If not theism then what?

[Audie]

What on earth are you talking about Audie?

ANY behaviour that deviate from the ideal norm for humans is deviant behaviour

adjective
1.
deviating or departing from the norm; characterized by deviation :

[PaulSacramento]

What on earth are you talking about Audie?

ANY behaviour that deviate from the ideal norm for humans is deviant behaviour

adjective
1.
deviating or departing from the norm; characterized by deviation :

That is correct and homosexuality falls under that category for humans biologically speaking.

[Audie]

What on earth are you talking about Audie?

ANY behaviour that deviate from the ideal norm for humans is deviant behaviour

adjective
1.
deviating or departing from the norm; characterized by deviation :

That is correct and homosexuality falls under that category for humans biologically speaking.

I tried it, its not for me. Am I still a deviant?

[RickD]

What on earth are you talking about Audie?

ANY behaviour that deviate from the ideal norm for humans is deviant behaviour

adjective
1.
deviating or departing from the norm; characterized by deviation :

That is correct and homosexuality falls under that category for humans biologically speaking.

I tried it, its not for me. Am I still a deviant?

Yes Audie. You're our resident deviant.

[Storyteller]

What on earth are you talking about Audie?

ANY behaviour that deviate from the ideal norm for humans is deviant behaviour

adjective
1.
deviating or departing from the norm; characterized by deviation :

That is correct and homosexuality falls under that category for humans biologically speaking.

I tried it, its not for me. Am I still a deviant?

No, you're curious. It wasn't for you, so no, youre not still a deviant.

Curiousity is healthy. Sometimes, it even leads to God.

[stuartcr]

Th equestionis, if not theisim ( a belief in God) then what?
Will, obviously we have 2:
1) the belief that we simply do not and may never know ( until we die of course) if there is a God.
2) The belief that there is NO God and that THIS, right NOW, is all there is.

While 1 does not necessarily lead to materialism, 2 most certainly does.
Materialism is the belief that the material world we are part of and observe is all there is.

But there is more to atheism and that is, perhaps, best summed up by Richard Dawkins:

The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
Richard Dawkins

Of course, this is also the same person that openly admits:

We are a very, very unusual species.
Richard Dawkins

I accept that there may be things far grander and more incomprehensible than we can possibly imagine.
Richard Dawkins

The fact that life evolved out of nearly nothing, some 10 billion years after the universe evolved out of literally nothing, is a fact so staggering that I would be mad to attempt words to do it justice.
Richard Dawkins


The real issue in regards to a world view and dealing with the problems that many atheist put out ( emotional ones like the problem of suffering for example) is, IMO, this:

While for the Theist the problem if suffering is a valid one to debate and even anguish about since the Theist believes in a God, for the atheist that believes the universe is, to quote Mr Dawkins:
"no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference", there really is NO problem of suffering at all, or injustice or even right and wrong since, well...the universe does NOT exhibit those traits at all.

So, from where does the atheist, the logical atheist, then get his/her view about good or bad or suffering ?

While we are alive, isn't the material world what we are really part of? What else are we capable of observing?

[PaulSacramento]

While we are alive, isn't the material world what we are really part of? What else are we capable of observing?

If you believe that, why even ask the question?

[stuartcr]

While we are alive, isn't the material world what we are really part of? What else are we capable of observing?

If you believe that, why even ask the question?

Why not? It's an interesting topic.

[PaulSacramento]

While we are alive, isn't the material world what we are really part of? What else are we capable of observing?

If you believe that, why even ask the question?

Why not? It's an interesting topic.

Why is it interesting though?
I mean, from a materialistic stand point, these abstract thoughts and notions are, well, pointless and irrelevant and even, according to some, delusional.

[stuartcr]

While we are alive, isn't the material world what we are really part of? What else are we capable of observing?

If you believe that, why even ask the question?

Why not? It's an interesting topic.

Why is it interesting though?
I mean, from a materialistic stand point, these abstract thoughts and notions are, well, pointless and irrelevant and even, according to some, delusional.

They're still interesting, especially the responses. What else is a forum for, than to ask questions, make statements, and get responses?

[RickD]

While we are alive, isn't the material world what we are really part of? What else are we capable of observing?

If you believe that, why even ask the question?

Why not? It's an interesting topic.

Why is it interesting though?
I mean, from a materialistic stand point, these abstract thoughts and notions are, well, pointless and irrelevant and even, according to some, delusional.

They're still interesting, especially the responses. What else is a forum for, than to ask questions, make statements, and get responses?

Stuart,

I think Paul's point is that if the material world is all there is, then the question is meaningless. We would have no desire to even ask the question, if there wasn't something other than the material world.
So, the answer is in the question.

[PaulSacramento]

Rick is correct.
Abstract thinking, the awareness that is far beyond self awareness and awareness of others, the ability to philosophize to ask WHY and How and to question the answers to those questions.
All that and more are not material based thinking.
When we think, we believe, that the material world is all there is we mean that only what we can "five sense" exists.
Even the rest of the universe doesn't exist form a strictly materialistic POV because we simply can NOT observe it.
When we believe there is such a thing as the andromeda galaxy we are not stating a materialistic view because we are taking someone else opinion and believing it base don thei authority.
We simply have NO DIRECT OBSERVABLE evidence that it exists ( seeing through a telescope doesn't count for obvious reasons).

[stuartcr]

Not being an atheist, I guess I have a problem comprehending what a strictly material world is or would be like.

[RickD]

Not being an atheist, I guess I have a problem comprehending what a strictly material world is or would be like.

Me too...

[Kenny]

Th equestionis, if not theisim ( a belief in God) then what?
Will, obviously we have 2:
1) the belief that we simply do not and may never know ( until we die of course) if there is a God.
2) The belief that there is NO God and that THIS, right NOW, is all there is.

While 1 does not necessarily lead to materialism, 2 most certainly does.
Materialism is the belief that the material world we are part of and observe is all there is.

I suspect if something currently not considered a part of the material world were discovered to actually exist; it would be labeled as a part of the material world.

But there is more to atheism and that is, perhaps, best summed up by Richard Dawkins:

The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
Richard Dawkins

Of course, this is also the same person that openly admits:

We are a very, very unusual species.
Richard Dawkins

I accept that there may be things far grander and more incomprehensible than we can possibly imagine.
Richard Dawkins

The fact that life evolved out of nearly nothing, some 10 billion years after the universe evolved out of literally nothing, is a fact so staggering that I would be mad to attempt words to do it justice.
Richard Dawkins


The real issue in regards to a world view and dealing with the problems that many atheist put out ( emotional ones like the problem of suffering for example) is, IMO, this:

While for the Theist the problem if suffering is a valid one to debate and even anguish about since the Theist believes in a God, for the atheist that believes the universe is, to quote Mr Dawkins:
"no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference", there really is NO problem of suffering at all, or injustice or even right and wrong since, well...the universe does NOT exhibit those traits at all.

So, from where does the atheist, the logical atheist, then get his/her view about good or bad or suffering ?

True! The Universe does not exhibit traits of right, or wrong; it is the people in the Universe who exhibit those traits. The Atheist gets his views about good, bad, or suffering by interacting with those people.

Ken