*"Atheism = Suspension of Disbelief?"*

Post Reply New Topic

It is also a human survival characteristic to help one another out, as doing so means that the other person is more likely to help you out in return. Compromise is the most neglected survival characteristic on the market.... People are taught to roll over on human nature as a crutch, and by doing so they seem to deny any redeeming good qualities in humanity.
Also, not everyone's "inclinations" are correct. Most people can't view themselves critically. And that has a helluva lot to do with being tied down to a thought system. Once morality impinges upon their thought box, people stop caring about right and wrong or having compassion.
People say "everyone is a bi-product of their environment"... With most people this is true, because they are assimilated. But those of us who hunger for knowledge rise beyond our up-bringings. Just as I rose above my ill contempt for NTs for example. Many of the brightest people I know are NT now, some of them are even more intelligent than I am.

1. If theyr thoughts are given to them, their not their thoughts to begin with
2. What if their spoon-fed ideas conflict with their survival interests?
3. Look at the right/left paradigm, both sides are full of excessive and ignorant group think, and are ill-suited to make informed, intelligent decisions.
4. Yeah, some people (in fact most) are assimilated through their environment. But as I said, there are those of us who rise above it.
5. You stated, whatever the individual **believes** to be the factors. What is their premise for believing what they believe? Do they have rock solid evidence, or are they just conforming to a clique to fit in? If it's the latter, I'd question very strongly the reliability of their "beliefs".
Tribalism is more free than any "civilization" you could ever read about. Understood that some tribes have been violent (like the Aztecs), but others have been very peaceful. "Civilization" dates back to ancient Sumeria. Before this time, there were no borders, no religions, no money (they traded), they lived in tribal villages in North Africa. They had no wars, and there was no social pecking order (ie no "alphas" and "omegas"). History Channel even discussed this in their "documentary of civilization".

It really doesn't matter whether people derive their thoughts from spoon fed ideologies or the most intelligent, most aware sources or from what they can work out as best they know. All these processes drive them to perform in the best way they know how and that is totally preset with no freedom involved whatsoever. And that is the way it must be if the individual is to survive. There is no choice.
If people believe that their best choice is to help out others, that belief will be a factor in what they decide.

Yes, I agree we don't have a choice as to what is real and what isn't. That part I'll agree with. But, acknowledging that the facts aren't dependent upon their own feelings is a choice, a sentient, human choice. But the point is, we all have to live here together, and when people refuse to acknowledge someone else's perspective they tend to step on their toes. This is not good for group survival because it breeds conflict. So I would have to call bollocks on "that is the way it must be for the individual to survive". Creating conflict is not necessary to survive, in fact it's counter-productive to survival. If people are to survive in a setting, they'll have to work together to build a community, and that means people would have to compromise around the basic general facts involved in their situation..... So what would be needed, is for conscious, free thinking individuals to make a team effort to get by. It starts at the individual level, and works towards the common interests of the community.
Also, if someone is spoon-feeding them their beliefs, it's called brainwashing. Prior to "civilization" people were a lot more critical. But if someone is brainwashing people, there has to be someone doing the brainwashing, then there must also be an ulterior motive behind it. Basically, the person being brainwashed is being conned into following and putting blind trust into a system, blind trust into questionable leaders, that has an unknown motive, by someone of an unknown intent. This does not sound very survival conscious to me at all. It seems highly dangerous if anything.

Last edited by snake321 on 03 Apr 2008, 2:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I am not claiming that the choice an individual makes is the best choice possible or even the best choice considering his/her capabilities. It is the best choice that an individual believes he or she can make. Any living creature must, for its survival, choose the best according to its understanding. To do less would be a threat to its survival. And this permits no freedom. Nor would a less considerate choice be desirable.
But since each one of us understands a situation under the limitations of our experience and basic capabilities we probably would disagree as to what that choice might be.

Well yeah, basically all your saying is that we are subject to a reality that we do not choose, and therefore your claiming we have no freedom because we can't control reality. I agree that we as individuals can't control reality, but as individuals who are mentally self-evolved beyond our egos, we'd be able make better choices. But we can learn to make informed decisions based on the general unbiased facts, and compromise for the greater good of the community. That is a choice. A society of individual-first people who work together as a team or a community, then the people could alter some of the less desirable aspects of our world... Not all of them, but some of them. We'd definately be able to live in a more productive world.
Problems I see is that people are unwilling to compromise, they feel they've got to be dominant over others, because of their race, religion, gender, political label, nationality, whatever. And this breeds a lot of conflict.

Then you factor into it Mtv and reality tv and crap which sub-consciously brainwashed people into a child-like state of mind, where human/civil rights become poker chips in a game of poker between group a and group b.... Like it's gonna be "LIVE on ESPN, it's the hispanics vs. the lesbians, tune in to see who gets to screw who over, tonight at 10 o'clock on your local sports station"... I mean, civil and human rights shouldn't have to be fought over, they should just be understood. Everyone has certain unalienable rights, to live equally, to be left alone, and allowed to find happiness (without hurting others).
But many people fall for all this reality tv brainwashing, and basically a lot of people do not find compromise "entertaining", because theyr so used to being "entertained" to death. Theyr labels give them a "team" to play on...... I think what hurts the most is seeing how easily so many people will roll over and give away their liberties often times not even realising it, and how people seem to think basic rights are like poker chips in a card game. We live in a very anti-human day and age.
But it does, it truely does hurt to see people treat one another the way they do though, to see people refuse to get along, refuse to co-exist, refuse to compromise, refuse to stand up for themselves against all this big business and what not... I mean, how people lock themselves into a corner and look the other way when someone outside their little box screams for help, or whenever theyr confronted with any truth that doesn't fit into their little box (because that tells me people don't wanna know what is true, they simply don't care, their ego is more important to them than having compassion). Merely because people don't wish to confront their own egos.... And then I see the state of the world.... All the hunger, disease, wars, oppression...
What I find even sadder is that this type of mentality is considered "essential" to being "normal" now. Thinkers and individuals are becoming more and more outcasted. Being synthetic is "normal". If their group tells them 2+2=7, they've believe it and they'll try to find a way to rationalize it. But a liberal hates a thinker worse than a conservative, a conservative hates a thinker worse than a liberal. People hate not being able to categorize someone.

I don't seem to be able to get my point across so I give up. All choices we make are made because of our essential makeup, whatever that origin of makeup may be. Every choice we make is responsive to that makeup. Freedom of choice is an illusion.

the only god is myself.

To pick up from my ( almost) Opening Post:

I was thinking how one example of this process is narrated in the story of Cain and Abel.

Language introduced value judgements which inevitably, because of how language works, favoured/recognised certain characteristics over others, or introduced comparisons, polarities, which had not existed before.

Those qualities which language "labelled" as of less value might have to be banished for ever, and were "marked", by language, so would know that they were "inferior" behaviours.

You speak of "awakening", as of some higher conscienceness or realization. I would like to know what these experiences were you have had. I understand you may have reservations because people would not believe you. You sure don't need to prove anything to me, I'm just very interested in the way you came to realize.