Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
A lot more than that believe in alien abductions, so can we assume you are advocating that is real also?
Sure. I wouldn’t call these entities “aliens”. Their superior intellect comes with unimaginable power. There is no reason why these particular beings couldn’t swipe the consciousness of any given person and bring them somewhere more suitable to their living standards. Sure. I would fully endorse alien abduction along with lost time. And you don’t believe these people either. This goes beyond skepticism. This is pure dismissive intellectual snobbery on your part - to outright discount a person’s experience based on how scientific it sounds. Do you think the world revolves around science? The world revolves around money. Science revolves around money. Science creates medicine to treat as of yet discovered neurological disorders for what? The sake of money.
Missing Time does NOT prove Alien Abduction. All "missing time" proves is that the person suffered either a fainting spell, or lost unconsciousness for a period of time. This is indicative of a medical problem, NOT alien abduction.
rmfr
sorry. What I meant was that someone tells you you’ve been sleeping for three days and all you know is that you’ve been on a space ship for several hours ;)
rat spit: "sorry. What I meant was that someone tells you you’ve been sleeping for three days and all you know is that you’ve been on a space ship for several hours ;)"
Then that is a dissociative delusion. Bat shit crazy. Seek psychiatric help immediately.
rmfr
You're getting more and more hysterically incoherent, and that's no mean feat in itself.
However you're also making up lies, as no one has dismissed anything out of snobbery or based on how it sounds.
Claims are generally disbelieved because peolle can't demonstrate any objective evidence for them. It's manifestly the best most open minded approach.
You also seem obsessed with money, but have no cogent points beyond stating what is manifestly obvious to everyone as part a disjointed rant with no real idea of what it is you're proposing be done to improve the capitalist systems we live under.
"Do you think the world revolves around science? "
I don't even know what that is supposed to mean, but science is what enables us to feed cloth and house a global population of billions. What's are you suggesting wexreplace it with, archaic hokum superstition?
RAT SPUNK: "Well. If you would like to support the psychologist’s view of the world, you’re more than welcome."
Now you are having a go at the psychologists? Really? How do you not know that psychologists do not share a view of the world. What psychologists are generally interested in is how to lead people to change. They sometimes have a view of pathology.
First separate Psychologists from Psychiatrists.
Psychiatrists - strange behavior comes from an imbalance of chemicals. Medical Model. Psychoanalysis - belief in and the exploration of the psyche (Id, Ego, Superego) and their interaction can lead to the free association of information from the unconscious mind to the conscious mind. Preventing this flow are the defense mechanisms. Working through these requires regression and interpretation according to psychoanalytic theory. You are healthy when information flows from the unconscious mind to the conscious without hindrance. That is about as close as you are going to get to a view of the world from a Psychiatrist.
PSYCHOLOGISTS"
Popular these days are family systems theorists. They assert that symptoms occur in relationships. Pathology generally serves as a protective shield against real issues occurring in the family. What the family therapist attempts to do in Western Culture / Korea is different, is to get the parents working together as a united front in the family. Elevate them into the role of parents. This means getting the mom separated or the dad separated from their allies in the family and getting them to align with one another. It may mean pulling an absent or alcoholic dad back into the family and creating structure, boundaries, rules, and getting people to work as a team. Any theory can be paired with family systems theory, even psychoanalysis.
Cognitive Existentialists:
Therapy takes place in the here and now. You can change your life at this very moment. The cognitive existentialist is a master of the re-frame. Pathology is viewed as a logical choice that the patient has made to survive. CLAUDIA BLACK published a book that brought millions of Americans from alcoholic homes into therapy. She asserted that people who grew up in homes with alcoholics did not trust, did not feel, and did not talk. You can not trust because promises are always broken. You can not talk, for what would you say? "Dad you are an alcoholic?" At the least it will be denied and at the most you will get beat. And you can not feel. Your feelings do not count. So these people flocked into counseling centers believing they had issues. The cognitive existentialists response to them, once they have all been unloaded. "Great? You have done a wonderful job at surviving in a very difficult situation. So you don't trust, you don't talk and you don't feel. These are survival mechanisms that have served you well your whole life and they will always be there but as an adult we may want to trust a bit more, talk a bit more and feel a bit more. Which do you want to change? Then a plan for change is arranged....
GESTALT THERAPIST:
A gestalt therapist is also an existentialist of a kind. They are interested in the moment by moment flow of feelings. A person who enters therapy depressed, may assert, I always feel depressed. "This is not true." The therapist helps them to focus on the moment by moment flow of feelings and to recognize that feeling like clouds come and go. A person will realize I am depressed now but it will pass.
There is Cognitive therapy.
The basics of this is learning not to "SHOULD" on yourself. The elimination of should, ought to , need to, must, always, forever, and other such absolute concepts leads us to psychological flexibility. At the core of this therapy is REBT. Rational Emotive Behavioral Therapy. A key component is the idea of the ABCs of rational thought. Basically there is an activating event. Your belief 'B' about the activating event 'A' will determine the 'C' consequence or your reaction to it. Irrational beliefs lead to irrational consequences and the goal of therapy is to learn to use this system to develop more rational ways of seeing the world.
Look - I can go on and on and on with this stuff...
Behaviorism
Neurlinguistic Programing
Transactual Analysis
Structural Family Therapy
Strategic Family Therapy
Hypnosis
Contextual Therapy
Group therapies like Sensate Focus, guided imagery or just Problem Solving
Play therapy
Art therapy
Animal Assisted therapy
Aversion Therapy
Biofeedback
Drama therapy (Role Play)
Primal Therapy
AND YES - EVEN YOUR FAVORITE (BECAUSE SOME THERAPISTS ARE RELIGIOUS) BIBLEOTHERAPY.
Do you have any sort of edit button at all or does everything you think of automatically vomit from your lips? There is no psychologist view of the world any more than there is an Atheist view of the world.
DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT THE WORDS "WORLD VIEW" MEAN?
Argumentum ad populum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
It's a bare appeal to numbers. The voice in my head is me, if i chose to delude myself it was a deity that wouldn't be evidence it was. Multiplying that one example is simply a bare appeal to numbers.
Prove it’s you. Prove the voice in your head is you.
rat spit: "Prove it’s you. Prove the voice in your head is you."
Simple. Ain't nobody else wants to be inside this sick mind of mine. Even Freddie Kruger stays away. Thus, there is only me.
rmfr
"Prove it’s you. Prove the voice in your head is you."
Are you saying I can't hear my own thoughts? You're weird, and are using an argument from ignorance fallacy again. My thoughts exist as do I, if you're going to add something then you have to evidence the claim.
I don't have to prove lightning isn't caused by unicorns striking their horns against rocks.
I'm afraid you haven't the first clue of how to construct a rational argument to support a belief. You don't seem to know, or worse to even care, whether your asserti9ns are rational.
Your choice of course but it's no good ranting at atheists when they refuse to share those beliefs because they are demonstrably irrational.
My mind exists, as do my thoughts, if you want me to believe these are independent of my physical brain then you will have to properly evidence that belief. I doubt you could hope to do that here for a start.
" Well. If you would like to support the psychologist’s view of the world, you’re more than welcome. You’ll have as much difficulty explaining how personalities arise in ones mind - with their own intelligence (usually far greater than the hosts’) - along with other hurdles that support the scientific idea that it is all in ones head."
Argument from ignorance fallacy again, not being able to explain how the material physical brain works doesn't in any way evidenced anything supernatural.
"The personalities transmit information not available to the host - and I could go on. "
Without being too unkind you really do go on, but this yet another unevidenced claim. It's straight in the bin having been severed by Hitchens's razor.
"But my “proof” of these entities is simply that they speak to us - 4% of the population admitting so in a study done a while back by the danish."
I don't think you know what proof means, and if you think anecdotal claims that people hear voices in their head evidences a deity then no wonder you're gullible enough to believe such superstitious hokum, with the bar set that low for credulity there is literally nothing you couldn't believe. I have also explained that your 4% figure means nothing, the claim / belief could be 100% and still be erroneous. Argumentum ad populum fallacy, a bare appeal to numbers.
Is it chemical in nature? That’s a reasonable claim that, in order to prove, is going to require huge advances in our understanding of the brain.
Everything within any biological machine is chemical in nature.
rmfr
Including Consciousness?
What are neurotransmitters? Aren't they chemical?
rmfr
Biochemical. Organic Chemistry. Is that how you personally experience consciousness? As a wave of neurons firing in succession linking one brain cell to the other? I think you’ll find that the phenomenalogist’s experience of consciousness is quite unlike the Biochemist’s.
rat spit: Biochemical. Organic Chemistry. Is that how you personally experience consciousness? As a wave of neurons firing in succession linking one brain cell to the other?
Yes.
rat spit: I think you’ll find that the phenomenalogist’s experience of consciousness is quite unlike the Biochemist’s.
And I could care less what a retarded pseudoscientist thinks.
rmfr
Well. Existentialism and uh...phenomenology... they uh... you know ...
pseudoscience. And I view them so pathetically, that what they are does not deserve capitalization.
rmfr
RAT GUTS: What planet are you on. You have already been given all the evidence. Why are you continuing in this line of illogical nonsense.
Scientists determine that 'human thoughts are material'
November 17, 2015, Tomsk State University
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2015-11-scientists-human-thoughts-materia...
Treating thoughts as material objects can increase or decrease their impact on evaluation
https://repositorio.uam.es/handle/10486/666393
There is a whole lot of research into Thoughts As Material objects. Life, the world, psychology, and the universe is changing right under your nose.
It's not a claim it's a question, you are again using argumentum ad ignorantiam, do you think we will stop pointing out the fallacies and simply give up and start believing your claims if you repeat them enough?
Without the functioning physical brain no consciousness is ebidenced. What's more every time the physical brain does the consciousness disappears with it.
I have posted links to modern studies in physics that assert thinking is a physical thing. We can only observe thought manifesting in physical terms. All of our observations that constitute the evidence for Thought involve physical mechanisms: electrophysiological and imaging studies all rely on the mundane things of the universe. Therefore, whatever thought is, we can only observe it manifesting in physical terms. If you are going to assert that thought is somehow separate or distinct from the brain, the burden of proof is on you.
Sifting through the insults - I’ve noticed at least one thing. Most of you here admit to hearing your own voice in your head.
The question becomes - is that really you? Or are you merely identifying with it? All of those pernicious, anxious, sereptitious thoughts that you can’t control at night - for example? Do you really think “you” are the source of those types of discursive thought?
At the very least, you must admit that if your inner voice is really you - you do not have complete control over it.
Rat, you wrote, “At the very least, you must admit that if your inner voice is really you - you do not have complete control over it.”
I don’t have comp,eye control over what my pituitary gland does. I don’t have complete control over my bladder. I don’t have complete control over my respiratory cilia. The list goes on.
So, as you would ask, is it really me then?
"Most of you here admit to hearing your own voice in your head.
The question becomes - is that really you?"
No it doesn't at all, that's the very definition of an appeal to ignorance fallacy.
"you must admit that if your inner voice is really you - you do not have complete control over it."
Not at all again you're completely wrong, and it sounds to me as if you ought to seek professional help, depending what these *voices you have no control over are telling you to do....That's not good, at all. Though it does explain a lot.
Try to prove it’s you. A) the process isn’t a controlled one and B) “you” is a fabrication. But go ahead. Prove that you’re inner voice is you. If you can i’ll see what I can do about coming to terms with an infinitely powerful being hanging around, hissing over my right shoulder all day long.
And I would reply, “No. It is not really you.”
In fact the most intimate thing you relate to - your thoughts - are not really you either. The “self” is a fabricated construct.
And then there are those like Cognostic who identify with their penis - in which case they are correct. Ie. their self is a “dick”.
I think that’s complete woo woo.
"The “self” is a fabricated construct."
Did the voices in your head tell you to say that? You're starting to worry me more and more.
Pages