The common ground is the supernatural.
Atheists and theists are the same.
- Thread starter cookieduster
- Start date
The common ground is the supernatural.
Rabbie
Super Moderator
- Local time
- Today, 21:09
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2007
- Messages
- 5,906
How very convenient! A great sidestep there
. The "Supernatural" is just a way of explaining things that we do not yet understand. As creatures with the capacity to think and to create it is not difficult for humans to devise explanations for things. If these explanations have the added advantage of making it easier to control other humans then that is a bonus. Hence the creation of so many religions.
In one sense I am a creatonist - I do believe that Man created gods and not the other way round
I just thought I would chime in here, since apparently the topic is that people all around the world "agree in a common theme of the supernatural" or something to that effect.
More Americans believe in Aliens than Europeans believe in God. Does that make Aliens more real than God? Also, if a majority of people around the world started to believe and say that the sky is in fact pink with yellow green polka dots would that make it true because a majority of people agreed upon it?
Unless you are a believer in pantheistic solipsism then no, just because a "common theme" exists around the world doesn't make something true.
Perhaps the reason a common theme exists has more to do with human nature than the nature of the undocumented, unsubstantiated nature of the super natural.
On a personal note - It's all mythology to me.
More Americans believe in Aliens than Europeans believe in God. Does that make Aliens more real than God? Also, if a majority of people around the world started to believe and say that the sky is in fact pink with yellow green polka dots would that make it true because a majority of people agreed upon it?
Unless you are a believer in pantheistic solipsism then no, just because a "common theme" exists around the world doesn't make something true.
Perhaps the reason a common theme exists has more to do with human nature than the nature of the undocumented, unsubstantiated nature of the super natural.
On a personal note - It's all mythology to me.
How very convenient! A great sidestep there
The "Supernatural" is just a way of explaining things that we do not yet understand. As creatures with the capacity to think and to create it is not difficult for humans to devise explanations for things. If these explanations have the added advantage of making it easier to control other humans then that is a bonus. Hence the creation of so many religions.
In one sense I am a creatonist - I do believe that Man created gods and not the other way round
There is no sidestep.
It is simple. All religions have a supernatural or supernaturals as their common ground.
Atheists seem to be unable to come ie It is simply one more piece of the puzzle.
In fact atheists will often say such things as.....most scientists agree etc and etc.
And unlike aliens or polka dots in the sky the belief is truly wide spead as it covers a huge range of cultures and the full spectrum of education.
ColinEssex
Old registered user
- Local time
- Today, 21:09
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2002
- Messages
- 9,451
Aliens always seem to land in the USA and terrorise a small town in some outback no-mans-land, so that would answer that. If aliens landed in Times Square on CNN then that would be different.
Plus, Europeans are not as gullible as Americans.
You are comparing apples with pears here.
There is no shred of evidence there is a god or aliens. Yet if the sky was the colour scheme you describe, then we would believe because we would all see it.
Therefore, if we all saw god or aliens then we would also believe.
Col
Agreed, but that's because your country sent all it's crazy wacked out religious nuts over here. (cough Puritans cough)
Atomic Shrimp
Humanoid lifeform
- Local time
- Today, 21:09
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2000
- Messages
- 1,954
Actually, I'm not sure that's true of every religion. Buddhism doesn't necessarily have any deities, and of course the person who started this thread would like atheism to be classed as a religion, and that does not generally acknowledge the supernatural.
But even if they all do have supernaturals, I still think it's logically iffy to call that common ground, when the details of what various religions have under their 'supernatural' heading varies so widely - some may not in fact overlap with others at all - if it's a common factor in name only, is it really all that significant?
I mean, we could say that people who like chocolate pudding have a lot in common with people who like black pudding, because they both like something called 'pudding', but it just wouldn't be a very useful or accurate observation, because chocolate pudding is nothing like black pudding.
I will paste from my post to The Doc Man on the thread.
"Think of God as Access
You and I both have the same program on our computers. However, we will both interpret it and use it differently. For example, you are very strong on full normalisation whereas I am not. You have your reasons and I have my reasons but irrespective of our views on normalisation the Access software is still the same.Let me go one step further. If you and I were to run some run some classes on Access the courses would have a lot of differences. But Access would still be Access. Now if an outsider was to look at our courses (and the contradictions) they would not question Access they would question us. Contradictions between our courses would not invalidate Access itself.
I am sure you can mount as strong an argument for full normalisation as I can for "breaking some rules". However, that is comparable to comparing churches like Catholic and Anglican etc."
Think of it this way. People wo are on "health" diets won't touch the pudding or ice cream or hot dogs. The pudding eaters are a class of people.
When it comes to "eisms" there are basically two areas. Either nothing supernatural or there is something supernatural.
For example, in the case of my movie situation the atheist automatically says it is impossible for me to think of a movie I would to see and then it is on TV in a couple of days so there must be an explanation. But if I told the totem pole worshipper, the "born again" etc they would probably then tell me about their experiences.
Atomic Shrimp
Humanoid lifeform
- Local time
- Today, 21:09
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2000
- Messages
- 1,954
I completely understand your point - I just don't agree that 'there is something supernatural' represents a single area in practical, useful terms - it contains far too great a diversity of details, many of them contradictory or hostile to one another.
Supernatural represents a single area in the context of these threads.
Let me put the Access analogy another way. On this forum we all have one thing in common and that is, we believe using the computer is superior to boxes of cards. Now of course on different forums some people will believe in the FileMaker church, others the Excel church and here we are the Access church.
Even in the same church we disagree. In the Access church I prefer to output Access data to Word than use Access Reports and so it goes. However, we all think a computer should sit on the desk instead of boxes of cards.
If the fellow with the boxes of cards encountered the person who uses Access ( in whatever way), FileMaker or Excel he would hear the same basic story.
The bloke with the box of cards also has some variation. Another person thinks manilla folders in the cabinet are the way to go. They share in common a lack of belief in the computer being the solution.
Atomic Shrimp
Humanoid lifeform
- Local time
- Today, 21:09
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2000
- Messages
- 1,954
Not really - you brought it up as being a consensus. 'There is something supernatural' is not a consensus - it's a generalisation that glosses over a collection of widely different things that represent anything but consensus.
To say that the world's religions are in agreement that 'there is something supernatural' - although perhaps technically true - isn't really a very straightforward summary of the real picture. In fact, the world's religions are significantly not in agreement about a whole lot of things - supernatural and otherwise.
If you were questioning two witnesses, one of which said "I saw a large blue elephant enter the room" and the other said "I saw a man on a pogo stick ride into the room", you would be unlikely to summarise this as "well, they clearly saw something!" - you would merely note that they did not agree on any significant details.
"Saw something" here is like your category of 'there is something supernatural' - it's a technically true summary of things that do not actually belong together in the same category.
Of course it is consensus.
Simply look to how atheists define atheism.
Which religion does not believe in supernatural (s) Is there any religion that would suit an atheist?
Let me try another approach. If one of the atheists on the forum announced he/she was no longer an atheist......what would be the big change they had made in their belief or lack of belief systems
If I announce I have become an atheist what big change has occurred in my belief or lack of belief systems.
The fundamental is that one side believe there is more to all this than natural laws, 2 + 2 always = 4 etc. The other side believe that everything can be explained by natural laws and have a complete lack of belief in anything supernatural.
Atomic Shrimp
Humanoid lifeform
- Local time
- Today, 21:09
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2000
- Messages
- 1,954
You're ignoring all of the pertinent details. 'There is something supernatural' is like 'something entered the room' - unless there is some kind of common ground on the detail of what entered the room (or in the case in hand, what are the properties of this supernatural thingy), the consensus is illusory.
Atheism is, as far as I understand it, 'none of the above' - that doesn't necessarily mean the 'above' is a single category.
Buddhism, possibly.
I'm not disagreeing with this summary - I'm just saying that as a summary, it isn't useful, because it crams too many different diverse, contradictory and mutually hostlie things together into the same huge category, and that as a summary, it should not be described as a consensus, because it does not contain consensus.
Last edited:
There are three types of people:
1) Those who believe in a supernatural or supernaturals
2) Those who do not believe in a supernatural or supernaturals.
3) Those who are not sure whether they are 1 or 2
For the purposes of these threads it is perfect.
If the threads were about Anglican Vs Catholic, Christianity Vs Islam Vs Judaism etc then things would be different.
If the threads were about atheism at the quite level Vs atheism at the political level, that is, removing a religious based culture then that would be different.
A Catholic, a Jew and a Muslim all have consensus that there is a supernatural. They do not have consensus with an atheist in that area.
1) Those who believe in a supernatural or supernaturals
2) Those who do not believe in a supernatural or supernaturals.
3) Those who are not sure whether they are 1 or 2
For the purposes of these threads it is perfect.
If the threads were about Anglican Vs Catholic, Christianity Vs Islam Vs Judaism etc then things would be different.
If the threads were about atheism at the quite level Vs atheism at the political level, that is, removing a religious based culture then that would be different.
A Catholic, a Jew and a Muslim all have consensus that there is a supernatural. They do not have consensus with an atheist in that area.
Atomic Shrimp
Humanoid lifeform
- Local time
- Today, 21:09
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2000
- Messages
- 1,954
There are two types of animal:
1. Dogs
2. Everything else
1. Dogs
2. Everything else
That is correct.
Number 1 all have in common they are dogs.
Number 2 all have in common they are not dogs.
And if you approached a farmer in Australia or a pig shooter about using an animal for round up purposes and you suggested a cat or a lizard etc he would say each time, No, it needs to be a dog.
So for that exercise the snake, frog, bird and elephant all have in common that they are not dog and thus not suitable.
Mike,
Here is a copy of Alisa's thread starting post on the Are You an Atheist thread.
"I just finished reading Dawkins "The God Delusion", in which he talked about the correlation between level of education and atheism. i.e., more scientific/technical/educated populations have more atheists (that explains why there are so few atheists in U.S., just look at the educational system).
So lets have a poll. I know there are lots of educated people on this board. Are you an atheist? I'll start. I have always been an atheist (luckily born to non-religous parents), and have always found it incomprehensible that other people can bring themselves to believe there is some supernatural being in the sky responsible for our existence, despite an overwhelming lack of evidence to support that belief."
Here is a copy of Alisa's thread starting post on the Are You an Atheist thread.
"I just finished reading Dawkins "The God Delusion", in which he talked about the correlation between level of education and atheism. i.e., more scientific/technical/educated populations have more atheists (that explains why there are so few atheists in U.S., just look at the educational system).
So lets have a poll. I know there are lots of educated people on this board. Are you an atheist? I'll start. I have always been an atheist (luckily born to non-religous parents), and have always found it incomprehensible that other people can bring themselves to believe there is some supernatural being in the sky responsible for our existence, despite an overwhelming lack of evidence to support that belief."
Atomic Shrimp
Humanoid lifeform
- Local time
- Today, 21:09
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2000
- Messages
- 1,954
So they must all be pretty similar, no?
I did not say all people who are believers. What I said was they all have the common ground in believing in the supernatural.
And Number 2 does not just have in common....not being dogs....In common they also have life. NASA talks about looking for life on Mars. A microbe, elephant and lizard all have in common....life.
Ask Alisa, Rabbie and the others is a particular religion or god they don't believe exists or is it a lack of believe in a supernatural or supernaturals.
But I think we will have to agree to disagree.
Similar threads
