Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Poll: What is your religion?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 368 posts

Re: Poll: What is your religion?

#131

Post by jswinghammer »

Tycho wrote: post #90
jswinghammer wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure there is a false dichotomy present there. You're either going to burn in hell or you're not. The downside of trying something to get out of that sentence is small and upside is big. It's terrible theology but it's decent logic.

I think it's a false dichotomy because there is more than two possible outcomes. At one end you have 'there is no god' in which case it doesn't matter, fine, but then at the other end there's more than just 'worship God' - there's also 'worship multiple Gods', or 'worship the devil', or endless other possibilities of worship, with no strong reason to pick any one of them. Unless I have misunderstood the Wager.

I think the assumption is that you are considering believing in a Christian God and on those terms the wager is valid. As far as I know other religions offer little promises in terms of what happens if you stick with it.

I think category A would be believing in Jesus and category B would be not believing in Jesus whatever that means to you.

Re: Poll: What is your religion?

#132

Post by kylemathews »

anthonyb wrote: post #113
kylemathews wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a false dichotomy for the vast majority of religious people. There are very few people that believe exclusively in faith healing and don't accept modern medicine.

Faith healing was just an example. You can substitute pretty much any "because God said so" explanation. I think the reason that the world makes sense for most people is because they have their adequacy levels set too high - they're too used to 'hand wavy' explanations and not having to actually think through things for themselves.

I think that was augustl's point. Most atheist understand just as little about science as most religious people understand about God.

And is there any difference really between a "because God said so" explanation and a "because the Doctor said so" explanation? To follow either, you must rely on faith in the goodness and wisdom of the instruction given as you don't fully understand the reasoning behind it. To the religious and science-skeptic alike, the explanations used by the other camp sounds "hand wavy".

But Truth is Truth and both religion and science, if practiced well, will guide the earnest seeker along.

Re: Poll: What is your religion?

#133

Post by philwelch »

jbm wrote: post #32

It seems disingenuous to mix Agnosicism with Atheism. Both are utterly different - one makes a knowledge claim (atheism) while the other is in a position of neutrality or indifference (agnosticism)

Atheism and agnosticism are orthogonal:

1. If you believe in a god but don't claim to have knowledge, you are a theist agnostic. (This is not that silly. Many people believe things they do not claim to know. For instance, you can believe that P != NP while acknowledging the question as unproven and unknown.)

2. If you don't believe in a god but don't claim to have knowledge, you are an atheist agnostic.

3. If you claim to know, not just believe, that a god exists, you're a theist (but not an agnostic).

4. If you claim to know there are no gods, you're an atheist (but not an agnostic).

Re: Poll: What is your religion?

#134

Post by electromagnetic »

RK wrote: post #51
jbm wrote: post #32

It seems disingenuous to mix Agnosicism with Atheism. Both are utterly different - one makes a knowledge claim (atheism) while the other is in a position of neutrality or indifference (agnosticism)

Really comes down to a matter of definitions. For example, many would claim that atheism is simply the lack of a belief. Some would define agnosticism as the positive belief that the existence of God cannot be known. But these are just example definitions.

Grouping atheists with agnostics is as catch-all as 'Christianity'. I was educated Anglican and to me it's as vastly different from Catholicism as you can tell, my youth minister was actually a methodist and the assistant was baptist. My shop teacher was actually a Quaker, who actively disbelieved in the hierarchical structure of church, who was the person who probably put me on a path to agnosticism.

My agnosticism is of the - God's existence cannot be proven or disproven (at least in my lifetime, or potentially within the human races existence as homo sapiens) so it's illogical to take the side of religion or anti-religion. The logical conclusion (to me) is that it is an unknowable variable, concerning myself with it is a wasted effort.

Besides Greek Mythology has all the cool stories, Heracles slaying Hyrdas and freeing Prometheus. If religion can't entertain me in the slightest then it truly holds no value to me.

Re: Poll: What is your religion?

#135

Post by anthonyb »

anthonyb wrote: post #113
kylemathews wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a false dichotomy for the vast majority of religious people. There are very few people that believe exclusively in faith healing and don't accept modern medicine.

Faith healing was just an example. You can substitute pretty much any "because God said so" explanation. I think the reason that the world makes sense for most people is because they have their adequacy levels set too high - they're too used to 'hand wavy' explanations and not having to actually think through things for themselves.

I'm confused - why all the downvotes? My initial comment above is currently below the "Why isn't there a Cowboy Neal option?"

It's not a false dichotomy at all, as far as I can see. If you take religion at face value, then of course modern medicine shouldn't work and faith healing should - one of these is going against the will of God after all. It's an adequate explanation most of the time... until you have to cure a disease.

Re: Poll: What is your religion?

#136

Post by PostOnce »

chc wrote: post #6

It's not hard to be atheist or agnostic and a Buddhist. It's fundamentally a very god-optional religion (though some traditions add them back in, like Jodo Shinshu).

Many schools of buddhism revere different buddhas as gods, believe reincarnation, a buddhist hell, etc. All too familiar.

All religions have something useful to be gleaned, as do nearly all books, even if the useful content of that book amounts to a single sentence.

Re: Poll: What is your religion?

#137

Post by MikeCapone »

Gormo wrote: post #122
MikeCapone wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whether or not God exists objectively isn't really something I think about or care about answering. I think that you could fairly be described as an agnostic, then.

Apathetist is a better description. An agnostic says he doesn't know the answer; I'm saying the question is meaningless.

To elaborate a little, would you say it's "meaningless" to you personally, or in general? Just curious.

Re: Poll: What is your religion?

#139

Post by amatheus »

jeromec wrote: post #84
RK wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really comes down to a matter of definitions. For example, many would claim that atheism is simply the lack of a belief. Some would define agnosticism as the positive belief that the existence of God cannot be known. But these are just example definitions.

I agree definitions vary, and that can cause confusion. For example, people unsure of what to believe can label themselves agnostic . Some call this "fence sitting". At the same time there is what's called weak atheism and strong atheism , the latter asserting there are no gods, which of course is a stupid assertion to make in an absolute sense. So weak atheism makes the most sense as it makes no assertion; it's just…

There's a definition to atheism I've read once that I think it's the best way to define what atheism means to me: An atheist doesn't believe in god the same way he doesn't believe in santa claus, or werewolves. It's not that he can positively proof god does not exist, only that there's no reason, given current evidences, to believe.

Re: Poll: What is your religion?

#140

Post by jodrellblank »

jswinghammer wrote: post #87
dannytatom wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no reason to believe in a god, and no evidence to support it. I'd like to know why people do believe in a god, as not believing in one is fairly easy. So, a question to your question, is there a good reason you believe in it (assuming you do)? Edit: petervandijck said it better above me.

Well there is evidence but it's not evidence that you're presently accepting. The Bible is a sort of evidence and people's testimony is as well. For my part I believe in God because he speaks to me regularly and I'm the last person you'd expect that to happen to. I was minding my own business when I started hearing from God. Everyone I knew at the time was totally shocked and it took me over two years to accept what…

I was minding my own business when I started hearing from God.

What is that like?

Post reply on HN