Knowledge of Good and Evil

[William]

Q: Without knowledge of good and evil, can we have morality?

[William]

An atheists faith in what they believe, is as evident as a theists faith in what they believe.

But what is actually the truth?

I wonder if this is how other readers are also reading the underlined:
"An atheist's faith, which is withholding belief is what they believe."
They believe that what they don't believe.

I won't even argue against the claim that a theists faith is similar to a lack of belief as that would give this idea credit it doesn't deserve.

From observations and interactions with a variety of folk who identify as atheists and claim to argue from the platform of atheism, there are a variety of beliefs these espouse.

Lack of belief in Gods does not prevent atheists having belief in other things.

For example, since I lack belief in Gods, I could be called an atheist just by that, but since I do not lack knowledge and experience of mindfulness and what it has revealed of itself, and think there is way more than enough evidence to support the theory that we exist within a created thing, I do not lack belief that this is most likely, which doesn't really make me a contender for being an atheist, given atheists also lack belief we exist within a created thing, or - more to the point - believe that we exist within a thing that was not created.

Is my present assessment incorrect in that regard, or is one correct to say that while atheism is lack of belief (in a particular thing) atheists are free to have beliefs in other things?

Most atheists I have encountered are strongly in favor of materialism.

The knowledge I have obtained shows me that materialism unrealistically reduces mind to a position of lesser importance to the matter, than it actually is.

Whereas the mystery of mindfulness intrigues me to the point where I have to investigate and dig deeper and theism offers a means to that end in the sense that it at least acknowledges that we exist within a created thing.

But yes, I think it is fair to point out that atheist do have and are entitled to, their beliefs.

(I ran the above by LLS GPT)

4o. Your assessment captures the nuances in the discussion. While atheism is often defined as a lack of belief in gods, this doesn't preclude atheists from holding beliefs in other areas, such as materialism, which is a common perspective among atheists. Materialism, as a belief system, tends to prioritize matter over mind, which contrasts with your focus on the importance of mindfulness and the possibility of creation.

In this sense, atheism doesn't imply a complete absence of belief but rather a specific absence of belief in gods or a created universe. Your approach highlights the idea that both atheists and theists operate from belief systems, even if those systems are different in scope and focus. This underscores that belief itself is a fundamental aspect of human experience, whether directed toward gods, materialism, or mindfulness.

[TRANSPONDER]

An atheists faith in what they believe, is as evident as a theists faith in what they believe.

But what is actually the truth?

I wonder if this is how other readers are also reading the underlined:
"An atheist's faith, which is withholding belief is what they believe."
They believe that what they don't believe.

I won't even argue against the claim that a theists faith is similar to a lack of belief as that would give this idea credit it doesn't deserve.

From observations and interactions with a variety of folk who identify as atheists and claim to argue from the platform of atheism, there are a variety of beliefs these espouse.

Lack of belief in Gods does not prevent atheists having belief in other things.

For example, since I lack belief in Gods, I could be called an atheist just by that, but since I do not lack knowledge and experience of mindfulness and what it has revealed of itself, and think there is way more than enough evidence to support the theory that we exist within a created thing, I do not lack belief that this is most likely, which doesn't really make me a contender for being an atheist, given atheists also lack belief we exist within a created thing, or - more to the point - believe that we exist within a thing that was not created.

Is my present assessment incorrect in that regard, or is one correct to say that while atheism is lack of belief (in a particular thing) atheists are free to have beliefs in other things?

Most atheists I have encountered are strongly in favor of materialism.

The knowledge I have obtained shows me that materialism unrealistically reduces mind to a position of lesser importance to the matter, than it actually is.

Whereas the mystery of mindfulness intrigues me to the point where I have to investigate and dig deeper and theism offers a means to that end in the sense that it at least acknowledges that we exist within a created thing.

But yes, I think it is fair to point out that atheist do have and are entitled to, their beliefs.

(I ran the above by LLS GPT)

4o. Your assessment captures the nuances in the discussion. While atheism is often defined as a lack of belief in gods, this doesn't preclude atheists from holding beliefs in other areas, such as materialism, which is a common perspective among atheists. Materialism, as a belief system, tends to prioritize matter over mind, which contrasts with your focus on the importance of mindfulness and the possibility of creation.

In this sense, atheism doesn't imply a complete absence of belief but rather a specific absence of belief in gods or a created universe. Your approach highlights the idea that both atheists and theists operate from belief systems, even if those systems are different in scope and focus. This underscores that belief itself is a fundamental aspect of human experience, whether directed toward gods, materialism, or mindfulness.

All wrong. It does you no good to pretend that 'atheism' (secular materialism) reduces mind. Rather (prising logic and validated evidence above Faith and superstition) it elevates the mind (reason) above instinct. By Mind, i suspect you mean Faith, in a sortagod with as much Christianity - remnants as you can attach to it.

I'm letting a Lot pass, such as materialism as a belief - system, which in a way, it is, crediting what has been scientifically validated, but just don't pretend that is equal to Faith in what has not been validated - which is what belief System (religion or superstition) usually means.

[William]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #62]

You appear to be critiquing stuff I didn't say. Please don't quote what I did say and then make comments about what I didn't say.

[TRANSPONDER]

That just looks like the 'I didn't use those words' evasion.

This quote

Whereas the mystery of mindfulness intrigues me to the point where I have to investigate and dig deeper and theism offers a means to that end in the sense that it at least acknowledges that we exist within a created thing.

In the light of the cosmic mind arguments you have made in the past tells me i got your number.

[William]

Refer to the note in my signature.

[TRANSPONDER]

Refer to the note in my signature.

Why should I take anything in anything you posts as some Rule I should observe.

Look, I may misunderstand or mistake and get things wrong. But I can also say it how I see it. You are fre to clarify what your beliefs and theories are if I misundertand.

You appear to credit some sorta cosmic mind, though not any kind of religion, or personal god of a religion.

That's fine, we are on the same page, then. But the fact remains that there is no good evidence for a Cosmic mind, and pulling lawyer tricks like 'I did not actually says that' is really beneath someone who has reached the position of Theist -agnostic.

All you have to do is regard the Cosmic mind as an unvalidated hypothesis and you can drop trying to fiddle it to prtetend it has good supportive evidence.

You may not get this, but I like you, and I am not trying to Rob you; I'm trying to help you.

[Difflugia]

Most atheists I have encountered are strongly in favor of materialism.

The knowledge I have obtained shows me that materialism unrealistically reduces mind to a position of lesser importance to the matter, than it actually is.

The relationship between materialism and mind is that the materialistic position (that I also hold) is that mind is an emergent property of at least one arrangement of matter. That doesn't mean that mind isn't important, but it does mean that there isn't some mystical, disembodied mind or mindfulness out there independent of material reality.

Mind is the equivalent of spelling errors or tooth decay. They're all real, but they only exist as a property of something else. Mind is what brains do. We may speculate that mind might emerge from some arrangement of matter other than a brain, but as yet, we don't have any direct evidence of that. That doesn't make mind any less important, in the same way that the contents of a book are often more important than the material book itself. What it does do, however, is make mind less magical, which I suspect might be your real beef.

[William]

[Replying to Difflugia in post #67]

What it does do, however, is make mind less magical, which I suspect might be your real beef.

You are incorrect in your suspicions.

Rather, I am more interested in it's importance as at least equal to that of matter. Clearly your belief has it that brains are more important, just as healthy teeth and correct spelling are. That is what I mean by "materialism unrealistically reduces mind to a position of lesser importance to the matter, than it actually is."

[William]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #66]

You are fre to clarify what your beliefs and theories are if I misundertand.

I am also free to observe the patterns involved in doing so with you in particular, as it does not produce anything other than strawman responses from you anyway.
If those strawman responses are simply you misunderstanding, then I am wasting my time even engaging with you (or anyone who does this) because the results of my efforts and clarifying are wasted, because you (predictably now) don't actually address what I am clarifying, but simply put your own spin on it...the very definition of strawmanning.

I am unconvinced that you misunderstand.

[Difflugia]

Rather, I am more interested in it's importance as at least equal to that of matter. Clearly your belief has it that brains are more important, just as healthy teeth and correct spelling are. That is what I mean by "materialism unrealistically reduces mind to a position of lesser importance to the matter, than it actually is."

I'm not sure what you mean by "important" and I think you're using it in two different ways within the same thought.

Saying that a brain is more important than mind is analogous to saying that a book is more important than the story within it. One can have neither a story nor a brain without a material medium in which they exist, but that doesn't mean that the medium is more important in terms of a value judgement. Of course, one can't have a mind or a story without the medium, but if that's what you mean by importance, then that's simply a statement of how the world is. It's one thing to disagree and think that the universe is dualistic, but materialism in this context is just the claim that minds cannot be independent of a material matrix. It doesn't place a value on the mind any more than one can say that wood is more important than a chair or a house. Without the medium there simply is no chair, house, or mind.