• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

about that Stephen Fry interview and atheism in general...

Status
Not open for further replies.
from an islamic perspective

WHEN WE EXPLORE the history of evolution in search of the causative factors which gave birth to the sensory organs as life evolved, we can safely conclude that right from the beginning they have always been the sense of loss and gain. We identify the journey of evolution to be a long procession of some obscure realization of gains and losses which gradually evolved the sensory organs to register the presence of pleasure and pain, comfort and suffering. If we look back at the lower forms of life, at the first few rungs of the ladder and compare them with the higher forms of life near the top, it is not difficult to recognize that in real terms the evolution is the evolution of consciousness. Life is constantly spiralling up from a lesser state of consciousness to a higher state with continuously sharpening faculties of awareness.

The awareness of gain and loss is rather vague and obscure in the beginning, and we cannot locate a definite seat for this awareness in the anatomy of rudimentary organisms. But we know from their reactions to the surrounding elements and situations that they do possess some defused sense of awareness. It is this diffused inexplicable sense which is employed somehow by the Creator to initiate the sense of perception in life. This sense of perception gradually developed and created its own seats in the organism of life. It is these seats which got precipitated ultimately into what we know now as sensory organs. The creation of the brain was not a separate and unrelated incident. No development of sensory organs could be meaningful without a corresponding development of a central nervous system and a simultaneous evolution of the brain, which could decipher the messages transmitted by the sensory organs. Evidently therefore, the brain developed as an essential counterpart of the system of perception. The more evolved the consciousness becomes, the more intense grows the sense of loss and gain felt by specific nerve centres which translate the awareness of loss as suffering, and gain as pleasure, to the mind through the brain.

The less developed the consciousness, the smaller is the awareness of suffering. The same goes for happiness. Thus, the sensory provisions for the recognition of suffering and happiness are indispensable to each other. It is quite likely that if the level to which suffering can be experienced is reduced, its opposite number, the capacity to feel pleasure and happiness, will also be lowered to the same degree. The two seem to participate equally in propelling the wheel of evolution; both possess equal significance. One cannot be done away with alone without the other, thus nullifying the entire creative plan of evolution.

We understand from the Holy Quran, that God did not create suffering as an independent entity in its own right, but only as an indispensable counterpart of pleasure and comfort. The absence of happiness is suffering, which is like its shadow, just as darkness is the shadow cast by the absence of light. If there is life, there has to be death; both are situated at the extreme poles of the same plane, with innumerable grades and shades in between. As we move away from death, we gradually move towards a state of life which is happiness; as we move away from life, we move away with a sense of loss and sorrow towards death. This is the key to understanding the struggle for existence, which in turn leads to a constant improvement in the quality of life and helps it to achieve the ultimate goal of evolution. The principle of the "survival of the fittest" plays an integral role in this grand scheme of evolution.

This phenomenon is mentioned in the Holy Quran in the following verse:

Blessed is He in whose hand is the kingdom, and He has power over all things;

It is He Who has created death and life that He might try you—which of you is best in deeds; and He is the Mighty, the Most Forgiving. 1

The answer to the question 'Why is there suffering?' is clearly implied in this verse in its widest application.

The profound philosophy of life and death, the innumerable shades in between, and the role they play in shaping life and improving its quality are all covered in the above verse. It is the very scheme of things that God discloses here. We know that life is only a positive value, and death merely means its absence, and no sharp border exists separating one from the other. It is a gradual process, the way life travels towards death and ebbs out, or from the other direction we view death travelling towards life gaining strength, energy and consciousness as it moves on. This is the grand plan of creation, but why has God designed it so? 'That He might try you—which of you is best in deeds', is the answer provided by the Holy Quran.

It is the perpetual struggle between life and death that subjects the living to a constant state of trial, so that all who conduct themselves best survive and gain a higher status of existence. Herein lies the philosophy and the machination of evolution as described in the verses above. It is this constant struggle between the forces of life and the forces of death which provide the thrust to the living to perpetually move away from death or towards it. It may result either in the improvement or deterioration in the quality of existence in the wide spectrum of evolutionary changes. This is the essence and spirit of evolution.

Suffering could only be considered objectionable if it were created as an independent entity with no meaningful role to play in the scheme of things. But without the taste of suffering or an awareness of what it means, the feeling of relief and comfort would also vanish. Without an encounter with pain and misery, most certainly, joy and happiness would lose all meaning. Indeed the very existence of life would lose purpose, and the steps of evolution would stop dead in their tracks.

Thus in the evolution of our five senses, the awareness of loss and gain has played an equally essential role like the two wheels of a wagon; remove one, and the other would also lose its meaning. The very concept of the wagon would be grounded. The struggle between life and death, which produces suffering, is also the means of creating pleasure. It is the primary motivating force which fuels the carriage of evolution to move forward eternally.

During the long history of evolution, disease has arisen from various causes, directly or indirectly related to developmental changes. Environmental variations, the struggle for existence, mutations and accidents, have all jointly or severally played their part. Disease, defects and shortcomings all have a role to play in effecting improvement. This is how various animal species went on evolving unconsciously it seems, but certainly with a direction, which appears to follow a consciously designed course towards greater consciousness.

Read more for full chapter here: http://www.alislam.org/library/books/revelation/part_2_section_6.html

The creation and evolution of sensory organs owe their existence to interminably long encounters with loss or gain. They are the two most potent creative factors created by God. All the five senses which we possess are the products of our awareness of them, as discussed before, which during a billion years of our evolution, gradually materialised into sensory perceptive mechanisms. Suffering and happiness could not by themselves have created the mechanism of consciousness. To register their presence without such mechanisms, they themselves would cease to be. How then can nothingness create anything? Unconsciousness cannot design and create consciousness even in trillions of years. It has to be a conscious Creator to endow death with consciousness and create life out of it. The Most Masterly Creator seems to have employed pain and pleasure in an, as yet, unknown manner to create the very organs which perceive them. Remove the pain as an instrument in the making of this masterpiece of creative wonder and life will be rendered into a senseless mass of vegetation, not even aware of itself. Are a few odd cases of misery and deprivation too big a price to pay for the prodigious marvel of consciousness?

Let us remind the reader that Islam defines evil only as a shadow created by the lack of light. It is not a positive existence in itself. We can imagine a source of light (a lamp or the sun), but we cannot imagine any object as a source of darkness. The only way in which an object becomes a source of darkness is through its ability to obstruct light. Likewise, it is only the absence of goodness that constitutes evil. The grades of evil are only determined by the opacity of the obstructing medium.

Likewise, it is the awareness of possession which constitutes happiness. Any loss or threat of loss to possession constitutes pain or agony. But they must coexist in an equation of positive and negative poles. Remove one, and the other will disappear. Hence no one on earth can interfere with the creative design of pain, pleasure, goodness and evil and succeed in altering the plan of things. It is beyond the reach of human compassion to efface suffering without effacing life itself.

this is the answer which I subscribe to in relation to God and suffering.
 
if you are going to blame god for all the atrocities in life, isn't it a bit unfair to not blame god for all the good things in life as well?
But we don't let off people for murder, or whatever atrocious thing they might have done, if they did some good things as well. The good doesn't cancel out the bad. Why would it?
 
Money is human made.
That doesn't really change anything. This is God, if he's as powerful as people say he is, he could stop it any time he wants to, and doesn't. If he's "All powerful" he dictates whether money should even be able to exist or not. He dictates if we live or not. Every choice made by humans is representative of God because he doesn't step in and stop it from happening like he could. The fact that he allows the world to go on like it does is enough.

It's like if I got a puppy and decided not to feed him. I have full power to feed this dog and I could do it any time I want. But if I didn't, people would look at me and say I should be arrested for animal cruelty. But for some reason it's fine for God to let a bunch of people starve when, supposedly, he could end it whenever he feels like it.
 
There are no such thing as happiness, happiness is just a temporary relief from pain. You are not happy because you are healthy, you are happy because someone else is sick, and you are not.

If God does exist, and want to give us "happiness". All the pains and sufferings are mandatory. May be it is determined by dice roll? Karma? Who knows.
 
if I knew the answer to my own thread I wouldn't have started it.

I like the idea that people have said about god not factoring in at all for their decision to not believe in a god.

the issue I guess I have is for those that say "god did all these bad things THEREFORE I don't believe"
I have never heard of anyone saying that.

Just keep re-reading it over and over until the concept makes as little sense to you as it does to me.
 
There are no such thing as happiness, happiness is just a temporary relief from pain. You are not happy because you are healthy, you are happy because someone else is sick, and you are not.

If God does exist, and want to give us "happiness". All the pains and sufferings are mandatory. May be it is determined by dice roll? Karma? Who knows.

Well, I don't think it's like this either...
 
That doesn't really change anything. This is God, if he's as powerful as people say he is, he could stop it any time he wants to, and doesn't. If he's "All powerful" he dictates whether money should even be able to exist or not. He dictates if we live or not. Every choice made by humans is representative of God because he doesn't step in and stop it from happening like he could. The fact that he allows the world to go on like it does is enough.

It's like if I got a puppy and decided not to feed him. I have full power to feed this dog and I could do it any time I want. But if I didn't, people would look at me and call me a dog abuser and want me arrested. But for some reason it's fine for God to let a bunch of people starve when, supposedly, he could end it whenever he feels like it.

God doesn't step in because of free will.
 
But we don't let off people for murder, or whatever atrocious thing they might have done, if they did some good things as well. The good doesn't cancel out the bad. Why would it?

I'm not saying that the bad cancels anything out. There have been plenty of times where I've been incredibly angry at god to the point of almost denying the existence of god as well. But then I remember all of the incredible good things that have happened to me or others that had no right to but did.

if god is as all powerful as everyone makes him out to be then I'm pretty sure he can handle the naysaying or critiques.
 
I don't take your first sentence, because I don't preside that every human made thing is attributed to god's doing.

I already covered that notion
Well its cool that your personal conception of god is so fluid, but I'd love to see your source for god data. If you heard two contradictory traits of god, do you just explain away the less convenient one or are you actually referring to some source?
 
I'm not saying that the bad cancels anything out. There have been plenty of times where I've been incredibly angry at god to the point of almost denying the existence of god as well. But then I remember all of the incredible good things that have happened to me or others that had no right to but did.

if god is as all powerful as everyone makes him out to be then I'm pretty sure he can handle the naysaying or critiques.
What about babies that are born, feel immense pain, then die? What good things happened to them?
 
I'm not saying that the bad cancels anything out. There have been plenty of times where I've been incredibly angry at god to the point of almost denying the existence of god as well. But then I remember all of the incredible good things that have happened to me or others that had no right to but did.

if god is as all powerful as everyone makes him out to be then I'm pretty sure he can handle the naysaying or critiques.
No one denies the existence of something because they're mad at it, that's delusional. Unless, of course, its never been demonstrated to exist in the first place.
 
how is that relevant to my self-limitation theory?
It disproves the self-limitation theory that you set up as an argument.

He obviously didn't limit himself because he directly intervened in the lives of those people that he had killed.

He was probably just in a good mood when he decided not to kill all the isrealites, would that have made him an anti-semite?
 
if you are going to blame god for all the atrocities in life, isn't it a bit unfair to not blame god for all the good things in life as well?

Fry doesn't entertain that notion, because he is merely humouring the interviewer and his belief in god. Fry is rational, and believes that everything is down to random chance and natural selection.

An all powerful god that lets that shit happen can't really be considered a force for good anyway, so if you do believe, why are you worshipping it anyway? It's clearly a sadist.
 
I'm not saying that the bad cancels anything out. There have been plenty of times where I've been incredibly angry at god to the point of almost denying the existence of god as well. But then I remember all of the incredible good things that have happened to me or others that had no right to but did.

if god is as all powerful as everyone makes him out to be then I'm pretty sure he can handle the naysaying or critiques.

It's as though you think Atheists are just mad at God.
 
Imagine if you're someone who has been given the power to create a world and there are an infinite amount of switches in front of you. You decided that you should leave "bone cancer in children", "evil people" and "volcanic eruptions" at their "on" settings when you could have created a world with these options off. I would be inclined to call this creator various unkind names.
 
It's as though you think Atheists are just mad at God.

We discovered this idea with Maninthemirror in the previous thread, this thread is going over the exact same ground as the other thread.

I have no reasonable way of answering that man. That's a rough question that makes me sad to think about.

Grats, you have discovered the problem of evil/suffering with respect to the traditional attributes given to God.
 
how is that relevant to my self-limitation theory?

So why again would a god be limiting itself? Someone truly cared about cats, wouldn't they save one from dying? If a god is all powerful there's nothing it could do to theoretically limit itself, it would just be ignoring us. It still knows what will happen and what won't, and by it supposedly limiting its power its creations that it supposedly loves die in horrible ways. If limits itself and lets people die then it's ignoring us, and if a god already knows the fatal outcome of its lack of action and continues to ignore us, then it clearly doesn't care or cannot act in the first place.

These two outcomes are apparently impossible in most religions as god is truly benevolent and is all powerful. If a god is neither of those things despite the scriptures saying that they are, perhaps the scriptures are incorrect?
 
I have no reasonable way of answering that man. That's a rough question that makes me sad to think about.

The only conclusion that I can come up with is that if there is a creator who is all powerful and he or she created the world to be this way, the creator is an asshole.
 
the issue I guess I have is for those that say "god did all these bad things THEREFORE I don't believe"

Who actually says this besides Hercules from that one movie Lionel Mandrake watched for us?

Typically an atheist would phrase this more like "the Biblical God is supposed to be all-knowing, all-powerful, and benevolent. But given the existence of evil, at least one of those things cannot be true."

"I don't believe in God because God did all these bad things" would be... believing in God.
 
I have never heard of anyone saying that.

Just keep re-reading it over and over until the concept makes as little sense to you as it does to me.

But it's the premise of the thread, I think OPs question isn't really about the existence of a god but the existence of a benevolent god (correct me if I'm wrong), which comes into question when you see so much bad things happening, but the universe being "good" or "bad" for us doesn't prove neither disproves the possible existence of a deity.
 
Well its cool that your personal conception of god is so fluid, but I'd love to see your source for god data. If you heard two contradictory traits of god, do you just explain away the less convenient one or are you actually referring to some source?

The Bible.

Free will is a precious gift from God, for it lets us love him with our “whole heart”—because we want to.—Matthew 22:37.

"I have kept quiet for a long time.
I remained silent and restrained myself.
Like a woman giving birth,
I will groan, pant, and gasp all at once. Isaiah 42:14
 
As I said it was such a crappy question that I really don't understand why Fry even bother to answer it and specially with such a tired argument.

Were you just hoping he gave a non-answer? Why do you care so much? There's nothing wrong with his response.
 
God doesn't step in because of free will.
Which again, is a stupid thing to do and a judgment call that God is responsible for. It's not like we even abide by the same rules. Even as a society we banded together and made laws and court systems to step in and judge if what someone does is right or wrong. Because we came to a quick understanding that letting whatever people's free will tells them to do without punishment can be dangerous precedent to set.

So again, either God doesn't see something wrong with the way the world is running (Which seems like the most logical one considering he gave us the free will in the first place), or he doesn't care enough to step in and do what we've been doing on a much smaller scale since people started banding together as communities.
 
The Bible.

Free will is a precious gift from God, for it lets us love him with our “whole heart”—because we want to.—Matthew 22:37.

"I have kept quiet for a long time.
I remained silent and restrained myself.
Like a woman giving birth,
I will groan, pant, and gasp all at once. Isaiah 42:14

Yeah except for that one time God hardened Pharaoh's heart during the Exodus or when decided to smite everyone at various times...whoops.

Bible God doesn't give a shit about free will.
 
You're misunderstanding him.
He doesn't actually blame god for bad things.
He is an atheist, he doesn't believe in a god.

In this hypothetical situation, he would credit god for all the 'good' things.
But he also would question this god on why he gives terrible diseases to innocent children.
 
Why has he stepped in so many times before? All these points seem more like rationalizations to try and reconcile the logical fallacies that persist in having an all powerful christian god.

It's actually covered in the bible. He restrains himself from stepping in any further at one point, but at the end of times will step in again to rid the world of all evil

Who's freewill was the Japanese Tsunami the other year, or the Indonesian one in 2004? I can only think of an all powerful god that would be able to do that by choice.

The Earth
 
I don't really get Fry's argument really. It ignores the fact that in Christianity there are two opposing forces of light and dark. It's like he suddenly forgot that Christian's also believe in Satan who would obviously be the one going around making life shitty for people.
 
RealityExists said:
if you are going to blame god for all the atrocities in life, isn't it a bit unfair to not blame god for all the good things in life as well?
if I knew the answer to my own thread I wouldn't have started it.

I like the idea that people have said about god not factoring in at all for their decision to not believe in a god.

the issue I guess I have is for those that say "god did all these bad things THEREFORE I don't believe"
I'm not saying that the bad cancels anything out. There have been plenty of times where I've been incredibly angry at god to the point of almost denying the existence of god as well. But then I remember all of the incredible good things that have happened to me or others that had no right to but did.

if god is as all powerful as everyone makes him out to be then I'm pretty sure he can handle the naysaying or critiques.
You appear to be constructing a person who had a similar experience to yourself (a religious person who believes in god, and got angry at bad things happening), but made the opposite decision you did (decided that it didn't make sense there was a god given these events, and stopped believing).

However, generally speaking, atheists don't believe in god because they believe the world is governed by interlocking systems that naturally allow for good and bad things to happen. They are not angry at some omnipotent being for making bad things happen, but rather are just saying that if tomorrow it was proven that one existed, they feel it wouldn't be worth worshipping because of the bad things it decided to let happen.

Stephen Fry is not mad at god, he simply doesn't believe he exists. However, if Stephen found out there was a god as defined by Abrahamic religions, he shared what his response to that god would be.

You're looking for someone with an experience you're unlikely to find in a forum with a relatively young (sub-40) population, since the lack of believe is far more likely to have come from matching up their education with what's thought in religious texts and finding them incongruous. If you found someone from 60-80 years ago, or especially hundreds of years ago, it's more plausible that they threw out their faith because they felt they were cast out by god, because that would imply they strongly believed in religious for many years and still likely do on some level.
 
The Bible.

Free will is a precious gift from God, for it lets us love him with our “whole heart”—because we want to.—Matthew 22:37.

"I have kept quiet for a long time.
I remained silent and restrained myself.
Like a woman giving birth,
I will groan, pant, and gasp all at once. Isaiah 42:14

Why does the "free will" of murderers, rapists, deadly viruses, etc. override the free will of victims who want to live their lives without being killed, raped, infected with diseases, starved, etc?

ShemhazaiX said:
I don't really get Fry's argument really. It ignores the fact that in Christianity there are two opposing forces of light and dark. It's like he suddenly forgot that Christian's also believe in Satan who would obviously be the one going around making life shitty for people.
onelightonedarkbackgammon.gif
 
God doesn't step in because of free will.
Does a lesser being actually have the mental capacity to make its own decisions? Doesn't the puppy have free will? Why is it animal abuse then? It had every chance to choose to eat food for crying out loud.

You might not want to hear this, but if there is something that high above us in cognitive power, then we are the puppy to him.

Do we actually have the cognitive ability to do these things on our own? If a god existed that was that powerful, I'd say no. He gave us a"gift" that we could not hope to control and he should have known better.
 
Who actually says this besides Hercules from that one movie Lionel Mandrake watched for us?

Typically an atheist would phrase this more like "the Biblical God is supposed to be all-knowing, all-powerful, and benevolent. But given the existence of evil, at least one of those things cannot be true."

"I don't believe in God because God did all these bad things" would be... believing in God.

Exactly.

To OP, can you imagine the possibility of there not being a god? For everything to be grounded in science, every event decided by a million different factors and chance?

How would your outlook on life change, if you imagined the possibility of there not being a god. Or a heaven. Or a hell...
 
Does a lesser being actually have the mental capacity to make its own decisions? Doesn't the puppy have free will? Why is it animal abuse then? It had every chance to choose to eat food for crying out loud.

You might not want to hear this, but if there is something that high above us in cognitive power, then we are the puppy to him.

Do we actually have the cognitive ability to do these things on our own? If a god existed that was that powerful, I'd say no. He gave us a"gift" that we could not hope to control and he should have known better.

Read the bible. Animals do not have free will :/ Only humans are blessed with this ability.
 
I'm not saying that the bad cancels anything out. There have been plenty of times where I've been incredibly angry at god to the point of almost denying the existence of god as well.

Yeah, it seems clear to me that the problem here is that you're projecting. You think about times when you've been "angry at god to the point of almost denying the existence of god" and assume that's how atheists have reached the position of not believing in God.

If you want to have a conversation about this and truly understand it, you're going to have to drop that assumption and accept that that's not where atheism generally comes from.
 
It's actually covered in the bible. He restrains himself from stepping in any further at one point, but at the end of times will step in again to rid the world of all evil



The Earth
Why rid the world of all evil when you can rid the world of all life save two of each animal and one drunk guy's family?

How does Earth have a will? It just has reactions to external pressures. Are you saying God didn't dictate the mechanical rules of the Earth?
 
from an islamic perspective

Suffering could only be considered objectionable if it were created as an independent entity with no meaningful role to play in the scheme of things. But without the taste of suffering or an awareness of what it means, the feeling of relief and comfort would also vanish. Without an encounter with pain and misery, most certainly, joy and happiness would lose all meaning. Indeed the very existence of life would lose purpose, and the steps of evolution would stop dead in their tracks.

This is an incredibly hard pill for for a few reasons. I live a pretty good life and it's other people that experience suffering (and through that I gain "awareness of what it means"). On the other hand, some people suffer with no chance of any happiness. That's cruel, that some people suffer to give a meaning of happiness to others but never to themselves.
 
There cannot be free will in the same world created by a omniscient omnipotent god.

If he created me and the world then he set the circumstances that led me to be who I am long ago, how could he judge me based on my decisions when I actually never had the power to choose something that wasn't predetermined?

He knew the end of my story all the time.
 
Who actually says this besides Hercules from that one movie Lionel Mandrake watched for us?

Typically an atheist would phrase this more like "the Biblical God is supposed to be all-knowing, all-powerful, and benevolent. But given the existence of evil, at least one of those things cannot be true."

"I don't believe in God because God did all these bad things" would be... believing in God.

I guess my mistake here is adding that extra layer of skepticism as indicated by the words "the supposed"
 
I have no reasonable way of answering that man. That's a rough question that makes me sad to think about.



I'm sure there are other reasons. But yeah, I've seen some pretty angry atheists. In fact I live with two.
Perhaps you are confusing "anger to a god" to frustration. "God" can't be praised or blamed for anything if he doesn't exist...perhaps you are projecting?
 
Read the bible. Animals do not have free will :/ Only humans are blessed with this ability.

Then the bible is wrong. I'm pretty sure my cat does whatever it wants to do.So does the millions of animals with a mind that allows them to decide on what they want to do next.
 
I don't really get Fry's argument really. It ignores the fact that in Christianity there are two opposing forces of light and dark. It's like he suddenly forgot that Christian's also believe in Satan who would obviously be the one going around making life shitty for people.

Why are you ignoring the fact that God can get rid of Satan at any time?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom