Why has religion retained its appeal?

[dutch]

I'm not an astronaut, do I need a space craft?

 

Edit to add.

 

As atheism is the rejection of the claim that a god/gods exists. I suppose that if no-one claimed that a god/gods exists, then there'd be no rejection of the claim, therefore there wouldn't be any atheists.

 

I don't know how that makes atheism religious.

 

Depends if you want one, you don't need it nothing wrong in having spacecraft it's your choice.

 

Only humans are interested in religion or rejecting it. A sheep cow or monkey doesn't do it they don't claim God exists or is a load of rubbish. We are capable, it is possible to connect with consciousness. The religious struggle is created when unaware believing we are mind. When fully aware of consciousness religion is seen and understood, not by the mind but by seeing your consciousness clearly again.

[SnailyBoy]

Depends if you want one, you don't need it nothing wrong in having spacecraft it's your choice.

 

Only humans are interested in religion or rejecting it. A sheep cow or monkey doesn't do it they don't claim God exists or is a load of rubbish. We are capable, it is possible to connect with consciousness. The religious struggle is created when unaware believing we are mind. When fully aware of consciousness religion is seen and understood, not by the mind but by seeing your consciousness clearly again.

 

Word salad....

[Robin-H]

I think dutch is right in the sense of atheism and religion being co dependant on each other. You can't identify with being atheist without religion being relevant to your position. I suppose it could be argued that babies can be atheists without religion being relevant to their position but the truth is, they don't really have a position do they since they have no concept of either religion or atheism.

 

---------- Post added 07-08-2018 at 16:36 ----------

 

 

If I knew what consciousness was I'd probably be in a better position to tell you how accurate or inaccurate dutch's description is.

 

I don't understand the relevance. Yes, atheism and religion are linked (although it is often wrongly thought that atheism is the rejection of religion, when it isn't - they aren't opposite sides of the coin).

 

I fail to see however how that fact is of any importance or relevance, it does absolutely nothing to validate either claim.

[danot]

I don't understand the relevance. Yes, atheism and religion are linked (although it is often wrongly thought that atheism is the rejection of religion, when it isn't - they aren't opposite sides of the coin).

 

I fail to see however how that fact is of any importance or relevance, it does absolutely nothing to validate either claim.

 

Can you elaborate on why you think that?

[Robin-H]

Can you elaborate on why you think that?

 

On why I think what? That religion and atheism aren't two sides of the same coin, or that the fact that their existence as words does anything to validate either claim?

[danot]

On why I think what? That religion and atheism aren't two sides of the same coin, or that the fact that their existence as words does anything to validate either claim?

The latter.

[Robin-H]

The latter.

 

The fact that the terms atheism and religion exist does absolutely nothing to validate either claim.

 

Does the fact the the term wizard and witch exist mean that either of those are validated?

[RootsBooster]

That's right. No bicycles and no one can cycle or not cycle.

Bring them back and you can choose again.

I don't choose for either side and have no attachment with bicycles. Just like I have no attachment to my mind.

 

Why does not cycling have to be a choice? Millions of people get up every day and don't cycle, without the option even entering their minds. Because not cycling is the default state when someone gets up in a morning, they're already not cycling.

Take away all the bikes and everyone's not cycling.

 

Just like I was born without theistic beliefs and remained that way, it wasn't a choice.

The funny thing about your claim is that the word 'atheism' literally means without theism, that's what the 'a' prefix means, sans. So without theism, everyone is literally an atheist! There just probably wouldn't be a word for it (which I think is what you're inadvertently basing your argument on).

 

Ignoring all this for a second and pretending that atheism does have to be a choice, how does that make it a religion? If I choose not to wear a hat, is non hat wearing also a religion?

[danot]

The fact that the terms atheism and religion exist does absolutely nothing to validate either claim.

 

Does the fact the the term wizard and witch exist mean that either of those are validated?

Bad example: If a witch asked a wizard if he believes in witchcraft(witchcraft being the common link), I doubt his reply would be- "No, I don't, I'm a wizard" Just saying.

 

Do you have a better example?

[Robin-H]

Bad example: If a witch asked a wizard if he believes in witchcraft(witchcraft being the common link), I doubt his reply would be- "No, I don't, I'm a wizard" Just saying.

 

Do you have a better example?

 

Why is your example relevant in any way?

 

Neither claim is validated because someone believes in it or not, it doesn't matter what a witch, wizard, atheist or religious person says.