The 9 foundational questions?

[algebe]

1. Quantum interactions
2. A mythological concept used to control people’s minds
3. Our instincts as social mammals
4. The last surviving homo species
5. We’re moving toward the Andromeda Galaxy. We’re here to live every day till we die.
6. To learn from or to repeat
7. Cessation of all biological processes, followed by decomposition and recycling
8. Reason
9. Reason never gives you a wrong answer. Faith distorts.

[Giga-VOLTaire]

@sara1

I am a believer, in no way am I trying to teach or preach to “ignorant atheists” (which you are not, and I hate it that other believers make it seem this way) this was actually an assignment for a class I am taking. I had to answer these questions myself and then reach out to others that dont share my own view and ask them. I am also very interested in other beliefs, because I feel like I grew up in a very sheltered household and I dont know much about other beliefs.

Well, that’s awesome, thanks for stopping by. I am glad you were prompted to talk and communicate with us…promoting dialogue.

But yeah…questions 1, 8, and 9 are a bit redundant. Just asking about epistemology. Basically, something has to be scientifically DEMONSTRABLE (can be shown in a laboratory setting) cannot be unfalsifiable (phrased in such a way as to have no condition for failure [“its not even wrong”], cause that would mean it would be untestable), must be testable (able to be tested in a lab), and parsimonius (obey Occam’s Razor).

Put simply, the claims made by Christian and other faith-based belief systems fail one or all of these. Thus I don’t invest any belief in them. As for my own positive propositions, I have few.

[Randomhero1982]

1. Who knows, but evidence to support any claim would give credence to it.

2. A fairy tale.

3. It has evolved over time with humankind.

4. A bundle of particles.

5. Literally speaking, because Earth formed from an accretion disc and we happened to evolve over an enormous time… metaphorically, to live briefly and die.

6. Hopefully to learn and improve from.

7. They tend to decompose.

8. We use the word belief very differently, but what I hold dear is empirically proven, evidenced driven and logically/rationally sound.

9. Again, the wording is awful here and trying to conflate atheism and theism.

Atheism is simply an answer to a question, “do I belive in a god?” To which I answer not on your bloody nelly.

There is zero evidence for a god(s) and the burden of proof is on theism, which it has never met.

So until it becomes available, I’ll continue under the rubric that its a nonsensical belief structure.

[LogicFTW]

@sara1

1. What is the nature of reality? (What is really real?)
2. Who or what is God?
3. What is the basis for morality?
4. What is man? (What is mankind? What are human beings?)
5. Why are we here? (Where are we going?)
6. What is the purpose of human history?
7. What happens to a person at death?
8. What is the foundation or basis for your beliefs? (Why?)
9. What evidence do you have to support your decision to place your faith in that foundation?

1. Reality is what has actual consequences on your ability to create your reality.
2. A human idea, with no demonstrable ties to actual reality.
3. Another human idea, I personal think a “good” idea would be to have morality that helps humanity as a whole progress to better things.
4. Another advanced living organism, from the “ape” family, made special by the most advanced/complex brain we have yet to encounter.
5. I think that question is mostly answerless except in a philosophical sense. My guess? No reason at all, in this tiny corner of the universe complexity gave rise to us.
6. I think human history is a useful tool to learn from, so we do not repeat the same mistakes of the past.
7. They die (back to the way they “were” before they were born.) Nothing.
8. My foundation relies upon demonstrable, repeatable, open to improvement gathering of what is known, by human discovery and knowledge sharing.
9. Demonstrable, repeatable evidence, that is open to editing and improvement as our knowledge base expands.

EDIT:
After re-reading the thread, I realize you are likely in no way “ready” for these answers sara1. Especially if you are taking a class call foundations of faith, which implies you are in a school that is religion based, instead of knowledge based.

I gave you the short response, but being able to understand these answers requires a knowledge base in how this sort of stuff works. Feel free to ask your questions about them.

[Simon_Moon]

1. This is currently unknown, and may never be known
2. This is not up to me to define. It is up to the person who is claiming that some god or gods exist, to define the god they believe in, then provide demonstrable and falsifiable evidence, and valid and sound logic, to support their claim.
3. Too long to answer on this post. But it is based on the well being of other thinking creatures, the physical laws of the universe, empathy, and our evolutionary history.
4. An intellectually advanced species of hominids, very closely related to Bonobo chimps
5. We are here due to the drive of our ancestors to survive and reproduce.
6. Not really sure what you are asking here.
7. Currently unknown, but we probably cease to exist. Everything that is associated with what makes each of us, “us”, is found in our physical brains. So, most likely, after we die is much like before we were born.
8. Demonstrable evidence, critical thinking, valid and sound use of logic, skepticism,
9. It works. Every single advancement in humanity, from the computer you are using, to the network that transmits your messages, to our drastically increased lifespans (when compared to not eve a 100 years ago), etc, etc, etc, ALL came about due to the same method I use. Not a bad track record.

[Giga-VOLTaire]

Damn good reply…way to hit the nail on the head

[Calilasseia]

Oh look. It’s another of those mythology fanboy “gotcha” lists of questions that they’re so fond of. Let’s take a look at this shall we?

@sara1

What is the nature of reality? (What is really real?)

That which is observable. And, as a corollary, measurable.

Though of course, there’s an entire worm cannery full of cans of worms to be opened up here.

@sara1

Who or what is God?

An imaginary entity asserted to exist in an error-laden mythology.

@sara1

What is the basis for morality?

There exists an abundant scientific literature, pointing to the evolutionary and biological basis of [1] our capacity for ethical thought, and [2] our motivation to act thereupon. On the old version of the forums, I provided an exposition of some of that literature. You can read that post in full here.

@sara1

What is man? (What is mankind? What are human beings?)

Humans are a species of ape. Indeed, Linnaeus, the father of modern taxonomy, regarded us as related to chimpanzees sixty two years before Darwin was born, as I explain in this post on the old version of the forums, which also covers numerous other pertinent topics.

@sara1

Why are we here? (Where are we going?)

We are here because the laws of physics permitted our existence, and the relevant physically permitted interactions took place. To think otherwise is to fall into the trap known as “Douglas Adams’ Puddle”.

@sara1

What is the purpose of human history?

There is none. History is simply the record of human activity. While sufficiently powerful human beings might attempt to steer events toward a particular goal, there is no guarantee that they will be successful.

@sara1

What happens to a person at death?

Decomposition.

@sara1

What is the foundation or basis for your beliefs? (Why?)

And at this point, I have to state here that those of us who paid attention in class, reject belief itself as a foundation for knowledge. Not least because there exists a voluminous body of observational data, pointing to the fact that belief, certainly as practised by mythology fanboys, consists of nothing more than uncritical acceptance of unsupported assertions, frequently assertions arising from mythologies. Those of us who treat assertions as they should be treated properly, wait for evidence informing us one way or the other of the truth-value of those assertions. From that post containing the exposition on Linnaeus, you will find the following apposite:

Atheism, in its rigorous formulation, consists of nothing more than a suspicion of unsupported supernaturalist assertions. That is IT. Being suspicious of your assertions, does not mean affirming the contrary assertions, because, wait for it, it’s possible to be equally suspicious of both assertions. Furthermore, one central principle of discourse that is recognised here by many others, though not apparently by you, is that assertions, when presented, possess the status “truth value unknown”. It will be necessary, in the interests of rigour, to state explicitly that an assertion possesses a truth value by dint of the fact that every assertion constitutes a proposition, but when first presented and in the absence of test, the precise truth value in question remains unknown. Applying this central principle to supernaturalist assertions isn’t “belief”, but the very antithesis of “belief”, particularly as practised by supernaturalists.

Just because some assertions are contained within a mythology that, for reasons best known to yourself, you have decided somehow dictates how the universe and its contents operate, regardless of how frequently real world data disagrees with this, doesn’t mean that those assertions are in any way deserving of special, privileged treatment exempting them from the above central principle of discourse. I know that supernaturalists like to pretend that their favourite mythologies arise from a fantastic special source, and that as a corollary, they think the assertions in question are “sacred”, and therefore to be protected from even the most elementary levels of scrutiny, but this pretence merely makes those of us who paid attention in the relevant classes point and laugh.

But, and here’s an essential difference which is telling here, the moment genuine data eliminating the epistemological deficit I’ve expounded above becomes available, I and others, upon learning of the validity of the conclusions arising from said data, modify our views in accordance with the analysis in question. Unlike a good few supernaturalists, who are on public record as stating that no amount of evidence will lead them to reject their favourite mythologies, if said evidence leads to a robust conclusion that the assertions of their mythologies are wrong. Perhaps the most embarrassing example of this in action, was when Bill Nye engaged with creationist Ken Ham, and both were asked “what would make you change your mind?” Bill Nye replied immediately “Evidence”. Ken Ham said “Nothing”.

@sara1

What evidence do you have to support your decision to place your faith in that foundation?

Again, those of us who paid attention in class, dispense with “faith”, because it’s all too often synonymous with the usage of “belief” I covered above.

As for why I accept the validity of various postulates, try the fact that several million peer reviewed scientific papers document the evidence for those postulates, including direct experimental test and verification thereof.

Next?

[Whitefire13]

@sara1

What is the foundation or basis for your beliefs? (Why?)

You are young.

Change out “belief” for “trust” (hmmm - about the same, eh?)

And if you have a second, in return for everyone contributing to your schoolwork,
I’d like only one question answered by you…

What is the foundation or basis for your trust? (Why?)

[David_Killens]

@sara1

I am a Christian and believe in God

Why?

Why do you believe in a god?

In the interests of fair play, I will answer that same question. I lack a belief in any god because I have not been presented with sufficient evidence.

If we go down this road you will learn a lot more about us atheists and yourself.

[anon14261619]

@sara1

But honestly thank you for sharing what you believe!

What we believe?

More like the lack of, as there’s just too much lack of evidence for any god. Ask yourself can you fill an eternity full enough to not get bored out of your mind living forever?

No we do not have all the answers, such as what exactly happened to cause the Big Bang, but we do know it happened.

Time did not even exist as something you could measure with a clock before then, time did not begin until the Big Bang.

We also know that when the universe was first born or came to be, it was tiny and condensed down to like the size of a marble.
Then it began to expand rapidly actually expanding faster than light can travel. Expansion believe it or not broke no laws of physics.

But when finding evidence for any kind of deity or god there’s nothing there. There’s not enough evidence to suggest a god was responsible for the universe’s creation. We know that we can observe the universe, and many objects in it. There’s little to no evidence that a god was responsible.

So I believe in nothing when it comes to a deity.