Atheism
Community Guide
Archive Today will help you look at paywalled content the way search engines see it.
Statement of Purpose
- This is a support and conversation community for people who don't believe in gods.
- Superstition hucksters have no reason to subscribe or post here at all.
- If you are looking to debate or proselytize, options will be linked lower in the sidebar.
Acceptable
- Honest questions or conversations.
- Discussions on parenting or advice.
- Struggles, frustrations, coming out.
- Atheist memes. We can have fun!
- News headlines relevant to atheism.
Unacceptable
Depending on severity, you might be warned before adverse action is taken.
- Anything against site rules.
- Illegal and/or NSFW material.
- Troll posts and comments. There will be no attempt to explain what that means.
- Leading questions, agenda pushing, or disingenuous attempts to bait members.
- Personal attacks or flaming.
Inadvisable
- Self promotion or upvote farming.
- Excessive shitposting or off-topic discussion.
Application of warnings or bans will be subject to moderator discretion. Feel free to appeal. If changes to the guidelines are necessary, they will be adjusted.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a group that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of any other group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you you will be banned on sight.
Provable means able to provide proof to the moderation, and, if necessary, to the community.
~ /c/nostupidquestions
If you want your space listed in this sidebar and it is especially relevant to the atheist or skeptic communities, PM DancingPickle and we'll have a look!
Connect with Atheists
- Matrix: #atheism:envs.net
Help and Support Links
- Freedom From Religion Foundation
- The Secular Therapy Project
- Secular Students Alliance
- Black Nonbelievers
- The Clergy Project
- Atheist Alliance International
- Sunday Assembly
- Atheist Ireland
- Atheism UK
- Atheists United
Streaming Media
This is mostly YouTube at the moment. Podcasts and similar media - especially on federated platforms - may also feature here.
- Atheist Debates - Matt Dillahunty
- Rationality Rules
- Friendly Atheist
- Making Sense with Sam Harris
- Cosmic Skeptic
- Genetically Modified Skeptic
- Street Epistemology
- Armored Skeptic
- NonStampCollector
Orgs, Blogs, Zines
- Center for Inquiry
- American Atheists
- Humanists International
- Atheist Republic
- The Brights
- The Angry Atheist
- History for Atheists
- Rationalist International
- Atheist Revolution
- Debunking Christianity
- Godless Mom
- Atheist Freethinkers
Mainstream
Bibliography
Start here...
...proceed here.
- God is Not Great (Hitchens)
- The God Delusion (Dawkins)
- The End of Faith (Harris)
- Why I Am Not a Christian (Russell)
- Letter to a Christian Nation (Harris)
Proselytize Religion
From Reddit
As a community with an interest in providing the best resources to its members, the following wiki links are provided as historical reference until we can establish our own.
view the rest of the comments
The part that this particular form of meditation isconnected to Buddhist religious and spiritual practices.
There are perfectly secular or non-spiritual forms of meditation. This is not that.
Could you cite some information on both of those to help me understand exactly what you're referring to?
I apologize, but I'm not the best to explain it, particularly to the specifics of Buddhist meditation. But really, mediation is a catchall for any sort of mental discipline or conditioning. Like practicing mindfulness or simply maintaining a state of calmness, right?
What OP asked specifically about is samatha and vipassana, which are forms of meditation from buddhist teachings. They're inherently buddhist. Samatha is itself not particularly offensive; it's basically a technique for mindfulness and focus. But vipassana? it's the pursuit of enlightnement through meditation and gaining insight into 'reality'.
I'm not particularly surprised by the OP reporting the encounters with "spirits". Deep meditation places you into an altered mental not entirely unlike that of psilocybin. Except meditation is lighter, doesn't last as long, and one has more control of where one's experiences go while on the trip.
I have no reason to believe the OP's encounters with spirits was anything other than their brain falling into an altered state and doing what it could to oblige their beliefs and expectations. not like I can very well interact with their spirits in any meaningfully or tangible way.
Why not just go with it? For conversation's sake.
Because the world is large and we are small and stranger things have happened.
Because why should I?
People’s brains convincing them something stranger has happened isn’t actually all that strange.
Neither is people just making shit up.
Until I have a reason- tangible evidence- for a thing, I’m going to stay skeptical.
Edit: To put this another way, if I indulge this, then I’d have to also indulge Mike Johnson’s insistence god told him he’s the second coming of Moses. Do you see the harm there?
No, I do not see the harm. Lol.
So, going back to Mike Johnson, he's a US lawmaker- the speaker of the house, and 3rd in line for what used to be one of the most powerful and influential positions in the world.
You don't see the harm that he has voices in his head telling him he's some kind of salvation figure (moses) liberating his people (evangelical christsians) from persecution (that isn't happening.) making some very fucked up policies because of all the other shit the voices in his head are saying?
I prefer my policies set on evidence, not the internal monologue of a madman.
You're welcome to believe what you want, but that doesn't mean I have to indulge anything. And to be blunt, I have no more reason to believe spirits come and talk to you than Mike Johnson is sent by god. (even if I do wish he'd go wander the desert for a few decades.)
Your thesis amounts to mere convention.
Without evidence, I have no more reason to believe some divine being is giving Mike Johnson orders than I do to believe spirits come talk to you while you meditate.
I do have some reason to believe that, during prayer/meditation/whatever you've entered into a state of altered consciousness and your perceptions are not grounded in reality.
For example, Michael Persinger's "god helmet" experiments (in which they stimulated parts of the brain and induced euphoric visions of god,)
or the work of Newberg and d'Aquili who monitored brain activity of people praying or meditating (franciscan nuns and tibetan buddhists, in particular,) showing altered brain activity.
or Roland Griffiths who dosed people with psilocybin and achieved some of the same things, while doing similar neural imaging.
or the studies of near-death experiments which have more or less conclusively demonstrated those were not "real" experiences. (they brought things into the surgical theater and later asked them to recount what they saw. Including some studies where that was the the whole point- with instructions to 'turn around')
In short, if you have no tangible evidence of the spirit world (and you don't,) then I have no reason to indulge it. anything that is claimed without evidence can be equally dismissed without evidence. and personally, I think anything claimed without evidence should be dismissed.
But there is evidence, my testimony.
Which is not really evidence at all.
which brings us back to: you have no tangible evidence. every religion has people reporting broadly similar experiences.
For example, the Prince Philip Movement in Vanuatu. They report Prince Phillip appearing to them in dreams. Do you really think that Philip spoke to them in their dreams?
Actually, in a court of law, we ask for the testimony of witnesses all the time. So you got that wrong.
Maybe you mean that it isn't the kind of evidence that you want.
Nope. I didn't.
First off, a witness saying "i saw that man do that crime" is entirely different. the claims being made by the witness can be falsified. For example, by showing that the witness wasn't in place to see the crime being committed, or that the accused wasn't actually there. or maybe there's security recordings showing the witness is reporting events leading up to and after the crime inaccurately.
Alternatively, the defense could demonstrate that the witness was tripping balls on shrooms; or is schizophrenic or otherwise experiencing hallucinations. Or the Defense could demonstrate that the witness in questions is lying about some aspect of the testimony being given.
It should be telling to you, that 'divine revelation' or mediums conveying messages from the dead, or any other witnesses reporting knowledge gained by supernatural means are basically never accepted as evidence to a US court. Historic examples of supernatural testimony being accepted have pretty much universally been demonstrated as a travesty against justice. The Salem Witch Trials, for example.
As for the topic at hand. We are not in a court of law.
before you can convince me that spirits came and talked to you... you first have to convince me that spirits actually exist. Saying, 'well, I know they exist because they talk to me"... raises the questions I've been trying to get you to consider for some time now.
Let me ask you this: have you considered the alternative explanations I suggested? that you are misunderstanding the nature of your experiences; and that the nature of your experiences stemmed from your subconscious extemporizing while you were in an altered state of consciousness, following your established cultural and spiritual beliefs?
For example, as demonstrated by Coren and Perschinger, who stimulated regions in the brain and replicated religious experiences; or in the same way that the cultural framework and spiritual beliefs guide trips while on psychedelic drugs?
your testimony is not testable. I cannot falsify it, and therefore it cannot be evidence. that is how science works. it requires tangible, observable evidence; and one would imagine that with all the people that believe in spirits, if there genuinely was tangible, observable evidence, it would have been found.
But without that evidence, I only have your word it's true... and frankly, I don't trust you.
Yes wrong. You haven't even examined the witness.
And then you compound that wrong by misrepresenting his opening statement.
Wrong upon wrong.
Okay, since you’re unwilling to engage with reality and insist we’re in a courtroom…
I. Have a friend. He’s a big flying dildo. He says you fell into a state of self-hypnosis and that your experiences only felt real.
Prove my big flying dildo is not real.
Prove that your claim of supernatural entities is more real than mine, the BFD. Until you do, you have to accept my big flying dildo knows what he’s talking about.
Or you can just admit that science doesn’t accept claims that cannot be tested, and neither do courts for that matter.