So I don't have any problem believing that there is no Santa Clause . . .
I've been a pretty firm agnostic for the past few years since I ran across the idea that I could believe in god and still accept that I really don't know. I knew that the gods people had made up were definitely not real but I wasn't ready to say definitively that there wasn't any God at all. However, I've continued to lose more and more of the religious ideas hiding in the corners of my mind until I find myself truly questioning the idea of god. The bottom line is, I have no problem saying definitively that Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, and the tooth fairy, all figures I used to passionately believe in, are nothing more than figments of the imagination. Without any real evidence of god (not counting all the evidence believers make up), why do I have a problem saying I simply don't believe in god? I guess I'm losing that too.
1
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
7 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button. For me belief in all of the above manifests in two ways; how it effects you, and how it affects how you perceive and interact with others. If a persons belief in something creates a pattern of behavior that leads to positive action and that action persists despite the fact that said thing does not exist then the action or pattern becomes the notable reality. You outgrow the belief but the intent and lesson of the myth persists.
One can argue that humans should or do manifest positive behaviors without such belief. Yet throughout human history such myths, dogmas, religions, traditions persisted and still do. And they drive positive and negative behavior. For me the true meat and potatoes of anything is its result. So if you believe in something and through said belief you build a personal code or set of actions that drive positive behavior great. If you do the same and it leads down the path of destruction for yourself and/or others then that is bad and should be challenged.
For me the biggest evil is certainty in human perception, Whether your religious and believe science driven thought is evil or your an Atheist who believes all religion is evil and drives ignorance, fear and hatred. They are both wrong in their certainty that the label is accurate for the length and breadth of humans and their experiences.
Scientists and rational people believe in some version of divinity and uses it to drive their curiosity. To give it meaning and a structure of ethics. Rational people use science and reason to drive down the path of evil whether it be the prosecution of war, the construction and use of weapons and other means to destroy their enemies, or as a rational for selfishness and greed. Both groups share a very real evil; the evil of certainty in action and willful ignorance of others within humanity but outside what they consider "their" humanity.. Whether that other is the enemy of their nation, their faith, or simply someone who is in the way of a goal. America's manifest destiny and the extermination of the Native Americans being a good example of that.
More and more I think that what humanity needs is something to unite it as one species seperate from nationality, race, gender or other seperations. What that can be and how it would come about I do not know. Perhaps if our technology can overtake our destructive bent we will get there. 
Quarm
Level 6
Oct 4, 2019
1
Much of religion is based on fear. They use love to try and cover it over, but the driving force is fear. Fear of the unknown, fear of death, fear of being alone. The human need of tribalism, fear of “the other.” All are used to indoctrinate children into the fold of whatever the religious beliefs of their parents happen to be. As we grow older, we develop our own sense of need. Some leave their faith for stronger ones, cults if you will, out of fear that the one they were in had it wrong. Some go the other way and find more liberal believers to follow. And some like you just question what it is you believe but can’t accept the idea of nothing out of fear of being wrong.
I had a friend who said he believed because he could not accept the idea that life on earth is finite, humans being the wonderful species we are. That there had to be more! Even my Dad, who I’m sure was an Agnostic even though he never stated it directly, as he neared the end, was hedging his bets and showing a religious side. You know, just in case. That is how deeply ingrained the idea was in his childhood.
Speaking for myself, I am an Atheist. I went through many years when things in my life seemed too odd to be just random events or coincidence. So I espoused “fate” as propelling people’s lives to their “destinies.” The problem with that is fate and destiny require a master to orchestrate, which of course leads you back to a god. Then in watching the movie Butterfly Effect there was a short extra feature on the Chaos Theory as it relates to life. (The movie itself was not that great. I am not an Aston Krutcher fan. The earlier French version I though was better by far, called Happenstance I believe.) This theory explained to me exactly why things happen, sort of. They are not random, and not controlled by some invisible puppet master as in fate, and certainly not subject to change by human prayer, which I consider to be the equivalent and as useful as wishing. No, the things that happen in your life are created by not only decisions and actions that you yourself make, but by those made by millions of others all the time! This is a very simplified version of the theory and would probably take a book to explain exactly the thoughts behind it. But it was the time I pretty much became a certified Atheist. And I will remain one until the day someone will show me with photos, a map and introduction exactly where heaven is, who god is and where all the billions of people who have died over the eons of human existence are stored. 
Sorry, I ran on, don’t get to talk about this much.
Barnie2years
Level 8
Oct 2, 2019
1
Thanks for your thoughts. I enjoyed them.
I actually really liked the Butterfly Effect. The first one, anyway. The second one was a big disappointment.
@UpsideDownAgain did you see the original French film starring Audrey Tautou? Much more realistic than the Aston Kutcher version I think. No flashbacks and time travel.
@Barnie2years No, but you've got me interested. I'll look it up.
Whether or not there is some being, or beings, in the universe, or universes, that we would call a god or gods is simply something that cannot be known (proved, or disproved). However, we can look at the universe, how it operates, and deduce that no god is necessary for it to behave just as it does; and there is no evidence for the existence of any.
My journey from believer to * atheist took over a decade. I left organized religion but I still believed in a god, namely the Christian version of one; but I thought I had become a more liberal-minded one--not taking the Bible so literally. Well, the more I learned about the Bible, the more I came to realize that the god described in it cannot exist--it is far too contradictory.
So, I decided to discover what I was: Gnostic Christian, Pagan, Buddhist, etc. Well, I finally settled into deism, believing there was a creator god; but it didn't care, or possibly didn't even know, about us.
It was when I dug into the sciences, I had been taught to fear and ignore, that I realized that there simply is no need to insert a god. One does not need to give energy consciousness, intent, will, volition; and doing so, just complicates things (Occam's Razor).
This was a terrifying journey for me and I pleaded with this god, through prayer, to not let me get led astray up until I stopped believing in it. When one is taught to never question their god, that an eternal Hell awaits those who reject it, or simply that it really loves us and is looking out for us, it makes it much tougher to let go of than when one stops believing in Santa--after all, we don't need a Santa to get presents.
- I am an atheist because I absolutely do not believe any gods exist.
I am an agnostic because I do not claim to have all of the knowledge of the universe(s).
Joanne
Level 7
Oct 2, 2019
2
Varn:
You don’t need ‘all the knowledge of the universe,’ only proof…
@Varn : What I mean by that is that I do not know everything that is possibly either inside, or outside, of our universe. And, to make a positive claim that there absolutely is no god, is basically making the claim that one contains the knowledge of the universe(s). And, it too would require that I provide evidence. I absolutely don't believe there is any kind of god; but I cannot say that this is based on any absolute knowledge I possess. It is based on the fact that I see no need for any gods, nor evidence for any.
@Varn : I agree we don't need to worry about disproving any claims. It is up to the person making the claim to offer up testable, verifiable, falsifiable, proof. If someone says to me "there is a god" I will ask them to show me such proof...personal feelings and supposed miracles don't count.
And, if I say to someone that there is no god (and by this I mean no god of any kind) I must then show proof because I have made a claim. And, there is no evidence that I can submit that will prove that no being, that we would call a god, exists somewhere inside, or outside, of our time and universe.
I am under no obligation to disprove their claim; but, if I make a claim I am under an obligation to offer proof to back up my claim. And, I cannot offer solid proof, I can only offer up the science that shows that no god is necessary for the universe to behave just as it does and that there is no evidence for the existence of any such being, or beings.
Varn:
@Joanne They say, “There’s a Loch Ness Monster!” You say, “Prove it.”
Yet you won’t say, “There is no Loch Ness Monster,” because you’ve not personally searched every underwater crevice of Loch Ness?
I have a good understanding of their description and concept of both a god, and ‘nessy,’ and can without the shadow of a doubt rest assured, neither exist..
Though self-limiting purity may feel accurate, or noble, it’s weak and destructive to empower those putting forth false claims not to deny them because we can not disprove a negative. They win - because they don’t back off.
@Varn : The Lock Ness monster is something that is supposed to exist within our time and on our planet, just like Big Foot. It is easier to say that they do not exist, for if they did, we would have proof. To make a claim of non-existence for a being that supposedly exists outside of what we know as time, and encompasses the universe, is simply something that cannot be scientifically disproved. Again, which is why, even though I personally think there is no god, I will not make that claim in an argument against a believer.
You have to make up your mind 
St-Sinner
Level 9
Oct 2, 2019
0
Like hell I do.
It's not possible to either prove or disprove the existence of a god. It's reasonable to be a skeptic; it's agnosticism. Disbelief is atheism. Belief is religion. You are OK!
EdEarl
Level 8
Oct 2, 2019
0
when one can neither prove nor disprove the existence of something the default position is to assume until evidence shows otherwise that the thing in question in all probability does not exist or that if it does it is irrelevant.
This stance has worked pretty well for "false" gods, faeries, pixies, unicorns, demons, evil spirits, the boogieman, Captain Kirk, Sherlock Holmes, the loch Ness monster and Mr. Burns.
It's not possible to prove or disprove the existence of Santa Clause either. The only reason I ever believed in Santa was because I was brought up with the idea of Santa. I stopped believing when I crawled under the kitchen table one Christmas Eve and watched dad and mom carry presents out to the tree. The "evidence" that Santa existed had been proven false and without that, there wasn't really anything else to base my belief on.
I only believe in god because I was brought up to believe in god but slowly I'm understanding that all the "evidence" isn't necessarily what it seems. Every piece of evidence can have other explanations. I believe in law they call that "reasonable doubt." Without the evidence, I am asking myself why on this one subject I insist that I just don't know. I am reasonably sure Santa doesn't exist so why insist god might? Well, the conditioning runs deep and this wouldn't be the first time I hesitated to give something up just in case I get hit by lightening or something.
@LenHazell53 Agree. No evidence means irrelevant.
@UpsideDownAgain You have been taught to fear the wrath of a god, and fear makes one cautious. That's OK. It may take years or decades to become comfortable with your agnosticism. Everyone is different. Family interactions may be troublesome as long as you live. Every family is different.
You are becoming more enlightened, less deluded, and more into realism. It is a lifelong process. Try to enjoy it; there are amazing things to learn.
I think you are experiencing culture shock. (There's a book named Culture Shock) It will lessen over time, but can make you feel out of sorts. In addition we are living in a time of Future Shock (another book), so you are doing very well, all things considered.
LenHazell53
Level 9
Oct 2, 2019
0
Whew! Wasn't in the budget anyway.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.