# Any other Atheist here?



## Ram

I was wondering if their are any other Atheists on this board? How do you deal with the more metaphysical aspects of martial arts? What type of martial arts are interesting to you and why? Anything else that would make good conversation would be great!


----------



## Blindside

What metaphysical aspects of the arts?


----------



## Touch Of Death

No one is without a theism.
Sean


----------



## Makalakumu

Touch Of Death said:


> No one is without a theism.
> Sean


 
"Ve are nihilists!  "Ve beleive in nussing, Lebowski!"

Unless there is scientifically determined proof...


----------



## Touch Of Death

upnorthkyosa said:


> "Ve are nihilists! "Ve beleive in nussing, Lebowski!"
> 
> Unless there is scientifically determined proof...


So your theism is science.


----------



## Makalakumu

Touch Of Death said:


> So your theism is science.


 
Nein.  Because anything in science can be disproven.  Thus, I can always be wrong.  A theist can NEVER be wrong.


----------



## michaeledward

Ram said:


> I was wondering if their are any other Atheists on this board? How do you deal with the more metaphysical aspects of martial arts? What type of martial arts are interesting to you and why? Anything else that would make good conversation would be great!


 
I am an atheist. I have no ideas concerning metaphysical aspects of martial arts. I study American Kenpo because I feel better leaving the mat than I do entering the mat. It's that simple.


----------



## Monadnock

michaeledward said:


> I am an atheist. I have no ideas concerning metaphysical aspects of martial arts. I study American Kenpo because I feel better leaving the mat than I do entering the mat. It's that simple.


 

What is this "I" you refer to?


----------



## Touch Of Death

Monadnock said:


> What is this "I" you refer to?


Bingo!


----------



## exile

Monadnock said:


> What is this "I" you refer to?



Sorry... could you spell that out a bit more?


----------



## Touch Of Death

exile said:


> Sorry... could you spell that out a bit more?


sigh.


----------



## Carol

exile said:


> Sorry... could you spell that out a bit more?


 
ROFLMAO!  Nice!


----------



## Ram

> So your theism is science.


 
ugghhh. Do I have to go through this on every board I go to.

O.k.  A Theist someone who beliefs in a God. Science a tool used by man to understand the Universe. Atheist some one who dose not see enough evidence to believe in one. Atheist are attracted to science because to us it is our best bet at understanding life. You can twist words all day to make it seem like atheism is a "scientism religion" or some other buzz word but the only people who do that are people who are afraid of atheism. Now I would be happy to talk to anyone one on one about my atheism but this thread was suppose to be for me to chat with other atheist or people with non trolling intentions.


----------



## Ram

> What is this "I" you refer to?


 

"I" to me is the bunch of smaller parts that came together to form me temporarily but will soon enough dissipate into another form when I die.
Abstact ideas are very different and scientificlly supported compared to throwing Chi balls.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Me a troll? Any assumtion based on science is a theism. You are placing your faith in the idea that your answers lie in science.


----------



## Ram

> I am an atheist. I have no ideas concerning metaphysical aspects of martial arts. I study American Kenpo because I feel better leaving the mat than I do entering the mat. It's that simple.


 
 Thanks for the answer Short but to the point.


----------



## Ram

Considering my question was





> I was wondering if their are any other Atheists on this board? How do you deal with the more metaphysical aspects of martial arts? What type of martial arts are interesting to you and why? Anything else that would make good conversation would be great!


 
Yes you are a troll.



> You are placing your faith in the idea that your answers lie in science.


 
In the same way that science allowed me to get safe stomach surgery. Allowed man to fly and go to the moon. It has not done me wrong so far. Psychology and sociology give me morals and ethics. To me their really is no point looking for more unless for the sake of conversation with a alien being.


----------



## Lisa

Gentlemen,

Lets refrain from starting the name calling in this thread.  The discussion here could really be interesting and I for one would like to see how it plays out.

Certainly we can discuss this with some civility.

I for one am unclear as to what I am.  I believe in spirituality but unsure if I believe in God as it has been explained to me.  

Count me amoungst the confused and wondering.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Ram said:


> Considering my question was
> 
> Yes you are a troll.
> 
> 
> 
> In the same way that science allowed me to get safe stomach surgery. Allowed man to fly and go to the moon. It has not done me wrong so far. Psychology and sociology give me morals and ethics. To me their really is no point looking for more unless for the sake of conversation with a alien being.


Theism doesn't require alien worship. It is just an unproven belief system.
sean


----------



## exile

Touch Of Death said:


> Me a troll? Any assumtion based on science is a theism. You are placing your faith in the idea that your answers lie in science.



Theism denotes belief in a personal God, intelligence or mind which in some way determines the ordering of events in the universe, or at least did so at some point in time. Science posits constraints that hold among measurable dynamical variable in the universe, e.g. conservation of energy or the exclusion principle prohibiting on two or more particle sharing the same quantum numbers, or... and you're saying these two points of view are the _same_?


----------



## Ram

> Theism doesn't require alien worship. It is just an unproven belief system.


 
 I am open to proof, message me when you have some so I can look at it. One of the myths about atheism is that you are not open to proof.


----------



## Ram

> I for one am unclear as to what I am. I believe in spirituality but unsure if I believe in God as it has been explained to me.
> 
> Count me amongst the confused and wondering.


 

Thanks for the open and honest answer:ultracool  How dose your beliefs impact your martial arts?


----------



## Makalakumu

Touch Of Death said:


> Any assumtion based on science is a theism.


 
This is wrong because any assumption in science can be proven wrong.  This is differs from theistic belief in a very fundamental way.


----------



## Touch Of Death

exile said:


> Theism denotes belief in a personal God, intelligence or mind which in some way determines the ordering of events in the universe, or at least did so at some point in time. Science posits constraints that hold among measurable dynamical variable in the universe, e.g. conservation of energy or the exclusion principle prohibiting on two or more particle sharing the same quantum numbers, or... and you're saying these two points of view are the _same_?


Yes the mere beilief that answers lie in future scientific discovery is a faith... A personal god? Your concept of God does not limit theism.
Sean


----------



## Touch Of Death

upnorthkyosa said:


> This is wrong because any assumption in science can be proven wrong. This is differs from theistic belief in a very fundamental way.


Not the assumptions themselves, but the faith in where the answers lie is a theism.
Sean


----------



## Makalakumu

Touch Of Death said:


> Theism doesn't require alien worship. It is just an unproven belief system.
> sean


 
Would you consider evolution unproven?  How about the atom?


----------



## Lisa

Ram said:


> Thanks for the open and honest answer:ultracool  How dose your beliefs impact your martial arts?



No, I grappled and that tends not to have many metaphysical aspects in it.


----------



## Kacey

Define "god" (or "God", if you prefer).  For those who believe in science as the guiding force in the universe, science may well be their religion, thus it becomes, for some people, a theistic belief.  For others it does not.  For all, religion, in all its forms, it is a personal choice, and, often, an individual belief system, and individually defined.  This is one of the issues that makes this such a difficult issue to discuss; everyone is working from a slightly different understanding of the terms used.

As to your original question - it doesn't.  Yes, there is a moral component to my practice of TKD, but it concerns solely the moral aspects of using the skills I learn and teach.  Religion does not enter into it - which is good, as, being Jewish, none of my current students, and few of my past students, share my belief system.


----------



## Ram

To me being a open atheist in society can be rough. You get accused of having no values. Of worshiping science. Of trying to be a know-it-all who wants to ruin Christmas for everyone. Even liberal religious people will put you down. Thats one of the reasons their are so many militant atheist today. You almost have to be unless you want to stay in the atheist closet.


----------



## Touch Of Death

upnorthkyosa said:


> Would you consider evolution unproven? How about the atom?


When we streatch the belief to fill in the unproven blanks even though its obvious its still a faith.
Sean


----------



## Ram

> No, grappling tends not to have many metaphysical aspects in it.


 

 LoL:jediduel:


----------



## Makalakumu

Touch Of Death said:


> Yes the mere beilief that answers lie in future scientific discovery is a faith...


 
I assume nothing.  If we don't prepare, it don't happen.  Take Peak Oil for instance...


----------



## Ram

> When we streatch the belief to fill in the unproven blanks even though its obvious its still a faith.


 
 I don't know but I have "faith" in the *theory of gravity.*


----------



## Ram

BTW I was being sarcastic.:uhyeah:


----------



## Ram

I also forgot to mention their is a difference from faith and reasonable expectations based on evidence.


----------



## Makalakumu

Touch Of Death said:


> Not the assumptions themselves, but the faith in where the answers lie is a theism.
> Sean


 
In order for this to be true, you need to somehow link REALITY, as determined by what can be measured, AND anything that someone may believe.  

The truth is that our observations zero down on certain ideas and that they LOGICALLY take precidence in our minds.  

Assumptions in science are not truth...they are merely our best guess...and we can NEVER do any better then that.

"Ve believe in nussing, Lebowski!"


----------



## Ram

So anyways to get back on topic how has your way of thinking affected or not your martial arts?


----------



## Ram

I will be getting offline for a while but will be back on later tomorrow. I will also happily do a "ask the atheist" thread if anyone wishes or has anymore misconceptions about atheism.


----------



## crushing

upnorthkyosa said:


> This is wrong because any assumption in science can be proven wrong. This is differs from theistic belief in a very fundamental way.


 
There was a fairly recent thread on MT Imagining the 10th Dimension. Where the linked to website tries to help people understand up to the 10th dimension.



			
				http://www.tenthdimension.com/textonly.php said:
			
		

> In String theory, physicists tell us that Superstrings vibrating in the tenth dimension are what create the subatomic particles which make up our universe, and all of the other possible universes as well.


 
Can the existence of 'all the other possible universes' really be proven wrong?


----------



## Makalakumu

What works.  What doesn't.  No ********.  I hope that answers your question.


----------



## Makalakumu

crushing said:


> Can the existence of 'all the other possible universes' really be proven wrong?


 
Do other universes really matter?  How does another universe affect you?  According to quantum mechanics, as soon as you observe something, "it" "chooses" which universe in which it will operate in.  If you are an observer, you cannot choose to unobserve.

This will forever determine your path...


----------



## Andrew Green

Touch Of Death said:


> Me a troll? Any assumtion based on science is a theism. You are placing your faith in the idea that your answers lie in science.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theism

*Theism* is the belief in the existence of one or more gods or deities.

Science does not = Theism, unless you get your science through some science God whispering forumals in peoples ears and handing out physics equations carved in stone to guys on mountains.


----------



## exile

Touch Of Death said:


> Yes the mere beilief that answers lie in future scientific discovery is a faith[/I]
> 
> It's not a faith at all. It's based on the concept of a useful working assumption: that a method of inquiry which has served us as a guide to knowledge in the past will continue to do so, and will continue to modify and revise its own previous conclusions. I don't know what your use of `mere' adds here, but science as a mode of observation. reasoning and testing has pretty well shown itself without competition over the past several thousands of year. Go from the Aristotelian view of the cosmos, to the Copernican, to the refinements of Kepler and Newton, to the perspective of modern physics, and you will find that each step added greater generality while preserving the correct results of the previous `best theory'. Newton showed that the same mathematical relations which govern the motions of the planets also governed the behavior of billiard balls and out of control vehicles on planet Earth. Special relativity showed that the same modifications to Newton's theory necessitated by the constancy of the speed of light for all observers also accounted for the otherwise inexplicably long life of certain very short-lived particles travelling at nearly the speed of light... Science isn't a belief system, it's a method of inquiry which demands that you apply the most economical reasoning possible to data, formulate conclusions that accord with your observations and then keep those conclusions in mind when you encounter new data.
> 
> Imagine someone in the 15th century saying the above line that I've quoted from you by way of dismissal of a doctor's belief that someday we will find a way to eliminate smallpox. It doesn't play any better in the early 21st century, Sean. We may be wrong about our conclusions, but we know how to find out that we are and make corrections. Do `theisms' do that?
> 
> 
> 
> Touch Of Death said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... A personal god? Your concept of God does not limit theism.
> Sean
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not my concept. It's a _dictionary definition_. Check out the Oxford English dictionary, or any of a dozen others. _You're_ the one using the word `theism'---OK, well, that's what the word means---as you'd expect, given its etymology, right? If you mean something else, use a different word whose meaning coincides with your intention. My concept of God isn't the issue here; your statements are what are issue.
Click to expand...


----------



## Cruentus

Ram said:


> ugghhh. Do I have to go through this on every board I go to.


 
1st of all, to get off topic for a bit, awesome avatar! You might be interested in some of the threads I started regarding dogs. One is pics of us doing SAR, and another is an anti BSL thread in the study.

Back on topic...

to answer your question above, if you go to every board and start a thread saying "I'm an Athiest, what do you think of..." then yes. When you put an opinion or belief out in a public forum, you have to expect that some will disagree and have a different view, and may debate your stance.


----------



## The Master

"If there are gods, they do not help, and justice belongs to the strong: but know that all things done before the naked stars are remembered."
*- Klingon proverb*

"I've begun worshipping the Sun for a number of reasons. First of all, unlike some other gods I could mention, I can see the Sun. It's there for me every day. And the things it brings me are quite apparent all the time: heat, light, food, a lovely day. There's no mystery, no one asks for money, I don't have to dress up, and there's no boring pageantry. And interestingly enough, I have found that the prayers I offer to the sun and the prayers I formerly offered to God are all answered at about the same 50-percent rate."
*-- George Carlin, Brain Droppings*

"In the ******** Department, a businessman can't hold a candle to a clergyman. 'Cause I gotta tell you the truth, folks. When it comes to ********, big-time, major league ********, you have to stand in awe of the all-time champion of false promises and exaggerated claims: religion. No contest. No contest. Religion. Religion easily has the greatest ******** story ever told.

     Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man -- living in the sky -- who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!

     But He loves you.

     He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He's all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can't handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good ******** story. Holy ****!
*     -- George Carlin Politically Incorrect, May 29, 1997*

"You know who I pray to? Joe Pesci. Joe Pesci. Two reasons; first of all, I think he's a good actor. Okay. To me, that counts. Second; he looks like a guy who can get things done. Joe Pesci doesn't **** around. Doesn't **** around. In fact, Joe Pesci came through on a couple of things that God was having trouble with. For years I asked God to do something about my noisy neighbor with the barking dog. Joe Pesci straightened that ****-sucker out with one visit.

I noticed that of all the prayers I used to offer to God, and all the prayers that I now offer to Joe Pesci, are being answered at about the same 50 percent rate. Half the time I get what I want. Half the time I don't. Same as God 50-50. Same as the four leaf clover, the horse shoe, the rabbit's foot, and the wishing well. Same as the mojo man. Same as the voodoo lady who tells your fortune by squeezing the goat's testicles. It's all the same; 50-50. So just pick your superstitions, sit back, make a wish and enjoy yourself."
*-- George Carlin* in concert


One is born. One lives. One dies. You can believe that paradise awaits you, that you come back, that angels protect you, or that ancient aliens are responsible for all that is wrong.  Religion is there to give you strength when life hits lows, to guide you by a moral code that has been refined over time, to hold a community together.

In the end, though, it doesn't matter. 

Add me to the Atheist list.


----------



## Andrew Green

Tulisan said:


> to answer your question above, if you go to every board and start a thread saying "I'm an Athiest, what do you think of..." then yes. When you put an opinion or belief out in a public forum, you have to expect that some will disagree and have a different view, and may debate your stance.




Is that true?

If I where to post that "I am a Christian" would I get people saying "No, you're really still a buhdist" cause I think that's rather unique to people claiming athiesim


----------



## crushing

Andrew Green said:


> Is that true?
> 
> If I where to post that "I am a Christian" would I get people saying "No, you're really still a buhdist" cause I think that's rather unique to people claiming athiesim


 
I don't think you would get people claiming you're a buddhist, but you may get some people telling you that there is no real record of that particular Jesus having existed and comparing your God to Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.


----------



## Cruentus

Andrew Green said:


> Is that true?
> 
> If I where to post that "I am a Christian" would I get people saying "No, you're really still a buhdist" cause I think that's rather unique to people claiming athiesim


 
Really? I can recall many times when people have elluded to Christian beliefs on this board to be told that their beliefs were all illusions, that Jesus wasn't a person, and so forth. I can recall many times where Catholicism gets bashed, as well as Islam. The list goes on.

I'm not saying anyone's a martyre, but I don't think people are playing favorites, either.

I do think that if one puts up an opinion, belief, philosephy, or idea on a forum, one has to be prepared that a discussion will ensue and that some may disagree.


----------



## The Master

Tulisan said:


> I do think that if one puts up an opinion, belief, philosephy, or idea on a forum, one has to be prepared that a discussion will ensue and that some may disagree.


 
Yup. One would also hope that such discussion would be done in a grown up manner. Sadly, most places I've been they quickly break down to insults, mud, and threats of physical violence by narrow minded morons who haven't progressed much past the discovery of fire mentally.


----------



## Cruentus

The Master said:


> Yup. One would also hope that such discussion would be done in a grown up manner. Sadly, most places I've been they quickly break down to insults, mud, and threats of physical violence by narrow minded morons who haven't progressed much past the discovery of fire mentally.


 
People do tend to get very emotional with religious or philosophical topics.

I will say that the people on this board aren't that bad, however. Some things end up in the toilet, but I have read and been in some good discussions that would gone completely South in other forums...


----------



## The Master

Very true. One of the reasons I signed up.


----------



## exile

The Master said:


> Yup. One would also hope that such discussion would be done in a grown up manner. Sadly, most places I've been they quickly break down to insults, mud, and threats of physical violence by narrow minded morons who haven't progressed much past the discovery of fire mentally.



Ah, but MT is different: we have very vigilant Moderators who keep things from getting ad hominem pretty effectively---given all the threads they have to moderate---and responding to way off-thread topics. And what Tulisan says is quite true---the people who gravitate to and stay on MT seem to be way more reasonable than people on other boards, which is one of the main reasons why I too signed on. And people are pretty good about reminding each other about the need for civility, I've noticed.


----------



## CoryKS

Ram said:


> To me being a open atheist in society can be rough. You get accused of having no values. Of worshiping science. Of trying to be a know-it-all who wants to ruin Christmas for everyone. Even liberal religious people will put you down. Thats one of the reasons their are so many militant atheist today. You almost have to be unless you want to stay in the atheist closet.


 
Really?  I've never had that problem.  I find that the topic never comes up.  I think the militant ones are annoying, however.  They tend to be as dogmatic as the fundamental Christians.  And, let's face it: they _are_ ruining Christmas for everyone.  I love Christmas.  Best time of year.  You know, Santa Claus, and ho-ho-ho, and mistletoe, and presents to pretty girls.    The only people who bring it up are lefties who mistake me for a conservative (I'm mostly libertarian, with qualifications).  They'll ask me how I can be for this or that when Jesus said such-and-such.  I ask them what made them think I was a Christian.  The look on their face, she is priceless!


----------



## Ram

> 1st of all, to get off topic for a bit, awesome avatar! You might be interested in some of the threads I started regarding dogs. One is pics of us doing SAR, and another is an anti BSL thread in the study.
> 
> Back on topic...
> 
> to answer your question above, if you go to every board and start a thread saying "I'm an Athiest, what do you think of..." then yes. When you put an opinion or belief out in a public forum, you have to expect that some will disagree and have a different view, and may debate your stance.


 


Thanks I love dogs! I am getting my APBT mix and my Shepard mixes paw prints tattooed on me this weekend 

 Well the reason I am surprised at the response is that I was asking for the opinion of other atheist. I did not mean for this to turn out to be another thread where I had to discuss atheism misconceptions.


----------



## Ram

LoL been their done that:ultracool 



> The only people who bring it up are lefties who mistake me for a conservative (I'm mostly libertarian, with qualifications). They'll ask me how I can be for this or that when Jesus said such-and-such. I ask them what made them think I was a Christian. The look on their face, she is priceless!


 
I am more of Independent conservative myself. Which is hard to do at least where I live you are either conservative religous or liberial spiritual/non religous. So I can not hang with the conservatives but I have had some sucesse in getting liberals I know to start being more "hawk like".


----------



## Ram

> Can the existence of 'all the other possible universes' really be proven wrong?


 
To not believe in something you do not need to be prove it wrong.It has to have enough evidence in the first place to exist. Take Zeus for instance. I am not worried about Zeus and neither are the Christians I know. Why,because we know that their is no logical reason to worry about Zeus and to your average Christian you would not need to prove all realities wrong before they would stop believing in Zeus.I would have to submit some pretty substantial evidence to a christian to get them to believe in Zeus.
 To me the whole argument "you can not be an atheist because we do not know everything yet" is pretty flimsy and if it were true we would all be polytheist.


----------



## michaeledward

Kacey said:


> ~snip ~
> *For those who believe in science as the guiding force in the universe*, science may well be their religion, thus it becomes, for some people, a theistic belief. ~ Snip ~


 
While I tend to think the highlighted clause is poorly phrased representation of the underlying idea, some of the arguments put forth seem to indicate this phrase is the underlying idea.

As an athiest, I do not believe science guides anything. Science does not lead, science does not follow. Science is a tool which we (clever primates) can interpret the natural forces that do guide the universe.

Light allows us to see the coffee table in the middle of the room - but light is not the coffee table in the middle of the room. 

Light is to Coffee Table as Science is to Universe.


----------



## Floating Egg

Ram said:


> I was wondering if their are any other Atheists on this board? How do you deal with the more metaphysical aspects of martial arts? What type of martial arts are interesting to you and why? Anything else that would make good conversation would be great!



I have identified myself as an atheist in the past, but I'm not sure how useful it is anymore. How can I _not_ believe in something that doesn't exist? To my knowledge we don't have a word for people that don't believe in leprechauns or pink unicorns, so why should we have one for people that don't believe in deities? 

I've been practicing Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu for a couple of years, but I'm thinking about moving on. I'm not sure what I'm interested in, but I'm going to go out of my way to avoid people that believe in woo-woo stuff.


----------



## MBuzzy

As far as your beliefs and martial arts go, I don't think that they have anything to do with each other.  Whether I believe in god or not is not going to make me kick any higher, or grant me the ability to perform a throw better, or more importantly, praying to a god will not allow me to defend myself when the time comes.  Only training will do that.

So you ask how people deal with the more metaphysical aspects of the martial arts...As with this entire discussion, that question depends solely on your definition of terms.  Most philosophical arguments or disagreements begin with a lack of common definition. 

Main Entry: *meta·phys·i·cal*


Pronunciation: -'fi-zi-k&l
Function: _adjective_
*1* *:* of or relating to metaphysics
*2 a* *:* of or relating to the transcendent or to a reality beyond what is perceptible to the senses *b* *: [SIZE=-1]SUPERNATURAL[/SIZE]*
*3* *:* highly abstract or abstruse; _also_ *: [SIZE=-1]THEORETICAL[/SIZE]*
*4* _often capitalized_ *:* of or relating to poetry especially of the early 17th century that is highly intellectual and philosophical and marked by unconventional imagery 
- *meta·phys·i·cal·ly*


 /-k(&-)lE/ _adverb_ 

How do I deal with the supernatural aspects?  Well, people only fly in Chinese martial arts movies.

The abstract or abtruse aspects...I believe that the only "belief" or lack thereof that can influence your practice of martial arts is your belief in yourself.  Your mind, your feelings, and your composure are more powerful than any belief...in fact, they are what dictate your beliefs.


----------



## bydand

This is entertaining so far.  Lets see where we end up, I'm interested in this discussion/thread and while I'm going to withold my personal thought and feelings, I will read and maybe even learn something new. opcorn::drinkbeer


----------



## Monadnock

MBuzzy said:


> *As far as your beliefs and martial arts go, I don't think that they have anything to do with each other.* Whether I believe in god or not is not going to make me kick any higher, or grant me the ability to perform a throw better, or more importantly, praying to a god will not allow me to defend myself when the time comes. Only training will do that.
> 
> So you ask how people deal with the more metaphysical aspects of the martial arts...As with this entire discussion, that question depends solely on your definition of terms. Most philosophical arguments or disagreements begin with a lack of common definition.
> 
> Main Entry: *meta·phys·i·cal*
> 
> 
> Pronunciation: -'fi-zi-k&l
> Function: _adjective_
> *1* *:* of or relating to metaphysics
> *2 a* *:* of or relating to the transcendent or to a reality beyond what is perceptible to the senses *b* *: [SIZE=-1]SUPERNATURAL[/SIZE]*
> *3* *:* highly abstract or abstruse; _also_ *: [SIZE=-1]THEORETICAL[/SIZE]*
> *4* _often capitalized_ *:* of or relating to poetry especially of the early 17th century that is highly intellectual and philosophical and marked by unconventional imagery
> - *meta·phys·i·cal·ly*
> 
> /-k(&-)lE/ _adverb_
> 
> How do I deal with the supernatural aspects? Well, people only fly in Chinese martial arts movies.
> 
> The abstract or abtruse aspects...I believe that the only "belief" or lack thereof that can influence your practice of martial arts is your belief in yourself. Your mind, your feelings, and your composure are more powerful than any belief...in fact, they are what dictate your beliefs.


 
Apparently, many other cultures disagree with you. From the kamikaze to almost any other militarized group (be they tribal, or modern day US troops receiving a blessing from a priest) the "metaphysical" is quite entwined. It may help some, even if just a sense of security, but it has been and is still there.

Not that anyoneis forcing you to look into it....I'm just saying.....


----------



## Cruentus

Ram said:


> Well the reason I am surprised at the response is that I was asking for the opinion of other atheist. I did not mean for this to turn out to be another thread where I had to discuss atheism misconceptions.


 
Let's be honest. You don't appear to be surprised, or not wanting the discussion... 

On the topic:

I know I really shouldn't post on this because I don't want to get involved in a lengthy discussion, but here is some food for thought...

A lot of people need to separate the difference between a positive athiest and a negative athiest. A negative atheist believes that there is no God; a positive atheist doesn't believe in God because there is no material evidence. Yes, the two perspectives are different. A positive atheist is essentially saying "there could be a God, but I am not going to put my faith into something without proof," which is different then asserting, "there is no God."

The difference is that negative atheists are relatively easy to "pick apart" because their assertion is based in faith without objective evidence the same as any other religious belief. Yes, contrary to popular misconception, if you assert a negative, the burden of proof is on you to prove your assertion the same as if you asserted a positive. If you don't make an assertion at all (other then that you aren't going to believe in something without evidence) then there is no way you can be disproved. By nature of the positive atheist argument (that being that the p.atheist bases the argument only on objective evidence where as a theist and n.athiest bases the argument at some point on subjective belief), one can philosophically disagree or even philosophically refute the position, but the p.atheist arguement cannot be disproved in the objective format.

How does a metaphysical perspective effect training?

Many times, in secular martial arts schools, it doesn't. But if you go to a Christian karate school, an Animist or Islamic Silat school, a Shintoist Aikido school, a Taoist Tai Chi school, etc., then it could matter greatly. If that particular school roots the training process and practices in a particular metaphysical perspective, then it will matter at some point. The only important thing would be how would it matter to YOU.

Independent of metaphysics or religion, Philosophical approaches to training, however, do matter greatly, and not just subjectively. If, for example, you're at a school that can't separate the subjective training format from the objective format of an actual fight, then that would greatly effect how one trains, what one trains, and what is assumed to be effective in combat.

Paul


----------



## CoryKS

Tulisan said:


> A negative atheist believes that there is no God; a positive atheist doesn't believe in God because there is no material evidence. Yes, the two perspectives are different. A positive atheist is essentially saying "there could be a God, but I am not going to put my faith into something without proof," which is different then asserting, "there is no God."


 
I think you are comparing atheism to agnosticism.  I probably fall more into the latter category in that I can allow for the existence of a "higher" being, but not as defined by any of the existing belief systems.


----------



## Ram

> Let's be honest. You don't appear to be surprised, or not wanting the discussion...


 
I will admit that I am sucker for a good discussion.:hammer: I guess I did not expect the side comments to come as quick as they did.:matrix: 



> I know I really shouldn't post on this because I don't want to get involved in a lengthy discussion, but here is some food for thought...
> 
> A lot of people need to separate the difference between a positive athiest and a negative athiest. A negative atheist believes that there is no God; a positive atheist doesn't believe in God because there is no material evidence. Yes, the two perspectives are different. A positive atheist is essentially saying "there could be a God, but I am not going to put my faith into something without proof," which is different then asserting, "there is no God."
> 
> The difference is that negative atheists are relatively easy to "pick apart" because their assertion is based in faith without objective evidence the same as any other religious belief. Yes, contrary to popular misconception, if you assert a negative, the burden of proof is on you to prove your assertion the same as if you asserted a positive. If you don't make an assertion at all (other then that you aren't going to believe in something without evidence) then there is no way you can be disproved. By nature of the positive atheist argument (that being that the p.atheist bases the argument only on objective evidence where as a theist and n.athiest bases the argument at some point on subjective belief), one can philosophically disagree or even philosophically refute the position, but the p.atheist arguement cannot be disproved in the objective format.


 
Agreed. Although I think that there comes a time and place for the negative in me to come out if need be. Like when a certain president stated that atheist are not citizens.On a quick note Pat Tilman was one and he was a great person and a hero and was defiantly fulfilling his duties as a citizen.
 You can't let people walk all over you. They will if you give them a chance especially when they are in group think mode.One on one people are generally open to conversation.


----------



## Cruentus

CoryKS said:


> I think you are comparing atheism to agnosticism. I probably fall more into the latter category in that I can allow for the existence of a "higher" being, but not as defined by any of the existing belief systems.



No. Agnosticism and Positive Atheism can be similar, but are distinctly different. Agnosticism states that it isn't possible to have knowledge of a diety in this life, so religious matters are unknown. Positive athiesm doesn't make a claim that such matters cannot be known; it simply states that there isn't evidence for a diety and will not take a leap of faith to assume that there is or isn't without that evidence.

So the two are fundamentally different.


----------



## Ram

> I think you are comparing atheism to agnosticism. I probably fall more into the latter category in that I can allow for the existence of a "higher" being, but not as defined by any of the existing belief systems.


 
Not really. I can not believe in a god but with the proper evidence I will reassess if need be. I don't believe in the lock ness monster but if someone captured one alive or found a full carcass after the examination was shown to be it then I would believe in it.

Or you could look at it as everyone is agnostic because no one knows about it for sure. In this scenario you could have a agnostic/atheist or a agonstic/theist.


----------



## Cruentus

Ram said:


> Agreed. Although I think that there comes a time and place for the negative in me to come out if need be.



I should clarify that the terms "positive" or "negative" aren't value judgements like "good" or "bad," they are just ways of characterizing the different perspectives.


----------



## Ram

> I should clarify that the terms "positive" or "negative" aren't value judgements like "good" or "bad," they are just ways of characterizing the different perspectives.


 
Thats true.:ultracool


----------



## CoryKS

Tulisan said:


> No. Agnosticism and Positive Atheism can be similar, but are distinctly different. Agnosticism states that it isn't possible to have knowledge of a diety in this life, so religious matters are unknown. Positive athiesm doesn't make a claim that such matters cannot be known; it simply states that there isn't evidence for a diety and will not take a leap of faith to assume that there is or isn't without that evidence.
> 
> So the two are fundamentally different.


 
Gotcha.  Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## Andrew Green

I don't think anyone will claim that there is nothing that would convince them of the existance of God.  Agnostics are undecided, athiests believe there isn't.  But even the strongest athiest could probably tell you what could happen to convince them of the existance of a God.  How many Christians can tell you what it would take for them to convince them that there is no God?


----------



## Cruentus

Andrew Green said:


> I don't think anyone will claim that there is nothing that would convince them of the existance of God. Agnostics are undecided, athiests believe there isn't. But even the strongest athiest could probably tell you what could happen to convince them of the existance of a God. How many Christians can tell you what it would take for them to convince them that there is no God?



Your stating the obvious, really. By nature of the theist position, when one has a perspective based in faith, it would be difficult to state exactly what objective element could change that subjective perception. Someone without that subjective belief would want to see objective proof to change his/her position, and could therefore easily state what that might be.

So, not that your doing this, but it is worth saying that one shouldn't make a value judgement on the willingness or unwillingness to state what would change ones position, when this willingness or unwillingness is a product of the philosophical position itself.


----------



## Monadnock

Andrew Green said:


> I don't think anyone will claim that there is nothing that would convince them of the existance of God. Agnostics are undecided, athiests believe there isn't. But even the strongest athiest could probably tell you what could happen to convince them of the existance of a God. How many Christians can tell you what it would take for them to convince them that there is no God?


 
Christians, or Theists? Funny people choose them over the 100's of other Theist religions....

But proving a negative requires proof of the positive. Maybe people do not understand that religions are based on Faith. No more need to prove or disprove. End of discussion. You either develop Faith, follow it, or sleep well at night with Science.

Night night.


----------



## qizmoduis

Touch Of Death said:


> No one is without a theism.
> Sean



That's just silly.  Why debase your own beliefs by redefining the core words of your beliefs into meaningless gibberish.

Try to take use of language, especially in discussions such as this, a little more seriously.  

I'm an atheist.  I do not believe in deities of any stripe.  You cannot make me a theist by arbitrarily deciding to redefine theism to include any belief that suits your fancy.

Believing that the sun will rise on schedule tomorrow does not make me a christian.  Understanding that jumping off of a very tall cliff will almost invariably result in an uncomfortable and likely fatal splat at the bottom is not even remotely the same as believing that thunder is the result of angels running regular Heaven Leagues at the celestial alley.

I've said this before on this very forum, and I've said it before on almost every forum where religion occasionally gets discussed.  And like Ram, I tire of seeing this silliness crop up from religious apologists every single time.  I am an atheist.  I do not have the same beliefs or belief patterns that you do, and you cannot make it so by inventing your own private word definitions.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Ram said:


> I don't know but I have "faith" in the *theory of gravity.*


Lot a holes in that theory. We understand less about gravity than we do light. Who's theory do you place your faith in?
Sean


----------



## Ram

> Lot a holes in that theory. We understand less about gravity than we do light. Who's theory do you place your faith in?


 
I can tell you that I believe in the theory of gravity enough not to jump off a 100 story building without a parachute any time soon. Of course if you would like to prove me wrong.....


----------



## Ram

B.T.W. we have actually be getting a lot closer to figuring out the abstract parts of gravity lately. I agree that it is a very interesting subject.


----------



## Touch Of Death

qizmoduis said:


> That's just silly. Why debase your own beliefs by redefining the core words of your beliefs into meaningless gibberish.
> 
> Try to take use of language, especially in discussions such as this, a little more seriously.
> 
> I'm an atheist. I do not believe in deities of any stripe. You cannot make me a theist by arbitrarily deciding to redefine theism to include any belief that suits your fancy.
> 
> Believing that the sun will rise on schedule tomorrow does not make me a christian. Understanding that jumping off of a very tall cliff will almost invariably result in an uncomfortable and likely fatal splat at the bottom is not even remotely the same as believing that thunder is the result of angels running regular Heaven Leagues at the celestial alley.
> 
> I've said this before on this very forum, and I've said it before on almost every forum where religion occasionally gets discussed. And like Ram, I tire of seeing this silliness crop up from religious apologists every single time. I am an atheist. I do not have the same beliefs or belief patterns that you do, and you cannot make it so by inventing your own private word definitions.


Didn't you used to believe there were nine planets in the solar system? Did you not accept it as scientific fact?
Sean


----------



## Andrew Green

I believe that gravity is a very real force.  I can pretty much prove this.  What is in doubt is pieces of our understanding of why the force exists and exactly what causes it.  However I suppose you say that my "faith" leads me to believe that we will eventually be able to understand gravity.

And for me that is a important distinction.  Science assumes that we can and eventually will understand the universe.  Religion assumes that we can never comprehend it.

Guess I am a optimist 

Anyways... Trying to define science as Theism is IMO, along the same lines as trying to define Creationism as a science.  Put them under the same umbrella in a attempt to jumble the distinctions between them and balance there credibility.

Religion is just one of those things that requires faith without reason, and those that have it do, and those that don't do not.  But I really think trying to justify religious beliefs by claiming they are what they are not weakens there position, not strengthens it.


----------



## crushing

Touch Of Death said:


> Didn't you used to believe there were nine planets in the solar system? Did you not accept it as scientific fact?
> Sean


 
I'm not sure where you are going with that.  Changing the definition of the word 'planet' doesn't negate the existence of those known celestial bodies.


----------



## Andrew Green

Touch Of Death said:


> Didn't you used to believe there were nine planets in the solar system? Did you not accept it as scientific fact?
> Sean



I could be wrong, but I believe it wasn't until Pluto was cast out that any real definition was created.  Until then "proper" form was just "Satellites" for planets, moons and things like Pluto


----------



## Touch Of Death

I must confess I'm an atheist as well, I just listen to strange radical religious programs at night when I work Grave shift. LOL
Sean


----------



## Ram

> I must confess I'm an atheist as well, I just listen to strange radical religious programs at night when I work Grave shift. LOL


 
LoL you had me going


----------



## jkd friend

Only fools think there is no GOD, only to do foolish things but to do martial arts and be atheist is not very promising when the when the, Mind, Body, and Spirit need to be one as a way of study not of any religion. But people do there own thing and thats just it everybody wants what they want so what can you do but give your point of view.:erg:


----------



## CoryKS

jkd friend said:


> Only fools think there is no GOD, only to do foolish things but to do martial arts and be atheist is not very promising when the when the, Mind, Body, and Spirit need to be one as a way of study not of any religion. But people do there own thing and thats just it everybody wants what they want so what can you do but give your point of view.:erg:


 
I must confess, I'm not entirely clear how one's belief in a god or lack thereof has anything to do with focusing one's own Mind, Body, and Spirit.


----------



## jkd friend

Well you hust have to consider what we all tie the spirit too. You can not claim a spirit that you do have but in the same say you don't believe in whatever simple because the spirit tie to the invisible world of thing you can't see but Know are their.


----------



## Kacey

jkd friend said:


> Only fools think there is no GOD, only to do foolish things but to do martial arts and be atheist is not very promising when the when the, Mind, Body, and Spirit need to be one as a way of study not of any religion. But people do there own thing and thats just it everybody wants what they want so what can you do but give your point of view.:erg:



I could turn your statement around completely by replacing "no GOD" with "GOD".  This is your opinion, and you're welcome to it - but simply because some people disagree with you does not make them fools, especially on an issue as complex as faith.  By its very nature, faith is based on belief and emotion, not more scientific methods of proof - therefore, each individual must determine what they believe in, based on their own experiences, background, and emotional responses.  Believing other than you do is their choice, and it is not foolish - the ability to decide such issues for oneself is what makes us human, and not sheep following the herd.



jkd friend said:


> Well you hust have to consider what we all tie the spirit too. You can not claim a spirit that you do have but in the same say you don't believe in whatever simple because the spirit tie to the invisible world of thing you can't see but Know are their.



I _*know*_ no such thing.  What I believe, however, is totally different from what I can _*know*_ in the sense of proving it objectively to another person.  You believe such a thing, and that is your choice.  My belief is different, and equally my choice.


----------



## The Master

jkd friend said:


> Only fools think there is no GOD, only to do foolish things but to do martial arts and be atheist is not very promising when the when the, Mind, Body, and Spirit need to be one as a way of study not of any religion. But people do there own thing and thats just it everybody wants what they want so what can you do but give your point of view.:erg:


Fascinating.

Fool - a person who lacks good judgment.

One might say the same of those who choose to believe in an invisible entity whose existance can neither be felt, seen, nor proven, but yet whose inability to be proven is somehow taken as proof. People laugh at those who think rocks can heal, yet will insist that Angels guard them. I can hold  rock, I can feel a rock, I can taste a rock, I can see a rock, and I can hear a rock.  I can not do any of those with Angels or Diety.  Yet I am supposed to just "believe".  Faith is a powerful force, but faith is not proof.  Believing in diety does not make it any more real than believing that fire is cold. The difference is, one can test the latter.


----------



## jkd friend

Proof is not the problem its the lack of a open heart who has seen every one from the past letalone touch them or any oher physicial contact. Like all people you read it some one says it is real and you believe it. I can not touch " nothing" because it is a state of being yet we say it is there because it is not there. You breath air but you breath out carbinD yet we chose to call one, one thing and another, another. To get back to the point just stop trying to understand why and understand that you want what you want the way you want it and sometimes it won't come to your way of believing it but much simpler most of the time.


----------



## jkd friend

We all have to come to the realiztion that being religious and being spiritual are to different things you can breakdown meanings of words all day but to come to the truth you must understand that we all chose what we chose ether for truth or self.


----------



## Touch Of Death

jkd friend said:


> Only fools think there is no GOD, only to do foolish things but to do martial arts and be atheist is not very promising when the when the, Mind, Body, and Spirit need to be one as a way of study not of any religion. But people do there own thing and thats just it everybody wants what they want so what can you do but give your point of view.:erg:


Buddhists don't believe in God and they seem to do alright.
Sean


----------



## michaeledward

jkd friend said:


> Proof is not the problem its the lack of a *open heart* who has seen every one from the past letalone touch them or any oher physicial contact. Like all people you read it some one says it is real and you believe it. I can not touch " nothing" because it is a state of being yet we say it is there because it is not there. You breath air but you breath out carbinD yet we chose to call one, one thing and another, another. To get back to the point just stop trying to understand why and understand that you want what you want the way you want it and sometimes it won't come to your way of believing it but much simpler most of the time.


 
Slow down. You are trying to say way too much, way too fast. This results in you having no idea what the hell you are actually saying. 

"open heart" - the heart is a muscle used to send blood through the circulatory system. If you 'open' it, you are going to die. 

We breathe in air - we breathe out air.  We do not breathe out carb*o*n dioxide. Carbon Dioxide is a component of air which we expel from our lungs. So is nitrogen, oxygen and several other gases. 

The phrase "you want what you want the way you want it" is an insult. When used in this manner, the phrase is accusing another of immaturity. Personally, you telling me that you think I am immature because I don't believe in your higher power tells me much more about you, than it enlightens me. 

If you wish to find me on Sunday ... I'll be in the river, observing the masterful dynamic of our planet, with a fly rod in my hand. Be sure to say hello to the preacher.


----------



## MBuzzy

The majority of this discussion has been centered on definition of terms.  Each person knows how they feel.  Whether they are labeled an Atheist, Agnostic, positive atheist, christian, theist, buddhist, whatever...they still know what they are.  Knowing yourself and how you feel about things is the first step to understanding your mind, body, and spirit.  Your spirit does not have anything to do with your beliefs - unless you want it to.


----------



## Ram

> How does a metaphysical perspective effect training?
> 
> Many times, in secular martial arts schools, it doesn't. But if you go to a Christian karate school, an Animist or Islamic Silat school, a Shintoist Aikido school, a Taoist Tai Chi school, etc., then it could matter greatly. If that particular school roots the training process and practices in a particular metaphysical perspective, then it will matter at some point. The only important thing would be how would it matter to YOU.


 
I have attended mostly Kung Fu dojos lately. Such as Hopgar. The Taoist influence is strong but my instructor will give you the Taoist version of the move and then give you the bare bones explanation. My favorite quote during a training session "you know all of that flow like water s*** you learned about, this is where you use it"


----------



## jkd friend

michaeledward said:


> Slow down. You are trying to say way too much, way too fast. This results in you having no idea what the hell you are actually saying.
> 
> "open heart" - the heart is a muscle used to send blood through the circulatory system. If you 'open' it, you are going to die.
> 
> We breathe in air - we breathe out air. We do not breathe out carb*o*n dioxide. Carbon Dioxide is a component of air which we expel from our lungs. So is nitrogen, oxygen and several other gases.
> 
> The phrase "you want what you want the way you want it" is an insult. When used in this manner, the phrase is accusing another of immaturity. Personally, you telling me that you think I am immature because I don't believe in your higher power tells me much more about you, than it enlightens me.
> 
> If you wish to find me on Sunday ... I'll be in the river, observing the masterful dynamic of our planet, with a fly rod in my hand. Be sure to say hello to the preacher.


 
Very well then but I say what comes to mind it my come out different on a computer but all in all I can get the done judging from your remarks you got what I was saying see you at the river I love water it my element.LOL! :asian:


----------



## Cruentus

Tulisan said:


> A lot of people need to separate the difference between a positive athiest and a negative athiest. A negative atheist believes that there is no God; a positive atheist doesn't believe in God because there is no material evidence. Yes, the two perspectives are different. A positive atheist is essentially saying "there could be a God, but I am not going to put my faith into something without proof," which is different then asserting, "there is no God."
> 
> Paul


 
I know this is not exactly on topic at this point, but I was just informed that I mixed up my terms, so I need to correct the mistake.

I switched terms. Negative atheist is the one that doesn't believe in God because there is no material evidence, and positive atheist believes that there is no God. 

Again, this is an important distinction; I just mixed my terms up.

So sorry about that!  :anic: 

Carry on...


----------



## The Kai

Or the process of science??


----------



## xMarishltenx

what about the process of science?


----------



## heretic888

Contrary to popular belief, atheism and the scientific method have very little (if anything) to do with one another.

The former (atheism) is a preset belief system that has its basis in a priori assumptions about reality. 

The latter (scientific method) is a systematic process for acquiring and confirming/disconfirming information about reality; it only endorses particular beliefs insofar as they conform to the available information, and as such, as the information changes this 'endorsement' also changes (self-correction).

In my opinion, many "atheists" rather opportunistically hijack science and claim it as their own. However, this does not logically follow, as science does not support any given belief or value system. Many religious fundamentalists (Christian or otherwise) tend to go along with this trick, in large part because science has revealed information contrary to their view of the world (i.e., evolution).

To put it simply, science and scientism ain't the same animal.

Laterz.


----------



## michaeledward

Heretic888 is exactly correct with that last post.

Atheism and Science are not mutually exclusive; one can believe equally in both, but they are not dependent on, nor derivative of, each other. Of course, if you poll actual scientists, you will find that approximately 95% of them have faith in a higher power. Which is just about the same percentage of non-scientists.


----------



## Ram

> In my opinion, many "atheists" rather opportunistically hijack science and claim it as their own. However, this does not logically follow, as science does not support any given belief or value system. Many religious fundamentalists (Christian or otherwise) tend to go along with this trick, in large part because science has revealed information contrary to their view of the world (i.e., evolution).


 
I agree with your post. I just want to clarify that there is a difference between "their is absolutely no God" atheist and "I will not believe in something till I see proof for it" Atheist. The first uses faith the last uses science. Again science is a tool that is all.


----------



## Ram

> Atheism and Science are not mutually exclusive; one can believe equally in both, but they are not dependent on, nor derivative of, each other. Of course, if you poll actual scientists, you will find that approximately 95% of them have faith in a higher power. Which is just about the same percentage of non-scientists.


 
True, people are people scientist, mechanic, or artist.


----------



## Marginal

jkd friend said:


> Well you hust have to consider what we all tie the spirit too. You can not claim a spirit that you do have but in the same say you don't believe in whatever simple because the spirit tie to the invisible world of thing you can't see but Know are their.


 
Spirit can simply refer to the ingegration of instinct and the thought process. Mind on its own can conceived of a lot of means to deliver a punch etc, you can work a strong body, but without the will to put it together, you have less than the sum of the whole. 

There's nothing supernatural about that.


----------



## heretic888

michaeledward said:


> Of course, if you poll actual scientists, you will find that approximately 95% of them have faith in a higher power. Which is just about the same percentage of non-scientists.


 
Actually, that doesn't seem to be quite true. From Wikipedia's Religiosity and intelligence entry:

*Religiosity and education in the United States*
Research in the United States has suggested a negative correlation between religiosity and educational level, a variable usually related with higher IQ. In 2000, noted skeptic Michael Shermer found a negative correlation between education and religiosity in the United States, though Rice University indicates this may not apply to the social sciences.[4] Lastly a June 2006 Gallup survey further supported that a definite belief in God declines with educational level.[5]
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/
*http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Religiosity_and_intelligence&action=edit&section=4
Belief in a personal God among scientists*
In one study, 90% of the general population surveyed professed a distinct belief in a personal god and afterlife, while only 40% of the scientists with a BS surveyed did so, and only 10% of those considered "eminent."[1]. Another study found that mathematicians were just over 40%, biologists just under 30%, and physicists were barely over 20% likely to believe in God.[2]
A 1998 survey[3] by Larson and Witham of the 517 members of the United States National Academy of Sciences showed that 72.2% of the members expressed "personal disbelief" in a personal God while 20.8% expressed "doubt or agnosticism" and only 7.0% expressed "personal belief". This was a follow-up to their own earlier 1996 study[4] which itself was a follow-up to a 1916 study by James Leuba[5].​ 
Just something to think about....

Laterz.


----------

