Is it still possible to be a non believer without also being a partisan?

[brewerb]

Depends on what is being claimed. 'Creator' (see previous SYZ post) is pretty much a hard stop for me. 

After reading a few posts sounds like humanist/ism might need to be thrown in the discussion. I see that there's a religious humanist position also.

Really?  What branch of science deals with 'creators'?  Science has nothing to say about it except those who lose discipline and spout their own opinion as if being a scientist in their day job had any relevance to what religion and the humanities deal with.  Krauss and Dawkins should be laughed out of their profession.

None, that's kind of the point. Science eliminates 'god did it' as a possible answer, at least for the material world. Science has been correcting/eliminating religious material claims for centuries. Any of god(s) immaterial attributes and benefits (believing) are a product of the mind. Google 'psychology of religion'. Science addressing the human psyche certainly has something to say regarding mans beliefs in god(s).

[emjay]

I agree with almost all of this.  I too think everyone is a believer in something though many are unaware of what they believe in.  

Formerly I thought "believe in" was a twisted construction, that all that mattered was what one "believed that".  But no longer.  Now I realize even reductive materialists believe in the law of the excluded middle and often in adequacy of science to decide all matters.  Some also think language is able to express all truths.  I don't believe any of that.

My new take on "believing in" comes from my favorite nonfiction writer Iain McGilchrist's first important book, The Master and His Emissary.  Here is what he says about belief there:

Believing is not to be reduced to thinking that such-and-such might be the case. It is not a weaker form of thinking, laced with doubt. Sometimes we speak like this: ‘I believe that the train leaves at 6:13’, where ‘I believe that’ simply means that ‘I think (but am not certain that’. Since the left hemisphere is concerned with what is certain, with knowledge of the facts, its version of belief is that it is just absence of certainty. If the facts were certain, according to its view, I should be able to say ‘I know that’ instead. This view of belief comes from the left hemisphere’s dispositions toward the world: interest in what is useful, therefore fixed and certain (the train timetable is no good if one can’t rely on it). So belief is just a feeble form of knowledge.

But belief in terms of the right hemisphere is different, because its disposition towards the world is different. The right hemisphere does not ‘know’ anything, in the sense of certain knowledge. For it, belief is a matter of care: it describes a relationship, where there is a calling and an answering, the root concept of ‘responsibility’. Thus if I say that ‘I believe in you’, it does not mean that I think such-and-such things are the case about you, but can’t be certain I am right. It means that I stand in a certain relationship of care towards you, that entails me behaving (acting and being) towards you, and entails on you certain ways of acting and being as well. it is an ‘acting as if’ certain things were true about you that in the nature of things cannot be certain. … I think this is what Wittgenstein was trying to express when he wrote that ‘my’ attitude towards the other is an attitude towards a soul. I am not of the opinion that he has a soul. An ‘opinion’ would be a weak form of knowledge: that is not what is meant by a belief, a disposition or an ‘attitude’.

This helps illuminate belief in God. This is not reducible to a factual answer to the question ‘does God exist?’ … It is having an attitude, holding a disposition to the world, whereby that world, as it comes into being for me, is one in which God belongs. The belief alters the world but also alters me. … One cannot believe in nothing and thus avoid belief altogether, simply because one cannot have no disposition toward the world at all, that being in itself a disposition. Some people believe in materialism, they act ‘as if’ such a philosophy were true. …

A recent post on X brought this to mind.  The poster said that Trump had corrected the fake news, and ended with, "I trust Trump."  This seems less a literal declaration than a declaration of allegiance, that the person will believe in Trump regardless of what other sources might say, and, perhaps more crucially, that one's commitment to Trump is unwavering.It isn't about who is telling the truth, as Trump has a documented penchant for bending it, it is a political alignment.  It's the same with statements that Trump is truthful and doesn't lie.  Though it brings up a related point that one of the key elements of fascism is a shared unreality.  In this we see that these statements refer to a commitment to that alternate reality, even if it differs with recognized truth.  This is not far from the statement that, "I believe in God," in which one is affirming a commitment to that reality, that alternative to mundane fact.

Yeah, reading this more closely, both his post and your response, I think I was wrong in my understanding... that this is not really like Belacqua's argument at all after all, which was perhaps 'just' an argument for 'cultural religion'. This seems to me, as you describe it, far worse than that if true, both for politics, like the polarisation towards Trump we now see, but also towards religion, people essentially believing in God more because they believe it should exist rather than actual belief that it does exist. That is incredibly depressing to me. Granted I'm already feeling depressed, but this is making it even worse... why anyone thinks the Christian God should exist remains beyond me, but it's looking to me more and more like that is how Whateverist is actually leaning... and if so, I have to say, that is very depressing to me.

[Rizen]

Yeah, reading this more closely, both his post and your response, I think I was wrong in my understanding... that this is not really like Belacqua's argument at all after all, which was perhaps 'just' an argument for 'cultural religion'. This seems to me, as you describe it, far worse than that if true, both for politics, like the polarisation towards Trump we now see, but also towards religion, people essentially believing in God more because they believe it should exist rather than actual belief that it does exist. That is incredibly depressing to me. Granted I'm already feeling depressed, but this is making it even worse... why anyone thinks the Christian God should exist remains beyond me, but it's looking to me more and more like that is how Whateverist is actually leaning... and if so, I have to say, that is very depressing to me.

Sorry you're feeling depressed. I've been there. It's a depressing time. I recommend cutting out all news. I was having panic attacks from reading the news. Go do something fun instead. Getting on medicine really helped me after a very long period of trial and error.

[emjay]

Yeah, reading this more closely, both his post and your response, I think I was wrong in my understanding... that this is not really like Belacqua's argument at all after all, which was perhaps 'just' an argument for 'cultural religion'. This seems to me, as you describe it, far worse than that if true, both for politics, like the polarisation towards Trump we now see, but also towards religion, people essentially believing in God more because they believe it should exist rather than actual belief that it does exist. That is incredibly depressing to me. Granted I'm already feeling depressed, but this is making it even worse... why anyone thinks the Christian God should exist remains beyond me, but it's looking to me more and more like that is how Whateverist is actually leaning... and if so, I have to say, that is very depressing to me.

Sorry you're feeling depressed. I've been there. It's a depressing time. I recommend cutting out all news. I was having panic attacks from reading the news. Go do something fun instead. Getting on medicine really helped me after a very long period of trial and error.

Thank you, I really appreciate this... I really feel like shite right now, and in this sort of state of mind even meditation is not as easy or helpful as it usually is. Right now tbh I think I just need to imagine the presence of the Buddha... that actually does give me comfort.

[Rhythmcs]

Really?  What branch of science deals with 'creators'? 

Cultural anthropology, archeology, biology, geology, and physics - I don't think I could even begin to imagine all of the areas of specific expertise that can and do study the various creators that have cropped up and died down over the ages.  Their cults, their religions, their superstitions.  The fundamental validity and accuracy of their existential claims.  

I'm sure there are plenty of atheists who acknowledge the weight of evidence against, the absence of evidence for, and the logical problems at the heart of theistic ideation as a phenomena.   You'll find alot on an online message board for sure.  We ground zero for that demographic.  That might explain your apprehensions...the "meet online" bit is doing all the work.  We're not like this because we're atheists, "dyed in the wool atheists" are all around you out in the world whop aren't nerds and don't chat on boards - but because people like us in that particular way tend to congregate in these sort of places.   OTOH, there's an atheist hillbilly out there in the woods somewhere drinking warm bud light in a can trying to watch the game and he doesn't give a shit about the science.  He just knows gods are a way to scam you out of your welfare.  

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you don't actually disagree that the superstitious existential claims of the various theistic religions are not at issue in debate?  It's another category of things, things that a geologist doesn't study, which are the proper context for an analysis of religious ideation?  If that's the case, I'd have to mention there will be a branch of science that studies it...but I appreciate the distinction.  

I'm an atheist because I don't believe in gods.  Never did.  For me, the resolution to all of these claims can be no more than a reason I haven't started believing since.  I don't think any appreciation of the scientific aspect of theistic claims is necessary to be an atheist, but I do think it promotes a deeper and more accurate understanding of religious ideation, though. I'm an antitheist, because even if gods did exist, and the science showed it to be undeniably so, I still wouldn't follow or claim any theistic religion. One is a rejection on basis of fact, the other on moral suitability.

[Dānu]

A recent post on X brought this to mind.  The poster said that Trump had corrected the fake news, and ended with, "I trust Trump."  This seems less a literal declaration than a declaration of allegiance, that the person will believe in Trump regardless of what other sources might say, and, perhaps more crucially, that one's commitment to Trump is unwavering.It isn't about who is telling the truth, as Trump has a documented penchant for bending it, it is a political alignment.  It's the same with statements that Trump is truthful and doesn't lie.  Though it brings up a related point that one of the key elements of fascism is a shared unreality.  In this we see that these statements refer to a commitment to that alternate reality, even if it differs with recognized truth.  This is not far from the statement that, "I believe in God," in which one is affirming a commitment to that reality, that alternative to mundane fact.

Yeah, reading this more closely, both his post and your response, I think I was wrong in my understanding... that this is not really like Belacqua's argument at all after all, which was perhaps 'just' an argument for 'cultural religion'. This seems to me, as you describe it, far worse than that if true, both for politics, like the polarisation towards Trump we now see, but also towards religion, people essentially believing in God more because they believe it should exist rather than actual belief that it does exist. That is incredibly depressing to me. Granted I'm already feeling depressed, but this is making it even worse... why anyone thinks the Christian God should exist remains beyond me, but it's looking to me more and more like that is how Whateverist is actually leaning... and if so, I have to say, that is very depressing to me.

Whether we are tense or relaxed, depressed or happy, tomorrow will always come. And it will be different than today.

[Szuchow]

As long as religion will be making bullshit claims about reality it will be in conflict with science.

Likewise as long as you'll be insisting religion is talking about physics or other science matters you can't help but talk bullshit.  Stay ignorant if you like.

Are you drunk or dumb since you were born? As long as religion will be making claims about reality it will be in conflict with science. It's obvious though perhaps not to idiots like you.

[Szuchow]

Religion made sense thousands of years ago when people didn't have a good answer for how the world worked. But we have better methods now. We have science. I think it's possible for religious people to still believe in science but that requires a sort of cafeteria religious perspective. Picking and choosing what parts you believe and don't believe of religion. I've found these people choose to work with science in most cases but not question the parts of their religion they believe. As I say, they give it a pass. I'm a rationalist. My philosophy is that everything should be held to scientific standards and scrutiny. But when it comes to religious people I'll take what I can get.

I should clarify, there are two kinds of Christians: Liberal Christians who work with science, get vaccinated and vote democratic, who I have no problem with. Then there are the science denying Christian nationalist morons who currently control our country, who I hate.

This is exactly the same rigid ideas that I've read online for years from conformity bound atheists.  Science is not the best approach to every question and the modern point of view is poorer in many ways than what came before.

For those questions science cannot answer philosophy run to help. Nothing more is needed, certainly not fairy tales about bloodthirsty tribal deities.

[Whateverist]

Likewise as long as you'll be insisting religion is talking about physics or other science matters you can't help but talk bullshit.  Stay ignorant if you like.

Are you drunk or dumb since you were born? As long as religion will be making claims about reality it will be in conflict with science. It's obvious though perhaps not to idiots like you.

Are you so simple that you actually believe that reality is restricted to what you can verify by science or by consulting a library reference book?  I truly feel sorry for you if that is your actual worldview.

[emjay]

Yeah, reading this more closely, both his post and your response, I think I was wrong in my understanding... that this is not really like Belacqua's argument at all after all, which was perhaps 'just' an argument for 'cultural religion'. This seems to me, as you describe it, far worse than that if true, both for politics, like the polarisation towards Trump we now see, but also towards religion, people essentially believing in God more because they believe it should exist rather than actual belief that it does exist. That is incredibly depressing to me. Granted I'm already feeling depressed, but this is making it even worse... why anyone thinks the Christian God should exist remains beyond me, but it's looking to me more and more like that is how Whateverist is actually leaning... and if so, I have to say, that is very depressing to me.

Whether we are tense or relaxed, depressed or happy, tomorrow will always come.  And it will be different than today.

Thank you Danu, I really appreciate this. It's just gone 3am. I can't even walk for twenty minutes without a lot of pain at the moment, and had to cancel going to a Buddhist meeting last night because of it, and today my parents are off to hospital for an operation, and I can't go with them as I would've wanted to because I can barely walk, or sit or whatever at the moment. So yeah, very depressed, but yeah, you're right, tomorrow is another day, so thank you for that reminder

So far I've been quite reliably meditating in the morning 5, or 6 or 7 o'clock and it really helps set me up for the day, more than I ever thought it would, and recently all thanks to what I see as a game-changer, basically the notion of "checking in" which is pro-actively checking your mind for distractions, every five or six breaths, to catch them before they cause you to forget your breath. I just think that technique is amazing, and it was worth getting that book just for that if nothing else... so get that book or not I hugely recommend that "checking in" technique, which doesn't just apply to meditation, but any type of mindfulness... any task or whatever you're concentrating on, it's just an amazing way of dealing with distractions before they break your concentration, I can't recommend it enough, and hopefully I'll be able to have a good meditation tomorrow and just essentially reset my mind, cos it really feels like it needs a reset right now, just a bit of freedom from all these horrible distractions at the moment. Thanks for your kind words  

[Szuchow]

Are you drunk or dumb since you were born? As long as religion will be making claims about reality it will be in conflict with science. It's obvious though perhaps not to idiots like you.

Are you so simple that you actually believe that reality is restricted to what you can verify by science or by consulting a library reference book?  I truly feel sorry for you if that is your actual worldview.

Did I say so clown? That said science and philosophy is all you need, tribal fairy tales belong in dustbin of history.

[Rhythmcs]

Are you drunk or dumb since you were born? As long as religion will be making claims about reality it will be in conflict with science. It's obvious though perhaps not to idiots like you.

Are you so simple that you actually believe that reality is restricted to what you can verify by science or by consulting a library reference book?  I truly feel sorry for you if that is your actual worldview.

For clarity, are you suggesting that there are things "science" doesn't know, or things that can happen even if "science" is squarely against them, or that did happen even if all physical evidence says that they did not?

I'm right there with you on the first one. There are things we don't know and that science has not found a way to test for..if there even is one. OTOH, there are many...many...many claims that we do know how to test for, have tested, and found to be demonstrably false in the vast array of creator god stories, are there not?

[Dānu]

Whether we are tense or relaxed, depressed or happy, tomorrow will always come.  And it will be different than today.

Thank you Danu, I really appreciate this. It's just gone 3am. I can't even walk for twenty minutes without a lot of pain at the moment, and had to cancel going to a Buddhist meeting last night because of it, and today my parents are off to hospital for an operation, and I can't go with them as I would've wanted to because I can barely walk, or sit or whatever at the moment. So yeah, very depressed, but yeah, you're right, tomorrow is another day, so thank you for that reminder

So far I've been quite reliably meditating in the morning 5, or 6 or 7 o'clock and it really helps set me up for the day, more than I ever thought it would, and recently all thanks to what I see as a game-changer, basically the notion of "checking in" which is pro-actively checking your mind for distractions, every five or six breaths, to catch them before they cause you to forget your breath. I just think that technique is amazing, and it was worth getting that book just for that if nothing else... so get that book or not I hugely recommend that "checking in" technique, which doesn't just apply to meditation, but any type of mindfulness... any task or whatever you're concentrating on, it's just an amazing way of dealing with distractions before they break your concentration, I can't recommend it enough, and hopefully I'll be able to have a good meditation tomorrow and just essentially reset my mind, cos it really feels like it needs a reset right now, just a bit of freedom from all these horrible distractions at the moment. Thanks for your kind words  

What was the book?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Thank you, I really appreciate this... I really feel like shite right now, and in this sort of state of mind even meditation is not as easy or helpful as it usually is. Right now tbh I think I just need to imagine the presence of the Buddha... that actually does give me comfort.

Ever considered volunteering for some group that does good work? Always need people, and sometimes the volunteers just love the glow they get when they help people in dire need.

[SYZ]

Likewise as long as you'll be insisting religion is talking about physics or other science matters
you can't help but talk bullshit.  Stay ignorant if you like.

And...

Are you so simple that you actually believe that reality is restricted to what you can verify by
science or by consulting a library reference book?  I truly feel sorry for you if that is your
actual worldview.

Also...

Of course people can disagree about such things but I don't accept your drivel...

With derogatory, patronising comments such as these about other
members' postings, opinions and responses to yours, you're not
gonna make many friends here.  If—as it would seem—you feel
you've been backed into a philosophical corner, then attacking your
opponents personally is definitely not the way to go mate.   

   It simply weakens all you arguments.   

[Szuchow]

Likewise as long as you'll be insisting religion is talking about physics or other science matters
you can't help but talk bullshit.  Stay ignorant if you like.

And...

Are you so simple that you actually believe that reality is restricted to what you can verify by
science or by consulting a library reference book?  I truly feel sorry for you if that is your
actual worldview.

Also...

Of course people can disagree about such things but I don't accept your drivel...

With derogatory, patronising comments such as these about other
members' postings, opinions and responses to yours, you're not
gonna make many friends here.  If—as it would seem—you feel
you've been backed into a philosophical corner, then attacking your
opponents personally is definitely not the way to go mate.   

   It simply weakens all you arguments.   

I doubt that this troll is interested in making friends. Showing imagined intellectual superiority and attacking atheism seem to be more to his liking.

[emjay]

Thank you Danu, I really appreciate this. It's just gone 3am. I can't even walk for twenty minutes without a lot of pain at the moment, and had to cancel going to a Buddhist meeting last night because of it, and today my parents are off to hospital for an operation, and I can't go with them as I would've wanted to because I can barely walk, or sit or whatever at the moment. So yeah, very depressed, but yeah, you're right, tomorrow is another day, so thank you for that reminder

So far I've been quite reliably meditating in the morning 5, or 6 or 7 o'clock and it really helps set me up for the day, more than I ever thought it would, and recently all thanks to what I see as a game-changer, basically the notion of "checking in" which is pro-actively checking your mind for distractions, every five or six breaths, to catch them before they cause you to forget your breath. I just think that technique is amazing, and it was worth getting that book just for that if nothing else... so get that book or not I hugely recommend that "checking in" technique, which doesn't just apply to meditation, but any type of mindfulness... any task or whatever you're concentrating on, it's just an amazing way of dealing with distractions before they break your concentration, I can't recommend it enough, and hopefully I'll be able to have a good meditation tomorrow and just essentially reset my mind, cos it really feels like it needs a reset right now, just a bit of freedom from all these horrible distractions at the moment. Thanks for your kind words  

What was the book?

The book is called "The Mind Illuminated" by "Culadasa (John Yates PhD) and Matthew Immergut PhD with Jeremy Graves"... and the subtitle of the book is "A Complete Meditation Guide: Integrating Buddhist Wisdom and Brain Science for Greater Mindfulness".

In the 'About the authors' bit it says Culadasa was a professor who taught neuroscience for many years, as well as practicing Buddhist meditation for over four decades. So it's definitely a book that comes from a more psychological and neuroscientific perspective than most books would about meditation, but though it does come from a Buddhist perspective, it doesn't focus too much on that if that would be offputting... ie although the Buddhist message will probably gently find it's way through, by talking in such depth about meditation, it is clearly not the goal of the book to teach about or promote Buddhism per se in religious or philosophical terms, or at least not yet (as I have not finished reading it yet... because doing so is a long term project for me) but I hugely doubt it will take that direction from what I've seen so far.

[SYZ]

...Are you so simple that you actually believe that reality is restricted to what you can verify by science or by consulting a library reference book?  I truly feel sorry for you if that is your actual worldview.

You really have this arse over tit...

Science doesn't "restrict" the reality of the world we live in or
the cosmos.  Quite the contrary in fact;  it expands our knowledge,
deepens our understanding, fosters learning and enhances it.  And
if you eschew scientific reference books from your search for
knowledge, then you're further restricting yourself from finding
the "correct" answers.

Religions on the other hand do satisfy your claim that a sole, specific
resource could be more often than not restrictive in the sense of
stifling research, honest investigation, determining facts, and considering
scientific options, replication, accepting the truths of earthly nature and
the cosmos, and more generally separating the wheat from the chaff.

The classic example is the fantastical, anti-science Christian bible.  For example...

Leviticus 14:49–53 says in order to cure and remove leprosy,  one must "cleanse the
house then, he shall take two birds, cedar wood, a scarlet string, and hyssop, and he
shall slaughter the one bird in an earthenware vessel over running water. Then he shall
take the cedar wood, the hyssop, and the scarlet string, with the live bird, and dip them
in the blood of the slaughtered bird as well as in the running water, and sprinkle the house
seven times.

So he shall cleanse the house with the blood of the bird and with the running water, along
with the live bird, the cedar wood, the hyssop, and the scarlet string. However, he shall let
the live bird go free outside the city into the open field. So he shall make atonement for
the house, and it will be clean.”

   —(from) Tim Zeak, Medium, Ten Fatal Flaws of the Bible, 12 December 2020. (with apologies to Moses)

         But let's not waste our time [sic] with scientific references such as this for example...

The WHO recommends multidrug regimen of rifampicin, clofazimine, and dapsone has been
used since 1982. It is highly effective, and more than 11.2 million patients have received it.
Patients receive rifampicin 600 mg monthly, dapsone 100 mg daily, with clofazimine 300 mg
monthly and 50 mg daily added in for patients with multibacillary leprosy.

   —(from) PubMed, WHO, Chemotherapy of leprosy for control programmes, 1982.

[emjay]

Thank you, I really appreciate this... I really feel like shite right now, and in this sort of state of mind even meditation is not as easy or helpful as it usually is. Right now tbh I think I just need to imagine the presence of the Buddha... that actually does give me comfort.

Ever considered volunteering for some group that does good work? Always need people, and sometimes the volunteers just love the glow they get when they help people in dire need.

Thanks for the suggestion, maybe at some point in the future, but I really don't feel well enough for that sort of thing right now, but thanks for the suggestion

[Dānu]

Ever considered volunteering for some group that does good work? Always need people, and sometimes the volunteers just love the glow they get when they help people in dire need.

Thanks for the suggestion, maybe at some point in the future, but I really don't feel well enough for that sort of thing right now, but thanks for the suggestion

If you look up humanist and atheist meetup groups on Meetup, some of them have one-shot volunteer opportunities like packing food or creating bags of necessities for the homeless. You wouldn't have to commit to anything ongoing and so you could participate as much or as little as you like, depending upon your health.

[Whateverist]

...Are you so simple that you actually believe that reality is restricted to what you can verify by science or by consulting a library reference book?  I truly feel sorry for you if that is your actual worldview.

Science doesn't "restrict" the reality of the world we live in or
the cosmos.

  

Here at last we can agree.  It isn't science which restricts our knowledge; it is we who do that when we over invest in the world as revealed by science.  Handy stuff but if that is the one tool you reach for no matter what question arises - you will have restricted your access to the reality of the world.

Quite the contrary in fact;  it expands our knowledge,
deepens our understanding, fosters learning and enhances it.  And
if you eschew scientific reference books from your search for
knowledge, then you're further restricting yourself from finding
the "correct" answers.

Fortunately I wouldn't do that.  I actually appreciate science quite a lot for the insights it makes possible.  For example I really liked Philip Ball's How life works A user's guide to the new biology. For any who prefer a video I recommend this one.  But I have other tastes and interests too.  I'd say literature has informed my point of view even more than science, though of course they do or should go hand in hand.

Religions on the other hand do satisfy your claim that a sole, specific
resource could be more often than not restrictive in the sense of
stifling research, honest investigation, determining facts, and considering
scientific options, replication, accepting the truths of earthly nature and
the cosmos, and more generally separating the wheat from the chaff.

The classic example is the fantastical, anti-science Christian bible.

I've never read it but given how old it is I know it cannot have had anything to say about science since it did not exist then

The larger point is that a self imposed restriction of attention is stunting, whether it is an over reliance on the Bible as with fundamentalist Christians or an over reliance on science (AKS scientism) as with fundamentalist atheists.

[emjay]

Thanks for the suggestion, maybe at some point in the future, but I really don't feel well enough for that sort of thing right now, but thanks for the suggestion

If you look up humanist and atheist meetup groups on Meetup, some of them have one-shot volunteer opportunities like packing food or creating bags of necessities for the homeless.  You wouldn't have to commit to anything ongoing and so you could participate as much or as little as you like, depending upon your health.

Thanks for the info, I might look into it but generally speaking, health aside, I'm not a very independent or confident sort of person, so I don't know, but thanks for the info

[Rizen]

@Whateverist I genuinely tried to talk to you three times but you've done the same thing every time: you say you don't want to debate but then you'll contradict my point, I'll follow up and then you simply abandon that threat of thought when you can't support your claim, sometimes insulting me in the process. You make accusations about fundamentalist atheists or overreliance on science being flawed, but are unwilling and probably unable to give any examples to support these claims. It makes me not want to talk to you anymore. You live in your own world.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Ever considered volunteering for some group that does good work? Always need people, and sometimes the volunteers just love the glow they get when they help people in dire need.

Thanks for the suggestion, maybe at some point in the future, but I really don't feel well enough for that sort of thing right now, but thanks for the suggestion

They sometimes take people who will just answer the phone or run the printer. I gave CPR classes for new employees one a month at a local charity. I was "hired muscle" for a women's emergency shelter. I taught people how to use the computers. And I mopped the floor when it was very very necessary.

[emjay]

Thanks for the suggestion, maybe at some point in the future, but I really don't feel well enough for that sort of thing right now, but thanks for the suggestion

They sometimes take people who will just answer the phone or run the printer. I gave CPR classes for new employees one a month at a local charity. I was "hired muscle" for a women's emergency shelter. I taught people how to use the computers. And I mopped the floor when it was very very necessary.

Okay, thanks for the info again, but as I said I don't think I'm ready for this sort of thing.