What's the final solution to the atheist question?

What's the final solution to the atheist question?

Other urls found in this thread:

washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/01/10/conservatives-really-are-better-looking-research-says/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

why would you not be an atheist?
why would you actually believe in god?

That we all become Atheist

>worshiping a dead kike on a stick

Nihilism
It is chemotherapy for secular humanism

answer "ok you've convinced me there is no god"

>why would you not be an atheist?
because materialism is retarded
>why would you actually believe in god?
eternal salvation

nu/pol/ is full of godless atheists

come on man there isn't a man in the clouds. we live for a while and then it's just totally over. religion only serves to unite people in a bunch of good ways but also a bunch of terrible, deadly ways. no reasonable person believes this shit.

This.

which god though?
do you just pick based on where you were born and who everyone around you is worshiping?

seems like some pretty long odds to get it right

Slide thread.

>which god though?
The God that has revealed himself to you
>seems like some pretty long odds to get it right
As opposed to atheism which offers no long term reward

Not giving them platforms to get attention and make everything cool and masculine religious.

let them die out

>As opposed to atheism which offers no long term reward
just picking things based on the potential outcome doesn't make sense if there is no logical reason for it to be true
otherwise I'd just make up my own religion with the best possible benefits

if god revealed himself to you, it sounds like it shouldn't really take faith to believe

>make sense if there is no logical reason for it to be true
then why did you pick materialism?

Make all media not give platforms to atheist workers or celebrities, display intelligent and strong religious people in the media portray atheists as immoral weak degenerate decadent and arbitrary, we must kill the idea of atheism not the people who believe in atheism.

>machine consciousness = create god.

I don't
not believing in god is the default position
I'd rather believe in god desu, but following any major religion isn't something I can understand doing

The moral foundation of atheism must be destroyed and made evil.

>is the default position
What does this have to do with logic?

That part has been decided for you, whatever your parents worship in most cases. Sometimes a small infant will be permanently separated from his parents and in this case whatever his adoptive parents worship or whatever the people at the orphanage worship.

If you would like to change your religion and alter it at some later point in life you can ingest copious amounts of LSD.

Having a belief system which involves a "relation" with a superior been fits perfectly with our biological predisposition.
Ofcourse that isn't proof of God's existence but our brains are healthier this way and don't forget the roll of religion in social control.

>What's the final solution to the atheist question?
To walk all over religious degenerates and teach them discipline. What's the matter religious man? You ain't got happy marriage, you are perverse, you steal money. Times for moral lessons are over. Either stick to your principles or face the future of your extinction.

Moral realism is no joke.

I was saying the reason to believe in god needs to be given, you asked why I picked materialism which I assume you meant as the alternate to religion because you know nothing about me

I agree with this

>ingest copious amounts of LSD.
when I used to take mushrooms in high doses every few months, I was much closer to beliving in god than I am now
its actually very interesting that brain scans have shown tripping on these drugs have similar bloodflow in certain areas as someone having a religious experience

Why doesn't a reason to believe in materialism need to be given?

What is the problem about someone being an atheist?

Winning the atheism game is a good way not to win the set of all possible games. Even if it is true. It isn't true. And that's that.

The real question is who gives a fuck?

You don't hate aethists, you don't hate Christians, you don't hate Muslims

You hate the fuckers who above these ideologies down your throat and are violent or intolerable or annoying

If they never went out of their way to bother you you wouldn't hate anyone of any ideology

Why does religion have to be a public thing that others think they need to share with everyone, why can't it be a private thing to contemplate and believe?

No one gets pissed off at Buddhists for this reason (except china)

Onus probandi.

>ZERO (0) evidence for any type of creator
How can you possibly justify belief/faith?

"materialism" may sound retarded if you don't fully comprehend what is going on. It's foolish to think that there is a possibility of eternal salvation when you have literally no physical evidence of the existence of god besides a bible.

how does a superior being fit in with our biological predisposition? can you elaborate

Jesus

not a logical law

Produce evidence that God exists.

>if you don't fully comprehend what is going on.
So you fully comprehend where the universe, laws of physics and your consciousness comes from

but a legal one nonetheless

I don't know why you would want to genocide 2% of the American population for

This
While I'm here, /r/ing the link to a study correlating atheism (and/or agnosticism?) with depression

I don't think I DO believe in materialism, I don't even know what you mean by that

We are talking about logic not law

Slippery slope argument, safest bet is that they're all fake

Faith and belief dont need to be justified.

religion gives a sense of comfort, purpose, and community with other believers
it does not surprise me that religious people would be much less depressed

still though, doesn't truth matter?

belief in materialism is based on pure faith

no, absolutely not. and that is what excites me about the scientific community. To accept the claim that a superior being is responsible for all of the unknowns in the universe just seems so childish to me. It's like being satisfied with the idea that Santa Clause travels around the world and delivers gifts. You don't bother to ask "why". And science admits that we don't have a fuckin clue about how the universe began. What if it never began? If eternal salvation is a realistic idea then why is it unrealistic to say that the universe never began, and will never end? I'm not claiming to know everything, but accepting god as an answer to these unknown questions just does not satisfy me.

>atheists dindu nuffin

I do hate atheism. Atheism has disasterous effects on the societies it plagues. We see it in the breakdown of our own society, which still has one foot in religion and one foot in the grave. The effect is even more pronounced atheist states like Stalinist Russia and Moaist China, where hundreds of millions died and suffered.

Religious on left, Atheist on right, you decide

Your long term reward is eternal blackness, rotting in the ground there is literally no proof of anything beyond death you believe in fiction

you would think that the basic element of the legal system that the country was founded on would be based on logic. You have to provide proof, how is that illogical

Id attribute that to shitty government and political systems than lack of religion

I'd rather find a way for me to fake it till I make it with religion than be this hypoactively, cripplingly depressed. I'm lucky if I can get out of bed without taking amphetamines at least once a day.

If you're an atheist, you're either a neckbeard or a SJW. You're also not going to get laid, because all the hot girls are Christians:

washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/01/10/conservatives-really-are-better-looking-research-says/

>but accepting god as an answer to these unknown questions just does not satisfy me.
let me know when you solve them

but is is not a logical contradiction

*tips*

>Marxism is aethism

That's some nice mental gymnastics you got there
Russia is majority Orthodox Christianity

Just because someone doesn't believe in God doesn't mean they want to seize the means of production by leading a workers rebellion...

man you're ignorant. I'm not trying to solve them myself dumbass same way as you don't speak directly to god for all of your worldly answers.

I would disagree. For me its logical that a person has taken a life should have their life taken from them, but thats not the law in most places.
For me it is logical that the person who stole something should have something taken from them. But thats not the law.
In history a thief would have his hands cut off, seemed logical to them, apparently not logical today. Things change.
Im an atheist and right wing on most topics.

Deism is the absolute redpill

I don't follow

ye that makes sense and I can definitely respect it
I do other pretty questionable things to try to make myself happy with mediocre success...religion would be less harmful to me I'm sure

im athiest but i pretend god is real to stop degeneracy spreading in the west

arent ((asians)) like 4" average

I didn't mean to speak on issues of ethics, I merely meant the "burden of proof" is a pretty fundamental element of the judicial system

>atheism
The only quality trait you'll find in sweden... o wait

>No reason to believe in god until proven otherwise
>But you can still benefit from a peaceful dogma with valuable set of meanings so you don't fall into Nihilism.
This is the final redpill and you know it.

abokaneer is 2" average

An I am saying they are never going to be solved
What does burden of proof have to do with logic?

>man you're ignorant
dont forget arrogance, alot of these athiests and pegans think they know everything, when they haven't a clue.

>What does burden of proof have to do with logic?
really made me think

y'know, most people say they're christian and believe in god etc and all this other shit, but they still partake in "degenerecy"

>sin all week, cheat, steal, lie
>confess sins on sunday
>rinse and repeat

hence eastern europe

>they are never going to be solved

Like what
What question do you have that cannot be answered?

Atheists who have come to their conclusion out of legitimate thought are fine.
Athiests who are atheists because Rick and Morty said so are just as bad as those who blindly follow religion

>Im an atheist and right wing on most topics.

That's known as a neckbeard.

Just throwing my pennisworth in, but I think that the key point atheists fail to see is the very probable chance of 4th or 5th dimensional beings exisiting. Time is but a picture in motion to us, however to some other being the picture exists at all points, to be experienced at once.
Call me Lovecraftian, but I think there are things that we cannot even hope to understand how to perceive

EG
A 1st dimensional being (A dot) would view a 2nd dimensional being as another dot, not able to comprehend another linear axis.
A 2nd dimensional being (a square) would see a 3rd dimensional being as another 2D shape.
3rd dimension sees 4th dimension as 3rd, so on so forth

Then we hit ourselves, 4th dimensional beings, 3d shapes with a single point on the axis of time. It is more possible than not a greater being exists, that we quite simply will never perceive. I don't pray to a 'single' god/s or religion/s, just to the idea of a greater being and hoping it is benevolant to me in whatever crazy greater thing it decides to do.

Well the post you were replying to was talking about correlation of law and logic so your point was abit unclear.
I agree, burden of proof is a fundamental element of the judicial system and innocent until proven guilty is absolutely logical and the only correct way to base a judicial system

faith is belief without proof

you are ignorant to think that, science is getting better every year but religion makes no progress in providing any greater answers. And I suppose nothing without the proper contex

you know its true.

i agree its annoying to listen to though.

Continue down the rabbit hole of forbidden knowledge and you will find God staring at you, as you stare at him.

Hm interesting. I hope i do not have to explain why that is an incredibly stupid assumption.

>marxism =/= atheism

Marxism was designed specifically as a replacement for religion you ignorant fuck.

Please tell what it has to do with logic
>where the universe, laws of physics and your consciousness comes from
I am confident science will never solve these questions

what are your political and religious beliefs?

I think that this is actually a fascinating idea, and string theory suggests what, 11 or 14 possible dimensions? But what makes you think that they are able to influence us in the afterlife?

Dimensions beyond the third are just an abstraction of our inability to perceive them

I don't know where this meme came from that time is the 4th dimension but beyond the third adding another dimension can be whatever you want as long as the category is measurable in some way

We could be 5th dimensional beings right now measured by our height, width, depth, dick size, and number of cokacola cabs we drink in a year

4th dimensional beings are a joke, kind of like god, and don't exist until they are proven to exist

yeah I got a bit off topic actually as the original discussion was about the relation of the burden of proof to logic, and there really isn't now that I think about it

>until proven guilty is absolutely logical
only if you are concerned with not locking up the innocent
This is a moral decision
It has nothing to do with logic

le nihilism XD

Well there are theories, the things that god explains cannot be reduced to those few things listed, but theoretically you could say big bang, the laws of physics come from the large and small forces or whatever they are (including gravity and the forces between atoms) and consciousness is just a result of our increased brain capacity and is a favorable trait when it comes to reasoning, empathy, realizing that you are alive and don't want to die etc. And those barely qualify as explanations as I'm just pulling things off the top of my head.

Ok so
>where the universe comes from

That's a hard one but many talented researches and some of the most intelligent people on the planet alive today are attempting to answer this question and while they might not answer it in your lifetime they will keep searching until they do
>where the laws of physics come from
This one is easy even I can answer it
We made them up
They don't exist they are a construct that help us rationalize the way the universe operates
>consciousness
Also not difficult
It's a series of chemical reactions in the organ we refer to as the Bain which transmits data through the electrical firing of millions upon millions of synapses

If a question isn't answered why shouldn't we search for the answer? Do you not want to learn? Are you content with being a momentary blip on the radar of existence or should we strive to know everything?
If god is the only answer we need then why try at all?

>the laws of physics come from the large and small forces or whatever they are (including gravity and the forces between atoms) and consciousness is just a result of our increased brain capacity
citation needed

To claim to to know what happens after death, would imply that you have proof. Which could be one of the biggest revelations a human can get to.

Though i have a really childish way of removing some possibilities of the afterlife. If there really was life after death or any form of existence in which you can act freely and create, id imagine that all the intellectuals and scientists that died would already somehow figure out a way to contact us, nikola tesla proudly leading the charge ( serb jerking off nikola tesla who knew). But if thats not the case, its safe to assume that life after death is not much of a life when you are so restricted in what you can do, id rather disappear from existence than not be able to do anything and still "exist".
I think its fine to say that its logical that the burden of proof lies upon the one making the claim, worked before works right now probably gonna work in the future.
Seeing as not locking up the innocent is what pretty much everyone wants its logical to have the system "innocent until proven guilty". In a place where locking up the innocent is the goal, it would be logical to have a system of "guilty until proven innocent"

I'm agnostic, and the problem with this situation is that there is ZERO evidence of any deities, either ones that exist within human religions, or any deities that don't match any religion. At the same time, we have no evidence of the non-existence of them, so all we can really do is bicker endlessly, without ever reaching a conclusion.

That's right, friend :)

When studying thermodynamics we were talking about how the universe will eventually die from heat death due to the second law. One theory for the origin of the universe is that it basically transcends time, never beginning or ending, only growing larger until dying from heat death and collapsing inwards on itself. All of that mass concentrated down to a singularity and then boom, you have the big bang and everything starts over.

Yes, but how does one actually make the leap of faith and just believe?