Protestant Family and my search for truth.

[Mish]

This author has made a classic mistake, confusing abiogenesis and evolution theory. They are not the same. Sorry Mish, this person is just wrong. Evolution is NOT the same as the creation myth, there is TONS of data supporting it (evolution theory).

Creation/abiogenesis, yes, that is still an unknown (tho some good theories are out there). But evolution theory is pretty solid.

Indi, you have a very valid point here, I agree. However I think you might have misunderstood the context of the author. She referred specifically to "our origins" and not "origins of life". She was referring to one of the main mechanism behind theory of evolution the "Natural Selection" and how this commonly being misinterpreted by Scientists as (And I'm reaching for definitions here) "conditions that produce competition between organisms for survival and reproduction. Consequently, organisms with traits that give them an advantage over their competitors pass these advantageous traits on, while traits that do not confer an advantage are not passed on to the next generation." She points out that Darwin himself disagreed with this point of view and was leaning more towards the opinion that competition and natural advantage are not necessarily drivers of evolution. That there are organisms that did not need to compete to survive or evolve. There are organisms with traits that did not confer a natural advantage who reproduced and evolved.

Nothing to do with the original author, just an example, as a scientist you must be aware of the fact that currently at least 80-90% of DNA (in molecular biology) is classified as junk DNA which plays no particular purpose and provides no natural advantage (Or at least is not yet understood as having one) which yet had been passed on from generation to generation.

She is pointing out that our evolutionary origins by Scientists are being discussed as a product of competition and selfishness of our ancestors. That idea that we are here (our origins) because our ancestors were the fittest and the most selfish (Views which are also being fed on by Social Darwinists and supporters of the Elevator theory). This idea though potentially flawed has far reaching consequences and wide social and moral implications in our modern culture.

There are actually ppl reproducing evolution artifically in the lab. Did you know this, Mish? Here, I happily provide this wiki link; lets just say I happen to personally know several of the authors in the citations & am personally familiar with the work. Lol.

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_world_hypothesis[/url]

This sounds interesting, I will read through it. Thanks for the link Indi.

Are you SURE you read The God Delusion? My mistake if so.

I haven't finished it yet, but I read a significant portion. I understand his ideas. I want to point out that in many regards I agree with him, but I simply don't accept his certainty in that which is beyond proof today. I also disagree with some of his attacks on Religion. Specifically I disagree that Religion is useless (Today or in the past).

[anachronistic]

This author has made a classic mistake, confusing abiogenesis and evolution theory. They are not the same. Sorry Mish, this person is just wrong. Evolution is NOT the same as the creation myth, there is TONS of data supporting it (evolution theory).

Creation/abiogenesis, yes, that is still an unknown (tho some good theories are out there). But evolution theory is pretty solid.

There are some other interesting ideas in the quotes. Unfortunately, also glaring errors like the one I mentioned already. Pity her readers didn't pick them up. Its important to be very clear in these kinds of discussion to avoid confusion.

There are actually ppl reproducing evolution artifically in the lab. Did you know this, Mish? Here, I happily provide this wiki link; lets just say I happen to personally know several of the authors in the citations & am personally familiar with the work. Lol.

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_world_hypothesis[/url]

Are you SURE you read The God Delusion? My mistake if so.

I am impressed at how long this topic has been debated in this thread.

Anyway, theories and religions are for people that can't think for themselves. Why the hell do people need to figure stuff out? Take a risk. Stop devoting your time to solving such mysteries. Never forget that there is always possibility. Always, always, always. Let people think what they want, and prosecute those who harm others, but allow them the ability of judgment and choice.

[Only-virgins]

This last I add for OV & anyone else who might find this interesting:

[url]http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2008/01/a_radical_violation_of_the_tru.html#c91612[/url]

And I got a msg today about how the pope has jumped on this bandwagon also. This is a lot like the behaviour of the creationists who got majorly owned when that gal did a content comparison search on their proposed ID textbook for schools (she correlated all the 'search/replaces' for ID & creationism & found almost 100% identity, lol). I think its sad that these groups need to resort to trickery and convoluted argument to get their message across. Ironic, really.

That much I agree with Mish. There is pretty clearly a need for belief that is so deep that groups will make up stuff & lie to keep their beliefs. There's a desperate psychology there that needs addressing. It feels like taking a security blanket from a child that isn't ready to face the world without it. Maybe there is some cruelty in that. Perhaps there are only relatively few psyches that can manage a purely rational existence? It seems like a 'nature/nurture' experiment that could be done w/twin studies (one religious upbringing, one non-), I guess.


Toodles everyone. This thread is becoming too much like work.

Yea, Dawkins called it the Crutch...remember? People fear death and have such hopes for an after life that they NEED to believe in something or they go crazy. Pretty pathetic in my opinion. I can't believe they will try and argue against science like this link you gave me. They don't know anything about science so who the **** do they think they are kidding? and most of all WTF do they know about human dignity? I am assuming they will LOSE this case or there is something wrong with the world. Lilwing says to avoid arguments and let people believe what they want, that would be easy if they did the same thing and didn't try and **** their way into scientific experiments. This is where I draw the line, they have no support why it would be a bad idea to experiment with human embryos. So many possibilities and potentials lay within our genome, we can maybe finally cure cancer with a discovery maybe from this. Wtf is wrong with them? preventing human progress in science is just wrong and will happen no matter what. Plus, most women would like a man with a horse's penis anyways....so there is an idea. lol...they make it sound like if they approve there will be horseman running around every where. Not to mention what dignity are they talking about? Lets not forget that we actually ARE animals. Part of Kingdom Animalia, Mammalia, Order Primates, Genus Homo, Species Sapien...us humans.

I would actually than by that logic call religion a curse. Poor humanity has to suffer believing a pathetic lie. It is a good think I am not this pathetic.

Anyway, theories and religions are for people that can't think for themselves. Why the hell do people need to figure stuff out? Take a risk. Stop devoting your time to solving such mysteries. Never forget that there is always possibility. Always, always, always. Let people think what they want, and prosecute those who harm others, but allow them the ability of judgment and choice.

Isn't figuring out things on your own a part of thinking for yourself? I mean you just contradicted yourself. Theories in science are necessary. Humanities curiosity is what got us so far in the first place. Don't be a jack ass and take it for granted..the computer you are using, the cola your drink, the condom you put on, the soap you use, the games you play, the music you listen to. Technology and science. So unless you live in a cave with a statue of Jesus you can go **** yourself. There are people and than there are scientists and philosophers(not the pot heads). Scientists and philosophers are the better part of humanity. Religion is for people who can't think for themself, because the belief in religion is pretty much the lack of knowledge of the truth. I don't know if by theories you only meant religion but it didn't seem like it.

I am to not care for the mysteries of the world I might as well be dead. What is left? getting drunk and maybe an over-dose of instant gratifying entertainment? Yea because watching tv is so much better than thinking about where we came from....not. I rather hypothesize about my origins and be wrong than avoid it all together.

[Mish]

Yea, Dawkins called it the Crutch...remember? People fear death and have such hopes for an after life that they NEED to believe in something or they go crazy. Pretty pathetic in my opinion.

I would actually than by that logic call religion a curse. Poor humanity has to suffer believing a pathetic lie. It is a good think I am not this pathetic.

Like Dawkins here you are reducing Religion and purpose of Religion to its lowest common denominator. There are many reasons why people become Religious. Even rational people. Even scinetists. Religion gives a lot more than hope to people. It gives a sense of community, a sense of security, a sense of altruism, a meaning in life. The main flaw of Dawkins in my opinion is his failure to see how Religion as a mechanism perfectly fits into human evolution and provides evolutionary "survival and reproductive benefits" to the followers over others.

preventing human progress in science is just wrong and will happen no matter what.

I agree with you on this. Some Religious people do have a tendency to become overzealous and over righteous. Overcome with pride that they alone have a monopoly of what's right and wrong. I agree that there sould be a line where Religion trying to cross into Science should be stopped (Just like the line where Science trying to cross into Religion should stopped as well).

I am to not care for the mysteries of the world I might as well be dead. What is left? getting drunk and maybe an over-dose of instant gratifying entertainment? Yea because watching tv is so much better than thinking about where we came from....not. I rather hypothesize about my origins and be wrong than avoid it all together.

Of course there's nothing wrong with that OV. You just have to bear in mind that the moment you start to hypothesize about that which is beyond proof like origins you enter the field of Theology (Or Science Fiction). You are no longer meddling with Science. See my earlier comment on Good Scientist entering the field of Phillosophy with poor understanding of principals of Philosphy becomes a poor Philosopher, good Scientist entering the field of Theology with poor understanding of principals of Theology becomes a poor Theologist.

[IndiReloaded]

Nothing to do with the original author, just an example, as a scientist you must be aware of the fact that currently at least 80-90% of DNA (in molecular biology) is classified as junk DNA which plays no particular purpose and provides no natural advantage (Or at least is not yet understood as having one) which yet had been passed on from generation to generation.

Again, Mish I don't want to argue anymore. But I will say that, yes, I am very familiar with junk DNA. And you (or the author) is incorrect that it serves no function. This is a very active research area w/several groups finding that so-called 'junk DNA' actually has function.

So, by analogy, one could argue that the conservation of 'faith or belief' in human society may likewise have function. Dawkins alludes to this in the chapter we were discussing. It wouldn't be the first time that something apparently w/o reproductive benefit (e.g. homosexuality) actually has one (female relatives of male homosexuals are more nurturing, so it seems the trait is conserved in the female genome). But there's a big difference b/t something like junk DNA & a societal trait being conserved--timescale. From an evolutionary standpoint, evidence for the longevity of human belief is orders of magnitude less than for the conservation of junk DNA. A few thousand vs millions of years. And there is no evidence of the concept in other species (say the great apes) that I know about, so that's a problem too if you want to argue an evolutionary benefit. Belief could simply be the equivalent of a neutral (or harmful) mutation that is on its way out, just on a scale that is difficult for us to measure.

Should we hasten its departure? Even if we could prove my above statement? Well, that's a question for ethicists. What I would actually like to see as a compromise is a reversal of the order of how our children get programmed. Teach them first to think logically for themselves. There is NO harm in this. Don't teach them anything about religion, just how to critically evaluate any data the world presents them with in general terms. Later, around the age of reason they can be exposed to religious doctrine as one of the philosophical subjects they encounter. After this, if there are those who (for reasons not understood) decide the 'belief crutch' as Dawkins calls it, is something that appeals & helps them deal with the universe, fine. But the blind indoctrination of children with the 'faith virus' before they can decide for themselves is, I think, a crime. I completely agree w/Dawkins on this.

[Mish]

Again, Mish I don't want to argue anymore. But I will say that, yes, I am very familiar with junk DNA. And you (or the author) is incorrect that it serves no function. This is a very active research area w/several groups finding that so-called 'junk DNA' actually has function.

There is reaserach yes, but currently it's not understood to have one. It's absolutely posible that certain parts of junk DNA have no purpose what so ever

So, by analogy, one could argue that the conservation of 'faith or belief' in human society may likewise have function.

Belief could simply be the equivalent of a neutral (or harmful) mutation that is on its way out, just on a scale that is difficult for us to measure. But the blind indoctrination of children with the 'faith virus' before they can decide for themselves is, I think, a crime.

Indi I'm confused. Which one is it? If Religion has a function and gives evolutionary benefits why should it not be taught to children by their own parents who want those evolutionary benefits (As well as enhanced chance of reproduction) to be passed on?

If Religion is a harmful "faith virus" with nothing but detriments to followers how do you exaplain it having a function and positive benefits it provides to those who follow it?

Dawkins alludes to this in the chapter we were discussing. It wouldn't be the first time that something apparently w/o reproductive benefit (e.g. homosexuality) actually has one

Okay, perhaps DNA wasn't the best example. Much is unknown. But, it looks like you agree with the notion yourself? You agree that "Survival of the fittest" may not be about "Survival of the most fit and extinction of the less fit"? That perhaps "Survival of th fittest" even as a term should be replaced with something more representative of realities of evolution? Perhaps with a term "Survival of the most naturaly adept" or "Survival of the most reproductive and replenishing", in both cases fitness is not a neccessary driver for evolution opening up the idea that there are a lot of other important factors that drive evolution. I believe that this vague notion (I.e. Survival of the fittest as a concept) has a very dangerous potential when applied to a wide variety of social and moral issues. Especially when not properly understood.

This is by the way what I think the author meant by "Symbolism" of evolution that extends much further than its truths.

[anachronistic]

Isn't figuring out things on your own a part of thinking for yourself? I mean you just contradicted yourself. Theories in science are necessary. Humanities curiosity is what got us so far in the first place. Don't be a jack ass and take it for granted..the computer you are using, the cola your drink, the condom you put on, the soap you use, the games you play, the music you listen to. Technology and science. So unless you live in a cave with a statue of Jesus you can go **** yourself. There are people and than there are scientists and philosophers(not the pot heads). Scientists and philosophers are the better part of humanity. Religion is for people who can't think for themself, because the belief in religion is pretty much the lack of knowledge of the truth. I don't know if by theories you only meant religion but it didn't seem like it.

I am to not care for the mysteries of the world I might as well be dead. What is left? getting drunk and maybe an over-dose of instant gratifying entertainment? Yea because watching tv is so much better than thinking about where we came from....not. I rather hypothesize about my origins and be wrong than avoid it all together.

My points obviously went over your little, oblivious head. Reread what I wrote; I am not going to take the time to explain such things to you, since all you want to do is insult. Goes to show how philosophical you are.


Mish, why do you exist? And why do you think you should exist? (anyone else can answer, not necessarily directed to Mish)

[Mish]

Mish, why do you exist? And why do you think you should exist? (anyone else can answer, not necessarily directed to Mish)

I exist because a flying spagheti monster sent me to silence the unbelievers


I exist for a positive purpose and I should exist because I believe our chaotic world needs positivity. I can't prove that as a fact. But having certainty in this gives me purpose and my life meaning. Also, having this idea motivates me for positive change, I must become that which I believe. It gives me an "irrational" certainty and hope that everything will change for the better, I need not worry and just concentrate on living a healthy, positive and prosperous life. Perhaps this irrational hope will give me an evolutionary advantage, improve my chances of leading a long and positive life, and improve my chances of passing on my genes to a partner attracted to my irrational positive confidence over those without such certainty

[misombra]

i'm living to grow, give, and die. pretty much the same as all those other living things.

[Only-virgins]

My points obviously went over your little, oblivious head. Reread what I wrote; I am not going to take the time to explain such things to you, since all you want to do is insult. Goes to show how philosophical you are.


Mish, why do you exist? And why do you think you should exist? (anyone else can answer, not necessarily directed to Mish)

No, I pretty much nailed it since you avoided my comment and referred to insults right away.....but whatever helps you sleep at night I guess.

Like Dawkins here you are reducing Religion and purpose of Religion to its lowest common denominator. There are many reasons why people become Religious. Even rational people. Even scinetists. Religion gives a lot more than hope to people. It gives a sense of community, a sense of security, a sense of altruism, a meaning in life. The main flaw of Dawkins in my opinion is his failure to see how Religion as a mechanism perfectly fits into human evolution and provides evolutionary "survival and reproductive benefits" to the followers over others.

You can have what ever purpose you tell your little head you want. The fact is that religion is a lie and in the 20th century is pointless and unnecessary. We don't need religion to breed.

Of course there's nothing wrong with that OV. You just have to bear in mind that the moment you start to hypothesize about that which is beyond proof like origins you enter the field of Theology (Or Science Fiction). You are no longer meddling with Science. See my earlier comment on Good Scientist entering the field of Phillosophy with poor understanding of principals of Philosphy becomes a poor Philosopher, good Scientist entering the field of Theology with poor understanding of principals of Theology becomes a poor Theologist.

I prefer to test my hypothesis after I make them. You jump to conclusions.

I exist because a flying spagheti monster sent me to silence the unbelievers


I exist for a positive purpose and I should exist because I believe our chaotic world needs positivity. I can't prove that as a fact. But having certainty in this gives me purpose and my life meaning. Also, having this idea motivates me for positive change, I must become that which I believe. It gives me an "irrational" certainty and hope that everything will change for the better, I need not worry and just concentrate on living a healthy, positive and prosperous life. Perhaps this irrational hope will give me an evolutionary advantage, improve my chances of leading a long and positive life, and improve my chances of passing on my genes to a partner attracted to my irrational positive confidence over those without such certainty

What evolutionary benefit does religion have besides relying on what science has done anyways? I'll spread my genes with an intelligent girl and make better and smarter babies than you. It is ok though, religion lost its power over government centuries ago and now it is losing its people. I forgot that as an atheist I can not live a prosperous life....silly me.

i'm living to grow, give, and die. pretty much the same as all those other living things.

What do you give?

But the blind indoctrination of children with the 'faith virus' before they can decide for themselves is, I think, a crime.

I couldn't agree more. This is where the problem starts.

[Mish]

You can have what ever purpose you tell your little head you want.

It's everyone's right to do so

The fact is that religion is a lie and in the 20th century is pointless and unnecessary.

You mean in the 21st century? And according to whom? According to everyone or to Atheists?

I prefer to test my hypothesis after I make them. You jump to conclusions.

You can't test a hypothesis if it's unprovable. If there is no empirical evidence, no obesrvations to base conclusions on. You can make a good guess and be happy with it, which is fine as long as you realize that it's not fact that you are dealing with.

What evolutionary benefit does religion have besides relying on what science has done anyways?

I listed basic ones earlier:

- Meaning of life - A Religious person needs not wonder about his purpose or the meaning of life, he is already certain of what his purpose is. He doesn't need to worry about his purpose or place in life. According to psychology this is a huge benefit that has a big influence on person's general well being.

- Sense of community - A Religious person inside of a Religious community shares a deep connection with other believers and can interact with a wide variety of individuals by simply talking about their faith. Read: easier firendships, easier community interactions, easier meeting with members of opposite sex

- Traditional Values - More taditional belief in sanctity of marriage. Religious people more readily accept the idea that two married people should stay together for the rest of their lives. Religious people statisticaly divorce less than others and thus have more stable environments for their children's growth.

- Health - There are many documented cases where person’s beliefs and hope have been the reason or at least a supporting factor for their ability to fight a disease and become healthy again or to overcome obstacles and challenges relating to their health.

- Consolation -Many people have found help for loneliness and grief in religion. In fact many have been known to turn to religion after the loss of a partner or loved one. In times of sadness and loneliness the church congregation and religion can provide very deep consolations to a person, revitalising a person's their strength and resolve to move on.

- Psoitive life changes - Life Changing For some finding faith can be life changing. We’ve all heard of criminals that found God and turned their lives around to become a productive member in society.

- Safety - Religious people try to stick together and find safety in the congregation. They support each other deeply since they share similar deep beliefs.

Religion is a very personal choice. Each religion has their own belief system but each religion has its ties to a higher power or God. Many religions play a large role in helping humanity as a whole. Offering counseling services, providing food and shelter for the poor, helping people in what ever capacity they can.

I'll spread my genes with an intelligent girl and make better and smarter babies than you.

You believe you are smarted than me OV?

Is that what it comes down to?

On what may I ask empirical evidence do you base this assumption?

It is ok though, religion lost its power over government centuries ago and now it is losing its people.

Loosing it's people? Christianity alone has close to 2 Billion follwers worldwide. Islam has another 1.4 Billion. The last I heard Religion is a growing factor and a re-emerging power in our modern culture, not a diminishing one. In the last couple of decades followers of major Religions (Especially Islam) were growing at a very high rate

I forgot that as an atheist I can not live a prosperous life....silly me.

I never said that OV. You can have a prosperous life regardless of who you are. I believe I was specifically referring to myslef when I made comment about me leading a prosperous life due to my irrational hope

[Only-virgins]

You can't test a hypothesis if it's unprovable. If there is no empirical evidence, no obesrvations to base conclusions on. You can make a good guess and be happy with it, which is fine as long as you realize that it's not fact that you are dealing with.

Thus I throw that hypothesis away. Now we are getting somewhere. Get my drift?

I listed basic ones earlier:

- Meaning of life - A Religious person needs not wonder about his purpose or the meaning of life, he is already certain of what his purpose is. He doesn't need to worry about his purpose or place in life. According to psychology this is a huge benefit that has a big influence on person's general well being.

- Sense of community - A Religious person inside of a Religious community shares a deep connection with other believers and can interact with a wide variety of individuals by simply talking about their faith. Read: easier firendships, easier community interactions, easier meeting with members of opposite sex

- Traditional Values - More taditional belief in sanctity of marriage. Religious people more readily accept the idea that two married people should stay together for the rest of their lives. Religious people statisticaly divorce less than others and thus have more stable environments for their children's growth.

- Health - There are many documented cases where person’s beliefs and hope have been the reason or at least a supporting factor for their ability to fight a disease and become healthy again or to overcome obstacles and challenges relating to their health.

- Consolation -Many people have found help for loneliness and grief in religion. In fact many have been known to turn to religion after the loss of a partner or loved one. In times of sadness and loneliness the church congregation and religion can provide very deep consolations to a person, revitalising a person's their strength and resolve to move on.

- Psoitive life changes - Life Changing For some finding faith can be life changing. We’ve all heard of criminals that found God and turned their lives around to become a productive member in society.

- Safety - Religious people try to stick together and find safety in the congregation. They support each other deeply since they share similar deep beliefs.

Religion is a very personal choice. Each religion has their own belief system but each religion has its ties to a higher power or God. Many religions play a large role in helping humanity as a whole. Offering counseling services, providing food and shelter for the poor, helping people in what ever capacity they can.



You believe you are smarted than me OV?

Is that what it comes down to?

On what may I ask empirical evidence do you base this assumption?

All those you can accomplish with out religion. There is no EVIDENCE at all that belief cures diseases. There are documented cases of big foot as well. We KNOW that science cures diseases. I'll stick to known facts. The meaning of life is really irrelevant to anything...you either make one up...or you understand the fact that there really isn't one. On another note as I said before...consolation and meaning of life...you are supporting Dawkins and me...basically religion is a crutch. I think it is an insult to believe that humanity would not survive if we took that crutch away. For crying out loud, you have mentioned those points away before and we told you they sound pathetic and like a crutch. You can depend on a lie to make you feel better, but as Dawkins says..it isn't the adult and dignified way to do it. Did you even listen to the debate link I gave you?>

Maybe smart/intelligent wasn't the word to use but rather rational kids. you said it yourself "Irrational belief". Being irrational isn't exactly something you see on the resume of an intelligent person.

[Mish]

Thus I throw that hypothesis away. Now we are getting somewhere. Get my drift?

Of course. I get that you are left without a hypothesis. You are left with a question on what life really means which you can not answer, only guess at. I.e. Realm of Science Fiction. Science outside of provable, empirical evidence, facts and observation ceases to be Science and becomes something different.

[Mish]

All those you can accomplish with out religion.

You can but it's not happening as well as in Religious communities. Why? Maybe because people who don't believe in sanctity of marriage on spiritual grounds decide to divorce more leaving behind broken homes. Maybe because people who don't have certainty in the meaning of life struggle more to find their purpose and place in the world and become more prone to depression. Maybe because lonely people find it harder to find a community to belong to outside of Religion, have less friends and reduced well beings. Maybe because without Religion people give up hope more easily. Maybe because without a positive symbol for life change, people on the wrong path (e.g. criminals) struggle to get onto the right path more than if they had one to strive to.

You are a rational scienetist OV. You must see the facts that support the notion that Religion does provide positive benefits to its followers and has a positive purpose (Even if it might also have an additional negative one)

There is no EVIDENCE at all that belief cures diseases.

Who said that belief cures diseases? Did someone say that? I posted

Beliefs and hope have been the reason or at least a supporting factor for a person's ability to fight a disease and become healthy again or to overcome obstacles and challenges relating to their health.

The links between mental resilency and the immune system had been well documented OV.

The meaning of life is really irrelevant to anything...

On the contrary. A documented psychological fact. A person who believes that life has no meaning is more prone to depression than a person who believes in a positive meaning in life.

On another note as I said before...consolation and meaning of life...you are supporting Dawkins and me...basically religion is a crutch. I think it is an insult to believe that humanity would not survive if we took that crutch away.

Who are you to decide what humanity needs or doesn't need OV? Evolution has higher authority than you. Evolution will decide whether Religion will survive or not. So far judging by the number of followers Religion seems to be winning the debate of who has the majority.

Maybe smart/intelligent wasn't the word to use but rather rational kids. you said it yourself "Irrational belief". Being irrational isn't exactly something you see on the resume of an intelligent person.

Irrational belief in positivty and hope and rational aprroach to everything else. The way I see it a person like that has the best of both worlds. Rational when necessary and confident / hopeful when rationality fails

You kids will not necessarily be better off than mine,

[Only-virgins]

You are left with a question on what life really means which you can not answer, only guess at. I.e. Realm of Science Fiction. Science outside of provable, empirical evidence, facts and observation ceases to be Science and becomes something different.

Actually the misconception here is the idea that there is an answer to that question in the first place. Though biology gives reasons for life, it gives the environment where life first formed which gives reasons why life exists and life just continued to evolve over time for the benefit of survival. There is no single reason to live, you are meant to just survive and pass on your genes. Though I see why people need a crutch to hold onto because they want to believe something beautiful like a wonderful reason for their existence. People want to feel special, pathetic really. We evolved from chimps, what reasons to live do chimps have? because it is the identical one we have.

Who said that belief cures diseases? Did someone say that? I posted



Who said that belief cures diseases? Did someone say that? I posted

Beliefs and hope have been the reason or at least a supporting factor for a person's ability to fight a disease and become healthy again or to overcome obstacles and challenges relating to their health.

You have got to be kidding me, that pretty much says the same thing.

You can but it's not happening as well as in Religious communities. Why? Maybe because people who don't believe in sanctity of marriage on spiritual grounds decide to divorce more leaving behind broken homes. Maybe because people who don't have certainty in the meaning of life struggle more to find their purpose and place in the world and become more prone to depression. Maybe because lonely people find it harder to find a community to belong to outside of Religion, have less friends and reduced well beings. Maybe because without Religion people give up hope more easily. Maybe because without a positive symbol for life change, people on the wrong path (e.g. criminals) struggle to get onto the right path more than if they had one to strive to.

First of, on your last comment. Speak for yourself because rationality has never failed me. On this what you posted above, you make it sound like there is nothing else but religion to make someone happy and atheists just drown in depression and sorrow from lack of belief. You kidding me? I am part of many communities. I have a wonderful family, I am part of a biology community here that does things outside of work, I have a rewarding job, I train martial arts and belong to a community there etc..I always manage to keep myself busy. You mentioned things that are good things for a human mind, Religion is a lie and the wrong way to reach them. There is also a negative to belonging to an extreme community like religion...it secludes out lots of other people.

On the contrary. A documented psychological fact. A person who believes that life has no meaning is more prone to depression than a person who believes in a positive meaning in life.

It is what it is. I rather be miserable in truth than pathetically happy in a lie. You can be Cypher from Matrix if you like. I think that makes me happy though, knowing that I know the truth... it is so rewarding knowing that I am smarter than theists. Anyways, like I said. You make yourself a meaning. Some of it is real and honest such as family. To my parents raising us was all the meaning for life they needed.