From: johnsd2@jec316.its.rpi.edu (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Need Input
Reply-To: johnsd2@rpi.edu
Organization: Information Technology Services, Rennselaer Polytechnic Institute.
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 18:55:05 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.215851.4150@news.nd.edu>, smaurer@artin.helios.nd.edu (sean maurer) writes:
|> Hi I am writing a paper on the argument in rec.org.mensa and was wondering
|> if you could answer a few questions.

I'll try, after all why not.

|> Is it irrational to believe in god?

Not exactly. I don't see how you can DISprove the existance of God (as
a possible entity, not in term of did-he-do-this-or-that), so its not
exactly irrational. Reason doesn't really say "it can't be", at least not
to me. I don't see any logical proof that there IS one either, so its
not exactly "rational".

If you mean the Christian God, well it depends on the specific sort
of beliefs we are taling about. Sometimes the Bible is specific
enough to show that if you take it literally, it must be full of it.
But who takes it literally anymore?

Its somewhere in between, or else just beside the point.

|> Is it unproductive?

Depends what you want to produce. Wanna produce a nice orderly society
then it is indeed productive. Wanna produce people who behave in certain
ways (which depend on the god) it is productive. It also tends to produce
intolerance. At least, I've noticed people who think that everyone ought
to obey the Word of God (tm), and are wish to force them to do so. That's
intolerant in my book.

So, I'd give you a big fat no. It's productive, although you may not
like what it produces.

|> If it is both unproductive and irrational (as some atheists claim) then is
|> it always unproductive to do illogical things?

I do not see any evidence that it is always unproductive to do illocial
things. I believe it may be productive to be illogical (you become harder
to predict, for one thing); But perhaps that may be disproven. It hasn't
been to me, so I choose to believe as I do.

|> What about the human purpose of god? The idea that if he didn't exist we would
|> have invented him?

I believe that we did invent him. He has provided an explanation for
how the world is, and why it should be that way. But that's guessword,
the real reason we have invented God is up for speculation (tho I'm
very unsure of myself on this question, and may well be full of it)

|> Compare your beliefs to traditional religion.

You presumably mean "about God"; my believes on Spam are roughtly the same.
I'd say they choose to have Faith in many thing that I do not choose
to have Faith in. Nonetheless I do have Faith (or perhaps faith, if you
like) in some things- I believe that what I observe reflects "reality",
despite the obvious evidence that this is not always so (the evidence?
Dreams! Sometimes they seem very real to me)

That's assuming you mean traditional religion = Christianity. Of course,
this is hardly a universal truth. (in China, Traditional Religion
isn't that, IMHO. If it is, I'm am just SO lost...)

|> Do you thing as intelligence increases belief in god is less prevelant?

This needs a definition of intelligence. Do you mean
cleverness? I'd say no. Do you mean reason? I'd say no (see
comments on reason above) Do you mean scepticism? Yes, IMHO, because
if you are NOT sceptical at all (you're gullible instead),
you won't doubt anyway.

None of these things are "intelligence" of course. But as I don't
have a working definition of intelligence for you, I can't say.

|> Any other thoughts or observations would be appreciated.

Thots? Hmmmmm... Well, sometimes (often) I wonder if something
like Buddhism classifies as a form of "atheism". As I understand
it (and I know this is real weak) one of Buddhisms  central beliefs
is that EVERYTHING is temporary, and all things perish. This, it
seems to me, would not admit anything that I'd call a "God".

Have a nice thot.

|> Sean.

Are you SURE???? heheh.

|> Wait now I have more..
|> In the face of non evidence is it more logical or productive to believe or
|> disbelieve (in reference to anything)

I'd call it personal choice. Wo/ evidence people believe as seems
most reasonable to them. This is good with me, as long as they
[or me, I do this too] realize that this boils down to opinion.

|> Do you accept the possiblity of 'aliens' that are further developed
|> (read: higher) beings than us?

I don't think this is meaningfull. I think aliens must exists (as
there is just SOOOOO much space for them to be in, it seems very likely)
and that they will be DIFFERENT. Like, I think if we ever meet them our
reaction will be something like:

	WHAT THE HELL IS ***THAT*** (ick)

and that our thoughts about THEIR ideas (if they have ideas) will be
similar.

I don't buy the idea that life follows a continuum. I don't
think we are "higher" than (say) a cheetah (that can run faster
than us, and longer) or a bear (much stronger) or a mouse
(can hide better) and so on and so forth. IMHO, invention
(origional toolmaking, inventing things that is) is OUR adaptation,
and other races will almost certainly be different.

|> What evidence is there against God?

I don't see any. I just think God is a farfetched idea, and
that there's no convincing evidence FOR (as shown by the
fact that I am not convinced)

|> What is the purpose then if there is no God?

"the purpose"? The purpose of a chair is to be sat on. But I
presume you mean of life. I don't think you can say there's
one Universal purpose. I feel that if you want a purpose, you
have to go out and MAKE one for yourself.

Maybe YOUR purpose is to bring the Word of NO GOD to rec.org.mensa :)
Ya never know.

|> Obscenely ridiculous questions.

The best kind.

|> Basisically any response is fine just like tell me what you think if you could
|> thanks.
|> I am trying to get a feel for an atheists logic.

You've come to the right place, IMHO.

|> Sorry this whole thing is so jumbled, I can't paste worth a damn.

I noticed... :) [I duck to avoid flames]

|> I would also like to hear from anyone who is a 'believer' and reads this group
|> Also is there any such group for agnostics?

This seems like a good group for agnostics- they get to hear the two sides
that they cannot decide between chew on each other.

|> thanx :)
|> 
|> --
|> Sean Maurer smaurer@artin.helios.nd.edu
|> 

-- 
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0
Newsgroups: alt.atheism