princessmoviesandinternetporn asked: why is it wrong for me to believe in what i believe in? i dont believe in one set system (for instance, i am not catholic) but i believe in a higher power, and i believe in karma, and i believe in the afterlife. why am i wrong?

The better question is, why are you right?

Obviously you’ve been able to convince yourself of your own beliefs, but are you able to show others that your belief in these things is well founded? Are you able to point to proof, signs, and indications that your belief in these ideas should be something others believe as well?

It is not up to me to prove to you your beliefs are wrong. It is up to you to prove that your beliefs are right. The reason that most Atheists are Atheists is because we base our perception of the world based on real, verifiable, testable information. If there were solid reasons to believe in these things many Atheists would.

There is no proof of a higher power, no proof of karma, and no proof of an afterlife. These ideas not only have no basis in reality but they offend reason and logic by lying outside of the realm of verification. The only possible basis for belief relies on faith. That is the basis we start with. So in order for me personally to consider your beliefs valid you would have to show me why your faith is more important than my facts. Yet, why would I do that with no proof?

I can’t prove to you you’re wrong, no one is responsible for disproving outlandish assertions. You can’t prove to me you’re right, going back to that whole pesky proof thing. You’re the one looking to make a contention that these things are real. You’re the one making a statement of belief. So I’ll return to my question, why are you right

gloriousnymph asked:

I see myself as an atheist because I don't believe there's a god, but I'm still religious in some aspects - I believe in karma and reincarnation, can I still call myself an atheist? I had this discussion with a friend - and she told me that her teacher had said that if you're an atheist you don't believe in anything. so.. what do you think?

Atheism deals only with lack of belief in gods. Raelians, for example, are atheists and that does not preclude them from believing in all sorts of weird, evidence lacking ideas.

That being said, atheists tend to value beliefs if they can be properly justified. If the reason for atheism is the lack of evidence in favor of gods, why would a self described atheist believe in karma or in reincarnation when there is no evidence in favor of those?

Again, an atheist can believe in karma with no problem but if you ask me I would say that such a person is just being inconsistent. In regards to atheists not believing in anything I just think such a statement is hilarious. As an atheist I believe in tons of things, namely ones that have evidence of being real going for them. Why would it be any different? It is as easy as that.

Take care.
In reason:

Anonymous asked:

Can you provide examples of "bad" people you've seen not have "karma" (in a non-spiritual sense) catch up to them. To me, the idea of what could or couldn't be classified as "karma" is subjective. I don't really think there is a definitive definition for everyone. In my mind, it could be (depending on whether or not you consider karma a legitimate concept/occurrence in life) satisfied differently from one person to another. The relativity of the degree of how "bad" someone or something is or how "bad" something someone did or didn't do is subjective. You know, the same way that there is no defining definitions of morality. Someone else's idea of what is moral or immoral is likely to be different from mine, even if only slightly. Does this make sense? I feel like the idea of "karma" is something of which you can't really provide disproof.

If there is not a definite definition of Karma, why bother with it?

I disagree with the statement that there are “no defining definitions of morality”. Nor do I agree that everything is “subjective”. Fact is that what we call morality is nothing more than of society developed concepts that can and are enforced (that is why we have laws). Compare this to karma where it does not fit nor is necessary in societal discourse. Of course it would be interesting to hear a non-spiritual definition of karma. I guess it would sound like a non-supernatural definition of god. It would make the words god and karma devoid of any useful meaning.

BTW, Sam Harris has addressed the subject of morality briefly here (see point 3).

In summary, there are many things one can not disprove. So? Does that mean they are all worthy of our attention? Not being able to disprove “something” means nothing if that “something” has not been proven in the first place. It is the typical putting of the apple cart before the horse.

Like fairies, ghosts, or gods, mystical concepts feed on our fascination with the mysterious and how we try to make sense of it. That is why the non-existent, be it supernatural beings or mystical concepts, are so appealing. It is just a way of blunting fear and despair, of having the feeling that eventually all wrongs will be right. That there is hidden meaning in coincidence and that there is a purpose for everything.

Personally, until such things are proven, I can do nothing else but hold my belief. I think it is the moral thing to do.

activitygrrrl asked:

Re: Karma
I saw a critique of karma (relating to atheism) come through my stream yesterday. My thoughts on it are that it's the idea of karma that most people reference rather than the belief itself. It's a catch-all term for "you'll get yours" that doesn't necessarily mean one actually believes in a cosmic power. I don't believe that using the word makes anyone a 'bad atheist' any more than saying 'goodbye' does (sure, some people may hold that view, but really, they're just words). Leave the judgment to Christians. Just my 2¢.

Here are 2 additional cents:

It is true that the idea of Karma can be conceived without the need of a god. That is why I did not use the words god or cosmic power in my previous post on the matter.

I don’t think there are “bad atheists” (maybe, like Raelians, irrational atheists but that is another story). Nor do I believe that judgment has anything to do with it. It is all about what the evidence and the facts can support and the idea of Karma is not one of those.

Still if anyone wants to use the word Karma in a colloquial non-meaningful way (since we know that people do not always get theirs), be my guest. My only question would be, why? At least when we say good bye we actually mean something.


Anonymous asked:

do you believe in the idea of karma?

Karma is defined in many different ways depending on the religion/philosophy.

I have not seen any evidence in favor of Karma when it is defined as “eventually getting what you deserve”. I know of really bad people, through out history, that died without Karma ever catching up to them.