Tag Archives: Atheism

Quantum Conciousness

Roger Penrose, one of the most accomplished physicists of our century and his partner Stuart Hameroff are proving a theory of quantum consciousness. This is part of a growing field of quantum biology which is changing our understanding of how certain aspects of our known universe functions. In this post I am going to talk about how this discovery threatens the beliefs of everyone.

First, consciousness. We have gained a lot of knowledge on the brain in terms of mechanics but something that has always eluded scientists was how consciousness functions. How scientists discovered what parts of the brain did what was while doctors were doing surgery. A patient with their brain exposed would have certain parts of their brain stimulated with electricity and as expected their body would do certain things like raise their arm or in some cases the person would hear music etc.. The doctor would then ask a question like, “why did you do that?” and universally the patient would reply, “I didn’t do that, you did.” It didn’t matter where doctors did this in the brain, this would happen. This was perplexing because how could we possibly know after all the brain has no physical sensors to speak of.

The OR Theory asserts that consciousness is a quantum process and predictions are being proven and it is also being supported circumstantially by other advances in quantum biology, we now know the process of photosynthesis uses quantum coherence.

What can this challenge?

Untouchable Spirituality
Discovery is always the first step to interaction. The thought that spirituality could never be touched or accessed by humans via technology could be a thought of the past. What spiritualists held as a guarded elite experience could potentially be open to everyone.

“Impossible” Experiences
It is a common story that a loved one can know when another loved one either dies, lives, or is suffering. With classical science, this kind of experience would be impossible. Quantum Biology not only makes this plausible but makes all other non-local phenomenon of similar type also plausible such as remote viewing, and near death experiences. Caution: This theory doesn’t make these things real, just plausible. It also will not stop people from scamming you out of money using this new theory as a basis to their extra-sensory scams.

Classical Evolutionary Process
Quantum biology can fundamentally challenge the classical process of evolution that asserts that evolution occurred through “random” mutations. In Quantum biology, it is possible that no mutation was random and instead changes could of been executed purposefully and non-locally.

Artificial Intelligence
No matter how intelligent a system appears, without a quantum component it will not have awareness. This can alleviate some pressure on us as we build more sophisticated simulations of the human mind; we are not locking a consciousness in a box because consciousness is non-local.

Some might say that this actually helps religion and it might appear that way at first, but it really doesn’t. It creates as many issues for a religion’s spirituality concepts as the theory of evolution did for literal creation. While scientists will be forced to be faced with the reality that goes with quantum consciousness, the religious will have to face with a different sort of issue. Their “soul” is more sophisticated than simply another force locked in a biological box. Instead their “soul” is part of an ultimate dimension that is persistent.

There are many things that science is working on that could fundamentally change the human condition and this in my opinion could be one of the largest. This is the first scientific discovery that could dig into the issue of human existentialism in serious a way, so we should all definitely pay attention.

Atheism’s Core Problem

The Atheistic belief revolves around certain philosophical arguments to justify its stance. Logically it is based on an impossibility, you cannot prove a negative. Since proving that something does not exist is an impossibility, the default is to use absurdity. Arguments such as, “Could God make a rock so heavy, that he could not lift it?” or “God is as real as a flying spaghetti monster.” All of the logical absurdity arguments are always rooted in some form of physical realm, they have to be, because it is only in the physical realm one can create a logical absurdity. If an extra dimensional entity exists it cannot be proven or disproved using basic physics. Even though as a race our understanding of the extra dimensions is increasing, the atheistic belief cannot form logical absurdities using our newly discovered knowledge because physically rooted absurdities do not hold up under our new knowledge.

One of the first monotheistic religions to exist was Judaism and it put forward the idea that God had no physical attributes what so ever. This in itself was a complex subject matter that humans in the physical realm have a hard time grasping. It is only when God appears (real or not) to manifest physically that the God concept can be attacked. These physical forms are many with not the least of which of course being religion.

However, if one is to believe in an extra dimensional entity that is present in all things then one must also accept that God is also present in Atheism and uses it as a tool for its ultimate purpose. What is presented in Atheism instead is a standing opposing character reference. Despite their unwavering need to define a godless reality, they never the less proceed to apply universal physical traits to God in order to make the concept vulnerable, in their belief, to attack. The most important universal characteristic they apply is that of God being good. This question usually takes the form of, “If God is good why does God allow this certain bad event to occur.” The logical route isn’t that God is bad, instead they force a different choice, “God is either good or does not exist.” This of course is because regardless of actual existence, the definition of God we all know and Atheism reviles and fights against anything that seems to counter our internal definition of God. Atheism leads the fight against those who use God to their own selfish gratification.

Objectively we know that suffering is good. Suffering drives us and without suffering we would not have choice. Objectivity does not seem to work with atheism when it comes to proving God. We want God to be personally self serving, if God cannot satisfy our most selfish of desires, God does not exist. However, this is important because it drives selfishness into a corner. It makes us question our very essence which is that of selfishness and selfishness seems completely incompatible with God.

Which bring us to the crux, if any application of selfishness makes God absurd or incomprehensible to us, why is that? Its because God cannot be understood in any selfish definition because an ultimate extra dimensional entity is the antithesis of selfishness. The paradox serves a specific purpose, to help us define something that is our opposite.

Conversation with an Atheist

1319049368159_ORIGINALHe sat across from me, a little confused, “You’re telling me you believe in God?” I nodded and I knew where this conversation was headed, “So you believe all that stuff in the bible, you think it is all true?” I shook my head, “No I do not.” I could tell the common line of arguments were already lining up, the common atheist rhetoric that is used mostly to target those with a belief forged by the necessity of human capacity. I began to speak, “I don’t have a common belief in God I…” as if to try and catch me off guard he quickly interjected, “easter bunny.” I sighed and he continued, “God is no more real then the Easter Bunny or a flying spaghetti monster.”
“You forgot Santa Clause.”
“Exactly! how can you believe something that could of so easily been made up?”
“To assert that God is as real as a flying spaghetti monster is to assert that if God were real that God would be tangible. Theoretically if the flying spaghetti monster were real I would be able to reach out and touch it, this does not apply to God in my opinion. You could compare an intangible concept such as God is as real as karma, or love, or anger. However using fictional physical tangible entities to disprove an intangible one is a little silly.”
“This still does not prove that God is not fictional.”
“True, but my belief system does not have the necessity of God actually existing. While it would be nice, it by no means is a requirement for me.”
This was clearly not what he was expecting but none the less, defiant, he continued, “Well if God is so great why does he let suffering happen?” I laughed a little, “Why should he stop it?”
“Because God can.”
“So you assume that if God existed he has to be good or conform to some human trait that you have defined. You clearly admit that you don’t believe in God yet you seem to have a clear understanding of what its personality should be if God did exist.”
“It doesn’t make any sense though, why would God create something to let it suffer?”
“Well first, you’re making the mistake that I believe that God created us as a completed entity, which I don’t. Even if God did create us in the current state we are in right now, truly that cannot be a final state, but let me get back to your original question. Suffering is freedom. If we were incapable of making bad choices we would be no different then anything else, we would be complete automatons without any freedom whatsoever.”
“So you believe God created evil,” he said frustrated.
“No, we created evil as a way of defining things that make us less progressive as a race. Even if there was some kind of supernatural forces in play, it would be the same thing, a force stopping us from progressing as a race.”
“But there is zero proof of God! We are figuring out everything! We used to think we were the center of the universe. Surely you don’t think evolution is false?”
“Where I believe we came from does not factor at all into any belief I may have about God. While there may not be proof that God exists, we have circumstantial proof in the form of microcosms. Everything we don’t think God could be possible of, we’re doing. We’re creating artificial universes and intelligence. Despite the fact that we are a combination of multiple independent personalities, we are capable of working as a group to create a cohesive universe. If we were to create a universe with life, how would they fathom us?”
“So you believe God could just be some hyper intelligent entity or race that created us?” he said with a laugh.
“That is possible but, honestly, impossible to know. There is something more important then that though. It is how we relate to God that is important. You see everything we are trying to accomplish is represented in God as an epitome. Science is a way of gaining knowledge, God is all knowing. Art is the discovery of the meta physical, God is perfect meta. Philanthropy is represented in God as love.” his demeanor suddenly changed, he became curious, “do you think there is a correct religion? Do you think everyone is worshiping the same God?”
“This is where I disagree with Oprah. Every religion is not worshiping the same God, they are worshiping aspects. Further each religion we have today is characterized by primary traits. Christianity is love, Islam is majesty, and other religions are tradition. Each of these characteristics when combined make a singular personality. Of course they don’t see it that way, each system believes they can exist without the others. That would be like a warrior incapable of disciple or compassion. So what we get is war.”
“I still don’t believe in God, but you have done a better job convincing me then anyone I have met, but I just don’t feel it is reasonable.”
“That is understandable, what is reasonable is affected by time. If I could time travel 5000 years into the past it would be fairly unreasonable to ask those people to build me an airplane. What is truly unreasonable is that many atheists are completely aware that it is a logical impossibility to prove a negative yet they will write entire books on how something doesn’t exist. At the end of the day if God doesn’t exist that doesn’t bother me because it means we have something we can build.”

Self Enslavement

Most of the modern world acknowledges that slavery is wrong. Slavery prevents humans from being flexible which is needed for the race to adapt to rapidly changing conditions in both technology and the environment. Once we have freedom one of the first things we try and do is figure out what we should enslave ourselves to. The major difference, of course, is that if you choose to follow something it is your choice and you weren’t forced into it by anyone else. However, instead we now have unconscious slavery which is actually superior to physical slavery because if you can convince someone to do something and make them believe it is their choice they will work much more aggressively.

The best example of this enslavement is through religion. Religious leaders will get adherents by presenting people all the benefits of joining a religion, leaving out the history, and then tell you, “it’s your choice.” Having grown up in the Church, I can tell you that there is no choice, it is an illusion. While you’re being moved emotionally by nice music the religious leaders will say that if you are feeling called that you need to convert. There is no long logical conversation, or weighing of options, the emotional atmosphere drives people to do the conversion. This is not limited to any one religion, all religions do this, and everyone who makes a conversion will say they felt compelled or knew it was the right thing to do. They ignore the fact that a manipulative environment was setup or that their choice wasn’t really a choice at all it was “life or death.” It’s not a choice, it is an ultimatum.

I talk about Elolight as a driving force but it is not a master and it also isn’t a choice. Even if you were never made aware of the idea that humanity is striving for something or even if you don’t believe in God, you are still moving the entire race forward. It might not be much but you’re still doing it. Even a person in complete suffering is moving the world in some form or another. Your actions merely affect the speed at which we move forward.

I don’t believe spirituality is about submission; I believe it is about progression

As religion is starting to break a new form of enslavement is arising and it is masking itself as spirituality. If anything can make you perfectly happy it is an enslavement. Joy and happiness are very important things but if anything promises you absolute happiness and peace it is disingenuous. Discontent moves the world, if humans stayed content we would all still be living in tents hunting every day. Imagine we had infinite resources, should we hook up everyone  to machines so they can live in a complete heavenly world while being pumped with drugs? While we think we want perfect peace and happiness the fact is we don’t; if that is all we had, there would be no value to joy and happiness they would become bland and boring. These new spiritual trends promise and may deliver this happiness by requesting you submit and accept things. They explain to us that we are not masters and we should simply submit to the “masters of the universe”.

We are the masters of the universe, the sun does not wish to own the universe, God does not wish to own the universe, but we do. If you believe in God all you need to do to prove this point is look at scriptures. In the old testament who was given the authority to name the animals? Gods of scriptures did not create this universe so that we could simply be puppets. Organic life is the only thing that could come to control the universe and the best creature that we are aware of that has this capability right now is the human race; all other creatures are simply concerned with getting tomorrow’s meal.

While I do talk about spirituality on this blog let me make the clear distinction that I don’t believe spirituality is about submission; I believe it is about progression. I truly believe that anyone who preaches submission based spirituality is only doing it so that they may be, by proxy, in control of you whether they know it or not.

Agnosticism is Not Weak Atheism

When I used to be in heavy religious debates I met many different kinds of people. I had Christians who condemned me to hell and Muslims who threatened to cut off my head. However, I also had Christians who gave me unique insights into scripture and Muslims who engaged me on subjects that a lot of Christians wouldn’t even consider. However, before I solidified my current views I had one Muslim say to me, “You’re monotheistic and don’t adhere to any religious traditions. You’re already Muslim, you just don’t realize it yet.” This was absurd on so many levels and now many years later I am witnessing Atheists who are modifying their Dogma to try and brute force Agnostics into their belief system.

The claim is that if you’re agnostic you’re actually just a weak atheist, Atheists are calling it negative Atheism. This is incorrect because a synonym for belief is opinion. To prove my point I am going to use oxford:

Atheism (Oxford Dictionary)
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

The logic expressed by Atheists is that if you answer the question of God’s existence as, “I don’t know” you’re lacking a belief. This would be valid except for the fact that “I don’t know” is actually an opinion and therefore a belief. The only time you lack a belief is when you are completely ignorant of something. For instance, you could say a child is Atheist or if a human responded to the God existence question with, “What is God?”  However if their answer is “I don’t know” they have a stance or an opinion and therefore a belief.

Agnosticism which atheists are trying to say is actually weak atheism is the stance of not knowing whether God exists or not. If you believe God Exists, you’re a theist. If you don’t believe in God, you’re the opposite or an a-theist. If you don’t know or are not convicted about the existence of God, you’re agnostic. Unless you are a child, an animal, or potentially live on an island it is almost impossible to not have an opinion on God. The moment you gain an opinion you gain a belief and therefore will either be an Atheist, Theist, or Agnostic.

No one should be brute forced into a group that potentially has extremist adherents.

Why do I bother fighting over word definitions? Atheism is rapidly becoming a religious like group as I stated in my blog post Atheism = Theism and they are starting to utilize pseudo logic in an attempt to grow their numbers. No one should be brute forced into a group that potentially has extremist adherents because the group utilized intellectuals to come up with a pseudo logical explanation to push the weaker or on the fence believers into their own group. If you’re an Agnostic and have Atheists trying to convince you that you are actually an Atheist, reject it outright, it is your choice to not join their group.

Information, Ignorance, and God Abuse

In our lives we all have defining moments that define what we will come to believe and what we will do with our lives. These moments put us into The Flow. These events whether we acknowledge it or not really define us. One of these defining moments for me was at a boxing tournament. The fighters from my club had cleared out and I was sitting on the side of the ring and two younger men were two my left. One was sitting on the ground against a pillar and the other was standing next to him talking. The first said, “Ya, I know what you’re saying man.” The second man continued, “When all the things in the Qur’an happen, everyone will realize we were right.” This did not convert me to Islam but it was shocking to me because of how they said it – with complete faith and conviction.

Growing up in the Christian church I heard full conviction speech often. This played into everyone’s story, “we know we are right and so we have to be right.” However, there was an underlying connotation to it which was, “we know we are right and no one else believes as strongly as us because it is not possible.” Suddenly I understood why there could be religious wars. Faith and conviction was not limited to one religion, these young men spoke with the same conviction and glitter in their eyes that up until that moment I thought was limited to one religion.

Everyone has reasons for what they believe, and everyone thinks that everyone else doesn’t have enough information. Atheists are no exception to this rule, science still has a lot of questions to answer but they utilize faith, conviction, and speak with glitter in their eyes with complete conviction that they have the truth. The universe is microcosmic in nature and there is every possibility that our universe was created in the same process that we are creating virtual universes today. To say our universe being created is an impossibility would also be saying creation by humans is impossible, you can’t pick and choose capability and redefine the rules of physics to justify philosophical arguments. The capability for intelligence and creation was latent in the universe before we ever came into existence regardless of the process (evolution or otherwise).

So whether it is the belief or disbelief of God, God is still fundamentally playing the same psychological role as a motivator.

It interesting to note that both Atheists and Theists abuse the God concept in order to get adherents. Theists will say that believing in God will provide you with happiness and ever lasting life. Atheists on the other hand will say that not believing in God will stop all wars and usher in a new age of prosperity that the world has ever known. They both utilize God in some way to express a possible fantasy. This comes back to my idea of Elolight where God represents a powerful motivational entity. So whether it is the belief or disbelief of God, God is still fundamentally playing the same psychological role as that of a motivator. This also plays into the idea that we are striving to be like God and it doesn’t matter if you do or don’t believe, the God concept is still moving you towards an ultimate epitome of humanity.

Where Atheists are most likely right is in the idea of God personality projection. Before Judaism, paganism was very common. All Gods had identifiable human like traits. Judaism came along and said that God doesn’t have human traits and for the most part can’t be understood in any precise manner. Sure enough humans then got another God character they could relate to in the name of Jesus. Jesus was human, so he could be understood easily and that was something which Judaism did not provide. Despite scripture completely contradicting the traditional christian myth (Luke 10:25-28) many modern day main stream Christianities continue to promote that one must accept and believe Jesus is God in order to obtain eternal life and this idea was in debate up until The First Council of Nicaea.

Atheism = Theism

Neil DeGrasse Tyson has an interesting quote which goes as follows:

It’s odd that word ‘atheist’ even exists. I don’t play golf, is there a word for non-golf players? Do they gather and strategize? I can’t do that. I can’t gather around around and talk about how much everybody in the room doesn’t believe in God.

If you’re new to my blog, essentially, my belief system revolves around accepting the power of certain concepts (such as God) and their ability to motivate and change as opposed to believing in actual physical entities which may or may not exist. This puts me in a particular limbo area where I can objectively understand and sympathize with both atheists and theists but I don’t exclusively believe either are right. However, the more I encounter adherents from both sides I have discovered that both atheists and theists believe and do the following:

  • Believe that they have the ‘real’ truth
  • Believe in some form of morality
  • Gather in groups and talk about opinions
  • Have books they revere
  • On average mate with people with similar opinions
  • Cannot with 100% certainty validate the existence of God with facts
  • Believe in tradition; atheists with Scientific method and Theists with religion
  • Have Charities
  • Take donations
  • Influence Government policy making

The reason atheism exists is because it represents a new social organization. It is not simply an opinion, but a religious like group. The fact that this grouping is occurring ultimately leads to the grim conclusion that just like religion different forms of atheism could emerge and these groups could ultimately engage in some form of war. Just like early Christianity these groups are fractured. Most atheists will contend that the only reason wars happen is because of religion, but this is a gross error, wars happen because humans are imperfect and if you analyze most wars they are done over real-estate and resources; religion is used as a powerful catalyst to get humans to go to war but the underlying selfish desires that lead to war remain the same regardless of the name of a particular God or in the future, lack of God name.

Atheism as an organization is spending all of its time trying to prove a negative which is a logical impossibility.

Atheists will also contend that their belief is based on logic and rationality but there is a massive irony to this. In a conversation with Ayn Rand (a well known atheist) she herself proclaims that, “you are never called upon to prove a negative.” If a theist confronts an atheist with the statement, “prove God doesn’t exist” the atheist, if they know their retorts, will come back with the line “you cannot prove a negative.” They may then go on to say something like prove that a unicorn doesn’t exist. The massive irony is that atheism as an organization is spending all of its time trying to prove a negative which is a logical impossibility. They have whole books, such as Dawkin’s God delusion, which offer up absurd philosophical arguments trying to validate the non-existence of God. This allows them as an organisation to spend an unlimited amount of time trying to come up with arguments why God doesn’t exist and gives strength to their social group through their superfluous conversation which is all built on top of trying to do the logically impossible. It is time we stop fighting over the philosophical and look towards what we want to accomplish a human race and not the religious opinions we should hold.

Alan Lightman, a physcist,  has this to say on religion, war, science, and death:

Certainly, human beings, in the name of religion, have sometimes caused great suffering and death to other human beings. But so has science, in the many weapons of destruction created by physicists, biologists and chemists, especially in the 20th century. Both science and religion can be employed for good and for ill. It is how they are used by human beings, by us, that matters. Human begins have sometimes been driven by religious passion to build schools and hospitals, to create poetry and music and sweeping temples, just as human beings have employed science to cure disease, to improve agriculture, to increase material comfort and the speed of communication.

So while even if atheism is the future, it will ultimately lead to more of the same. I once had an atheist say to me, “If everyone was atheist there would be world peace.” to the atheists confusion I started laughing and I replied, “I have heard a similar quote before and it was from a Jehovah’s witness at my front door.” If everyone could share a similar opinion, regardless of what it was, there would be world peace.