Hello! Former Atheist now Agnostic.

Jehanne · 01-19-2007, 06:00 AM

My name is "Don" and I used to describe myself as being an atheist, until I read Richard Dawkins' book The God Delusion. But, more about that later!

**George** · 01-19-2007, 09:02 AM

Awesome Don, welcome to the forums.

I look forward to sharing thoughts and ideas with you. Former atheists are interesting!

**The An-Jel** · 01-19-2007, 02:45 PM

Wow... never encountered an Aetheist that changed their mind. Welcome and what happened?

Jehanne · 01-19-2007, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The An-Jel

Wow... never encountered an Aetheist that changed their mind. Welcome and what happened?

As an atheist, I used to believe that atheism was about "suspending judgment" with respect to the existence of God, an afterlife, etc. In particular, atheism was the absence of belief with respect to the existence of a God or gods, or for that matter, with respect to any proposition that could not be verified nor falsified. After reading The God Delusion and listening to Sam Harris, it has become clear to me that many atheists define atheism as viewing the existence of God as being something that is "very, very improbable" (to quote Dawkins.) Dawkins has stated that he is "agnostic towards God to the same extent that he is agnostic about fairies." He compares belief in God to belief in Russell's Teapot, the FSM, IPUs, etc.

I believe that Dawkins' position is unreasonable for the simple reason that Science cannot answer (and may never be able to answer) the following two questions.

1) Why is there "something" as opposed to "nothing"?

2) What is the nature of consciousness, especially, and to a lesser extent, free will.

Until Science can answer these two fundamental questions (if ever), the "God hypothesis" in my opinion is not unreasonable, absurd, or stupid, as Dawkins and Harris implies that it is. While I acknowledge the fact that there is no credible empirical evidence or revelatory evidence for God's existence or of an afterlife, I have never considered either belief to be ridiculous, just unfounded. As I no longer wish to be identified with a belief system or attitude akin to Richard Dawkins' beliefs, I now feel that the term "agnostic" best describes my POV. (Not that any of this matters to anyone but me!)

Regards,

Don

Og · 01-19-2007, 05:47 PM

Science is beginning to address your second question. The first one is not really something that can be addressed. "Reason" things are not really in the realm of science. It also seems a bit of an anthropomorphized question too. Implies causality and rationale.

Jehanne · 01-19-2007, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Og

Science is beginning to address your second question. The first one is not really something that can be addressed. "Reason" things are not really in the realm of science. It also seems a bit of an anthropomorphized question too. Implies causality and rationale.

Question 2 relates more to the question of a "soul" or "spirit," something of our conscious mind that survives our physical deaths. While I agree that there is zero credible evidence that consciousness, whole or in part, survives one's physical death, I do not view the belief of a "life after death" or immortality of an immaterial soul to be ridiculous or absurd. I, for one, am not 100% convinced that my conscious self is simply the product of the 100 million (or so) neurons in my brain and the 1,000 trillion (or so) synaptic connections between them. I am not saying that there is "something more" to my conscious mind than my brain, and I am certainly not claiming any evidence for "something more," but I do not consider the belief of an immaterial, eternal soul to be absurd, only unfounded, and not necessarily something that is "extremely improbable," either.

**The An-Jel** · 01-20-2007, 01:51 AM

Well said Jehanne... it really is the art of testing and practice in actual reality i.e. Physics and the like that we will probably ever be able to decipher the Universal Question of WHY? We got to find out HOW... do it responsibly... we will all be better off for it.

Thank You for answering in such a logical state. For me at least Welcome to the Forum Again.

Fire Legion · 01-20-2007, 05:29 AM

Welcome to the forums and to a new way of thinking about the world.

sisterX · 03-26-2007, 02:34 PM

Hi Every1 I'm new here but not agnostic in fact I'm sure of the existence of a supreme creator.
God has given as so many proofs around us. Just look around you and seriously ask yourself how this can all be an accident. look at you bodies they say it's evolution but I dont buy that.
One thing is for sure we all have an innate need or desire to worship something or someone, wether it is God, a person, a football team an idol, or we may have our "lucky charms" etc which we think ha external influences in our lives.
It's not as complicated as we make it.
Yes, we can only think within the realms of our conciousness, but TIME is a creation of God and God is timeless, God was always there and always will be. The fact the we all HOPE for the best shows we subconciously think it might make a difference, why HOPE for anything if you do not believe there is a God who can influence your fate? the Truth hope is just like prayer. Prayer to a highre Being, a Being whom we believe (even if it a subconcious belief) has the power to consider our hope and answer our prayers.

bye for now

Sister X

Jehanne · 03-26-2007, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sisterX

Hi Every1 I'm new here but not agnostic in fact I'm sure of the existence of a supreme creator.
God has given as so many proofs around us. Just look around you and seriously ask yourself how this can all be an accident. look at you bodies they say it's evolution but I dont buy that.
One thing is for sure we all have an innate need or desire to worship something or someone, wether it is God, a person, a football team an idol, or we may have our "lucky charms" etc which we think ha external influences in our lives.
It's not as complicated as we make it.
Yes, we can only think within the realms of our conciousness, but TIME is a creation of God and God is timeless, God was always there and always will be. The fact the we all HOPE for the best shows we subconciously think it might make a difference, why HOPE for anything if you do not believe there is a God who can influence your fate? the Truth hope is just like prayer. Prayer to a highre Being, a Being whom we believe (even if it a subconcious belief) has the power to consider our hope and answer our prayers.

bye for now

Sister X

"Trolling, trolling, trolling...keep those wagons trolling, raw hide!!!" Actually, I'm back to calling myself "atheist" these days, which is why I have not posted much here recently. As for you, Sister X, well, it is clear that you have read little, if nothing, about atheism (or agnosticism, for that matter). Why not try this web site for starters:

RichardDawkins.net - The Official Richard Dawkins Website

Check out the debate between Alister McGrath, a theist, and Peter Atkins, an atheist.

P.S. Please use the "spell check" option available in the upper right hand corner of your screen before posting again!