How is it that some atheists are good people?

Post Reply New Topic

Twightlightprincess has pointed out another good reason for questioning the presence of an all powerful deity who spends his time finding keys and putting his support onto professional sports teams.

On the other hand, from substantial experience interacting with people who do credit God with specific small benefits, I have learned that they benefit from this belief because if one is grateful to anyone, God, a neighbor, a teacher, (and God is always handier ), it prevents the believer from the erroneous and deleterious belief that any good fortune is due to their own cleverness, intelligence and in general belief they are better than others.

I think it depends on how far it’s pushed. There’s nothing wrong with feeling good about yourself for an accomplishment as long as it’s not pushed to the point of feeling superior to others. We’re all good at different things, etc. I enjoy considering the beauty and knowledge that different individuals have brought to the world.

I recently read a book about creativity by a writer who stated that all of her accomplishments had nothing to do with her whatsoever but were basically the result of a godlike universe using her as a channel.

I found the concept a little disheartening. It’s empowering to believe that people are creative and intelligent in and of themselves. It doesn’t mean that the creators stand out as gods because they are always inspired by work that has come before (you can’t have Einstein without Newton, particular art styles are ongoing sources of inspiration and dialogue for artists, etc.), but there is certainly much creativity and intelligence without attributing everything to God or someone else.

The particular author I reference above also used her belief to distance herself from the work and remove personal responsibility. Basically: “If it sucks, don’t blame me; I had nothing to do with it.”

On another note, as an example, if I spent a lot of time helping an individual move by packing and moving heavy boxes and furniture, I’d be a little annoyed if she only thanked God and claimed that he was the one that enabled her to move while I’m sore and exhausted from all the work I put into it. A little acknowledgement would go a long way. After all, I worked very hard and my effort shows.

Sometimes putting responsibility (and credit) away helps.
Some pages ago I described very important construct of Santa Claus in my family:
All the presents are labeled and anonymously put under the Christmas tree. As the whole - quite large - extended family takes part, everything gets mixed. Then "all presents are from Santa", so it's not allowed to inquire which one comes from whom.
It was a custom in my family and I learned the importance of it when I spent Christmas in my husband's family, without such a custom.
It makes giving presents incomparably less stressful.

But in larger realms it wouldn’t provide an individual with an impetus to improve. If you’re a painter but your work is suffering due to poor drawing skills, hopefully, you’d work on that instead of just saying that God is responsible for the end result.

For the field of medicine, personal responsibility ranks very high.

In giving gifts from Santa, all the adults bought presents. I’m sure you didn’t just expect Santa to bring them. It’s not quite the same thing as removing personal responsibility altogether. Probably none of you just bought a gum ball from a coin operated machine. (Then everyone would be wondering who the cheapskate was. )

It is stressful to be personally responsible all the time, but it’s good for our species overall.

It e.g. removes the responsibility in case I forgot about someone, which happens more often than not
"A gum balls from a coin operating machines" actually do happen, there is so many people not everyone can afford "real presents" for everyone but some still want to show they remember - so a neatly decorated ginger cookie is quite common.
The kids take part in "helping Santa", too, by the way.

Of course, complete removal of any responsibility would end in constant catastrophe. However, there is a saying in Polish: A soldier shoots, God carries bullets.
Which I don't interpret literally but as something like: You do your best but the final result is often beyond you.

What I've been thinking about lately, is why "useless pest" insects such as flies, fleas, ants and cockroaches are far more numerous and better at surviving than beautiful and useful insects such as bees, ladybirds and dragonflies.

The results in warfare are often so bad it’s hard for me to envision a loving deity being involved, so I have some trouble with that expression. (Expressions often trouble me, like “killing two birds with one stone.”) Being confronted with some of the realities is gut-wrenching for me. I have a really hard time reading war novels for this reason. I know the expression isn’t limited to war, but I think it holds true beyond that.

I also think there is a certain amount of chance involved when it comes to success. If a person’s ideas are too revolutionary in science, they tend not to catch on. The current time period has to be ready for it or else the idea might be recognized and appreciated retrospectively. We have no control over when we were born or the intellectual ability we innately have. It wouldn’t be fair for a god to give us such differing abilities including some who are severely intellectually disabled.

The religious beliefs I was raised with often conflicted greatly with my sense of justice. Probably we’ve all experienced that on some level.

You have been brought up in quite a hardcore religion, IMO.
The one I have been brought up in at least allows asking difficult questions.

The problem is with your understanding of useless vs. useful. Perhaps flies, fleas, ants and cockroaches don't immediately serve your interests, but that certainly doesn't make them useless. Flies and cockroaches are important for recycling biomass and returning it to the environment, for example.

Why would the ones you like be more numerous than they are? Why would the ones you don't like be less numerous? They can't sustain themselves off of your affection. The ones that are most useful to nature will thrive, even if you don't understand what they do that makes them useful.

I don’t know...

I think that if people believe in a loving creator, at some point, they might be bothered about why God allows injustices to occur to innocent people.

My conclusions probably would’ve been the same no matter what religion I grew up in although it’s certainly become a special interest of mine.

I’m fascinated by bizarre belief systems. I can often relate on some level.

So do I if the intention is to "re-educate".
No amount of logic/reason will penetrate "The Walls of Jericho",
Though LOUD music might!

You just can't let it go, can you? <sigh>
A "belief system" based on *religious/spiritual* belief is NOT the same as a belief system based on reason.
An intuitive "faith" is not the same as a "considered" conclusion. <sigh sumore>

OK, ok,
Let me try a different tack.

Could you give me the *logical reasoning* behind a belief in the existence of a god, gods, an invisible friend, or Santa Clause?
That will "mindf**k" in "Every which way but loose", sure n' propah.

https://youtu.be/A3HkfnEXr8Q

In other words,
It is an exercise in wishfull thinking.
I (more than) suspect religious/spiritual "faith" is more an *instinctual* manifestation of the parts of the brain devoted to emotional considerations,
And as such, predominately emanates from our more primitive centres, as does "romantic luv", as an example.

Quite an interesting intellectual-construct/phenomenon when you consider that both a more recent development of the pre-frontal-cortex and the less evolved limbic/emotional system is involved in tandem to discombobulate the reasoning faculties of the brain.
Who says "Evolution" doesn't have a sense of humour.

Damn, this thread is popular!
I can't keep up.

Yep, the question bugged philosophers since Antiquity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil
Being aware of all the subtleties the philosophers found about it made me less radical.

Yesterday there was a meeting where people shouldn't discuss this topic, I'm very disappointed.

I expect you do have a good point there, and that most if not all insects serve some function in the greater scheme of things.

"Lukario: who said people shouldn't discuss this topic?