I can't choose to NOT be an atheist-but--

[digonswine]

Is belief a choice? I am pretty sure most atheists came to the conclusion that there is most likely no god despite all of what they were told or taught. Is belief similar? I simply can't help it. Is it the same for believers? I am not looking for targets-I really want to know. I suspect this is a false comparison but I have thought about it a bit and would like some input.
Again--the question is---Is belief a choice OR a decision?

[Ruby the Liberal]

1. Both a choice and a decision. I choose to believe

and the God I believe in affords you the same decision.

[digonswine]

3. No--

If I "decided" to believe--it would be pure hypocrisy on my part. I could say the words but they would have no backing. I tell you this is not a "decision"--you may just as well tell me that I decide for my heart to beat.

[Mariana]

10. I feel the exact same way.

I could choose to PRETEND to believe, but I can't choose to believe.

[Ruby the Liberal]

12. So, if you already predecided that "no" was the answer, why ask the question

unless you are just looking for an argument for argument's sake?

*yawn*

[digonswine]

15. Who are you replying to?

I am not looking for an argument. I asked the question with no qualifiers. I am not the one acting in a dickish manner here.

[Ruby the Liberal]

16. Scroll up.

And, as I was remiss, welcome to DU, and ignore.

I don't do flame bait for the sake of flame bait.

:hi:

[digonswine]

20. I had already said it was not a decision for me-

I was asking if believers felt the same way. This is a legitimate question and an interesting one for me. I disagreed that God left ME the choice-that was already clear from what I said. When someone says that I DO have the choice, I am free to disagree-NO? Sheesh.

[Betsy Ross]

2. I believe it is biological. n/t

For sixty years I had very strong spiritual sense. I went on a medication, and poof! It was gone.

[digonswine]

5. I would like to hear more-

your experience sounds interesting.

[Beartracks]

11. !!!!! n/t

[Merlot]

13. I second that - would like to hear more

interesting that some people take drugs to have a spiritual experience, and you had the opposite.

How are you feeling about this change of belief? Miss the old or welcome the new?

[Warpy]

19. I've always thought it was hard wired somehow

which is something fMRI tests would seem to confirm. I know the most belief could expect from me is lip service and I suspect, that were the tables turned, the most atheism could expect from a believer is lip service.

It's not a choice for me, I'm just not wired that way. The nuns did their best, honest. I just don't believe a word of it. It's a lot easier to be a believer in 21st century America. I just can't do it.

[SheilaT]

4. Most people are strongly influenced by

the belief system around them. Whether they accept it or reject it, what you were told or exposed to as a child tends to shape your beliefs ever after.

Especially people raised in profoundly religious environments. It seems to me as though they have a lot of difficulty thinking through their beliefs rationally. Think about all the times someone says something like, "But in the Bible it says . . . " There's not a lot of questioning of the essentially validity of the Bible by most people.

Obviously, someone like yourself who came to the conclusion of atheism (just to keep it short) is very, very different from someone who converted from one Christian sect to another, but still believes in religion, specifically Christian religion in this case.

It can be a choice, but for most people it's not really a completely free choice.

The real decision is in what a person thinks of those with different beliefs.

[digonswine]

7. I like the description as "not a really completely free choice"-

I think that is accurate.

I will admit that I can be a bit prickish when thinking about those with different beliefs from mine. I don't like this characteristic, which prompted the OP.

[Curmudgeoness]

6. I had to really think about this one.

Had to figure out exactly what a choice and what a decision were.

OK, to choose means that you do an eeny-meeny-miney-mo sort of thing. Which is it, will I believe or will I not believe. That isn't it.

To decide means that is it settle something by concluding it is the right conclusion. So, I have to say this is how I came to that determination.

But more precisely, I have to say that it was really neither. Somehow, it just happened. I just realized that there was no truth in religion or god. It was not a conscious decision.

[Iggo]

8. Decide something is true, and so come to bellieve.

I can live with that.

[digonswine]

9. I know it can't be a random, flip of the coin decision--

This is something I have have considered for some time-especially being a lurker here for years and finding so much in common with like-minded folks--except for this one thing--I love your description and honesty, but it is not satisfying. I also understand that satisfying me is not your duty. Thank you.

[Curmudgeoness]

50. Why does this matter so much to you?

You are letting something that has no answer bother you. It really makes no difference what you call the process used to come to a belief, or a non-belief. It is what it is.

Stop thinking so hard about it or your head will explode. :nuke:

[digonswine]

51. I was simply interested to hear how folks come to believe-

It might not make a difference in the end. Humans interest me--could be because I am one! In all honesty--I WOULD like to hear that it is not a choice for them, either. I suppose I have felt and have been judged in the past(really) for my lack of belief. I simply can't help it-not that I would change it if I could. I feel to judge me for something I cannot help is wrong. But I am judgmental, too. It bothers me a bit to think that people can reach such a different conclusion with the same set of facts. I don't want to be unfair in how I think of others. Just for me.

[Curmudgeoness]

54. It isn't unfair if you think that some people are idiots.

Some people are. But really, every atheist is judged critically for a lack of belief. You will never get around that in a so-called Christian nation. Best thing to do if it bothers you is to keep it to yourself.

I think that many people just do not have critical thinking skills. And in all honesty, I am ok with them having their delusions. They feel better and it doesn't do me any harm.

[digonswine]

55. I suppose so-

But I do not want to keep what I think to myself. No one else does. Plus-as is the common complaint-it is in my face all the time and does have real-life impacts on others. My thoughts do not. I would like to thank you for your initial response--it was one of a very few that responded directly to my question instead of trying to instigate a pissing match!

[ChairmanAgnostic]

14. The strength of belief is matched with the level of mental illness

There are direct correlations which suggest a lot of issues to be investigated.

[digonswine]

17. I was simply asking a question to gain some understanding-

regarding where people-people are coming from.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

48. but that is a responsive answer of sorts.

I refuse to believe in some fairy tale created god, who sent a son here to heal sick folks, walk on water, and spend 40 days and nights in secret. The idea that a bunch of power hungry sect leaders could define the whole of christianity in the Council of Trent and Council of Nicea is insane.

[rug]

18. People change their minds all the time, even on core beliefs.

[digonswine]

21. I suppose that is true-

but beside the point.

[rug]

22. No, it is the point. An intellectual conclusion is voluntary and yours was a choice.

[darkstar3]

23. So you're saying that it's voluntary to conclude that fire burns?

[rug]

24. Are you saying the conclusion that a belief is false is the same as the physics of combustion?

[darkstar3]

27. You said that an intellectual conclusion is voluntary. Obviously that statement is incorrect.

One must conclude that fire burns at some early point in life or forever be a danger to themselves. There are many intellectual conclusions that are arrived at in a completely involuntary fashion, and the realization that the god(s) you believe in isn't real is most certainly on that list.

[rug]

29. Therefore, people are compelled to be Republicans.

[darkstar3]

31. Ask a Republican to believe that taxes are necessary for a healthy economy and see what you get.

The bottom line is that you can't change an intellectual conclusion on a whim. You need evidence. Sometimes you need a lot of evidence.

[rug]

32. Certainly not on a whim but certainly it can, and often does, change.

Ergo, it's voluntary.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rug]

38. Snark, as usual.

Speaking of faulty logic, you now insert another assumption. No one here as been discussing not believing one's intellectual conclusion (although the insertion allows you to trot out another, and irrelevant, prefab concept of cognitive dissonance). The topic has been changing one's conclusion, not disbelieving it. Although I suppose you can hold a conclusion that any religious position different from yours must be cognitive dissonance. That is known, politely, as being closed minded.

[darkstar3]

40. Oh boy.

That's exactly what you're talking about, and you're not the only one. The central tenet of the OP is the question of whether it is possible to voluntarily change one's belief at will. Can you change your belief/intellectual conclusion that fire burns at will? Of course not. Yet you assert, against all logic and experience, that such conclusions are voluntary.

Could you change your belief in God at will? Could you decide at any time that you simply don't believe he exists anymore?

[rug]

42. Since you're now addresseing absent others, I'm done.

Besides, your fire analogy is inept.

Before I leave, the answer to your last two questions is, of course. The evidence? You. As you've posted before, that's exactly what you did.

[darkstar3]

43. I was talking specifically to you, and you're copping out as usual.

[tortoise1956]

45. Think of it this way...

Beliefs can be rational or irrational. One can believe in something that is obviously not true. For example, it wasn't that long ago that many people believed the earth was flat. (Apparently, some people still hold that belief...)

And yes, it IS voluntary to conclude that fire burns - usually from finding it out the hard way.

[digonswine]

26. I guess it depends on the way one thinks of the word-

I think like many do--I look at what evidence is available. I use this evidence to assign relative likelihoods to differing descriptions of reality. The description that most conforms with the evidence is what I think of as the most probable to be fact. This seems to be the best way to gauge the physical world. If this is "choice" to you--then fine. But to suddenly use a way of thinking that is not backed up by evidence does not seem viable. I can't do that. There is no choice.
So, again, I ask, for curiosity, do believers(individuals) feel there is a choice to believe?

[rug]

28. I'm more skeptical of the limits of evidence.

[digonswine]

33. I am skeptical of those who create reality in the absence of evidence.

[rug]

34. What kind of evidence?

[digonswine]

36. What have you got?

None-naturally. I mean non-anecdotal evidence--the real stuff-upon which we understand(partially) reality.

[rug]

39. The question is more basic. What do you consider to be evidence.

It seems to me your entire OP flows from this but you haven't stated what you consider to be determinative evidence.

[digonswine]

41. Ok-I'll bite again--

My only assertion in the OP was that MY non-belief is not my choice. What I TRULY want to know is if some who DO believe feel it is choice or something else. A few have given thoughtful responses. What do YOU think? Do you choose to (presumably) believe or is it something else? Can you describe it?

[digonswine]

37. This has gotten off topic-kudos.

Now-I assume you are a believer-yes? Could you please respond to my original question? It was meant in earnest.

[Silent3]

25. You can't realistically turn belief on and off like a light switch...

...so I don't see belief as a choice in that sense, but to the extent that the idea of "choice" has any meaning at all (and that's quite another can of worms to open) I suppose you can, to a limited degree, choose how open you are about considering and exploring ideas beyond your usual comfort zone. The choice to explore other ideas, to subject your current beliefs to scrutiny, might sometimes lead step by step to a change in belief.

[digonswine]

30. I did not mean to set up belief/disbelief in that way--I think-

I wanted to know if believers felt that they had a choice regarding their beliefs. Like--could whomever--as a believer, decide to NOT believe? As I said-I could not choose to believe no matter how my heart desired it.
Here is where this comes from--I think that believers should not hold my lack of belief against me. As I said-I did not actively choose it. I would LIKE to think that believers are similarly burdened by this lack of choice. If this was the case, it would be easier to accept the way others think and believe. For me to think that (SOME)people are thinking these things and acting the way they do just because they want to-is utterly depressing and appalling.

[tortoise1956]

46. Well said

I think you hit the nail on the head. Experience often leads one to change or modify a belief. I can attest to that.

The main problem comes when people refuse to accept anything that conflicts with their beliefs. All you have to do is read history to see what that leads to...

[tortoise1956]

44. It is a state of mind

Here is the definition of belief from the American Heritage Dictionary:

1.The mental act, condition, or habit of placing trust or confidence in another: My belief in you is as strong as ever.
2.Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something: His explanation of what happened defies belief.
3.Something believed or accepted as true, especially a particular tenet or a body of tenets accepted by a group of persons.

There's no such thing as a false choice when it comes to beliefs. You either believe in something, or you don't.

[Jim__]

47. It's not a simple choice, it's a worldview.

You can't just change your belief about a divinity and keep all your other beliefs the same. Your view of the world changes. So, if you are going to change your belief about a divinity, you first have to do a lot of thinking, and then have to seriously doubt some of the conclusions your current belief leads to. After that, your worldview may change, maybe aided by some crisis in your life.

[Humanist_Activist]

49. I don't know about that, I think it depends on how your worldview was constructed...

I was never raised in a very religious household, we were nominally Catholic, and I only went to PSR because my mom wanted to mollify my religious grandmother. The funny thing was that by my late teens, I was the one who became ultra religious in the household, much to my mom's dismay.

Long story short, I was never raised to believe in the Bible as literal truth, nor were my ethical and moral values ever given emphasized by anyone as being Christian values. Even being a religious Catholic I didn't agree with the Church on many things, choice and euthanasia being to two top ones. When I was studying to go into seminary my mom encouraged me to study other religions, and she probably knew what was going to happen next. Doubts grew and I abandoned that pursuit, which was a relief to my mother.

So when I examined my beliefs in god and Jesus and found the beliefs lacking in empirical evidence and that I cannot hold onto beliefs that don't have some empirical evidence backing them up, I abandoned the faith. I won't say it was easy, it was more of a process than anything else, indeed it wasn't even a decision, more of an acceptance of reality. But it certainly didn't completely shift my worldview, instead it seemed to have enriched it. Did all my beliefs remain the same? No of course not, but that doesn't mean they are related, working at Wal-Mart for two years changed me from libertarian to socialist, that was a much more radical shift than losing my faith in supernatural beings.

[digonswine]

52. I would think that drastically changing a world view due to a crisis-

would not be good thinking. You speak of a "current belief"--this does not easily apply to people who think in shades of grey. My "beliefs" are not absolute. When I think of things that I THINK I know(other than obvious, readily provable facts)-I do so with the probabilities of this or that being true based on current evidence and my own current knowledge. Other than what is ACTUALLY known and proved, I try to decide what best fits the evidence. This is NOT belief. If a bit of info serves to change my estimation, I do so-without wounded pride or shame.

[digonswine]

53. One more thing--

The idea that changing one's belief about a divinity necessitates a change in all "beliefs" is a major and chilling problem. Any new info should be incorporated into one's view--not change it entirely.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

56. As I've said many times on this board, religious faith is experiential, not intellectual

I couldn't turn off my religious faith voluntarily any more than I could voluntarily wake up one morning and say, "I've decided that I'm not going to love that person anymore."

You either do or you don't love someone, and the change in affection is not an intellectual decision.

[kwassa]

57. All beliefs are choices, including atheism.

Beliefs are choices, and choices are decisions. There really is no difference, except that belief might be a choice developed over time.

Atheism might be described as a lack of belief in god, but it is not a lack of belief. It is a belief unto itself.

(waiting for the usual people to show up .... five, four, three, two, one.)

[Humanist_Activist]

58. I can't choose to believe in Santa Claus, I can pretend to believe, but not really believe...

same with deities, why is it so hard for theists such as yourself to understand that?

[rug]

60. Because Santa Claus is not a deity.

If you find it that hard to understand you can't be helped.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

61. OK then. Zeus. Or, to pick one people still believe today, Shiva.

[rug]

62. How is Shiva like Santa Claus?

[Humanist_Activist]

63. They are both imaginary. n/t

[kwassa]

70. How do you know they are imaginary?

I was just talking to Santa Claus, and he said that Shiva was the real deal.

[Humanist_Activist]

72. None of them manifest in the real world, they only show themselves...

To select individuals, and all experiences ever recorded about them cannot be verified.

[kwassa]

79. What is the real world?

The world of the mind is not real? The world of experience is not real?

Lack of verification means nothing, by the way. There is little in antiquity that can be independently verified.

[Humanist_Activist]

80. and thats why its called mythical...

If you need a primer on how reality works, might I suggest going to your nearest accredited university. Take some courses on critical thinking and empiricism. I do not have the patience to argue with those who do not have the tools needed to argue back.

[kwassa]

92. so, you can't answer the questions I posed to you.

Another day on R/T.

Another newbie.

I would point out that avoidance of my questions does not constitute an answer. I would suggest that I am apparently asking questions that fall outside your range of knowledge and experience, and you seem to be either unwilling or unable to answer them. This would indicate your limits, not mine.

[Humanist_Activist]

97. The real world is the world we live in, the world we can measure and touch....

The world that can be objectively measured and agreed upon by most humans. The thing we must deal with is that our perceptions are often wrong, and our brains are mostly at fault. A mild example would be optical illusions, which are more accurately considered fooling the brain. A more extreme example would be false memories, either implanted by others or literally invented on the spot by our brains. The most extreme would be diagnosed mental illness and chemical induced changes to the brain.

How much does your experiences match reality when your brain can create false memories that fool itself? You would need something besides that memory alone, pictures, writings, witnesses, etc. To verify if an experience of yours actually happened.

[kwassa]

99. In your avoidance, one more time, how do you deal with those things that can't be measured and

touched?

I am still waiting for an answer. You seem to have no idea, so far.

[Humanist_Activist]

100. Until they can be measure and detected, and they aren't predicted...

To exist through through a scientific theory, the assumption is it doesn't exist. So we do nothing about the unproven. I'm puzzled by your insistence that I avoided the questions, I answered them, don't see what else I can what I'm avoiding here.

How about this, provide an example of one of these unmeasurable things.

[kwassa]

101. I have provided an example of one of those unmeasurable things.

Heart disease.

The stability of plaques can't be measured, nor what exactly creates excess cholesterol in our bodies.

Since we can't measure them, they don't exist?

Heart disease is still the #1 cause of death. It doesn't exist because we can't measure the cause of cholesterol, or the stability of plaques?

[Humanist_Activist]

102. No thats not unmeasured, the theory behind the observation is flawed...

And incomplete, that doesn't make heart disease unmeasurable. You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding on how the scientific process works.

[kwassa]

103. So, how do you deal with incomplete?

The CAUSES of heart disease remain unmeasurable. Is there part of that you don't understand, or don't believe?

So, what should people with heart disease do in the meantime, aside from just waiting for science to show up?

[Humanist_Activist]

104. All theories are incomplete, if you are looking for snake oil, religion fits the bill.

I think our views of reality are so different that conversation is impossible. I don't have time to teach empiricism, the scientific method, and logic.

Besides that, I'm beginning to think that you don't even know much about the subject you are claiming to be immeasurable, just because a theory or diagnosis is incomplete doesn't mean we know nothing about the subject. In addition, especially when it comes to medicine, there is no one size fits all solution for any disease and treatment. You are looking for something that doesn't exist, 100% certainty.

[kwassa]

105. You still avoid the question.

I am incredibly logical, and I've backed you into a logical corner that you are avoiding. Sorry about that, but you don't have to keep avoiding.

I understand empiricism, the scientific method, and logic, and also know that there are modes of human experience that can't be fully explained RIGHT NOW by any of them.

Can you solve my heart disease dilemma, by the way? I've posed the question twice now, and you haven't addressed it. Science has reversed itself, and can't give a solution. What should I do?

How long should I wait for an answer from you on the subject?

[Humanist_Activist]

106. What logical corner, and I'm not interested in telling you what to do...

As far as advice, consult with cardiologists, I'm no expert on the subject, and instead of pretending knowledge, I will admit ignorance.

And you keep making an assertion without fact, what human experiences can't be explained by science?

[kwassa]

107. My cardiologist can't answer the question, either.

The question you keep avoiding is this: what are we to do when we have problems that science can't currently answer? Pretend they don't exist? Declare them nonexistent because they can't be answered?

Human experiences that can't be explained by science. What is the true cause of heart disease?

What is the cause of cancer?

Why do the Redskins keep losing?

[darkstar3]

108. Search.

[kwassa]

113. I have searched.

What I report on this topic is the limit of what is known.

So ... it isn't enough. What do I do know, when science can't answer the question?

[darkstar3]

115. You mistake my meaning.

When you don't know an answer, you search. When you don't find the answer, you continue searching until you do. This is the drive of science. This is the drive of human progress.

Until you can find the answer, you must make peace with "I don't know." Making up an answer helps no one.

[kwassa]

116. And how do you make peace?

What is that process?

[darkstar3]

118. Acceptance of your own ignorance.

[Humanist_Activist]

109. what the fuck am I, Google? Do your own damn research...

I'm not your teacher, just because you don't know something doesn't mean no one knows it.

[kwassa]

112. Google: Nobody knows why the Redskins keep losing.

Google will not help me there.

There is vast uncertainty and lack of knowledge all over this universe.

And, you still haven't answered my questions. Why not? How logical is that? How rational? How scientific?

Caught you. Again.

[Humanist_Activist]

114. No you didn't, you pulled a Bill O'Reilly tidal wave of ignorance...

I made a mistake, I ceded, without asking for proof you premise of heart disease being somewhat mysterious. And now you add in cancer? I think you are dishonest and misrepresented yourself, seriously, playing on sympathy with a "mysterious" medical condition? That's low.

Frankly I think you are a Poe, you make far too many obvious mistakes to be geniune in the beliefs you advocate.

[kwassa]

117. Huh? What?

aside from the personal attack you made on me, rather than deal with my argument (calling me Bill O'Reilly??? Please.)

The rest of your answer, or all of it, really, is incoherent.

Would you care to re-phrase?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

65. She's not, and that's exactly the point. You took issue at somebody using Santa Claus as an example.

Because he's not a deity. So I picked two entities that ARE deities.

Get it now?

[kwassa]

68. I believe I'll have a beer right now.

[rug]

77. No, I was not taking issue.

What I said was that anyone who sees no difference between a deity and Santa Claus is beyond help.

Got it now?

[Humanist_Activist]

78. Beyond help? what does that mean, Santa Claus is a more "child friendly" version...

Of the God of the Bible anyways. He punishes sinners, knows all, can be everywhere and supposedly answers prayer, or at least letters. He even accepts sacrifices.

[Humanist_Activist]

64. What make deities any different from any other imaginary and mythological being? n/t

[kwassa]

69. How do you decide that they are imaginary or mythological?

That is a choice, too.

It is all about choices.

[Humanist_Activist]

71. I follow the evidence, or in this case lack of evidence...

Gods haven't been demonstrated to be real, the only evidence there is comes from subjective personal testimony, and I have yet to find one theist whose God isn't a reflection of themselves. The only logically sustainable conclusion to draw is that there is no evidence to sustain a belief in any gods.

[darkstar3]

73. "decide" that things are imaginary?

"You're either very smart, or incredibly stupid."

[Humanist_Activist]

76. Probably some who thinks all reality is subjective....

In other words a nutball.

[kwassa]

81. Much of reality is perception, and therefore subjective.

Not nutball. Just different perception than you.

[Humanist_Activist]

83. Thats not reality, thats perception, and not only can it be subjective, it can be wrong.

That's why empiricism, critical thinking and the scientific method are so important. These methods are the only consistantly reliable way to determine what is real and what isn't. They are practices and techniques that are designed to remove, as much as possible, subjectivity in observations and conclusions.

[kwassa]

86. Perception is reality.

You want a reality that can be measured independently all the time, and verified.

Guess what? We have lots of experiences as humans that can't be measured, and for which there is no measure at this time in history. What should we do?

Example: I had a heart attack last year. I did much research on heart attacks and causes.

Problem: I have no known heart attack risk factors, including no family history. Why did I have one?

Problem: the theory of what causes heart attacks has changed. It used to be believed by medical science that the likelihood of heart attacks was closely related to the degree of closure in the arteries by plaques. In the past 15 years, the theory has changed to the instability of plaques, rather than degree of closure. There is no current way to measure instability, however.

Problem: I tried to improve my diet by reducing saturated fat, as medical science has advocated for the past fifty years, as the theory is that 75-80% of the cholesterol in our bodies is produced by the liver from saturated fat. Unfortunately, a meta-analysis of studies on cholesterol last year revealed that there is little provable correlation between saturated fat and cholesterol. And, they don't know what else does create cholesterol.

So, what can I do but pray? What solution is there for me right now, when science has nothing to offer?

[Humanist_Activist]

88. Problem is, prayer doesn't work...

Humans may get things wrong, but we have a self correction method. It doesn't mean we know everything, but we learn nothing through prayer and wishful thinking. What are you expecting from your prayers? A cure, an answer to the mystery?

What's funny is you are criticizing the very self correction that works. I would trust that over the untestable and unverified claims of religion.

[kwassa]

90. It works for me.

Your mileage might vary.

You either missed or avoided my point. I am not criticizing self-correction. I am talking about lack of available information RIGHT NOW.

I need it. None is available. What should I do?

Give me an answer, please.

[Humanist_Activist]

96. Learn to live with uncertainty...

and living with mystery and yes even living with ignorance. Even on subjects like what you are talking about, its difficult, I went through similar a similar situation with my dad, who in the past 4 years went through both a heart attack and a stroke. Thank goodness he is still fully functional with minimal damage to his brain and heart. There is still uncertainty as to why it happened, and the hardest thing for me to do is accept that we may not, in our lifetimes at least, have all the answers. But certainty has its own drawbacks, the biggest being a disintentive to learn, and when you are certain of something that is wrong, then you lose an opportunity to improve your own understanding of the world.

[kwassa]

110. Who says that I don't live with uncertainty?

Life is nothing if not uncertain.

Being religious does not eliminate uncertainty.

[darkstar3]

111. It just serves as a coping mechanism.

[laconicsax]

98. Perception is reality? BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

:rofl:

Seriously? That has to be the silliest thing I've heard all month. Perception is fallible beyond measure--there is literally no limit to how wrong someone can perceive reality.

If you'd like small examples, look up inattention blindness and change blindness. A large example would be psychosis.

Reality operates independently of our limited ability to observe it.

Oh, and prayer http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html">doesn't work. You may take comfort in prayer and see each day that you don't suffer another heart attack as evidence of the power of prayer, but you're really just demonstrating the power of confirmation bias.

[darkstar3]

94. Solipsism was there before you, and it was uninteresting centuries ago.

We've simply moved beyond the concept.

[kwassa]

67. You can choose to believe in Santa Claus.

Nobody is stopping you. People choose to believe in all kinds of things, some rational, some not, some sane, some insane, etc.

[darkstar3]

74. Tell that to the 8-year-old who saw his parents putting the presents under the tree at midnight.

[kwassa]

82. They were Santa's temporary employees.

[darkstar3]

95. And even the 8-year-old is thinking "bullshit."

[Humanist_Activist]

75. Please, I'm all ears, how would I choose?

You are advocating a position with no facts to back it up, and about how other people come to their beliefs. That's quite arrogant of you.

[kwassa]

84. Belief doesn't require facts.

Belief does not ever require facts, and is always a choice. There are areas of human experience where facts are not easy to come by, yet the experience can be powerful and important.

(In case you haven't realized it, you are a newbie in this forum who is re-hashing arguments that have spun in circles here for years and years. Persist, if you like.

But you have offered nothing remotely new. Sorry. Check through the archives and find out for yourself.)

[Humanist_Activist]

85. Mine do.

And it seems rather obvious that you are immune to rational argument.

[kwassa]

87. I think you have a limited view of rationality.

You appear to have a strong belief in the scientific method. That is fine, I don't disbelieve in it.

But we as humans have many experiences that are important that are unmeasurable by the scientific method. It has always been that way, and will always be that way. Knowledge is finite, at any given point in history. Many things are beyond our verification, right now, as far as we have come scientifically.

What should we do? Not talk about them? Not speculate about them? Pretend they are not real because we can't measure them?

[Humanist_Activist]

89. No, we should study them and find out how they work...

But that doesn't mean we should blindly speculate on them, form a hypothesis, try to observe and test and repeat, if the hypothesis has validity, it will stand up to the test, if not, discard it.

[kwassa]

91. But what if it is untestable right now?

Should we ignore all human experience that is untestable?

[Humanist_Activist]

93. We need to increase understanding in related fields until...

It becomes testable, besides I don't even know what experiences you are talking about.

[trotsky]

59. Is not believing in the Easter Bunny a belief unto itself as well? n/t

[frogmarch]

66. I brainwashed myself

when I was a kid into believing in Jesus after I fell in love with Jeffrey Hunter as Jesus in King of Kings. I really wanted Jesus to be real and for him to look like Jeffrey Hunter. It wasn't like a game to me. I was obsessed with Jeff Jesus and stayed that way for a few weeks.

I think people can decide to believe in fantasies and even brainwash themselves into it, but with some of us, eventually common sense prevails.

[cleanhippie]

119. In many cases, especially with children, it is nether a choice or a decision. Its forced upon them,