/lit/ - Literature

>>18486209
I feel like that's an un falsifiable statement.

>>18486209
*hits pipe*
Religious instincts are innate. While the specific 'god image' that occupies a person's mind is culturally determined, the psychological preconditions that give rise to religious behavior exist in a child's mind since birth.

>>18486209
Many philosophers, e.g. Marx, Bakunin, Russell, Feuerbach, arguably the logical positivists, had aggressively atheist views that would make people send you fedora memes if you repeated them today. There's nothing really new about "new" atheism.

>d'holbach
already retroactively refuted him in one of my philosophy papers

>>18486209
>they have no idea of God

Babies don't have an idea about fucking anything. And if they were to be considered genuine atheists that wouldn't mean anything, either. This is like an appeal to authority but infinitely more stupid.

retroactively refuted by the prophet mohammad pbuh

all children are born muslim

>>18486293
Appeal to baby

>>18486209
Although I agree that a baby born and raised in isolation would not have an idea of God, he'd also be retarded and autistic. Instead, if a group of babies were born isolated from society and somehow managed to survive, I'm sure they'd quickly form some sort of rudimentary religion and believe in hundreds of Gods.

They also dont know how to use the toilet

>>18486390
This still shows that abrahamism is stupid.

>>18486248
jung is so fucking cringe

>>18486416
Monotheism can be considered a more advanced form of religious organization. It seems that the ancient Israelites and the Platonists came to similar conclusions about the nature of God and the world itself, and afterwards the two were joined and became the Christian faith.

>>18486293
I love cats. Why did Go- eh I mean Darwin make them so cute?

>>18486209
retroactively refuted by cicero

>>18486209
doesn't matter, I can still beat up every infant on earth

>>18486439
Not an argument, r*edditor.

>>18486702
>Monotheism can be considered a more advanced form of religious organization
Not really. Monism and non-duality are superior to montheism and monotheism do not fit in either, but polytheism certainly do fit. Hence the move from polytheism to monotheism is a regression.

>>18487854
You are wrong. No, I will not elaborate.

>>18486209
retroactively refuted by the fitrah

>>18486234
Easy to prove. Ask a child if they know god. Boom, they only know him if they grew up with religion.

>>18487906
Do Christians and such NOT notice this? Do they know that they were told the god they believe in exists and they didn’t just think it by default?

>>18486248

jung is so fucking based

>>18486209
What a retard.

Yeah all children are born incapable of speaking as well.

>>18486330
Kek.

>>18486209
A babe is not a man; only men may have perception of God; only men are flawed and sinful; the babe is even when he sins not sinful, because he knows not of God or the World, or Sin.

>>18488472
Only a free man can know God, and only a free man can Sin; those criminals are forgiven, because they are least free; the Men they were before, when they committed the act and knew well of it, are those punished; the forgiven criminal is released, but he does not again become just a free man, even with his freedom of body now restored.

A religious man would say that God gave Men freedom through sin thusly, and that the freedom unto sin and death and illness, and the angst, are what makes us free.
The religion of the Christians is not praying to idols of suffering, but to idols of freedom; not in suffering, but in the forgivenness of those who have suffered, which are all men, who know of their birth.
The Babe again, though so close to birth, cannot know this; because a babe is neither man, nor human full, and may not even know, like the animal; but who faults the atom that he does not live, when he is pillar of the cell?

>>18486209
They ain’t born atheists but they’re not born Christians either
>>18486248
Ok pantheist
>>18486702
Social technology!!

>>18486248
Show me a feral child demonstrating religious behavior

>>18487906
>>18487942
I teach small kids in a Buddhist country. they will ask questions like who made the Sun and stars? And I say God did and they say "oh yeah!" Like it's the most obvious thing to them.

>>18488506
Well the Fall explains why people forget God and need to be reminded. It makes sense.

>>18488591
Have you tried saying something else equally asinine as an answer? Santa? Gravity? Psychic phenomena?

>>18488620
Well to be honest they will keep asking "why" or "and who made that?" The only time they stop is if I say God did it, or God said so.
Not like this happens a lot but every year a few kids ask this and feel reassured when I refer to God as the final source

>>18486248
>religious behavior
what the fuck is this

>>18486248
Did Jung really believe this. Such a fucking stretch holy shit. It's like when some dumbass says
>Rome actually never fe
Shut up. Shut the fuck up.

>>18488746
Come back after your 18th birthday and I'll tell you.

>>18486439
See >>18487960

>>18488525
Nothing I said would indicate pantheism. Buy a dictionary so you can learn words.

>>18488536
I'll do you one better and show you how every independent culture in human history inevitably reaches a state of consciousness where they act out religious rituals and form religious beliefs. You can say religion is irrational if you want--perhaps it is totally irrational--but to deny that man has an innate predisposition towards religious behavior is beyond retardation.

>>18488757
Wait actually this fully does makes sense, given that the statement isnt trying to prove gods existence

>>18488766
>but to deny that man has an innate predisposition towards religious behavior is beyond retardation.
Very simplistic reasoning, there are conditions that has to be met.

>>18488591
Yes anon children also believe there are monsters under their beds. They inherently see agency and personality in inanimate objects.

>>18488828
Made in the image of God

>>18488828
Since when monsters became inanimate objects?

>>18488849
They fill empty space with animated brings in their imagination, they attribute agency to movement and inanimate objects. It’s a huge part of childhood development to have that phase and grow out of it.
My sister told me god was bowling and that made thunder when I was a kid and it made perfect sense to me.

>>18486209
>children are born ignorant
kek

>>18488870
It's something we clarify and make more precise as we learn. We don't throw out causality because we made causal errors as kids, in fact God is the precondition to many things we take for granted and that becomes clear if we think reasonably and mature. So it's not surprising to see kids have seeds of God in their mind, intuitively.

>>18488946
You literally, literally told the children that god exists and made the sun.

>>18488932
>kids are born ignorant thus atheist
>>18488946
>kids are born with intuitions about God

In a way both of these are true.

>>18488956
>>18488828
>>18488591

Yep it seems a lot of kids suspect God is working behind the scenes but they want a figure they trust to confirm it, so they'll ask infinite regress questions quite a bit: "why do we exist? And why does that exist? And why that? And who made that? And why and why?" Until they get to the transcended cause beyond the world

>>18489003
>Yep it seems a lot of kids suspect God is working behind the scenes
A lot of kids suspect there is a monster under their bed too. The human mind evolved to survive in the wilderness, not to automatically give correct answers to metaphysical questions. Kids also say things like “hi mr. cloud!” They are not logical beings.

Even still they don’t come up with “the Christian god made all this”

>>18488766
>where they act out religious rituals and form religious beliefs
Yeah anon if I lived 1000 years ago and didn’t know any science I would also assume magical beings made reality and I should please them to gain favor

>>18488870
Monsters in children's mind have nothing to do with seeing agency in an inanimate objects. Though you could argue that it came from the same condition.

>>18489059
I’m pointing out that children’s intuition doesn’t necessarily have any basis in truth or reality and it’s foolish to point to their assumptions about the world as an indicator of what’s true and false.
Are you doing a bit right now to make religious people look bad?

>>18489073
No, no reason to get mad when you talk out of your ass.

>>18489091
Oh please grow some thicker skin, your point was dumb and you can clearly see that now. Leave the thread if you’re going to get pissy with me.
Kids are not rational actors.

>>18486248
This is legit the dumbest shit that I've read today. Congrats.

>>18486209
I ain't no d'Holbach girl

>>18489107
Can you explain my point?

>>18487906
>>18487942
What you are suggesting doesn't make much sense; everything we know about anthropology says that belief in God is very much the "default" setting for human beings.

As early as I remember I believed in God even though nobody told me that there was or should be a God.

>>18489288
>everything we know about anthropology says that belief in God is very much the "default" setting for human beings.
False

>As early as I remember I believed in God even though nobody told me that there was or should be a God.
Almost certainly a false memory or an outright lie. The default is animism or polytheism.

>>18489025
You know what ''evolved'' to survive in the wilderness? Lions, tigers, wild boars.

>>18489297
Point to us any civilization, any cultural community which had no religion as its own foundation. Of course I mean it before the modern era.

>>18486248
Edgelords can't refute

>>18489311
Animism or polytheism seems to be the default natural metaphysic, not the Christian god.

>>18489325
Dodging the question completely, nice cope.

>>18489332
Oh I see, I’ll refer you to an earlier post of mine,
>>18489058

>>18489337
>1000 years ago
lmao you can't be this dumb

>>18489325
That's what Christianity teaches will happen to fallen man and his civilizations, man will create idols in place of God and suppress his intuition of God, that's why prophets come to remind us who we are and who our creator is. And then we kill those prophets and return to our idols, our sins and confusions. But deep down the truth exists in our hearts it's just obscured by the Fall.

>>18489347
Yeah and an even less primitive position is that a guy in the Roman Empire and his dad didn’t create the universe, but it’s powered and shaped by forces and energy.

>>18489347
Yeah the default state of man was in Eden, awareness and communion with God. But now it's all messed up and people worship genitals and secularism and pleasure

>>18489343
If I was more ignorant of how reality worked I would very likely assume a god or gods were responsible for creating the world around me.

>>18489374
>the forces are made by forces or energy or something...
Keep trying, you'll get to God eventually

>>18489380
Wow that’s weird that’s not what I typed, I wonder what your reason was for misquoting me in this conversation.

>>18489399
That's the implication of what you typed since the universe is itself forces and matter and energy. Saying forces shaped it is saying it shaped itself. It made it's own laws according to itself? Keep trying you'll get it eventually

>>18489380
I seem to encounter this logical misunderstanding a lot with people on 4chan.

You see, it’s possible to have a problem that needs to be solved where you don’t know the correct answer, but you can eliminate the less reasonable answers.

So if you’re wondering what broke into your garage and are all the birdseed, there are many possibilities based on the information you have, and maybe answers that you haven’t even considered. So you might not know what animal it was or even if it was a person or not, but if your friend throws out the specific guess “it was a small goblin” with total confidence, you can laugh him off.

So just because no one knows the entire story with the forces and energy that permeate our universe and why they exist or if that question even makes sense, you can still dismiss the idea “it was Jesus” just like you can dismiss the idea that it was Zeus or tengri or Ahura Mazda.

>>18489422
>Saying forces shaped it is saying it shaped itself.
Forces shape the matter. You can call them laws if you want but I suggest you fully contemplate the fact that it doesn’t actually mean law like an anthropomorphic mind writing it down. Law is just a word we use to describe the machinations of the universe and it’s forces.

>>18489423
Category error. The answer to our question is at the paradigm level, not at the level of particulars in a genus (i.e one thing among many). The pre-condition for the possibility of universal laws of nature, or laws of logic or the intelligibility of the world is manifestly different than who broke into your house. intelligibility
Atheists make the error of supposing God is just another being among many, but super powerful,
when he's actually the pre condition of all beings. We are derivative, he is not. Total category error.
To even make meaningful and rational arguments we have to presuppose certain laws of logic by necessity. And these are pre conditions to discourse itself. We don't need to presuppose a particular being in your example, it's open to be many possible particulars.
In our question there is only one ultimate, transcendent pre-condition possible, namely God. I'm not arguing that we can know who this God is by logic alone but we can know that he is and is the ultimate origin and pre-condition for all contingent phenomena. Who he is is a matter of revelation and without that revelation our worldview will be lacking in coherence, but someone who has no revelation yet admits God exists and is the creator is far closer to a true picture of reality and their place in it than an atheist or agnostic.

>>18489476
I’m telling you that just because we don’t know if it ends at nature or other details, doesn’t mean we cant dismiss the idea that it’s Jesus or Ahura Mazda or Tengri.

>>18489476
>To even make meaningful and rational arguments we have to presuppose certain laws of logic by necessity.
Yeah obviously, I’m saying Jesus didn’t write the laws of logic just like I’m saying just because we don’t know what broke into your garage, we can dismiss someone claiming it was a goblin.

>>18489532
Different anon here, but your analogy was completely incongruous.

>>18489534
Then forget the analogy if you don’t like it. >>18489526

>>18489532
So youre admitting God does exist or might exist, but you don't know who he is in particular? Your analogy misses the point. I'm not arguing for Christ yet, I could, but I don't have the time and I'm phone posting. But the main point was that our question about the universe is pointing to fundamental paradigm level ideas that the garage analogy misses.

>>18489559
>I'm not arguing for Christ yet
Yeah anon I know how you people argue. I’m just skipping the bullshit and telling you that a guy in the Roman Empire did not create the universe with his dad.

>>18486209
yes and babies shit themselves
they can't even chew food until they grow teeth after a year
they literally can't even speak when they're born ie they have no ideas of anything
and this guy wants to appeal to babies to refute God kek

>>18489585
he did
all the proof is in the bible
you don't understand because you don't believe

>>18489602
maybe he's saying if you don't believe in God you're as dumb as a baby?

I'm a nomialist. No knowledge is innate

>>18489602
>>18489615
You’re the only one in this thread who doesn’t capitalize sentences man, we can all see that you’re replying to yourself.

>>18489649
fuck you retard
i hope you're embarrassed

>>18489423
Ah yes because theoloical understandings of God from Ahura Mazda to Zeus to Jesus are entirely equivalent

>>18489667
The only relevant fact here is that none of them are actually real gods.

>>18489671
The only relevant fact is that you're a fucking moron who equivocates Zeus to Ahura Mazda

>>18489679
I’m not saying they’re equivalent, just that none of them are real. Take a deep breath man.

>>18489682
My criticism went over your head. You have a painfully low IQ

>>18489682
>I know we can eliminate some answers
>so I know I can eliminate all of them
fuck you that's not a logical conclusion
you don't have any way to know which answers you can eliminate
and the divine revelations of the bible are reason enough to leave Jesus in the conversation
he is the true creator of the universe. the truth is a man like you, who believes in nothing, isn't looking for an answer. because you have no belief, you have no understanding.

>>18489687
I wasn’t saying they’re equivalent, breathe it out man, you’ll be okay.

>>18489693

>>18489693
You dont even know what you're saying now. Very low IQ

>>18489692
No I mean you can eliminate the answers that say a god from ancient mythology created the universe.

>>18489700
no you can't

>>18489695
The common thread that allowed them to be listed in that example is that none of those gods are actually real.

>>18489700
Why should we put all those mythologies into one category

>>18489704
>they're all equivalent
Case in point. Moron

>>18486209
Children are also born not potty trained, but that doesn't mean we should shit in the street.

>>18489706
The category here is that the gods aren’t real, I’m sorry if this is complicated but I can’t make that idea much simpler for you.

>>18489708
Never said that, you literally made that up. Butthurt lying Christians are a common breed.

>>18489714
And how are you concluding they're not real?

>>18489717
if you can say they're all not real, they're equivalent in that respect
you're, truthfully, the moron, the fool, the ignoramus, etc

>>18489725
Yes things can be equivalent in one respect and not equivalent in general. Complicated I know.

>>18489725
>if you say a downy and a retard are both mentally defective, youre saying they're both equal in intelligence
??????

>>18489720
Zeus, Yahweh/Jesus, Tengri and Ahura Mazda? You think they’re real? Lol have a good night man

>>18489734
yes that's the logic i'm using.
>>18489732
there is nothing more general than existence

>>18489717
>>18489423
>you can still dismiss the idea “it was Jesus” just like you can dismiss the idea that it was Zeus or tengri or Ahura Mazda.
As I said earlier, my point went over yoir head, and you dont even know what you're saying. Do you think the word "god" is ubiquitous? Do you thik Christians reject Ahura Mazda for no reason in particular? Do you think these different concepts of God are exactly the same and answer the same questions about reality? Do yoi really think dismissing one deity is reason enough to dismiss them all? And then when faced with thiscritcism all you can say is hurr durr they're just not real. You're a fucking retard

>>18489734
He’s too assblasted for logic right now, Christians really lose their shit when you point out that their god is clearly not literally real and didn’t create reality.
They become childish.

>>18489738
>they're all equivalent
Case in point. Dumb ass.

>>18489743
>Do you think these different concepts of God are exactly the same and answer the same questions about reality?
Nope just saying they aren’t real, refer to my previous posts for clarification.
>>18489423
>>18489526
>>18489671
>>18489682
>>18489693
>>18489700
>>18489714
>>18489732

>>18489748
Never said that
>>18489756

>>18489747
no, it's the fools who don't believe the truth that get really upset by the faithful
see, watch this
>the one true God is the God of the Bible
>the one true God of the Bible created our universe, ourselves, and everything else
>the one true God of our universe is the ultimate authority on the Law

>inb4 seething atheists sperg out against the truth

>>18489756
>>18489761
You're not even consistent with yourself. Holy shit you are dumb. Come back when you can form a coherent thought

>>18489763
Lol

>>18489764
Not equivalent in theology etc. they just share the common characteristic of not being real and not creating the universe. Jeez I didn’t think this was so complicated

>>18489781
Its over your head. Dont even worry about it

>>18489325
>seems

>>18486209
Every child is born a rapist; they have no idea of rape

>>18490297
What an ass post.
You can’t even think. Get out.

>>18486209
God is not an idea nor is He dependent on the awareness of children to exist. Furthermore, children are born ignorant of the concept of atheism as well, so that atheist children is a concept that only applies to stereotypical redditors.