Jump to content

MySockSmell

Regular Member
  • Posts

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MySockSmell

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Rorty's Neo-Pragmatic Panrelationalism, Korzybski's non-Aristotelian General Semantics, R.S. Bakker's Blind Brain Theory, Stirner's Unique Un-Man and the anti-Platonism of Nietzsche/Wittgenstein/Deleuze.
  • More About Me
    Raised in a non-religious home but willingly brainwashed after exposure to outside social/cultural influences. Struggled through Calvinist, Pentecostal, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox denominations, followed by exploration of Buddhist, Daoist and Vedantic philosophy before finally deconverting from all ideological abstractions and metaphysics that lead to a sense of being alienated or trapped, empty or possessed.

Previous Fields

  • Still have any Gods? If so, who or what?
    None

MySockSmell's Achievements

Explorer

Explorer (4/14)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Conversation Starter
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later

Recent Badges

14

Reputation

  1. The idea that Santa Claus does not exist is a naive unsophisticated view that asks the wrong question. We should instead say that he is the condition for the coming into being of presents. ~ Ken (Butterflies & Wheels - 2009)

  2. After reading the 12 Painful Facts, I enjoyed "The Fall of Man - In a Nutshell".
  3. If you want to organize your thinking about God, then I suggest you: 1. Find a way to demonstrate to yourself the difference between the reality of God and the reality of your thoughts/feelings/beliefs about God. If there is no way to clearly distinguish between God and your own thoughts/feelings, then: 1. You will never know for sure whether you've organized your thinking about God or organized your thinking about your thinking. 2. You will mistake questions about how God is supposed to "feel" for questions about how God is supposed to be "real".
  4. For a prime example of how God-botherers make their beliefs unfalsifiable, look at the Pinned General Christian Theological Issues section above and note the first thread titled "Atheist Demolishes Christian's Beliefs". The OP observed a debate on Christian Forums and provided a 10-point list of belief tactics utilized to ignore falsifying data. In addition, others added their own observations: #15 The goalposts kept shifting. #19 Double standard utilized. #24 Re-framing the question to suit believers. Sidetracking with theological speculation. #26 Arbitrarily redefining doctrine and deity, leaving the non-believer at a disadvantage for trying to actually play by the rules and hold to Christianity/Bible. #33 Circular reasoning (it can make your head spin). #42 The believer just drops out of discussion and reappears later as if nothing had been refuted. #57 The thread was shut down by a moderator as if that was not a place for apologetics, However, the main site was reportedly said to be a place for apologetics...."for Christians only"! In other words, just preaching to the choir and patting each other on the back for believing. Here is exhibit A for how Christians go to any lengths imaginable to insulate their beliefs from falsifiablity. Their arguments are not actually FOR a God, but turn out to be arguments AGAINST arguments. When they find they can't argue against an argument, they shut down and just walk away. No one has ever succeeded in falsifying the belief of a believer while they are still in a state of belief. Belief and unfalsifiability are the same thing. Can anyone deny this un-falsifiability applies to Odin and Zeus as well as to Jehovah?
  5. All arguments for religious beliefs and experiences ultimately depend on introspection and first person testimony. Therefore, God experiences are self-referential and religious claims dependent on circular reasoning. Self-reference and circularity are not falsifiable. A sign that points to itself points nowhere. How can you falsify a nowhere? You can't examine feelings, visions and revelations from a third-person public perspective in order to verify that they correspond to empirical facts one way or the other. God always hides within the non-falsifiable first person perspective cloaked in ineffability. Falsifiability is what distinguishes science from theism. Scientists can find agreement on what it would take to make them change their minds. The only thing theists ever agree about is that "nothing" could ever make them change their minds. They just keep telling themselves, "I know, that I know, that I know." The theist dictionary entry for God reads like this: God: see god. A measuring stick which is the measure of its own measuring stickness {without even measuring anything else} might be thinkable, but that does not mean it is sensible to ask whether such a self-measuring measurer could be falsified. God is just such an ultimate, absolute yard stick. God is always tautological. Again, there can be no more a falsification of an awareness of having read the mind of God than there can be a falsification of an awareness of having read your own mind. No scientist ever had to prove the non-existence of Odin, Zeus or any Gods to get rid of them. Self-referential, circular, tautological God-ideas are never disproved for falsified. They are simply forgotten.
  6. "Words are abstractions made of things; reports are abstractions made of experience; inferences are abstractions made of descriptions. When people react to words as if they were things, to inferences as if they were descriptions, etc., they are confusing levels of abstraction". ~ Anatol Rapoport (1950)

    1. TrueFreedom

      TrueFreedom

      or perhaps their reactions are a demonstration of how closely related those abstractions are

  7. I can edit my posts now! But now I have to sign out and must wait until I have more time to fix past mistakes.
  8. Now that I've read Brother Jeff's signature, I know that Phillip K. Dick is the one who originated that reality-belief quote I've encountered several times before.
  9. It really does look like Brother Jeff is hollering, "Glory!". Or at least the way the Pentecostal preachers do it here in the south.
  10. The only thing I've done all day is chat on here and run on my treadmill. I'm hungry. I don't want to work tomorrow.
  11. Christianity uses your own nervous system against you. The nastiest trick Christianity pulls is to hijack recursive, reflective and reflexive neuro-linguistic/semantic brain mechanisms to get people to introspectively turn their own conscience against itself struggling to solve imaginary problems like sin. Feelings are not statements about who you are, whether positive or negative. But Christianity would have you believe that when your brain chemistry makes you feel physically nervous, anxious or depressed, then it must be "speaking" a metaphysical or ontological truth about you personally. Christianity wouldn't work without creating self-doubt, self-betrayal and self-alienation. Once it has tricked you into reacting negatively to being depressed, anxious or nervous, it treats that negative reaction like it was the original stimulus and calls it your "sinfulness". It uses your own depression or anxiety to trap you in a feedback loop of thoughts about thoughts, feelings about feelings, beliefs about beliefs. It's hard for believers to step outside the hall of mirrors to realize that concepts like "sin" only exploit brain chemistry imbalances and does nothing to balance them. For me, Christianity ended up generating a state of paranoia where the darkness "might" win; therefore, the light "must" win. It's a false dilemma that leads to a lot of "what-if" thinking and endless covering of theological bases just in case some variable got left out of the salvation equation. If the victim doesn't get healed, the victim is to blame. The spell was broken after I realized I didn't need to be saved from anything, especially "myself". One of the clues that tipped me off to how Christianity forces people to poison themselves before taking the Jesus cure is the story of former missionary Daniel Everett's failure to convert the Piraha tribe which led to his deconversion. The Piraha language lacks recursion. They can't be tricked by fixed ideas, abstractions, paradoxes or semantic argle-bargle created by inserting thoughts into thoughts. There was no way he could make them feel deficient, broken, self-loathing. He couldn't find the "god shaped void" that all humans are supposed to possess. There was nothing "wrong" with them. Dan also couldn't find anything in nature itself with which demonstrate the existence of a creator God. He had been trained in seminary that you have to get them lost before you can get them saved, but he just couldn't find a way to get the Piraha to damn themselves. Bottom line is, people are going to be afraid, depressed and worried, but Christianity makes them afraid of being afraid, depressed about being depressed and worried because they have worries - and then calls that evidence of sin.
  12. My deconversion was finally complete the moment I realized Christian supernatural revelation amounts to nothing more than a form of mind reading and ventriloquism. The roles of puppet and puppeteer alternate as God's disembodied mind operates from both inside and out. Preacher acts as a puppet by receiving messages from an external puppeteer God, but also acts as puppeteer by projecting an invisible hand puppet called God whose messages are read out loud from inside his head. The trick is, there's no invisible third party to be found speaking internally or externally; no disembodied mind; no mind reading. There's just a ventriloquist and an audience willing to suspend their disbelief. Once I recognized this, I never took first person testimony as evidence for God experiences again. I don't believe in mind reading, so that disbelief includes even my own former mental acts of religious auto-ventriloquism.
  13. That was one of my doubts on the way to deconversion. Why do I have to worship somebody else's God? That petty, vindictive warlior king from the Near East along with his uptight laws and taboos were the Hebews' problem, not mine. All the modern sectarian arguments about law vs grace and free will and eschatology are never going to be solved by trying to figure out a book full of mumbo jumbo that only mattered to some long-gone Isrealite poltitians and priests. Who cares about the tabernacles, sacrifices, tithes, holy days and prophesies from 5000 years ago? Jesus might have been an inspiration to his fellow Jews, but that doesn't make his religion the best for everyone else on earth. I'd much rather that the Hindu Gods turn out to be real than that egotistical monster Jehovah.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.