from planet Earth, not Mars and Venus.
When it comes to belief in god, neuropharmacological studies show dopaminergic activation is the leading neurochemical feature associated with religious activity. But too much of a good thing, such as too much dopamine, can lead to hearing voices you think are from god.
‘
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16439158
LikeLike
“The comprehensive study”
Your “comprehensive” study excluded half the human race, you know, any of the people from Mars.
“That they can be romantic and when they orgasm, it parallels to a heroin rush?”
So what? I asked if oxytocin addiction and maternal love explained why a man would lay down his life for another? Oh, that’s right, your study says nothing about male behavior since there were no men in the study.
LikeLike
InsantityB, men’s brains have been studied, too. The abstract mentioned the study of romantic love which included both men and women. Read or watch lectures from some of Helen Fisher’s studies about this subject. Men can be just as irrational (and blinded) when it comes to “love” as women. Like a god belief, there is a term called “intrusive thinking” where a lover will think constantly about the one they are in love with.
Click to access 15npolve.pdf
Incidentally, this is why deconversion from a god belief can be very difficult and excruciating. Those who were truly devoted to their god literally go through dopamine withdrawal. Deconversion is not for the faint of heart, which is why so few go through with it.
LikeLike
“Oh, that’s right, your study says nothing about male behavior since there were no men in the study.”
Kathy?
LikeLike
LikeLike
InsantiyB
http://www.pnas.org/content/103/42/15623.full”
http://www.economist.com/node/8023307
So, you can say that it’s god. I say its neurochemcials. People are altruistic with or without the believe in god. They are not, however, without neurochemcial rewards.
So, the next time you do something nice to another, thank your neurotransmitters and your hunger and thirst for reward.
LikeLike
Quite helpful, thank you. 🙂
LikeLike
Hi Insanitybytes, I also believe in God and I think I understand your what you are describing in this blog post. Let me mention a few ideas that might help. The specific criticism you are responding to has a major flaw. Suppose that belief in God is a drug like heroin for the sake of argument. We would have to hold belief BEFORE we got the euphoria. So, euphoria cannot be the initial cause of belief. If you are anything like me, you initially believed in a Creator, I mean really believed, because of a rational judgment by looking at the wonders of nature and thinking about existence.
Second, suppose that your longing for the perfect and holy helps you maintain (but not initiate) belief. We believe that this is not an accident, but God placed this longing within us. Regardless of neurobiology, psychology, evolution or however the mechanism of the longing being there, the Creator placed it there through some mechanism. So, “explaining it away” mechanistically is useless without first proving that atheism is true.
Hope this helps a bit.
-Brandon
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Regardless of neurobiology, psychology, evolution or however the mechanism of the longing being there, the Creator placed it there through some mechanism. So, ‘explaining it away’ mechanistically is useless without first proving that atheism is true.”
While I’ve heard you spout some pretty inane nonsense before Brandon, this, even for you, is a new extreme.
“So, euphoria cannot be the initial cause of belief.” – could indoctrination by the two most godlike humans in a child’s life have anything to do with that initial cause? I wonder if pleasing Mom and Dad might release some positive endorphins? Maybe we should ask Neuro.
LikeLike
Arch, you should know by now that these thoughts are pretty central to my stance and certainly not new. And, yes indoctrination can be a cause of belief. Then again you have to wonder where all the atheists come from. Are they also being indoctrinated by their parents or culture? And, do atheists also get euphoric about finding the “truth” about religion and so on? I mean some of the criticism is bidirectional, but I am aware of and understand the Critical Theory of Religion and the sociology of religious conversion and so on. From Augustine to Planginta philosophers have given an airtight logical response that I have never seen much engagement of.
LikeLike
Augustine? Sigh. He also thought having an erection was a sin because it happened without his control, therefore the best way to control this was to control women.
He also believed that the serpent approached Eve because she was less rational and lacked self-control, while Adam’s choice to eat was viewed as an act of kindness so that Eve would not be left alone. Augustine believed sin entered the world because man (the spirit) did not exercise control over woman (the flesh). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo
Brandon, most atheists in the West were/are surrounded and influenced by Christian indoctrination. Many of us were once devout. With much searching, we used the newest part of our brain, the frontal lobes, not our primitive, impulsive, emotional limbic system to come to this decision. To believe in and intensively love your god, neural circuity to the frontal lobes must be deactivated first. You made a comment “belief before euphoria.”
Well please explain to me how I had one of the most euphoric (mindgasm) experiences of my life but did not assume it came from your sky daddy? Had I been a devout Christian at the time, no doubt I would have assumed it did. This experience happened when all the conditions were right in my environment. These euphoric experiences can also be duplicated via years of meditation and in a lab setting using complex magnetic waveforms. Rather than just assume this was a god experience (limbic system) I used my frontal lobes and researched how this could happen.
Unlike my experience, you had visions which apparently is why you relate so much to and defend the other gospel — the gospel according to Paul. Also, in order for you to call yourself a Christian, you’ve had to twist and contort the Christian religion for it to fit your version of the Christian god. You are not alone. It’s been done for eons by people just like you.
Btw, Augustine most likely had a neurological disorder. Temporal lobe epilepsy.
Epilepsy and Mysticism
Click to access Epilepsy_and_Mysticism.pdf
Have you ever asked yourself why you tend to relate and resonate with people in the past who had symptoms of TLE?
LikeLike
Victoria, I wouldn’t say all of Augustine’s ideas were good!! And, sure you can absolutely have mindgasms and not interpret this as from the supernatural. You can even artificially induce this with drugs and maybe magnets, and even certain conditions like TLE enhance the experience. I don’t disagree with any of this. The thing that I’ve always tried to say is that it doesn’t mean that there is not a legitimate reason for this neurobiology being there, as in a Creator placed it intentionally.
Sorry this is an abbreviated response because i’m at work with limited time ATM.
LikeLike
I thought about the apostle Paul, and Augustine,and your experience when you had a vision, much like Paul, as well as others in the past and present who were/are so sure their “experiences” were from god. There is a manifestation called Forced Thinking. From the article I linked previously, it states:
So, when Paul had this vision of Jesus’ resurrection, and you did too, it seems logical to me to assume that this was more likely the cause of your experience than a god trying to manifest a message to you. But childhood indoctrination set the stage for the type of vision you had.
LikeLike
The study further states:
LikeLike
I can’t speak for Paul because we don’t know what happened to him, but I wouldn’t call what happened to me a vision. When I reconverted there was nothing particularly special about it. I have different ways of describing the transition: I saw something that looked true, then I believed. It was like making a rational judgment about any other mundane issue. Then, maybe a year later I had a lucid dream. I woke up sweating and sat up and could remember the entire sequence. It wasn’t a visionary experience, it was just a dream. Of course, I can’t prove it was of divine origin, but I can say it did not fit anything like a visionary experience or Forced Thinking and had nothing to do with drugs or TLE.
LikeLike
“…you have to wonder where all the atheists come from. Are they also being indoctrinated by their parents or culture?”
I don’t have to wonder at all Brandon, as children are born without a belief in anything – atheism being the default state of all animals (and most likely plants as well) – and are blank slates, to be written on by the god-like creatures that nourish and care for them and tell them their own version of the world they were born into.
Naturally, I can’t speak for all atheists, only myself and those who have related their stories to me, and of those, I can recall only two – a very small percentage – who were raised in a non-religious background, and none who were actually raised by other atheists, so for those and myself, I would have to say no, they arrived at their conclusions not only independent of familial indoctrination, but in the majority of cases, struggled long and hard to escape it.
LikeLike
Well Arch, technically speaking the tabula rasa theory isn’t held anymore by developmental psychologists. We are primed for certain beliefs. Infants progress from solipsism to more complex epistemologies and are primed to hold religious belief. That doesn’t mean it’s true or false though. From the standpoint of a rational debate though, the default state is undecided or agnosticism and both sides have a burden of proof.
And, I agree with you that families struggle to come to their worldview and it’s not an easy process. But, they also borrow from a preexisting culture of disbelief. That’s OK though, it’s not an insult. I’m just saying that cultural influence occurs for both believers and nonbelievers, and I think this is a modest statement.
LikeLike
“We are primed for certain beliefs. Infants progress from solipsism to more complex epistemologies and are primed to hold religious belief.”
I’m afraid I would have to see some VERY solid evidence for that, which would need to include an age breakdown. Solipsism is nothing more than a MEgocentric outlook, clearly a survival trait. I said babies were born with blank slates, what infants of other ages do or don’t do, can be influenced by their environment.
LikeLike
I’m not sure what the evidence for infant solipsism is, but it appears to be commonly held by developmental psychologists. If you want a good arguments against tabula rasa check out The Blank Slate by Steven Pinker. Pinker might have some lectures on this book on YouTube also.
LikeLike
Norenzayan and Gervais wrote an interesting article on The Origins of Religious Disbelief in which they hypothesize 4 different reasons disbelief may arise using an Evolutionary psychology explanation of religion and various studies as jumping off point.
LikeLike
Thanks for the reference, I’ll check it out tonight.
LikeLike
Consoledreader, I must say I enjoyed the paper. Also, I would bet there is sociological studies of atheism especially in post-Christian cultures supporting that the lack-of-belief is at least partly socially constructed. Although, I think the psychological explanations are extremely important as well.
LikeLike
Glad you liked the paper. Reason 3 InCREDulous atheists, as described in the paper, would suggest it is more a lack of cultural input that leads to more disbelief, especially in highly secular cultures.
LikeLike
I found this, from the article you suggested Consoled, to be particularly interesting:
Not only does it confirm what Neuronotes has been saying about the economically depressed areas of the US being the more religiously biased, but if ‘apatheism,’ as stated above, arises from conditions of existential security, then the converse must also be true – a tendency toward religiosity arises from conditions of existential insecurity.
LikeLike
Arch, to further highlight your point, more from the paper:
The exact same thing can be said about the U.S. The least religious states are considered the best states to live in for well being and security. In fact, the South (Bible Belt) is the worst region of the country to live in according to data from a new report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/10/07/why-the-south-is-the-worst-place-to-live-in-the-u-s-in-10-charts/
LikeLike
I agree with your point but wouldn’t discount cultural input in certain situations as well. Some possible cultural input could be having friends who are atheists or secular humanists. Especially if you were raised with a negative stereotype of atheists, this would make deconversion easier. Or, getting involved in atheist communities in certain cultures may also be a display of credibility. Imagine you and your best friend are highly involved in a Christian group and your best friend withdraws and gets involved with an atheist community. Or another situation is politics. Some US political strategists would say openly identifying as atheist is political suicide. So, it takes courage and sacrifice for some people to be intellectually honest, and this could be a sort of display of credibility in certain settings.
But, you’re right, the lack of CREDs is probably especially important in highly secular societies.
LikeLike
So, it takes courage and sacrifice for some people to be intellectually honest,…
So where does that leave you, Brandon?
LikeLike
Good question, Ark. In my social circles it’s not a big deal to be either way. At work, religion is a private matter and outside of work, it’s usually treated as a social datum like politics. It’s a compartmentalized life.
I also never really sacrificed much as a nonbeliever, but I knew plenty who did like a preacher’s daughter that actually did give nonbelief credibility to my eyes.
LikeLike
In other words your’re nothing but a hypocrite and a petty intellectual fraud. Pretty much like all the religious when push comes to shove.
Sounds about right.
LikeLike
So uncalled for Ark. I can’t imagine where your petty venom comes from, but it’s certainly odd behaviour to try and set people up for your scarcely relevant insults.
LikeLike
Hey … he sets himself up for it Dear Vi.
Let him step up to the plate and be counted. Let’s see some evidence for this so-called god belief that he so devoutly espouses.Let him be the first sincere , and more (importantly ) honest Christian to stop farking about and mincing words and deliver on what he backs.
Then I will offer a sincere apology. On THAT you have my word.
LikeLike
“like a preacher’s daughter that actually did give nonbelief credibility to my eyes like a preacher’s daughter that actually did give nonbelief credibility to my eyes”
Preacher’s daughters can do that to you, missionaries daughters too – all those years of pent up libido, then suddenly, it’s Katy bar the door. I could tell you stories, but this site is rated PG.
LikeLike
To some extent this would be true. After all, participating in multiple atheist blogs is itself a cultural input. Any sort of discourse is technically culture.
LikeLike
No some atheists are not indoctrinated. They have a brain and recklessly use it.
Atheists don’t get euphoric about finding the truth. There is nothing to find.
I hope that helps 🙂
LikeLike
Thanks Brandon, much appreciated.
LikeLike
That’s interesting you believe that a god put a longing for a god in all humans. Why did he do that when no explanation for the ‘real’ god (from your point of view) existed for most the existence of humanity, and although access to the Christian message increases with modern communication, even now isn’t accessible to the entire living human population? That would be massively illogical, not to mention insanely cruel. Christians are so smugy insular accepting that it makes sense of them in their (usually) predominantly Christian country to have reached the real god.
LikeLike
Violet, I can’t answer why God would do this exactly, but I can say that humans invented religion to fulfill this desire. It’s really a general desire for the sacred, for justice, for redemption and atonement, and so on. Also, I don’t think this is cruel because I don’t think other religions are necessarily any different psychologically than Christians. In Buddhism you might long for nirvana and work to achieve this goal and be psychologically fulfilled on this journey. From my point of view what makes belief in God different is he is the rightful object of our desire and worship, everything else is just filler. This is because God is real and nirvana is not. But, that’s my POV.
LikeLike
“…I can say that humans invented religion to fulfill this desire. It’s really a general desire for the sacred, for justice, for redemption and atonement, and so on.”
It may not surprise you Brandon that I disagree – those qualities, the sacred, justice, redemption and atonement – were similarly invented. I see human invention of religion as a way of explaining the natural world, for which, at that stage of their accumulation of scientific knowledge, they had no ready explanation.
LikeLike
Arch, I think it’s unjustified to suggest that ALL religious belief was invented to explain natural phenomenon. NDT’s quote pretty much goes against the God-of-the-gaps and that’s it. That’s fine, I’m all for it.
And, I think anthropologists would disagree with you about humans inventing the concepts of the sacred, justice, atonement. They seem to be universal even if they are expressed differently.
LikeLike
“I think it’s unjustified to suggest that ALL religious belief was invented to explain natural phenomenon.” – For some reason, I’m not shocked by that admission. I can’t begin to tell you how often I’ve found myself wondering what you think – I really can’t!
“I think anthropologists would disagree with you about humans inventing the concepts of the sacred, justice, atonement. They seem to be universal even if they are expressed differently.”
Would they? Which ones, and what are their arguments? I find language to be universal as well, are you saying that language is not invented?
LikeLike
On inventing ideas, I should clarify that I do think religious ideas were invented just like language. But, I think both religious ideas and language are constrained by reality. Not just anything will fly. There are linguistic universals and similarly something about the human condition which primes us for religious belief. Critical Theory talks about a desire for “other” whether it be justice or afterlife or something. EP talks about how we are primed for religious belief. Then, you can make an anthropological argument that since many cultures independently developed very similar religious ideas, that there is something about these ideas that are naturally attractive. The idea that you can control the weather somehow is attractive. The idea of gods and creator deities and sacred rituals, etc.
The point here is that these things are not invented out of thin air or written onto a blank slate. They are connected to human experience and psychology or some other feature of reality.
Is this much agreeable? I don’t think I’m saying anything terribly controversial.
LikeLike
Here’s your anthropological argument, Brandon:
LikeLiked by 1 person
This argument is plausible. Probably not the whole story and can’t account for all religious innovations, but plausible for sure.
LikeLike
“But, that’s my POV.” – try not to lose sight of that —
LikeLike
Brandon,
I don’t think this is meant to be a conclusive argument. It just raises the question, how do you know? How do you know that the initial cause of belief, in this case, isn’t just another mistaken attribution of agency? How do you know that the feelings elicited by the belief are different from those elicited by a handful of bad berries?
You might reply that you just know. That’s a somewhat legitimate basis for personal belief, but it seems a dangerous underpinning for a religion. If you disagree with my assessment, why don’t you try proposing open theism to the subject of your advice? Try telling her that the object of her affection isn’t who she thought he was.
Disbelief is met only with contempt, while heresy evokes hatred precisely because the heretic challenges the certainty of religious sentiment, while the non-believer merely challenges the ideas.
LikeLike
Keith, these are good points, actually great points. Critical Theory, evolutionary psychology, etc. may just make it easier to adopt a naturalist worldview by raising these questions. This is much more modest and reasonable than an absolute claim.
Also, I don’t think I would claim to “know” that God exists by most understandings of “know”. I believe God exists and very committed to this. But, I’m far less committed to doctrinal beliefs. When I consider the history of religious innovations, probably the most “connected” to the world is the idea of a Creator, but any further doctrine is much less “connected” so-to-speak. Seeing this is the case, I’m less likely to diagnose heresy or hold to an authoritative set of doctrine that everyone must believe or else. Actually, seeing the way the world actually is with its varieties of culture and beliefs, I think God is less concerned with your doctrine and more concerned with your behavior and conscience. That’s not to say that doctrine is unimportant, it’s something I think believers ought to wrestle with to all ends to understand God; but it need not be a tool for homogenizing or a test to get in the club.
And, I’m not really that sure about open theism anymore! 🙂 But, that aside, me and Insanitybytes may hold radically different doctrine, but we are bound together by Christ alone and our desire to maintain his conscience.
LikeLike
Oops, I just realized that it was Arch who posted the image and powerful statement.
Spot on, Arch.
LikeLike
It’s much easier to feel “bathed in moonlight” when other forms of bathing are also readily accessible, when your hair is free of lice and fleas, you have a soft bed to sleep in and three meals to eat each day.
LikeLike
Sign, so true Arch. Is that so much to ask of a supreme, benevolent, all-knowing god?
LikeLike
Actually one is not privileged or sheltered at all. One gets on with one’s life instead of contemplating imaginative beings. Nor does one speak about it, because, it is utterly boring. Everyone walks in dark places. We find our own way out.
And, I think there is more than a little persecution of homosexual marriages, birth control and abortion for us heathens. Or am I wrong?
LikeLike
No, Kate, you are not wrong. It does not take privilege nor being sheltered to be atheist. People who are so busy that they haven’t the time to contemplate the universe scarcely have the time to bask in such things as being “bathed in moonlight” either.
To say that thinking on the deeper things is the stuff of privilege seems utterly ignorant to me. As if the those in poverty don’t think. Besides being impoverished isn’t the only dark place in this world.
LikeLike
Just discussed it with my partner. Guess an atheist who isn’t a recusant post might happen! Religion, or lack of it, just actually doesn’t enter people’s lives. It was just never there. Totally different experience which is why I should probably write about it. Yawn. Boring old religion.
LikeLike
“It’s much easier to feel “bathed in moonlight” when other forms of bathing are also readily accessible..”
Kind of fascinating, because no, it is not. Something that always strikes me as fascinating is what a privileged position atheists are in. One has to have lived a rather sheltered life to be an atheists, full of free time to contemplate such things, free of the disturbance of having your entire world turned upside down, free of persecution for speaking your non belief.
Often God is easier to see when one has walked in dark places than when one lives in a world so familiar to them, they take everything for granted.
LikeLike
Are you suggesting that atheists haven’t seen dark times? That they haven’t experienced loss, poverty, tragedy, or disaster? That we haven’t had broken hearts?
LikeLike
And are you also suggesting that because we have taken the time to contemplate such things that we are somehow privileged? Because it was important enough to us to investigate it thoroughly instead believing because we had not contemplated it makes us privileged? I don’t think that’s taking anything for granted. Perhaps it is the believer who hasn’t contemplated such things who takes everything for granted.
LikeLike
“And are you also suggesting that because we have taken the time to contemplate such things that we are somehow privileged?”
Yes. Time and the freedom to pursue your interests comes from a very privileged position. If one is busy trying to survive, trying to feed themselves, then one simply does not have the time to pursue such things and therefore is not privileged to do so.
LikeLike
I don’t deny my privilege. However I would like to point out that there are those who are too busy trying to survive to even contemplate God. Or they don’t care to.
Atheism isn’t derived of privilege. That was my point.
LikeLike
“If one is busy trying to survive, trying to feed themselves, then one simply does not have the time to pursue such things and therefore is not privileged to do so.”
Or enjoy moonlight baths.
LikeLike
Exactly.
LikeLike
Sorry, Ruth – I didn’t see you had already said that – unlike our dauntless heroine here, I take my messages as they come into my emails, rather than open them all at once.
LikeLike
No worries, arch. I don’t think that can be overstated.
LikeLike
I agree with IB in this post. All I must ask her is not to expect us to believe the same way she does. If she has seen god or heard his voice, her god has chosen to privilege her and it would be asking too much of the rest of us to believe on her say so.
LikeLike
Well, all her blogging buddies over on her page seemed to believe her. I wonder how they handle it when they receive conflicting messages …
LikeLike
I would hazard a guess that at those times they would follow their whims.
I am only generous with IB in so far as we have no reason to say she didn’t have the experiences she claims to have had. That is the farthest my generosity can go. Those experiences by being individual cannot be treated as evidence for a god.
LikeLike
One is tempted to say live and let live … but then one has to keep reminding oneself that Yahweh also spoke to Noah and George W and in his Islamic guise is currently speaking to some rather extreme Muslims.
And one day ”He” may well speak to someone who has access to a low-yield nuclear weapon. And that person might well be Insanitybites.
One’s choice of blog name may actually reveal more than one cares to acknowledge – humour or otherwise …
All things considered, such Indoctrination as constantly displayed by this woman (and to varying degrees every other religious person) truly is quite disturbing.
LikeLike
John did ask me to ask her what she would do if her god asked her to kill someone, and she replied:
It’s a great question Violet. LOL, however, a better question would be, “so how many people are still alive because I am a Christian?” Trust me Violet, my non Christian self has an extensive list of people who need to be taken out of this world, but keep on breathing simply because God said no. Can’t even hit them. Nope, I simply have to pray that God shows them the same mercy He has shown me.
It’s a frequent concern I hear expressed by atheists, “oh great, this delusional woman thinks God speaks to her. Now what if the imaginary voices in her head tell her to kill somebody?” There’s a couple of principles at work here. First of all, God loves me so He’s not going to ask me to do anything that would collapse my psyche, go against what I believe to be morally right. Second of all, when God speaks to me He always reinforces the message over and over again in a myriad of ways, often using scripture and the perspective of other Christians, until I am not only certain it is God speaking, my brain is comfortable with what He is asking of me. I not only will know why I am being asked to do something, I will be equipped and prepared for it.
The few times God has demanded quick, blind obedience, have been times when the only price to be paid could be a slight loss of pride.
LikeLike
George Bush was ”certain” God was speaking to him and he felt justified going to war. And many people also felt the same.
We aren’t really discussing the mental state of Yahweh here, of course, even though InsanityB might think we are, and as such devout believers run on valves like an old wireless how would she know the difference if the voice in her head said, ”Good evening.This is the Home Service of the BBC..” or Yahweh, whispering, ”My child, this is Jesus. Now listen carefully …”
LikeLike
I think Violet she is pushing it here. If whatever god commands her is right, she would be disobeying a direct order from god if the command was such a one that would collapse her psyche unless she has not thought this through, I don’t see how she is going to get away from such a quagmire.
LikeLike
The only reason she isn’t killing people is because her God is speaking to her? Don’t mess with it, people. Let her keep her God.
LikeLike
It really is the only disturbing conclusion to come to. I’m even more worried she’s not disturbed by it, when I queried if she thought that was normal, she called me judgemental …
LikeLike
Why, then, do Christians kill people? And why do atheists refrain? Does she really believe the only thing holding people back from murder is hearing the voice of God? Or is this a problem specific to her?
LikeLike
Just try not to cross her path, that’s alls I’m saying. 😉
LikeLike
LikeLike
It could have been worse, she could have called you a Liberal!
LikeLike
Pingback: The privileged atheist with time on her hands | roughseasinthemed
I thought I would pop back….
My goodness! After reading Brandon;s discourse with Arch I am convinced he is mentally unbalanced. Truly. He goes beyond dickhead. To now believe that his god placed that little spark in his head as a baby is truly beyond reason of any kind. Where does one go?
One can demonstrate all the science one likes, have Victoria present every piece of evidence on record and someone like Brandon will claim, his god planned it just lime this …. on purpose!
People like him fly planes into buildings…
LikeLike
Gods don’t fly planes into buildings, people with gods fly planes into buildings.
LikeLike
That’s what I said … or meant to say. I am sure you don’t really think Yahweh would be at the helm, do you?
Remember, Arch, the song, Jesus take the wheel is a metaphor.
LikeLike
So there’s no truth to the rumor that he’s entered in Le Mans?
LikeLike
The gods, I hope not!
LikeLike
People like you push people like him into ideological corners so they end up flying planes into buildings. Give him time, he’s a sensible Christians in many respects, just a little stubborn and pre-programmed.
LikeLike
Yeah, Ark! Trying to get yourself banned from yet ANOTHER site? What happens when you run out of sites? Don’t take your rage out on the Koi —
LikeLike
No, he’s a dickhead and then some. Read his answers. They are, by and large, condescending and smug.
LikeLike
Another thoughtful comment from someone who is never condescending and smug in their own personal belief system … thanks Ark 😉
LikeLike
My pleasure, as always.
You can’t let dickheads like Brandon have the run of the hen-house. Before long he will encounter children.
He is not a nice person ….
LikeLike
For Zeus’ sake! You don’t know him. You dislike him because he doesn’t agree with you, and he types words that irritate you. Stop behaving like a silly 8 year old.
LikeLike
10 year old, please.
I dislike him because he is an ignorant arse who believes that since he got god again he is the bees knees.
LikeLike
Yawn. Would-be playground bully. Go look for some base humour videos to validate your nastiness. Come back when the god God tells you what a bad, bad sinner you’ve been (or your natural sense of empathy makes you realise that everyone can get picked on by the louder individual).
LikeLike
lol ….. I really must go and do some work now. T’ra.
LikeLike
But seriously, Mr. Enaten, Neuro used to defend him in much the same way as Vi is doing, when I used to attack him for much the same reasons as you – though admittedly I used words slightly more erudite than composite terms of four-letter words – if it’s any consolation, once she got to know him better, that became a non-issue.
T’ra la
LikeLike
That’s how they suck you in,Arch and before you know what’s happening it’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers or ‘V’ and singing ”Jesus wants me for a sunbeam” all over again.
Eek! I feel decidedly unclean just contemplating them.
I need a large whiskey to clean me up – I shall work form the inside out.
LikeLike
The bees knees? Really?
LikeLike
You prefer Earwig’s Elbows?
LikeLike
Apparently, my stone-faced friend, I have a slightly larger and more refined vocabulary (but then, I’m not a published author) – I’ve always referred to him as a smarmy sycophant. Consequently, I don’t get tossed off websites – unless I’m pushed.
LikeLike
By her own hand Violet said she was ”working class” thus I have to adjust my language to fit my audience.
And Brandon is still a Dickhead, just a smarmy sycophant dickhead.
If I say “Have sex and travel” most people would say. “Huh?”
However, everyone understands “Eff off!” – even Brandon.
ps. btw I too work, thus I must also be working class. Maybe I was drug up differently?
LikeLike
Well, I’m loafing class, so what do I know?
LikeLike
Pingback: god loves everyone* | violetwisp
Pingback: some interesting reading | violetwisp