Anyone else not care?

[copiae]

Well, is there anyone else out there who really doesnt care about religion or the non/existance of god?


P.S. i don't mean that you believe god to not exist and so, by extension, you don't care about religion... i mean that you really dont care if god exists/doesnt exist.


[EDIT]: I don't know if this is the right forum to post this in. If not, please move it to whereever it should be. thanks =)

[variant 13]

I don't know if not caring is the right word, I'm really interested in religions and what religious people think.

But as for caring about a god? I think if there was one or many that it would effect the way I viewed the world.

[factfinder]

I think it would be difficult to honestly answer this question in the affirmative.

If there was a God, then he could be quite pissed for those who did not care that He existed.

From my own experience people either:

a) Believe in a god
b) Don't believe in a god
c) Aren't sure
d) The inevitable but few exceptions to a, b, or c

But, in most cases, people are not apathetic about the issue. That's my own personal opinion of course. Humans are so diverse & such complicated creatures that I doubt I have covered all the bases.

[blindwatchmaker]

If you really don't care then why post on this site?
The discussion has wider implications in that many people in the world suffer greatly as a result of religion and some see the fact that so many people believe in a god to be a great problem. I do.

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by copiae
i mean that you really dont care if god exists/doesnt exist.

How could any rational person not care? The existance of God would be the most important thing any person could know. Even the existane of mere god(s) would be vastly more important than retirement plans or global warming. And the non-existance of any of this nonsense means that uncountable billions of lives have be wasted in futility.

Only a person of staggering naivete, irresponsiblity, or insensitivity could not care.

[Jamie_L]

Well, I am an atheist, but I also don't care that much.

I don't really care if there is a God, and I might be living in error. Really, I don't think it matters much. I spout off about Smith's Wager all the time, but it's not just Rhetoric. It's a conclusion I came to during my deconversion process. If God's a swell guy, it doesn't really matter. If God's a bastard, it doesn't matter much either.

*shrug*

Jamie

[Howard]

One would think that anyone who really didn't care wouldn't be here.

[NearNihil Experience]

I care more about whether a person or peoples believe in a God or gods more than being concerned with these dieties actual existence.

I have seen no interaction between people and gods, and the world and gods.

However, I have seen those that believe act from that belief....whether it be war or charity.
I feel its more important to deal with people's beliefe than to deal with the reality of the situation. People's view on reality is much stronger and dangerous that the actual reality. And should be paid that much more attention.

[EGGO]

Before I was one of those, "Couldn't care less" type of people. Ever since I went out with my girlfriend, however, her fundy parents are trying to "save" me. Wanting to stay in the middle ground (and trying to find that right answer to their 'proofs' which I always had at the tip of my tongue) I went out to go edumacate myself.

And well...after finding so many illogics and inconsistencies about it all, I just actually became a disbeliever.

[Protoctista]

I don't understand how anyone could not-care about God's existence. If a God exists and you're an atheist, you've been living in denial as to the true nature of the universe. You're probably missing out on God's magnificent love (or whatever); maybe you're even going to Hell.

On the other hand, if God doesn't exist, then most people are living their lives and choosing their future inspired by falsehoods. I think this is true: God does not exist, and this is an important discovery, much more important than e.g. that the Earth revolves around the sun or that things are made of atoms. If there is no God, that means "the natural order" is not there for a reason, and it can and should be manipulated and changed, in a responsible way.

[Eudaimonist]

Originally posted by copiae
Well, is there anyone else out there who really doesnt care about religion or the non/existance of god?

Care in what way? I care about theism with respect to philosophical issues since the answer could have importance to my philosophical worldview. I care about religion insofar as religious culture could influence politics, and thus myself. (I wouldn't want to live in an atheist-hating theocracy if I can help it.)

But, in a sense, I don't really care since my worldview is self-contained -- my ethics is based on a consideration of human well-being without respect to divine beings -- and I think it is possible for people like myself to find like-minded people and form beneficial subcultures. I think it is possible, in at least a reasonably free society, to live and let live, and to find a happy niche in society.

[copiae]

Originally posted by Yahzi


How could any rational person not care? The existance of God would be the most important thing any person could know. Even the existane of mere god(s) would be vastly more important than retirement plans or global warming. And the non-existance of any of this nonsense means that uncountable billions of lives have be wasted in futility.

Only a person of staggering naivete, irresponsiblity, or insensitivity could not care.



apologies for the lateness of response... unfortunately, life doesnt always go the way we want it to.


anyway, perhaps i could offer some justification.

There are two possibilities:

1) God does not exist. My belief/lack of belief is irrelevant, and therefore i do not care.

2) God does exist. There are three (main) sub possibilities to this:

a) God is a being similar to the god of christianity. Access to a heaven is only permitted via subscribing to his religion, and rigorously obeying the laws set out by god. Since i do not religiously (heh) believe, and since i do not live my life as set out by the rules of religions, i automatically forfeit any claim to enter a heaven, and so i do not care.

b) God is a friendly and forgiving god, in which case any claim i have to entry to heaven will be based upon my actions, and not my beliefs, so i do not care.

c) God is a disinterested being. see 1).

perhaps this view is callous and insensitive. Also, to clarify, i meant that you do not care about religion on a personal level, not that you don't care about how religion affects other individuals and the world.

[Gurdur]

Originally posted by copiae

Well, is there anyone else out there who really doesnt care about religion or the non/existance of god?
I begin to care ever less.
That is owing to SecWeb's effect upon me over 3 years.
As it is, mostly religion/atheism presented here on this board is simply a private quarrel between two camps of Americans, and they think it's of worldwide relevance, and that their experience is the same for all the world.
They've failed to convince me.

Since I feel secure in my humanism and atheism, and I live under no threat but in a state of co-existence with various theisms and fideisms, it really does begin to get all very ..... irrelevant to me.

[Jobar]

Originally posted by copiae
Well, is there anyone else out there who really doesnt care about religion or the non/existance of god?


P.S. i don't mean that you believe god to not exist and so, by extension, you don't care about religion... i mean that you really dont care if god exists/doesnt exist.


We- well, I- call such people 'apatheists'. And I suspect they outnumber strong believers and strong unbelievers alike, by tens, maybe hundreds, to one. You won't find any on this board, I think- though, as Gurdur testifies, there may be those who are heading in that direction.

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by copiae
Also, to clarify, i meant that you do not care about religion on a personal level, not that you don't care about how religion affects other individuals and the world.
Your examples demonstrate why your lack of belief is irrelevant. That's not the same thing at all. Presumably you care because you want to know the truth: and the existance of the supernatural would be more important than all the scientific truths ever discovered.

Can anyone not care about quantum physics, evolution, astronomy, or chemistry? Sure they can. But what do we call people like that?

Nothing complimentary.

Do the details of physics have to emotionally stir you? Well, no. But to say you don't really care is to say that truth isn't terribly important to you. To accept the benefits of science but not care about the methods is also a less than sterling moral position.

Obviously you don't have to be as passionate about physics as Feynman was. But equally obviously, to say you don't care at all about the basic structure of the universe, is remarkable.

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by Jobar
We- well, I- call such people 'apatheists'.
My brother-in-law believes in God and an afterlife. However, he does not believe in thinking about it. It's just something that's supposed to be at the back of your mind, but never exposed to any inquiry (he doesn't go to church, either). In a very strong sense he doesn't care about religion, especially about whether it is true or not. All he cares about is how it makes him feel.

As somebody once said, "not caring about whether religion is true or not because it makes you feel good, is like not caring how you got your money once you've got it."

[BDS]

Is the most important thing about God whether He exists or not?

The Fundamentalists think so, and so do some of the atheists who post here.

As I've suggested in some other threads here, I disagree. God is a pretty interesting chap (gal?), even if (though?) He doesn't exist.

[mjbeam]

The existence of god doesn't matter to me one way or the other. My take on the subject is that if there is a god he/she doesn't appear to be very involved in matters that affect this planet, and is therefore, of no concern to me.

God can do his thing and I'll do mine. I don't need anything from god and I can't imagine why a god would need anything from me. That being said it would be nice if electrons and protons continued to attract, objects in motion still wanted to remain in motion and that farts remain stinky so that the deaf can continue enjoying them with the rest of us.

If one of the documented gods should show himself, I'll read up on him and if I determine that he is moral and beneficial to mankind I'll decide whether he is worthy of my worship or whatever rituals he requires. Threats of death or eternal damnation will not be well received and could even result in rejection of said diety, so word out to prospective supernatural beings.


Currently godless
-mjbeam

[Barcode]

I consider God's existence to be irrelevant to my life -- even if he does exist (unlikely), it's not as if he's ever taken a special interest in the human race. It's an interesting thing to debate intellectually ... but beyond that, I have no regard for God whatsoever.

Now religion .... I wish I could find it irrelevant: as it is, I find the major religions dangerous and think certain things need to be opposed.

Just today, I read in the local newspaper a letter by a woman claiming that once Christ is removed from christmas, and we embrace humanism -- we're on a slippery slope. I guess she's never heard of non-Christian Japan which is doing o.k for itself. But anyway ....

I find the process by which someone arrives at their conclusions to be fascinating ...

[Jobar]

GRD mods- do you think this is an EoG topic? I sort of think so, though I admit I'm pretty apathetic about it... ;)

[mjbeam]

Originally posted by Protoctista
I don't understand how anyone could not-care about God's existence. If a God exists and you're an atheist, you've been living in denial as to the true nature of the universe. You're probably missing out on God's magnificent love (or whatever); maybe you're even going to Hell.

On the other hand, if God doesn't exist, then most people are living their lives and choosing their future inspired by falsehoods. I think this is true: God does not exist, and this is an important discovery, much more important than e.g. that the Earth revolves around the sun or that things are made of atoms. If there is no God, that means "the natural order" is not there for a reason, and it can and should be manipulated and changed, in a responsible way.

I have a couple problems with these arguments.

First, suppose it is proven that god exists. Which franchise does he belong to? If it turns out that the Christians were right, then don't the Wiccans and Hindus have a lot more explaining to do then I? I was just incapable of believing something in the absence of evidence. Surely those who chose the wrong god to worship and kill for will have caused greater offense. What if the Jews are right and the Christians have been worshiping a false profit all these years? How will god feel about that? There are so many different religions and accounts of god that I think it would be arrogant and foolhardy of me to choose one over the others without evidence.

On the other hand I don’t think it’s possible to prove that there is no god. What manner of proof could be accepted? I can't think of any way that it could be definitively proven to me that god absolutely does not exist. It’s impossible. I think that it may be possible in the future to explain the universe and that no godlike creator was necessary.

So, until I see evidence to the contrary I will live my life as if there are no gods. I don’t see how inability to believe something without proof could be characterized as “living in denial”.


-mjbeam

[Gawen]

Simply, I agree with ContraTheos AND Mjbeam. I couldn't have said it better...well...I'd have left out the fart bit...:)

[lville88]

mjbeam has just posted a couple of great explanations for why many atheists believe as they do. It also leaves open the possibility of changing our minds, something that religions normally don't even consider.

[mjbeam]

And your arguments are absurdly narrow. You have chosen a definition of god and religion that wins the argument for you, while ignoring all the others.

I know this was not directed at me but what the hey...

This could be a full time job, explaining my reaction to proof of the existence of god as defined by each of the world’s religions, but assuming you are talking about the Christian god here goes:

The Christian god as described in the old testament is cruel, evil and by my standards, unworthy of worship. If this god was proven to be the one true god I would reject him. Spending eternity in the presence of such a being would be torture. I could not bear to spend countless ages singing praises to this god while billions of people are suffering eternal torment. I would rather be with the rest of those who didn’t pass the test or willfully rejected him. I could never abandon them just for my own comfort.

What of Jesus? Jesus is just the way to god. It’s still the cruel unjust god described in the old testament. He may have been an excellent carpenter and may really love me, but so do my parents and I don’t worship them so it would seem unfair to single him out for adoration.

How can I judge god you may ask? Who am I to question god’s morality? But then who better? Who else can decide for me if a god is worthy of my worship? I have to make this determination for myself. I won’t base it on how powerful this god is. I won’t base it on what the upside is for me personally. I won’t worship god to avoid punishment.

It’s also possible that the god of Abraham exists but that the bible completely warps his true characteristics. Maybe he is really a swell guy and just misunderstood and misreported. I would still need a logical explanation of how my worship helps god, myself and mankind. Once again, worship me or suffer eternal damnation doesn’t cut it with me.

It’s impossible for me to answer definitively how I would react to proof that god exists without a LOT of information about him. Information that would have to be directly observable by me. This is too important and personal for me to accept the word or writings of fallible human beings.

Having said all that, the entire concept of an all powerful god needing me to worship him just seems silly, but that’s just me.

Hope that helps.


-mjbeam

[getalong]

Originally posted by Yahzi
Only a person of staggering naivete, irresponsiblity, or insensitivity could not care.

I am a person of staggering naivete, irresponsiblity, or insensitivity. I don't care. Any gods out there should mind their own business and I'll mind mine.

getalong

[xorbie]

Originally posted by Barcode
I consider God's existence to be irrelevant to my life -- even if he does exist (unlikely), it's not as if he's ever taken a special interest in the human race. It's an interesting thing to debate intellectually ... but beyond that, I have no regard for God whatsoever.

Now religion .... I wish I could find it irrelevant: as it is, I find the major religions dangerous and think certain things need to be opposed.

My thoughts exactly. Why shoud I be bothered by trying to figure out something I'm fairly certain I can't figure out? As other posters have outlined, the very notion of God is so nebulous that most conversation about it is rendered meaningless. Frankly, if there is a God who actually omnibenevolent, I feel that just living out my life the best I can is the best I can do - and I do that anyway. I bet if I were a theist I would probably be just about exactly the same person.

Joel

[tommyc]

I can honestly say with 100% accuracy that my Father does not care about the whole subject of religion. He sees the whole subject as meaningless and intensely boring. He is a retired airline pilot, very intelligent, quite old (78) and interested in a wide variety of practical subjects. However, anything philisophical, in any form completely turns off his interest. He is interested in the here and now, the physical and people.

Its quite annoying actually, because I am starved of religious debate in my environment, in the UK many people find the topic quite dull.

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by getalong
I am a person of staggering naivete, irresponsiblity, or insensitivity. I don't care. Any gods out there should mind their own business and I'll mind mine.

So you are asserting that you do not give a pig's whistle for what will happen to you for the next billion years. Your self-concern only extends at most 100 years into the future - after that you suddenly stop caring? The prospect of being tortured for all of eternity does not trouble you at all? The promise of being reunited with your loved ones, escaping death, suffering, and pain, for all of enternity, does not move you in the slightest?

If indeed your self-concern simply tapers off to zero after a hundred years, and indeed your love for your family and friends will not stand the test of time, then I agree with your self-assessment.

On the other hand, perhaps you merely meant that you find those prospects to be so unlikely as to not be worth thinking about: but that attitude was specifically excluded by the OP.

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by tommyc
I can honestly say with 100% accuracy that my Father does not care about the whole subject of religion.
Yes, but is it possible that is because he think's its all so stupid as to not be worth investigating?

Again, the OP specifically excluded that position for this particular discussion. Not to say that position is unreasonable: in fact, it's my position also. I don't worry much about the truths of religion because I don't think any of them are very likely to be true. But the OP asked a different question than that.

[getalong]

Originally posted by Yahzi
So you are asserting that you do not give a pig's whistle for what will happen to you for the next billion years. Your self-concern only extends at most 100 years into the future - after that you suddenly stop caring?

Well, it's much more likely that my concern only extends at most 50 years. Presuming that I have extended consciousness past death, which I highly doubt, no I do not care. The next life, if there is one, and this life are not connected in any conscious way. The important thing it to live in an ethical and contributory way in this life.

Originally posted by Yahzi
The prospect of being tortured for all of eternity does not trouble you at all? The promise of being reunited with your loved ones, escaping death, suffering, and pain, for all of enternity, does not move you in the slightest?

Uh, no. Where'd you get all that? There isn't any torture. There isn't any all eternity, either. Things will run down and come to the equivalent of zero DC. At least as far as I've been able to determine from extremely casual analysis. I also don't understand the threat of being reunited with my loved ones, it makes no sense. Either the kids will honor my memory or they won't, a situation to be determined in the future. More globally, I don't see that I have any influence over the mandates of heaven, if they exist, nor do they have any influence over me in any direct fashion, if they exist, so it really just doesn't matter at all.

Originally posted by Yahzi
If indeed your self-concern simply tapers off to zero after a hundred years, and indeed your love for your family and friends will not stand the test of time, then I agree with your self-assessment.

Actually. That was your assessment. :)

In any case, there isn't any 'test of time' that I'm aware of. My feelings for my family and friends extends through my period of self-awareness. It might just fail if I someday develop Alzheimers or enter a vegetative state and I don't see how those things can reasonably weigh so heavily as to determine whether I am an ethical member of society.

Originally posted by Yahzi
On the other hand, perhaps you merely meant that you find those prospects to be so unlikely as to not be worth thinking about: but that attitude was specifically excluded by the OP.

No. You excluded the position that no gods exist. Not all that other stuff.

getalong

[mjbeam]

If there is a god who demands that you cut off body parts, and further demands that his followers do the cutting for you if you are unwilling, and you live in a society that is full of cutters, how could any sane person not care?

In this scenerio why would I care if the god that the cutters are following actually exists or not? Shouldn't I just keep one eye on the cutters at all times? Wouldn't my time be better spent creating a government whereby I can be protected from the cutters? Perhaps a republic that respects the rights of all of it's citizens and protects the non-cutters from the cutters and vice versa?

Certainly I care about the cutters. They have an actual demonstrable effect on my life.


-Mike

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by mjbeam
In this scenerio why would I care if the god that the cutters are following actually exists or not?
Because if the cutter god actually existed, then cutting would make perfect sense!

If the doctor tells you he wants to amputate your foot so the gangrene doesn't kill you, why, the existance of gangrene is obviously important. In the same way, if the cutter god exists, then whatever amputations the cutters perform is justified by the cutter god's response to it.

[mjbeam]

Originally posted by Yahzi
Because if the cutter god actually existed, then cutting would make perfect sense!

If the doctor tells you he wants to amputate your foot so the gangrene doesn't kill you, why, the existance of gangrene is obviously important. In the same way, if the cutter god exists, then whatever amputations the cutters perform is justified by the cutter god's response to it.

You lost me there. If the cutter god exists then cutting still doesn't make sense to me. The cutter god would have to provide a logical explanation to me. If the cutter god refuses to provide an explanation then he is still of no concern to me. I would concern myself with whoever has the cutting instrument.

Look, if some god proves his existance and says "Follow my rules or suffer the consequences" and I determine that following the rules would be immoral then I will not follow them, no matter how severe the punishment. He is god so there is no way for me to resist because I am mortal. Therefore I will live this life as best I can with no thought to the punishment in the afterlife. I cannot change the fact that will be punished because I will not become immoral in this life to purchase a reward for myself in this life or the next. No use dwelling on something I can't change.


-mjbeam

[cybergeek]

Honestly even if there did turn out to be a god I probably
woudln't give that much a damn about him anyway.
For one thing I doubt he did much for me and what would I
owe him?

You can say he created me or gave me life.
But is that reason enough to give gratitude?
No. Your parents could have brought you into the world
and left you to fend for yourself.
But then do you owe them anything afterwards?
Again no.

I don't remember making any obligations or promising anything
to anyone before I was born.
So what obligation am I under to god if there was one?

If I'm alive then it's for myself not someone else.
If god objects then that should be his problem not mine.
It was him who created me and not I.

[getalong]

Originally posted by Yahzi
I got it from, you know, the Bible.

Ah. Unfortunately, I don't know the Bible well.

Originally posted by Yahzi
I realize that you hold standard theology in utter contempt, but sadly I am part of that large contingent which does not recognize your own personal fantasy as obviously the only possible theological position.

Again: go read the OP. Read the OP. Try reading the OP. Consider reading the OP. Then, consider actually responding to the OP.

I don't hold 'standard theology' in utter contempt, as far as I'm aware. If by standard theology you mean Bible - as in Christianity, I'm afraid I'm not familiar with it. I do not expect you to recognize my 'own personal fantasy' as you phrase it.

I have read the original question. Several times. The original question does not ask only about the Christian God (the custom is to capitalize that, no?), nor is the question directed only to Christians. It does not specify which god or gods is it asking about in any way. It does not in any way mention anything about 'hellfire'.

Given that this is inching into the realm of personal insults, I think it's best I drop out at this point. I hope I answered the question the original poster had asked in some useful fashion.

getalong

[jj]

Originally posted by Yahzi
So you are asserting that you do not give a pig's whistle for what will happen to you for the next billion years.

Come now, stop being circular. That only matters if you accept all that codswallop in the first place, and actually thing that anything powerful enough to be a god would give a hoot about little chemical units floundering about.

Your self-concern only extends at most 100 years into the future - after that you suddenly stop caring?

Again, circular. You PRESUME the existance of a soul. You don't get to do that. I'll start giving a teeny-tiny hoot about this all if you actually manage to prove that anything survives when my chemistry malfs.

The prospect of being tortured for all of eternity does not trouble you at all?

Goodness, you're not even good at the extortionist method of proselytizing. If you end when your chemistry malfs, what's this about "all eternity"? Until you come up with some reason that I should even begin to credit the laughable idea that something that nobody's ever seen, felt, measured, touched, etc, survives that final chemistry malf, well, 'scuse me if I find you a bit naive and more than a bit offensive in your attempts at extortion.

The promise of being reunited with your loved ones, escaping death, suffering, and pain, for all of enternity, does not move you in the slightest?

Now just whose god are we talking about here? Do you mean the Wargod of Sumer, do you mean the Fertility Goddess, or Zeus, or Karna and Arjuna, or Mithras or the Wild Hunt, or what here? What's this "escaping death and suffering" nonsense? I dare say that Mithras doesn't give much for that!

If indeed your self-concern simply tapers off to zero after a hundred years, and indeed your love for your family and friends will not stand the test of time, then I agree with your self-assessment.

Which god? Whose "heaven"? Could you be a bit more specific about which mythological creation you think I should worry about? After you do that, can you provide some testable, falsifiable, verifiable evidence that there's ANYTHING AT ALL to what some humans might have written down on a tablet in the desert?

On the other hand, perhaps you merely meant that you find those prospects to be so unlikely as to not be worth thinking about: but that attitude was specifically excluded by the OP.
Your "OP" presumes where it should not, and the OP also assumes that I should somehow care about things with no evidence in their favor.

It's like green cheese on the moon. I'm indifferent to that idea, as well. Likewise to the idea that space aleeeens shot down the last Mars probe.

I'm indifferent to things that don't show evidence. Too many people can think up too many fairy tales, and I don't have time for them, after all, life ends when my chemistry malfs, as far as you or I or anyone else can actually determine.

I suggest that that is also the only moral, ethical and sensible way to operate one's life.

[jj]

Originally posted by Yahzi
Ah, the magic of word taffy. Simply type the word "god" and watch people assume it means whatever crazy notion they choose to apply to it. Furthermore, watch them rail in outrage when you suggest it might actually mean something different to other people.

Well, it means lots of different things to different people, different cultures, and different belief systems. I hope you're not arguing for "one true way" here, without having some evidence that there is such a thing, now?

I got it from, you know, the Bible.

Which one? Jefferson's? The KJV? RSV? GNV? What bible? What author? What translation? Since they don't agree with each other, and since none of them appear to be anything more than translations of a bunch of older myths, that probably date back to even older myths, etc, well, what's this big deal about the 'Bible'?

How about the dreamtime? What about Coyote and the Crow?

I realize that you hold standard theology in utter contempt, but sadly I am part of that large contingent which does not recognize your own personal fantasy as obviously the only possible theological position.

So, now you're arguing ad-populum, but I can't even figure out WHAT you're arguing ad-populum. What "large contingent" of what do you think you're referring to? It would help if you explained? Do you mean all Hindu's? All Daoists? Perhaps all Buddhists? Those are the biggest "contingents" I can think of, and some of them don't even have this need to have a "hell" that you were trying to extort with in some other post.

Again: go read the OP. Read the OP. Try reading the OP.

Veni
Vidi
Legi
Risi

Consider reading the OP. Then, consider actually responding to the OP.
And?

[Luiseach]

Originally posted by Yahzi
Are you interested in communicating an idea, or just in scoring points?

*snip*

Were you seriously unable to discern my meaning despite my hyperbole? Either your literacy skills are in serious trouble, or you are just nitpicking. Neither case is complimentary.

Goodness.

Gurdur is far too intelligent and gentlemanly to participate in a discussion 'just' in order to 'score points'. Further, his literacy skills are certainly not in question here; indeed, his skills far exceed the requirements of contributing to this - or any other - discussion.

[Gurdur]

Originally posted by Luiseach
Goodness.

Gurdur is far too intelligent and gentlemanly to participate in a discussion 'just' in order to 'score points'. Further, his literacy skills are certainly not in question here; indeed, his skills far exceed the requirements of contributing to this - or any other - discussion. Many thanks indeed, :)
but I think jj said it better than I ever could:
Originally posted by jj
Veni
Vidi
Legi
Risi

And?

[tommyc]

Originally posted by Yahzi
Yes, but is it possible that is because he think's its all so stupid as to not be worth investigating?

Again, the OP specifically excluded that position for this particular discussion. Not to say that position is unreasonable: in fact, it's my position also. I don't worry much about the truths of religion because I don't think any of them are very likely to be true. But the OP asked a different question than that.
Actually Yahzi, on reading the OP again, I have to conclude that yes, I suppose it is more his position that he discards the subject because it is absurd. I believe he really thinks it's a "non-subject", he is probably not aware of any formal arguments about God, to him it is merely a ludicrous position to hold.

Though I think he is SLIGHTLY different. The only reason I suggest that is he honestly doesn't care about anything impractical. He discards sport, fiction and anything which doesn't relate to his life directly. He certainly does believe in sport, yet he discards it in the same manner as he discards religion. It has no relevance to him, so he does not care to expend any energy considering it.

However, (again I switch stance*) I know he is an atheist, therefore excluding him as a subject for this debate, yet he would never make a statement about it.

* I tend to do this a lot, I am terrible for changing my mind mid-debate, I apologise in advance if it makes it difficult to label my position at times.

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by mjbeam
I cannot change the fact that will be punished because I will not become immoral in this life to purchase a reward for myself in this life or the next.
But what if it's not an immoral act that is required? What if it is only a trivial act, like baptism by water? Surely then the consequences of hellfire make you care.

I think your response that your actions are fixed by the dictates of morality, and therefore you don't care in an important sense because it can't change what you do, is the first good response to the OP I've seen. I tend to agree. But I also think that all of us wold be terribly concerned about the existance of god (despite your very logical position) if only we believed it were at all likely.

If someone threatens you with hellfire, it is bizarre to assert you don't care. You can be resigned to your fate because of your moral choices, or you can dismiss the threat because you don't believe it: but it seems quite impossible that anyone would agree that they were going to hell for eternity, and yet not be concerned or aggravated by it in any way.

I'm just trying to point out that the truth of god's existance is of fundamental importance to all people. Like understanding gravity, or evolution. It is an issue of such over-reaching consequences that no rational person can be indifferent to its truth or falsity.

You've presented the best response so far, but surely you agree that while you would not change your actions if an immoral god threatened you with hellfire, you'd still care. On the other hand, several people here seem to indicate that the existance of god, and therefore the basic ground of all being and the fundamental structure of physical matter and information, are too trivial to be concerned about.

In other words, some people seem to be arguing that truth is not important for its own sake, even when it is about something so fundamental to every other truth.

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by getalong
I have read the original question. Several times. The original question does not ask only about the Christian God (the custom is to capitalize that, no?), nor is the question directed only to Christians.
So, because the generic term "god" was used, you think it is perfectly appropriate to assume that what the OP was referring to was your definition of god, and not any other?

I took the unspecified "god' to mean all gods. You took it to mean your own particular meaning. While I cannot read the mind of the original poster, I do feel quite safe in assuming that he did not mean your specific definition.

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by jj
That only matters if you accept all that codswallop in the first place
Yes, exactly. That was the thrust of the OP. Does anyone actually think that it is possible that God exists, and yet not care?

I submit the answer is no. Despite tommyc's very reasonable argument, I still submit that we would all "care" about being subject to eternal torment, if only we actually believed it. Ergo, we can assert that we do not care about god only because we do not believe in god.

Goodness, you're not even good at the extortionist method of proselytizing.
My unrelenting atheism and strict materialism probably detract somewhat from my presentation of this point of view.

Now just whose god are we talking about here?
Given that the OP did not specify a god, I took it to mean all of them. Do you care about any, all, gods? Obviously we don't care about some gods, like the god of daffodills: but I did not think selecting a specific case and arguing it was a respectable response to a general question. I concede we do not care about the god of daffodills: now, given that YHWH is one proposed god, is there anyone who thinks he could exist but does not care about him? Ditto for Allah.

Could you be a bit more specific about which mythological creation you think I should worry about?
Why, yes. YWHW, the god of Abraham, as described in the Bible. He promises to torture you or provide a paradise, for eternity. Now, can you honestly say that you think either of those are even remotely possible, but you don't care about them? No, you can't. Your entire post demonstrates that you do not care because you do not believe.

Your "OP" presumes where it should not, and the OP also assumes that I should somehow care about things with no evidence in their favor.
It was a simple question. The OP did not ask you to assume anything: it simply asked, is there anyone who does think god(s) could exist but are indifferent to the actual truth?

My answer is no: there are certain gods whose actual existance lead to such great consequences that it would be irrational to not care about them, if they were true. Therefore you must care whether or not they are true.

Everyone else's answer seems to be, "I don't care about <insert specific god>, and therefore your dragging in other gods is just silly."


I suggest that that is also the only moral, ethical and sensible way to operate one's life.
I completely agree. One should not care about things that are unlikely. The converse is that one should care about things that are likely! If god were likely, then you should care, if you want to be moral ethical, and sensible. I agree!

Now please explain that to the rest of the audience.

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by Luiseach
Further, his literacy skills are certainly not in question here
Speaking for myself, I generally expect people to be able to read the phrase "uncountable billions" and extract the meaning "a freaking lot of people, billions of them, even," or at the very least, to be able to rationally substitue the phrase "countable billions."

Gurder made such an issue of the adjective "uncountable" that he gave the distinct impression that he could not understand my point.

I submit that is either a) a problem of literacy, or b) nit-picking. Obviously you disagree. Perhaps you'd like to tell me what you though it was. Or perhaps you would like to tell me that you also find the phrase "uncountable billions" so utterly devoid of semblance of meaning as to be incomprehensible.

[jj]

Originally posted by Yahzi
My answer is no: there are certain gods whose actual existance lead to such great consequences that it would be irrational to not care about them, if they were true. Therefore you must care whether or not they are true.


Ok, I'm going to make one up on the spur of the moment. Do you, then, need to consider what it will do to you if you do or don't believe?

If you answer "yes", I'll make up another one. Then we'll go into children's fairy tales, etc.

If you answer "no", you just said that the question wasn't important to you, and you're what you said didn't exist.


The point is simple, I don't care about silly ideas, UNLESS they get in my road.

One could suggest that's why I care about the religion of the usurped Sumerian War God, and one would be right, the ONLY REASON I CARE ABOUT THEIR CODSWALLOP is that it GETS IN THE ROAD OF LIVING A DECENT LIFE.

Btw, the god I hypothesized would send you to perdition forever, in full view of 99 sexual partners you can never have, but need, if you didn't believe before I even filled in the details.

I dare say that does make my point, yes?

[mjbeam]

Originally posted by Yahzi
But what if it's not an immoral act that is required? What if it is only a trivial act, like baptism by water? Surely then the consequences of hellfire make you care.
I will concede that there are god scenerios that I could dream up in which I would care. Take the seventy seven virgin scenerio for example. Where does the line form? But then again, why are they virgins? You know where they get virgin wool don't you? From ugly sheep.

But anyway, here is the original question:
Well, is there anyone else out there who really doesnt care about religion or the non/existance of god?
There is a lot of room for interpretation here. If the question had been "Who here doesn't care about sports or athletes?" and I posted a reply stating that I don't, would you then ask me, "How can you say you don't care about athletes? What if an entire hockey team came over to your house and raped your wife? Are you saying you wouldn't care?"

And now that I read the question closer what it actually says is "Who doesn't care that there are no gods?" He probably meant "existence/nonexistence" but maybe not. Maybe he put a slash instead of a hyphen. For the sake of the argument I'll assume he means the former.
I think your response that your actions are fixed by the dictates of morality, and therefore you don't care in an important sense because it can't change what you do, is the first good response to the OP I've seen. I tend to agree. But I also think that all of us wold be terribly concerned about the existance of god (despite your very logical position) if only we believed it were at all likely.
Of course I care to a degree. I care about everything to some degree or other. But I am of the opinion that there is a threshold that the caring must cross before I answer in the affirmative. Otherwise everytime some one asks me if I care about something it would be necessary to answer yes, no matter how little I care.
If someone threatens you with hellfire, it is bizarre to assert you don't care. You can be resigned to your fate because of your moral choices, or you can dismiss the threat because you don't believe it: but it seems quite impossible that anyone would agree that they were going to hell for eternity, and yet not be concerned or aggravated by it in any way.
Perhaps it is due to the time I spent in the military but I honestly do not concern myself very much with things I can't change. Inevitability relegates the issue to below the 'caring' threshold. I guess that knowing for absolute certain that something bad is going to happen combined with free time to sit around and think about it would cause threshold creep.
I'm just trying to point out that the truth of god's existance is of fundamental importance to all people. Like understanding gravity, or evolution. It is an issue of such over-reaching consequences that no rational person can be indifferent to its truth or falsity.
That would totally depend on which god was discovered to be true.
You've presented the best response so far, but surely you agree that while you would not change your actions if an immoral god threatened you with hellfire, you'd still care. On the other hand, several people here seem to indicate that the existance of god, and therefore the basic ground of all being and the fundamental structure of physical matter and information, are too trivial to be concerned about.

In other words, some people seem to be arguing that truth is not important for its own sake, even when it is about something so fundamental to every other truth.
You are making a lot of assumptions. Let's say that the determination that there is a god is based solely on definitive proof that the universe could not have come to be without a god. The discovery can discern none of the characteristics of this god but is able to prove that god has not interacted with the material world since the creation. Would this discovery raise my level of interest very much? Yeah, for about 5 minutes. I'm no Stephen Hawkings. I'm not a theoretical physicist. This wouldn't change my world view very much. Maybe someone a lot smarter than I could use this information to further scientific discovery and put it together in Readers Digest format so I could understand it. Then i might get interested.

I will also concede that I definately care about religion. Everytime I can't buy my monthly bottle of Scotch on Sunday because the liquor store is closed I am reminded that I care about religion.

(This is the edit)I am reasonably certain that one day I will die, along with all other humans. I won't say I don't care at all but it's inevitable. It's going to happen and there is nothing I can do about it. It is not even in the top 10 things that I worry about from day to day. I'm talking about dying of natural causes at the end of a long life, I do concern myself with things that will get me killed now or things that will significantly shorten my life. I view eternal damnation the same way.

-mjbeam

p.s. I'm new to this forum. What's up with you and Gurdur?

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by mjbeam
I honestly do not concern myself very much with things I can't change.
I agree. It's hard to say you care about something when you're not willing to think about it or do anything about it. (And I agree that not worrying about things you can't change is good sense!)

But, the premise of the Christian god implies that you can do something about it. So presumably you'd care, if you thought it was believable.

As for not being interested in the basic foundation of the universe, I guess I just can't relate. I suppose its reasonable to not be terribly concerned with the gory mathematics of how stars work or where planets come from: but I find it hard to belive that someone could not be interested in how things work.

I think people have a moral duty towards the truth, and I think the existance of the supernatural would be an encompassing enough truth that everyone would have a moral duty towards it. So I think you ought to care about something so fundamental.

On the other hand, I don't find the supernatural at all plausible, and so I really don't care about it all. But - if it were to be true - then I would certainly want to know!

Maybe that's how I see the question: would you want to know if it were true? If there were a god out there, would you even want to know? I can't imagine answering that question any other way than, "of course!"


p.s. I'm new to this forum. What's up with you and Gurdur?
Honestly, I have no idea.

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by jj
I dare say that does make my point, yes?
Is this thing on? Can anybody hear me?

I was under the distinct impression that I ended my last post to you agreeing with your position. Upon reviewing my post, I see that in fact, I was agreeing with you.

You only pay attention to things that are a) relevant, and b) plausible. You recognize that the Christian god is relevant (via his threats of hellfire), but you do not concern yourself with it because it is implausible.

I think that it is a perfectly reasonable position. In fact, it happens to mirror my own perfectly.

However, the point is that both you and I would care about god, if we found it even remotely plausible. We don't care about god because we don't find it likely to be true. Ergo, we are not the people the OP asked for: we are not people who don't care about god regardless of whether or not we think god exists.

[jj]

Originally posted by Yahzi
However, the point is that both you and I would care about god, if we found it even remotely plausible. We don't care about god because we don't find it likely to be true. Ergo, we are not the people the OP asked for: we are not people who don't care about god regardless of whether or not we think god exists.

You're missing a point, sir. I agree with that, as far as it goes, but in fact given the lack of evidence for god(s), I don't CARE anymore. Yes, at one point I would have been concerned, had there been evidence. Now, I have concluded that it is exceptionally unlikely for any new evidence to arise, and that there is no real problem with first cause, so I am, frankly, uninterested in the concept altogether, except as it tries to move past my nose.

In other words, based on past experience where I was concerned, I am no longer concerned, and no longer even interested in the issue, except as mythology attempts to shove itself down my craw.

So, this is not JUST the implausibility factor, the sheer, enormous implausibility has moved on to simple indifference. When somebody brings up some new god, I don't care any more.

And, I think you're in that position, too, and I dare say that you, I, and some others here all agree that it just doesn't matter to us, at least in terms of the trVth value. Mere implausibility is no longer the primary criterion, it's moved on to "naaah". Only some startling new evidence will break that apathy.

Getalong, you still reading this? Dare I say that we all appear to agree despite Yazhi's insistance? :p

[mjbeam]

Originally posted by Yahzi
I agree. It's hard to say you care about something when you're not willing to think about it or do anything about it. (And I agree that not worrying about things you can't change is good sense!)

But, the premise of the Christian god implies that you can do something about it. So presumably you'd care, if you thought it was believable.
Once again, I have found the Christian god to be lacking in moral character and I would not worship him (whatever that means) even in the unlikely event that he actually existed. I would live my life just as I do now and accept the fact that death will be a bit more uncomfortable than I originally planned.
As for not being interested in the basic foundation of the universe, I guess I just can't relate. I suppose its reasonable to not be terribly concerned with the gory mathematics of how stars work or where planets come from: but I find it hard to belive that someone could not be interested in how things work.
The realization that the christian god exists would not enlighten us into the inner workings of the universe. It's not natural law, it's god magic!
I think people have a moral duty towards the truth, and I think the existance of the supernatural would be an encompassing enough truth that everyone would have a moral duty towards it. So I think you ought to care about something so fundamental.
As soon as god is proven then there is no longer such a thing as truth except the existance of god. Assuming the omnipotent version everything is just his whim. Facts, history, the laws of thermodynamics are all out the window. God can change any of it anytime he wants. No need to build a space craft to explore Mars, just pray for god to miracle your ass there.

-mjbeam

[dantonac]

No, I do not, on a personal level, care at all if there is a god or not. If there is a god and it reveals itself to me in such a way that my mind is changed, then maybe I would care, but as it stands I really don't care one way or the other.

I am a former fundie, and prior to arriving at atheism, I made a break with what I believed to be God, in this case the Christian god. Not going to bother with irrelevant personal details, suffice it to say that I came to very much dislike god, but still believed in his existence, believed I would be going to hell, etc. I learned to just resign myself to that fate.

So, that is the sense in which I really don't care if god exists or not. If the God of the Christians, Jews, or Muslims appeared to me and said "Boo", it wouldn't make one whit of difference to me other than I would likely pee my pants. As for the other god beliefs, frankly they all either bore me or they sound like beings with serious issues that would have a hard time being relevant to life as I know it.

So, no, I don't care if god(s) exist or not because I can't think of how my personal life or the way I lived it, the values I hold important etc. would be any different.

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by jj
So, this is not JUST the implausibility factor, the sheer, enormous implausibility has moved on to simple indifference. When somebody brings up some new god, I don't care any more.

But surely you don't care about new gods because you assume they are implausible?

If I could prove, really truly scientifically prove the existance of a supernatural being, are you saying you wouldn't even be interested?

[Jeffrey Formosa]

I really care if there is a god or not. If the Christian god is real so many people will go to hell(way higher then most people think).

I will only worship a religion that can turn every one to it's path, sounds so good it brings a smile to every one who hears it and makes the world better, any thing less then that will not be worshiped by me.

[jj]

Originally posted by Yahzi
But surely you don't care about new gods because you assume they are implausible?


Is there something unclear? The idea, for me, has gone from implausibility to absurdity, to utter indifference.


If I could prove, really truly scientifically prove the existance of a supernatural being, are you saying you wouldn't even be interested?

If you prove something scientifically, it's not supernatural any more.

[Novowels]

Eh. Not to interrupt the "flow" of the thread as it were, but in answer to the OP: I don't much care.

I, personally, think the concept of "god" is ridiculous and without merit, and to even give it the weight of consideration (let alone debate) merely legitimizes a wholly illegitimate concept.

The only thing the "god" concept has going for it as opposed to a fictional construct that I completely make up right now is that it happened thousands of years ago and was taken seriously for a while.

Everything after that is an argument from popularity gone through an evolutionary wringer to remove the least waffley arguments.

I care about "god" about as much as I care about "leprechauns" and worry about "heaven" and "hell" just about as much as a leprechaun's pot of gold.

[Furyus George]

Originally posted by Novowels
Eh. Not to interrupt the "flow" of the thread as it were, but in answer to the OP: I don't much care.

I, personally, think the concept of "god" is ridiculous and without merit, and to even give it the weight of consideration (let alone debate) merely legitimizes a wholly illegitimate concept.

The only thing the "god" concept has going for it as opposed to a fictional construct that I completely make up right now is that it happened thousands of years ago and was taken seriously for a while.

Everything after that is an argument from popularity gone through an evolutionary wringer to remove the least waffley arguments.

I care about "god" about as much as I care about "leprechauns" and worry about "heaven" and "hell" just about as much as a leprechaun's pot of gold.

WOW! Seems that you have given the concept weighty consideration indeed!

The fact that you have reduced God to a ridiculous fiction, as you say, requires that you yourself are Omniscient and Omnipresent.

Ergo, you must be God!

And to think you're wasting away in anonymity in Iowa!

Furyus George; hopes you make at least six figures

[jj]

Originally posted by Furyus George
WOW! Seems that you have given the concept weighty consideration indeed!

The fact that you have reduced God to a ridiculous fiction, as you say, requires that you yourself are Omniscient and Omnipresent.

Ergo, you must be God!

And to think you're wasting away in anonymity in Iowa!

Furyus George; hopes you make at least six figures

Do I sense a rather disrespectful, insulting use of the fallacy of the excluded middle here?

Yes, I think I do.

Tsk, tsk.

[Postcard73]

This thread is temporarily closed...

[Postcard73]

Okay, I've split out the argument between Gurdur and Yahzi, so I'll re-open the thread...

If anyone wants to examine Yahzi's opinions on this topic with Gurdur's replies, then they can be found here (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=72681), but that thread will not be re-opened...

Yahzi- it is obvious that you feel very passionate about your opinion, but you do not have to make it over and over again in the same thread. Your voice has been heard...

P73- GRD Moderator

Edit- I did leave some of the less combative posts in this thread because I think they still relate to the OP.

[Novowels]

Originally posted by Furyus George
WOW! Seems that you have given the concept weighty consideration indeed! Ah. Sarcasm.

The fact that you have reduced God to a ridiculous fiction, as you say, requires that you yourself are Omniscient and Omnipresent. I have "reduced" nothing. And no, it does not require that I, myself, be omniscient and omnipresent.

Ergo, you must be God!Well, no. I'm ridiculous, but I'm not all that fictional.

[Lanakila]

I cared about and believed in the Christian God for about 38 years. I worshipped and served him first (most of the time) for about 18 years. I went to Bible College, and studied and strived to know all about him, and his dealings with people. I found allas he does not exist a couple of months ago, and now I care that I wasted so much damned time, money, and effort, on him, and churchianity. I care that I led others to believe in him as well, that I convinced others they weren't believing exactly right, and that they needed to be born again. I care that I dragged my kids to church and brainwashed them for years. I am thankful that they think for themselves, and began questioning.

I guess I care about whether God exists, or not since so much of my time was spent believing in him. But, I don't care about trying to convince theists they need to stop believing. If religion makes them feel good, and helps them in a crisis that's what its for IMO. I wouldn't want to take that away from anyone. But however if a theist tries to convince me that I am all wet, they are opening themselves up to my opinions on the matter.

I will not be an evangelist for atheism. I don't see a reason for that, but that doesn't mean my opinion isn't valuable either. I guess the lifestyle evangelism classes I had as a Christian have finally sunk in, LOL.