Quit Trying to Invent Your “God of the gaps,” From the Scraps of Science.

Quit Trying to Invent Your God From the Scraps of Science.

What religious in most of their arguments try to do, is to act as if they reverse engineer facts of reality, trying to prove a god something or other has to be the only way it could be the way it is. Of course, as an atheist but more importantly a supporter of science and the valid and reliable reason and evidence they work from I know religion is false. I know the work of reverse engineer facts of reality has largely been done and is being done by science which is why we know about the truth of evolution over creationism in the first place as well as the truth of reality that contradicts or completely challenges any argument the supporters of religion can offer. I realize they are trying to reoffer thinking that is already reasonably been disregarded as the wishful thinking fantasies it always was.

Disproof by logical contradiction

‘A Logical Impossibility’

In classical logic, a contradiction consists of a logical incompatibility between two or more propositions. It occurs when the propositions, taken together, yield two conclusions which form the logical, usually opposite inversions of each other. Contradiction by the creation of a paradox, Plato’s Euthydemus dialogue demonstrates the need for the notion of contradiction. In the ensuing dialogue, Dionysodorus denies the existence of “contradiction”, all the while that Socrates is contradicting him: “… I in my astonishment said: What do you mean Dionysodorus? I have often heard, and have been amazed to hear, this thesis of yours, which is maintained and employed by the disciples of Protagoras and others before them, and which to me appears to be quite wonderful, and suicidal as well as destructive, and I think that I am most likely to hear the truth about it from you. The dictum is that there is no such thing as a falsehood; a man must either say what is true or say nothing. Is not that your position?” Indeed, Dionysodorus agrees that “there is no such thing as a false opinion … there is no such thing as ignorance” and demands of Socrates to “Refute me.” Socrates responds “But how can I refute you, if, as you say, to tell a falsehood is impossible?”. – Wikipedia

Axiological “Presumptive-Value”

Your god myth is an Axiological “Presumptive-Value” Failure

I am an Axiological (value theorist) Atheist, and Claims of god are a Presumptive-Value failure. Simply, if you presume a thing is of value that you can’t justify, then you have committed an axiological presumptive value failure.

Axiological “presumptive-value” Success: Sound Thinker: uses disciplined rationality (sound axiological judgment the evaluation of evidence to make a decision) supporting a valid and reliable justification.

Axiological “presumptive-value” Failure: Shallow Thinker: undisciplined, situational, sporadic, or limited thinking (unsound axiological judgment, lacking required evidence to make a “presumptive-value” success decision) lacking the support of a needed valid and reliable justification.

“Ok, So basically, the difference between reasoning with evidence and without?” – Questioner

My response, Well with or without valid justification because of evidence. As in you can’t claim to know the value of something you can’t demonstrate as having good qualities to attach the value claim too so if you lack evidence of the thing in question then you cannot validate its value. So it’s addressing justificationism (uncountable) Theory of justification, An (philosophy standard) approach that regards the justification of a claim as primary, while the claim itself is secondary; thus, criticism consists of trying to show that a claim cannot be reduced to the authority or criteria that it appeals to. Think of is as a use matrix. If I say this is of great use for that, can you validate its use or value, and can I use this as a valid method to state a valid justification for my claims without evidence to value judge from? No, thus an axiological presumptive-value failure as a valid anything. Theory of justification is a part of epistemology that attempts to understand the justification of propositions and beliefs. Epistemologists are concerned with various epistemic features of belief, which include the ideas of justification, warrant, rationality, and probability. Loosely speaking, justification is the reason that someone (properly) holds a belief. When a claim is in doubt, justification can be used to support the claim and reduce or remove the doubt. Justification can use empiricism (the evidence of the senses), authoritative testimony (the appeal to criteria and authority), or reason. – Wikipedia

“Presumptions are things that are credited as being true until evidence of their falsity is presented. Presumptions have many forms and value (Axiology) is just one. In ethics, value denotes the degree of importance of something or action, with the aim of determining what actions are best to do or what way is best to live (normative ethics), or to describe the significance of different actions. It may be described as treating actions as abstract objects, putting VALUE to them. It deals with right conduct and living a good life, in the sense that a highly, or at least relatively high valuable action may be regarded as ethically “good” (adjective sense), and that an action of low value, or relatively low in value, may be regarded as “bad”. What makes an action valuable may, in turn, depend on the ethic values of the objects it increases, decreases or alters. An object with “ethic value” may be termed an “ethic or philosophic good” (noun sense). Values can be defined as broad preferences concerning appropriate courses of actions or outcomes. As such, values reflect a person’s sense of right and wrong or what “ought” to be. “Equal rights for all”, “Excellence deserves admiration”, and “People should be treated with respect and dignity” are representatives of values. Values tend to influence attitudes and behavior and these types include ethical/moral values, doctrinal/ideological(religious, political) values, social values, and aesthetic values. It is debated whether some values that are not clearly physiologically determined, such as altruism, are intrinsic, and whether some, such as acquisitiveness, should be classified as vices or virtues.” ref, ref

The Way of a Sound Thinker?

“Sound thinking to me, in a general way, is thinking, reasoning, or belief that tends to make foresight a desire to be as accurate as one can with valid and reliable reason and evidence.”

Sound axiological judgment, to me, a “presumptive-value” success, is value judged opinions expressed as facts with a valid and reliable justification. In an informal and psychological sense, it is used in reference to the quality of cognitive faculties and adjudicational (relating to adjudication) capabilities of particular individuals, typically called wisdom or discernment. In a legal sense, – used in the context of a legal trial, to refer to a final finding, statement, or ruling, based on a considered weighing of evidence, called, “adjudication“.

A shallow thinker (i.e. not a Deep Thinker, a person whose thoughts are reasoned, methodological, logical, empirical, profound; an intellectual) quickly talks, often with boastful postulations, likely just as often pushed strongly and loudly as if this adds substance, and they do this before fully understanding what’s is really involved. Whereas, a Sound Thinker is reasoned (comparative more reasoned, superlative most reasoned) generally based on reasoning; being the result of logical thought. As a first debate process, a Sound Thinker commonly poses Questions to understand slowing down and assessing all the facts or factors involved and then builds their argument or ideas. In classical logic, the law of non-contradiction (LNC) (also known as the law of contradiction, principle of non-contradiction (PNC), or the principle of contradiction) states that contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time, e.g. the two propositions “A is B” and “A is not B” are mutually exclusive. It is the second of the three classic laws of thought.

Sound Thinkers don’t value FAITH

Critical Thinking, What Does it Mean to Be Open to Learn?

A General Thinking in all My Epistemology Theorizing is Justificationism

“Damien, I am an atheist but I have faith in gravity tho, but it isn’t exactly “faith.” – Challenger

My response, “No, I don’t agree, you don’t have faith in gravity or gravitation, as it is “a fundamental force” you have proof or if lacking some direct proof would use inference and if even less evidence you use conjecture, not faith. Do you gauntly thinking you need faith in gravity because you wonder or worry that when walking down a set of stairs that you going to fall back up? You don’t need faith (strong belief without evidence) as there is massive proof, almost to the point that it is easily self-evident. You don’t need faith (strong belief without evidence) for anything, as if its warranted it will or should have evidence or it doesn’t deserve not only strong belief but any amount of belief at all as sound beliefs need something to ground their worthiness in relation to reality; the only place evidence comes.

“Gravity, or gravitation, is a natural phenomenon by which all things with mass are brought toward (or gravitate toward) one another, including planets, stars, and galaxies. Gravity is responsible for various phenomena observed on Earth and throughout the Universe; for example, it causes the Earth and the other planets to orbit the Sun, the Moon to orbit the Earth, the formation of tides, the formation and evolution of the Solar System, stars and galaxies. Since energy and mass are equivalent, all forms of energy, including light, also cause gravitation and are under the influence of it. On Earth, gravity gives weight to physical objects and causes the ocean tides. The gravitational attraction of the original gaseous matter present in the Universe caused it to begin coalescing, forming stars – and the stars to group together into galaxies – so gravity is responsible for many of the large-scale structures in the Universe.” Ref

Understanding how children use magical thinking

Sound thinking to me, in a general way, is thinking, reasoning, or belief

that tends to make foresight a desire to be as accurate as one can

with valid and reliable reason and evidence.

Dogmatic–Propaganda vs. Disciplined-Rationality

Religionists and fideists, promote Dogmatic-Propaganda whereas atheists and antireligionists mostly promote Disciplined-Rationality. Dogmatic–Propaganda commonly is a common motivator of flawed or irrational thinking but with over seventy belief biases identified in people, this is hardly limited to just the religious or faith inclined. Let me illustrate what I am saying, to me all theists are believing lies or irrationally in that aspect of their lives relating to god belief. So the fact of any other common intellectual indexers where there may be right reason in beliefs cannot remove the flawed god belief corruption being committed. What I am saying is like this if you kill one person you are a killer. If you believe in one “god” I know you are a follower of Dogmatic-Propaganda and can not completely be a follower of Disciplined-Rationality. However, I am not proclaiming all atheists are always rational as irrationally is revolving door many people believe or otherwise seem to stumble through. It’s just that god belief does this with intentionally.

Disciplined-Rationality is motivated by principles of correct reasoning with emphasis on valid and reliable methods or theories leading to a range of rational standpoints or conclusions understanding that concepts and beliefs often have consequences thus hold an imperative for truth or at least as close to truth as can be acquired rejecting untruth. Disciplined-Rationality can be seen as an aid in understanding the fundamentals for knowledge, sound evidence, justified true belief and involves things like decision theory and the concern with identifying the value(s), reasonableness, verification, certainties, uncertainties and other relevant issues resulting in the most clear optimal decision/conclusion and/or belief/disbelief. Disciplined-Rationality attempts to understand the justification or lack thereof in propositions and beliefs concerning its self with various epistemic features of belief, truth, and/or knowledge, which include the ideas of justification, warrant, rationality, reliability, validity, and probability.

ps. “Sound Thinker”, “Shallow Thinker”, “Dogmatic–Propaganda” & “Disciplined-Rationality” are concepts/terms I created*

I am an Out Atheist, Antitheist, and Antireligionist as a Valuized Ethical Duty.

How can we silently watch as yet another generation is indoctrinated with religious faith, fear, and foolishness? Religion and it’s god myths are like a spiritually transmitted disease of the mind. This infection even once cured holds mental disruption which can linger on for a lifetime. What proof is “faith,” of anything religion claims by faith, as many people have different faith even in the same religion? When you start thinking your “out, atheism, antitheism or antireligionism is not vitally needed just remember all the millions of children being indoctrinated and need our help badly and who desperately need our help with the truth. Three things are common in all religions: “pseudo-science,” “pseudo-history,” and “pseudo-morality.” And my biggest thing of all is the widespread forced indoctrination of children, violating their free choice of what to not believe or believe, I hate forced hereditary religion.

I am an axiological atheist, and to quickly understand Axiological Atheism, it is like humanistic anti-theism and anti-religionism with strong secularism. As an axiological atheist, I understand and utilize value or actually “Value Consciousness” to both give a strong moral “axiological” argument (the problem of evil) as well as use it to fortify my humanism and positive ethical persuasion of human helping and care. Value-blindness gives rise to sociopathic evil.

No God: No evidence, No intelligence, and No goodness = Valid Atheism Conclusion

No evidence, to move past the Atheistic Null Hypothesis: There is no God/Gods (in inferential statistics, a Null Hypothesis generally assumed to be true until evidence indicates otherwise. Thus, a Null Hypothesis is a statistical hypothesis that there is no significant difference reached between the claim and the non-claim, as it is relatively provable/demonstratable in reality some way. “The god question” Null Hypothesis is set at as always at the negative standard: Thus, holding that there is no God/Gods, and as god faith is an assumption of the non-evidentiary wishful thinking non-reality of “mystery thing” found in all god talk, until it is demonstratable otherwise to change. Alternative hypothesis: There is a God (offered with no proof: what is a god and how can anyone say they know), therefore, results: Insufficient evidence to overturn the null hypothesis of no God/Gods.
No intelligence, taking into account the reality of the world we do know with 99 Percent Of The Earth’s Species Are Extinct an intelligent design is ridiculous. Five Mass Extinctions Wiped out 99 Percent of Species that have ever existed on earth. Therefore like a child’s report card having an f they need to retake the class thus, profoundly unintelligent design.
No goodness, assessed through ethically challenging the good god assumptions as seen in the reality of pain and other harm of which there are many to demonstrates either a god is not sufficiently good, not real or as I would assert, god if responsible for this world, would make it a moral monster ripe for the problem of evil and suffering (Argument from Evil). God would be responsible for all pain as life could easily be less painful and yet there is mass suffering. In fact, to me, every child born with diseases from birth scream out against a caring or loving god with the power to do otherwise. It could be different as there is Congenital insensitivity to pain (CIP), also known as congenital analgesia, in which a person cannot feel (and has never felt) physical pain.[1]

And, Yes, Your Male God is Ridiculous too!!!

Let’s address a few blaring facts summed up, the oldest anthropomorphic Repersinitive art is related to female at around a range of 500,000 – 233,000 years ago and the oldest totem at around 40,000 years ago or the oldest shaman with the oldest portrait carving at around 31,000 – 20,000 years ago all are female, does this not seem odd that there is no male as god until after the beginning of full-fledged and developed paganism, a little closer to the present time, after 7,000 years ago, not an ancient truth. Sedentism and the Creation of goddesses around 12,000 years ago as well as male gods after 7,000 years ago. The Sumerian Creator Being was a Female, not Male possibly around 6,000 years ago or more. and the first monotheistic male god may have connections to Confucianism’s Tiān (Shangdi): Supernaturalism, Pantheism or Theism? So, to me, it could be that the first monotheism god was from Aisa, not the middle east possibly around 4,000 years ago? What is early monotheism, are Zoroastrianism (around 2,600 – 2,100 to possibly 4,000 years ago) and Atenism (around 2,140 years ago) totally monotheistic? and Single God Religions (Monotheism) = Man-o-theism started around 4,000 years ago? this new thrust around 4,000 years ago was a male attack on feminism and this seems referenced in Kultepe? An archaeological site with a 4,000 years old women’s rights document. Are you aware that there are religions that worship women as gods, explain now religion tears women down? (Sun and Moon Goddesses). 1 2,400 – 11,700 Years Ago – Kortik Tepe (Turkey) Pre/early-Agriculture Cultic Ritualism as well as understanding that J DNA is involved in the Spread of Agricultural Religion (paganism) at least 10,000 years ago. And to put things in context, The BIBLE: written less than 3,000 years ago, provable to 2,200 years ago. Lastly, let’s not forget Jews, Judaism, and the Origins of Some of its Ideas.and this will help too, Animistic, Totemistic, and Paganistic Superstition Origins of bible god and the bible’s Religion.

Around 500,000 – 233,000 years ago, Oldest Anthropomorphic art (Pre-animism) is Related to Female

The Berekhat Ram (anthropomorphic Repersinitive art is related to female) sculpture, has a groove around the neck and on the sides which have been shown to be deliberate modifications absent from other scoria found in the area. The archaeologist Alexander Marshak examined the pebble using an electron microscope. He concluded that it had been made, or enhanced, by hominid hand, the hominins who found and worked on their respective pieces would have been unaware of their future significance. The Venus of Berekhat Ram is a pebble found at Berekhat Ram on the Golan Heights, Israel. The base object is an anthropomorphic red tufic pebble, 35 mm (1.4 in) long, which has had at least three grooves, possibly incised on it by a sharp-edged stone. One is a deep groove that encircles the narrower, more rounded end of the pebble, two shallower, curved grooves run down the sides. These grooves can be interpreted as marking the neck and arms of a figure. Because it was found between two layers of ash, it has been dated by tephrochronology to at least 230,000 years before the present but is at a range of 500,000 – 233,000 Years Ago. Moreover, lf the artifact was intended to replicate a female figure, it would be the earliest example of representational art in the archaeological record. Rather than being made by modern humans, it would have been made by Neanderthals or perhaps by Homo erectus, hunter-gatherers and Acheulean tool users. There is some other evidence of an aesthetic sensibility during the period although compelling examples do not appear in the archaeological record until the emergence of behaviorally modern humans around 50,000 years ago. The venus of Berekhat Ram is a red stone figure with symbolic intent and possibly intended to represent an anthropomorphic female figure. The surface is a bright high red with a large hole lined with black volcanic glass is at the approximate position of a ‘navel.’ Venus figurines are often found in different elements or mediums from limestone, serpentine, ivory, clay, and bone ash and are dispersed from western Europe to Siberia. These figurines are often faceless with downturned heads, large breasts, buttocks (many-extreme fat), some possibly pregnant, several stuck into the ground, and found near cave walls or in hearths. So what are the possible explanations of Venus figurines? They could be some kind of good luck charms (evidence of polish), symbols of fertility, cult objects, art, Paleolithic porn, or representations of women by women or men (some look like modern pregnant bodies and some very skinny) but overall there may be no one reason. These figurines may have been created for several different reasons depending on time, place, and people but we just do not know. Though calling them all goddesses or venus is at least misleading if not outright uncalled for because of mythologizing motivated by current projections and this is true even if a few were seen as some kind of goddesses. However, the venus of Berekhat Ram even if just anthropomorphic art (i.e. ascribing human form or attributes to a thing not human) could be seen as possibly the earliest known archaeological manifestations of any kind of elements that later become more defined religious belief systems. This is reasonable because anthropomorphic character design in art is a symbolic use of design to portray personality and thus, natural objects resembling the human body (or parts of it) which have received minor amounts of intentional modification in order to bring out the similarity further for a desired purpose. One could possibly even surmise that for some, there may have been a character that can play a possible part in telling stories. Thus, anthropomorphic art, such as Venus figurines, may connect or be a larger growing fantasy of symbolism, superstitions, and supernaturalism thus to socio-cultural-religious transformations or evolution. Although one cannot at present rule out a purely fortuitous association with the venus of Berekhat Ram and the piece can hardly be described as artistic, the possibility remains that it can be placed in the figures category as unambiguous indicators of early symbolism, let alone ritual, and we should not write it off as casual ‘lithic art’. Instead, the appearance of precocious lithic technologies such as end-scrapers and stone chisels at Berekhat Ram, symbolism (and by extension perhaps ritual) drifted in and out of use over evolutionary time. Ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Read more in the Art of the Ice Age section: Link

40,000 years ago “first seeming use of a Totem” ancestor, animal, and possible pre-goddess worship?

40,000 – 35,000 years ago “first seeming use of a Totem” ancestor and possible pre-goddess worship? There is, to me, evidence of possible ‘ancestor and possible pre-goddess worship’ at Hohles Fels cave Site, such as a small bird figurine around 33,000 years old is one of three carvings important as well as relatable to later times, which had been cited as evidence of shamanism, the belief that spirits can be influenced by priests known as shamans. A female fertility figurine ( pre-goddess Venus of Hohle Fels), a bird in addition to bird-bone flute— from a griffon vulture wing dated to around 35,000 years ago as well as around 40,000 years old mammoth-ivory flutes and the 40,000 years old the Lion man of the Hohlenstein Stadel. as well as “first seeming use of a Totem” as the female fertility figurine may have been worn as an amulet, along with seeming ancestor, animal, and possible pre-goddess worship. (the oldest known wooden sculpture Shigir Idol “totem pole” 17 feet high and approximately 11,500 years old and the Shigir Idol’s decoration has been thought by scholars to be similar to that of the oldest known monumental stone ruins, at Gobekli Tepe in Turkey.) ref

31,000 – 20,000 years ago Oldest Shaman was Female, Buried with the Oldest Portrait Carving

31,000 – 20,000 years ago, Oldest Shaman was Female (Dolni Vestonice, Czech Republic) Buried with the Oldest Portrait Carving. Dolní Věstonice (often without diacritics as Dolni Vestonice) refers to an Upper Paleolithic archaeological site near the village of Dolní Věstonice, Moravia in the Czech Republic. The site is unique in that it has been a particularly abundant source of prehistoric artifacts (especially art) dating from the Gravettian period, which spanned roughly 27,000 to 20,000 B.C. In addition to the abundance of art, this site also includes carved representations of men, women, and animals, along with personal ornaments, human burials, and enigmatic engravings. ref One of the burials, located near the huts, revealed a human female skeleton aged to 40+ years old, was found at Dolni Vestonice in an elaborate burial setting, ritualistically placed beneath a pair of mammoth scapulae, one leaning against the other. Also found was a carved ivory figure in the shape of a female head. The left side of the figure’s face was distorted. These and other items were found with the woman seemed to have had a profound impact on the interpretation of the social hierarchy of the people at the site, as well as indicating an increased lifespan for these inhabitants. The remains were covered in red ochre, a compound known to have religious significance, indicating that this woman’s burial was ceremonial in nature. Also, the inclusion of a mammoth scapula and a fox may indicative of what could be shamanistic ritual and/or a high-status burial. Surprisingly, the left side of the skull was disfigured in the same manner as the aforementioned carved ivory figure, indicating that the figure was an intentional depiction of this specific individual. The bones and the earth surrounding the body contained traces of red ocher, a flint spearhead had been placed near the skull, and one hand holding the body of a fox. This evidence suggests that this was the burial site of a shaman. This is the oldest site not only of ceramic figurines and artistic portraiture but also of evidence of female shamans. In the Upper Paleolithic, anatomically modern humans began living longer, often reaching middle age, by today’s standards. Rachel Caspari argues in “Human Origins: the Evolution of Grandparents,” that life expectancy increased during the Upper Paleolithic in Europe (Caspari 2011). She also describes why elderly people were highly influential in society. Grandparents assisted in childcare, perpetuated cultural transmission, and contributed to the increased complexity of stone tools (Caspari 2011). The woman found at Dolni Vestonice was old enough to have been a grandparent. Although human lifespans were increasing, elderly individuals in Upper Paleolithic societies were still relatively rare. Because of this, it is possible that the woman was attributed with great importance and wisdom, and revered because of her age. Because of her advanced age, it is also possible she had a decreased ability to care for herself, instead of relying on her family group to care for her, which indicates strong social connections. Furthermore, a female figurine was found at the site and is believed to be associated with the aged woman, because of remarkably similar facial characteristics. The woman was found to have deformities on the left side of her face. The special importance accorded with her burial, in addition to her facial deformity, makes it possible that she was a shaman in this time period, where it was “not uncommon that people with disabilities, either mental or physical, are thought to have unusual supernatural powers” (Pringle 2010). In 1981, Patricia Rice studied a multitude of female clay figurines found at Dolni Vestonice, believed to represent fertility in this society. She challenged this assumption by analyzing all the figurines and found that, “it is womanhood, rather than motherhood that is symbolically recognized or honored” (Rice 1981: 402). This discovery challenged the widely held assumption that all prehistoric female figurines were created to honor fertility. The fact is that we have no idea why these figurines proliferated nor of their purpose or usage. ref

Where did the god come from? Well, to me, it likely connects to the area of the Altai Mountains, a mountain range in Central and East Asia, where Russia, China, Mongolia, and Kazakhstan the heart of ancient shamanism.

“Shamans and Symbols”

The Shaman is a kind of a priest or medium who acts as a conduit between the human world and the realm of the gods, demons, and spirits of ancestors. The experience of death and rebirth is the most important condition for obtaining the power of shamanizing: only after this experience does a shaman reach the level at which his spirit-assistant sees fit to appear to him. in Siberian and Mongolian “petroglyphic art” there are some examples to support a thesis that these anthropomorphic figures may represent shamans and, since in Siberia the local shamanic folklore was continuous, have several types of symbols referencing the sun, skeletonized humans, horned figures may represent the proto-shamans. As signs, these anthropomorphic figures may represent an important, non-ordinary member of the community.considers the question of the antiquity of shamanism in Central Asia and outlines several lines of inquiry into the issue. It analyses both linguistic and archaeological data with particular emphasis on ancient rock art. In the sphere of rock art studies, it focuses on methodological questions connected with identifying shamanism in visual arts. Historical records from different times and parts of Asia clearly show that shamanism is an archaic belief system of Asian peoples. Although shamanic beliefs and practices have been documented in different parts of Asia, many studies still consider Siberia to be the land of their most classic forms. Furthermore, there is no single word for shaman across Siberia and Central Asia. Almost every culture has its own name for this spiritual practitioner, and even in a single language group the names for shaman differ regionally. And, research concludes that most convincing traits of shamanic symbolism, which characterizes Central Asian tradition, can be deciphered in the art dated to four thousand years. ref, ref

To understand fully read thess:

Art as Evidence

Stone Shamans and Flying Deer of Northern Mongolia – Smithsonian

Mongolia’s Bronze Age deer stones are one of the most striking expressions of early monumental art in Central Asia, yet their age, origins, relationships, and meaning remain obscure. Speculation about Scythian connections has stimulated recent research in Mongolia that has begun to peel away their mysteries and reveals connections to Scytho-Siberian and northern art. Radiocarbon-dated horse skulls indicate pre-Scythian ages of “classic Mongolian” deer stones as well as firm association with the Late Bronze Age khirigsuur [kurgan] burial mound complex. – Smithsonian

A 4,000-year-old art gallery found in Siberia, of ancient images of humans, a bull, trees, and birds (could this relate to sky-burials: ‘Sky Burial’ theory and its possible origins at least 12,000 years ago to likely 30,000 years ago or older. This (Sky Burials: Animism, Totemism, Shamanism, and Paganism) I believe sky-burials also somehow relates to shaman rituals of when a would-be shaman goes into a trance in order to undergo the mystical dismemberment of his body by spirits, the loss of his flesh, and to contemplate his own skeleton., which explains the connections of tres that reach the heavens where the birds live and the birds eat the dead taking the spirits of ancestors to the heaves such as the treetops and the believed heavens above and I also think there is a connection of stars to ancestors as well possibly. There is a practice of hanging bulls from trees as well and I image the birds would eat them too and the bull’s horns have connections to beliefs of them representing the moon in the heavens or the sun represented as a believed spiritual/magical energy-spirit of the sun between the horns holding it. The Tibetan sky-burials appear to have evolved from ancient practices of defleshing corpses as discovered in archeological finds in the region. These practices most likely came out of practical considerations, but they could also be related to more ceremonial practices similar to the suspected sky burial evidence found at Göbekli Tepe (11,500 years before present) and Stonehenge (4,500 years ago). Moreover, there is a 4,000-year-old art gallery found in Siberia contained 20-plus ‘perfectly preserved’ petroglyphs in a remote spot in the Transbaikal region. Most intriguing in the newly revealed rock art is a figurine and nearby a human-like image is a circle, seemingly a sign of the sun. Scientist Sergei Alkin said: ‘We can assume that the figure with the solar sign depicts a shaman with a drum.’ 4,000 years ago (2000 BC) — we see the Seima-Turbino Phenomenon originating in the Altai Mountains leads to rapid and massive migrations westward across the Urals into north-eastern Europe and eastward into China and South-east Asia. Seima-Turbino phenomenon refers to a pattern of burial sites dating from 2100 BCE to 1900 BCE found across northern Eurasia, from Finland to Mongolia, which has suggested a common point of cultural origin, advanced metalworking technology, and unexplained rapid migration. The buried were nomadic warriors and metal-workers, travelling on horseback or two-wheeled chariots. These cultures are noted for being nomadic forest and steppe societies with metal working, sometimes without having first developed agricultural methods. The development of this metalworking ability appears to have taken place quite quickly. The Altai Mountains in what is now southern Russia and central Mongolia have been identified as the point of origin of the cultural enigma of Seima-Turbino Phenomenon. The Altai Mountains have been identified as being the point of origin of a cultural enigma termed the Seima-Turbino Phenomenon which arose during the Bronze Age around the start of the 2nd millennium BC and led to a rapid and massive migration of peoples from the region into distant parts of Europe and Asia. In regard to religion, some of the Altay remain Altai people Shamanists. The name “Altai” means “Gold Mountain” in Mongolian; “alt” (gold) and “tai” (suffix – “with”; the mountain with gold) and also in its Chinese name, derived from the Mongol name (Chinese: 金山; literally: “Gold Mountain”). In Turkic languages, altın means gold and dağ means mountain. The culture spread from these mountains to the west. Artifact types such as spearheads with hooks, single-bladed knives and socketed axes with geometric designs traveled west. Although they were the precursor to the much later Mongol invasions, these groups were not yet strong enough to attack the important social sites of the Bronze Age. It is conjectured that changes in climate in this region around 2000 BC and the ensuing ecological, economic and political changes triggered a rapid and massive migration westward into northeast Europe, eastward into China and southward into Vietnam and Thailand across a frontier of some 4,000 miles. This migration took place in just five to six generations and led to peoples from Finland in the west to Thailand in the east employing the same metalworking technology and, in some areas, horse breeding and riding. However, further excavations and research in Ban Chiang and Ban Non Wat, Thailand argue the idea that Seima-Turbino brought metal workings into southeast Asia is based on inaccurate and unreliable radiocarbon dating at the site of Ban Chiang. It is now agreed by virtually every specialist in Southeast Asian prehistory, that the Bronze Age of Southeast Asia is too late to relate to Seima-Turbino, and the cast bronzes are quite different. It is further conjectured that the same migrations spread the Uralic group of languages across Europe and Asia: some 39 languages of this group are still extant, including Hungarian, Finnish, Estonian and Sami. However, recent genetic testings of sites in south Siberia and Kazakhstan (Andronovo horizon) would rather support a spreading of the bronze technology via Indo-European migrations eastwards, as this technology was well known for quite a while in western regions. “Radiocarbon Chronology of Complexes With Seima-Turbino Type Objects (Bronze Age) in Southwestern Siberia.” The religion of altai, the main and the most ancient religion of Altai region was shamanism. The traditional religion of the native Altaians is Tengrist shamanism, revived by modern Tengrist movements and Burkhanism. First, written sources about shamanism belongs to the second half of the 6th century. The religion originated in Altai and emphasized the “white” (could this relate to snow-covered mountains in the region?) aspect of shamanistic practice. Black, White, and Yellow Shamanism? Burkhanism remains an important component of Altai national consciousness and is currently being revived in several forms along with indigenous Altai culture in general. Characteristics of shamanic drums and costumes of ancestors of modern Tuva formed in the second half of the 1st millennium. Peoples of South Siberia and Mongolia have been already used developed shamanic cults with a characteristic feature as a priest chosen to communicate with spirits, using a tambourine during the ritual, falling into trance and traveling to the spirit world. Archaeological materials of Bronze Age, monumental sculptures, rock paintings show the complexity of the religious beliefs of tribes inhabiting the territory of the Altai Mountains (3 millennium BC. – 9 century BC.). They allow to see elements of Indo-European mythological tradition, images of shamans and spirits of patrons. Iconography images associated as with unique images related with early Buddhist subjects, so with Tibetan Buddhism, which originated on the basis of pre-Buddhist religion of Tibet Bon, also known as yundrun Coupons – “tradition of eternal wisdom”. The outlook of tribes inhabiting Altai represented a synthesis of several religious courses, which was reflected in funeral ceremony and arts in the Scythian period (8-2 centuries BC). Scythian culture mixed shaman, Zoroastrian and Buddhist ideas. Symbiosis of Indo-European and shamanic burial vividly presented at the funeral ceremony in Altai Pazyryk barrows (Tuekta, Bashadar, Pazyryk). Despite high degree of religious beliefs of that period, the tribes have preserved the cult of fire, sun, ancestors, as well as elements of magic and witchcraft. Archaeologists have found strands of human hair sewn into skin, nails and various charms in Pazyryk burial mounds. Archaeological evidence confirms the presence of special techniques of ecstasy, ritual fumigation and using of ritual drink “catfish” in the religious practices. Huns had extensive political and economic relations with countries which had a Buddhism as a main religion since 2 in. BC. Chinese source “Wei Shu” (506-572 AD.) mentioned that the Huns had worshiped to Buddhist statue of the great deity and smoked incense in 121 BC. But it is difficult to prevent widespread Buddhism among Huns because of lack of other historical documents. Altai tribes were descendants of ancient tribes and other great cultures at various times. They interacted with the Buddhist world: ancient Turkic period, western Mongols (Oirat), then a period of gradual strengthening of Buddhism in North-Western Mongolia and formation of Burkhanism. The indigenous Altai culture holds the lands of Altai to be sacred. The indigenous (Turkic) languages are focused on the stewardship of the lands. The Altai oral history is transmitted by throat-singers. Altai shamanism representation about “a double” is the dominant concept which explains the mechanism of the main religious ritual practice a Kam. Representation about individual double reflects the faith of cycle of human existence. Every human life begins in the heavenly area of the universe, yet it has not an anthropomorphic shape, then it is sent to the Earth in physical form. For example, in the form of a shooting star or a ray of sunlight. These embryos are falling through the smoke hole in the center of yurt, and then fall to a woman. So the fetal period of human life begins. It is concerned with a female deity called Umai. “A double” has the ability to separate from the body into a form of small lights and to travel to different places and back to the body during sleep. A man should behave especially cautious in mountains. He should be wary of a double output during sleep. If a person has a guilt, then the spirit of the mountains or taiga can catch and leave his double. This often happens. Only shaman can return a double. Shaman continues to possess special properties even after death of his double. Ordinary people double backs to the deity. A Kam double remains on the Earth. He lives in the mountains or taiga, and he is not associated with the burial place of the shaman. The Double determines the fate of the new Kama among any of his descendants. The double will serve as one of his hereditary patrons. Another important provision of Altai Shamanism in additional to «a double concept” is faith in spirits of shaman, composing its sacred magical power. This position keeps religious practice, the entire cult of shamanism. Shamans know that nobody can be a kam without kam-intermediary spirits. Nobody dares to go to such a dangerous journey as a kam is without the support of spirits. All religious activities that make by a shaman, and achieved results are carried out with the help of the spirits, which called him at the beginning of each ritual. Every shaman has his own spirits. Spirits are divided into groups called «strata”. The first group included Protector Spirits, the second group is helper spirits. Patrons are spirits of high rank such are the God of fire, the Gods of sacred mountains etc. Helpers perform two groups. The first called “Tos”, uniting shaman ancestors being kams during its life. The second group included ministering spirits, called during ritual by tambourine blowing. These spirits attend a shaman during his travels to one or another sphere of the Universe. Tambourine ministering spirits called as “chalular” consist the real strength of a shaman. Shaman appreciates and seeks to increase these spirits, convokes ancestors of shamans. Personal spirits of shaman determine its religious and magical power. The deity of fire differs among patron spirits. It is called Ot-Ana — mother fire in Altai. This deity has entered the pantheon of Altai shamanism heritage from ancient times. Altai kama begins kam ritual celebrating, treating and turning to Ot-Ana calling. Shamans ask Ana to give companions for upcoming travels and always receive the assistance. Spirits of sacred mountains are also high patrons of shaman. They give a tambourines for special prayer rituals to shamans. Shamans treated spirits of sacred mountains with different requests of welfare for family, for Ulus and people. A Kama receives shamanic mission, shamanic inherited gift from spirits of shaman ancestors. If the Altai shows the signs of a shaman, so it is said: “Tosi (ancestors spirit) comes». Cult of ancestor shaman provides continuity of shamanism and explains the mechanism of occurrence and formation of shamans. Tambourine and shaman ritual vestments are sacred objects of worship since it serves as a refuge for spirit helpers. When the shaman strikes tambourine, spirits rush towards him. Some of them place in the drum, the other place on the ritual vestments. Others, the most important, move into shaman himself, who gathers them by a deep breath. Tambourine connected with not only ritual activities but also with shaman life. If tambourine skin breaks or blood appears during the ritual, it means spirits came to punish the shaman and he dies soon. Tambourine is the main ceremonial instrument which given as a certificate for ritual from the supreme deity. Having made a tambourine, shaman shows it to deity. The ceremony of manufacturing and reviving tambourine continues for several days with a large crowd. After the ritual shaman goes to the spirit of the sacred mountain and there, showing the drum, gets permission to kam until he will make next tambourine. After the ceremony shaman kams alone. He hides a chula (a double of animal from which tambourine was made) from other shamans and hostile forces. If the drum is made of deerskin, so shaman hides it in taiga, if it is made of horse skin, so he hides in a tree hollow. A kam calls on spirits beating a drum at night to consult with them, to find out their wishes. Shaman makes spirits to watch the book “Sabyr Bichik.” Which help to find things that do not require a large ritual, for example, any prediction. Ritual vestments are necessary to communicate with the spirits. Production is carried out by instructions of the spirits-protectors. Vestments have a complex appearance. It includes braids, hundreds of different pendants, small chunks of tissue, ribbons, fringe, animal skins and their parts (claws, feathers, beaks, wings); rag anthropomorphic images of snakes, monsters. Suit serves as a refuge for shaman spirits which protect a kam during the ritual. Making shaman costume is collective women engagement. It takes place at the specific time and is accompanied by a special ceremony. This ceremony is held with large crowd and is used to remove filth from vestments, which can be left after a touch of the hands of bad people. But the main aim of the ceremony is to determine the suitability of the suit. A kam ritual differs by acting, songs, Gods which summoned by a shaman. Every shaman has his god and kams to it him. Only Ulgen and Erlik gods are common to all Altaian. The ritual has to express the journey of a shaman and his retinue of spirits to the distant abode of the deity. If a deity lives in heaven, for example, Ulgen, the mystery of Kam should clearly describe the journey to heaven, and shaman has to move from one sky to another until he reaches the last sky. If deity lives underground, such as Erlik, the mystery shows how the shaman descends to the underworld. Idolatry of Altai peoples came to symbolic representation of a good and an evil. Horses, bulls, and sheep sacrificed to gods, barbarously slayed dissecting animal chest and squeezing the heart by hands to stop beating. However, all this comes with extraordinary rapidity, the animal dies instantly. Then the victim will be roasted and eaten. Primitive representations of deity forces shamans to look at the sacrifices as a contract binding both parties by mutual obligations. The UNESCO World Heritage Site “Golden Mountains” protects the Ukok Plateau, on which there are many standing stones and kurgans. Although archaeologists consider kurgans to be burial sites, the indigenous people believe that they are highly refined magnetic instruments for directing the flow of cosmic energy into the Earth. Thus, there is great local indignation about the excavation and removal of the Siberian Ice Maiden, an extraordinary 2,500-year-old mummy that had been preserved in permafrost. The mummified remains of the “Ice Maiden,” a Scytho-Siberian woman who lived on the Eurasian Steppes in the 5th century BC, were found undisturbed in a subterranean burial chamber. ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

I am an Axiological (Theoretical and Normative VALUE Theorist philosopher) Atheist

Axiology and Value Theory?

“Value theory is a range of approaches to understanding how, why, and to what degree persons value things; whether the object or subject of valuing is a person, idea, object, or anything else. This investigation began in ancient philosophy, where it is called axiology or ethics.”– Wikipedia

“The term “Value Theory” is used in at least three different ways in philosophy. In its broadest sense, “value theory” is a catch-all label used to encompass all branches of moral philosophy, social and political philosophy, aesthetics, and sometimes feminist philosophy and the philosophy of religion — whatever areas of philosophy are deemed to encompass some “evaluative” aspect. In its narrowest sense, “value theory” is used for a relatively narrow area of normative ethical theory particularly, but not exclusively, of concern to consequentialists. In this narrow sense, “value theory” is roughly synonymous with “axiology”. Axiology can be thought of as primarily concerned with classifying what things are good, and how good they are. For instance, a traditional question of axiology concerns whether the objects of value are subjective psychological states or objective states of the world. But in a more useful sense, “value theory” designates the area of moral philosophy that is concerned with theoretical questions about value and goodness of all varieties — the theory of value. The theory of value, so construed, encompasses axiology, but also includes many other questions about the nature of value and its relation to other moral categories. The division of moral theory into the theory of value, as contrasting with other areas of investigation, cross-cuts the traditional classification of moral theory into normative and metaethical inquiry, but is a worthy distinction in its own right; theoretical questions about value constitute a core domain of interest in moral theory, often cross the boundaries between the normative and the metaethical, and have a distinguished history of investigation.” – (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Axiological atheism can be thought to involve ethical/value theory reasoned and moral argument driven apatheism, ignosticism, atheism, anti-theism, anti-religionism, secularism, and humanism. The valuations move up the latter as the levels of evaluation is made to value judge all the elements to better understand the value or disvalue available to reach the most accurate valuation reasonable with a sound aware value conciseness. Axiological atheism can be thought to involve Ethical Atheism.

Below shows the 7 axiological atheism argument flow to show the value layers and my thoughts on it:

1. Apatheism: we are born and by the fact reality is devoid of magic removes theological desires to understand the obvious naturalistic world, until we learn otherwise. (a “presumptive-value” failure, thus no motivation to adequately start the evaluation needed to understand if there is real value for an Axiology assessment to accurately place it in the value hierarchy). = no value

2. Ignosticism: Sees theological arguments and language as equivocation, contradictory, and/or un-cognitively relatable other than emotionalism or the like. I see Ignosticism as using the Theological non-cognitivism arguments of “mind understanding issues” (rationalism challenging) and an evidentialist/verificationist arguments of “lacking evidence issues” (empiricism challenging). As an atheist, I am a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of god or gods. In my non-belief, I am also ignostic feeling that every theological position assumes too much about the concept of god(s). As an ignostic, I am a person who rational no idea of anything from reality whatever to label as “a concept of god” thus I can say I have no idea of anything that can connect to the term god and no reason to think anyone else can either. (again a “presumptive-value” failure, no good Ontology of the thing for Identifying values that could influence belief but without what is needed to understand if there is real value for an axiology assessment to accurately place it in the value hierarchy). = no value

3. Atheism: How can we not reject the concept of gods, aka: supposed supreme magical beings, when not even some simple magic is supported in reality. So how then is it not even more ridiculous to claim some supreme magic aka: gods which are even further from reality. May I remind you that faith in the acquisition of knowledge is not a valid method worth believing in. Because, what proof is “faith”, of anything religion claims by faith, as many people have different faith even in the same religion? As an atheist, I am a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of god or gods. In my non-belief, I am also ignostic feeling that every theological position assumes too much about the concept of god(s). As an ignostic, I am a person who rational no idea of anything from reality whatever to label as “a concept of god” thus I can say I have no idea of anything that can connect to the term god and no reason to think anyone else can either. Atheists talk about gods and religions for the same reason doctors talk about cancer, they are looking for a cure or a firefighter talking about fires because they burn people and they care to stop them. We atheists too often feel a need to help the victim’s of mental slavery, held in the bondage that is the false beliefs of gods and the conspiracy theories of reality found in religions. If you think you believe in a god, “what do you mean by god,” saying a name tells me not one thing about the thing I am asking to know “its” beingness / thingness / attributes / qualities. Thus, what is the thing “god” to which you are talking about and I want you to explain its beingness /thingness / attributes/ qualities? Religious/theistic people with supernatural beliefs often seem as though they haven’t thought much about and that is something we can help using ontology questions about the beingness / thingness / attributes/ qualities they are trying to refer too. What do you mean by god, when you use the term god? And, I am not asking you for the name you attach to the thing you label as a god. I don’t need to know what the god you believe is known “by.” I am asking, what is the thing you are naming as a god and what that thing is, its qualities in every detail like all things have if they are real. Are you just making stuff up or guessing/hoping or just promoting unjustified ideas you want to believe, what is a god? As an atheist, I feel more wonder than I did as a theist because I thought, “big deal” to any wonder I experienced, thinking god could do anything. So with such an unrealistic mindset, everything lost its wonder but it’s the opposite as an atheist. As a theist, the world was full of superstitions and supernatural magic possibilities and thus utilized thinking that was not in the real world. As an atheist all I have now is the real world, not that all atheists seem to get this, we all are in a real world devoid of magic anything, therefore, everything adds to my feeling of awe. There should be little debate with atheist acknowledging discernable reality compared to theists with non-reality claims. Yes, I have way more awe and wonder as an atheist than I ever had as a theist because as a theist anything was possible with god. Therefore, as a theist things where not that amazing. However, as an atheist grasping what an absolute accidental or how random things are, with a 95 to 99 % of all life ever existing on this planet went extinct. I am thoroughly amazed we are even here the evolved children of ancient exploded stars, likely born in galaxies born in super-massive black holes, it’s all amazing. There is no evidence for Gods. But is their proposition outside of reason? As always start in reality from the evidence we do know, such as never in the history of scientific research or investigation has any supernatural claims shown to be true. So it is completely outside of possibility and is utterly ridiculous. Therefore, belief should be rejected as there are no warrants at all and it is axiologically unworthy to such a preponderance to demand disbelief. (yet again a “presumptive value” failure, no good Ontology of the thing not the cognitively meaningful claims relatable to reality that must be attached to all magic and gods claims for Identifying values that could influence belief but without what is needed to understand if there is real value for an axiology assessment to accurately place it in the value hierarchy).

4. Antitheism: Anti-theism requires more than either merely disbelieving in gods or even denying the existence of gods. Anti-theism requires a couple of specific and additional beliefs: first, that theism is harmful to the believer, harmful to society, harmful to politics, harmful, to culture, etc.; second, that theism can and should be countered in order to reduce the harm it causes. If a person believes these things, then they will likely be an anti-theist who works against theism by arguing that it be abandoned, promoting alternatives, or perhaps even supporting measures to suppress it. It’s worth noting here that, however, unlikely it may be in practice, it’s possible in theory for a theist to be an anti-theist. This may sound bizarre at first, but remember that some people have argued in favor of promoting false beliefs if they are socially useful. To me, I think many may have a misconception of the term. Atheism and anti-theism so often occur together at the same time and in the same person that it’s understandable if many individuals fail to realize that they aren’t the same. Making a note of the difference is important, however, because not every atheist is anti-theistic and even those who are, aren’t anti-theistic all the time. Atheism is simply the absence of belief in gods; anti-theism is a conscious and deliberate opposition to theism. Many atheists are also anti-theists, but not all and not always. To me as an antitheist, I see the concept of gods antihumanistic and wholly harmful to a free humanity and if the so-called gods somehow do end up being real that I will switch to direct opposition as I would any tyrant oppressing humanity. Antitheism (sometimes anti-theism) is a term used to describe an opposition to theism. The term has had a range of applications and definitions. In secular contexts, it typically refers to direct opposition to the validity of theism, but not necessarily to the existence of a deity. As an anti-theist, I am a person who is active in opposition to theism: both the concepts of god(s) as well as the religions that support them. This is because theistic concepts and theistic religions are harmful and that even if theistic beliefs were true, they would be undesirable. (And, again a “presumptive value” failure, of the other value challenges of the lesser evaluations and value judgments addressed in the apatheism, ignosticism, atheism value judgment conclusion and an Axiological Atheism assessment of the god concept that must be attached to all magic and gods claims Identifying a lack of value and/or disvalue that influence harm to real value in an axiology assessment to accurately place its value violations in the value hierarchy).

5. Antireligionism: Not just Atheist, axiological atheists should be antitheists but this generally will involve anti-religionism. it would generally thus hold anti-religionist thinking. Especially, I am an anti-religionist, not just an atheist, and here is why summed up in three ideas I am against. And, in which these three things are common in all religions: “pseudo-science”, “pseudo-history”, and “pseudo-morality”. And my biggest thing of all is the widespread forced indoctrination of children, violating their free choice of what to not believe or believe, I hate forced hereditary religion. And my biggest thing of all is the widespread forced indoctrination of children, violating their free choice of what to not believe or believe, I hate forced hereditary religion. As well as wish to offer strong critiques regarding the pseudo-meaning of the “three letter noise” people call “G.o.d” (group originated delusion)! As an anti-religionist, I am a person who can look at religion on the whole and see it is detrimental to the progress of humanity thus am in opposition to all and every religion, not even just opposition to organized religion. In case you were wondering, I am anti-pseudoscience, anti-supernatural, and anti-superstition as well. May I not be a silent watcher as millions of children are subjugated almost before their birth let alone when they can understand thought and are forcibly coerced, compelled, constrained, and indoctrinated in the mental pollution that religion can be. My main goal against religion is to fully stop as much as possible forced indoctrination, one could ask but then why do I challenge all adults faith? well, who do you think is doing the lying to children in the first place. End Hereditary religion, if its a belief let them the equal right to choose to believe. “Religion is an Evolved Product” and Yes, Religion is Like Fear Given Wings… (And, one last time a “presumptive value” failure, of the other value challenges of the lesser evaluations and value judgments addressed in the apatheism, ignosticism, atheism value judgment conclusion and an Axiological Atheism assessment of the god concept and anti-theism assessment of the god show not just a lack of value but a possibly or likely harm demonstrating bot just a lack of value but a real disvalue and that includes the religions potentially removing value in an axiology assessment to accurately place it in the value hierarchy).

6. Secularism: is the only honorable way to value the dignity of others. If it was not true that there is a large unequal distribution of religion contributing to violence then there would be equal religion and atheist secularism violence. You do not see atheists bombing agnostics the very idea is laughable however even different branches of the same religion do will and have killed one another. So, violence not who we are it’s something we need to be compelled to do. Therefore, please support secularism. We are all one connected human family, proven by DNA showing we should treat each other as fellow dignity beings, supported equally (no gods and no masters). States may often have powers, but only citizens have the glue of morality we call rights. And, as they say, in my “dream society”, lots of things are free (aka. planting free food everywhere, free to everyone); but I wonder what you mean when people say you can’t just let things be free, I think, yeah, how can I take free stuff from a free earth. If one observes the virtues of (T. R. U. E. “The Rational Universal Ethics” or “The Responsible Universal Ethics”) that connect to all things as that of the connectedness equality like those which mirror the rays of the sun, fall down equally with a blind but fair indifference. (what is being expressed is that this sun shining will not favor one over another, no, the same upon everyone offering its light to all plant, animal, human, women, men, single or married, homosexual, bisexual, heterosexual, nonreligious, religious, people of means and those without, able-bodied and those which special needs, people of color, and those who are not, those with access to resources and those which out, young and elderly, etc.) All who wish to follow T. R. U. E. thus embodying a universalize equalitarian standard of ethics should strive to be like a ray of connected light to the world, shining equally and freedom to all of the world. By such efforts a nonbiased unitive ethical approach is possible, one would have an increase in positive feelings to help others understanding equalitarian connectedness. If you don’t think different you will not behave differently, if you have never lived differently it is hard to see things differently and if you do not strive to understand difference one is thus unknowingly or not bound by limited encapsulation. I am for a Free Secular Society. I am not for oppression or abuse of religious believer and want a free secular society with both freedoms of religion and freedom from religion. Even though I wish the end of faith and believing in myths and superstition, I wish this by means of informing the willing and not force of the unwilling. I will openly challenge and rebuff religious falsehoods and misunderstanding as well as rebuke and ridicule harmful or unethical religious ideology or behavior.

7. Humanism: is the philosophic thinking that humans can solve human problems by human means, without feeling a need to appeal to the likes of holy books, mystical anything, nor the belief in gods or religions. But, instead, aspires to a true belief in humanity, viewing it with a persuasion of equality. This caring realist thinking found in humanism utilizes an unstated assumption or aspiration, to do no harm as much as possible and to do good whenever one can. Moreover, we are all one connected human family, proven by DNA showing we should treat each other as fellow dignity beings, supported equally. And, no one really owns the earth, we may make claims to it even draw lines on maps thinking this makes the fantasy borders, illusion supported by force and the potential for threat. Thus the ethical truth is we need to share the earth as communally as possible. And use the resources as safe and ethically as possible striving towards sharing and caring. (do no Harm and do good = Humanism). My core definition of humanism is that humans can solve human problems by human means. I am not saying other things can’t or shouldn’t be added to it but to me, a definition of humanism must always contain something coherent to such a thinking or not contradict such as I have offered. Thus, why it is appropriate to say “good without god” when one is a humanist.

I argue for Atheism on scientific, archaeologically/anthropologically, philosophical, social/humanitarianism and prehistorical/historical grounds.

Archaeological, Scientific, & Philosophic grounds: Link

Prehistorical/historical grounds: Link

Social/humanitarianism grounds: Link

Without God, there would be no science? Think again!!!

Divine fallacy (Argument from incredulity) – arguing that, because something is so incredible or amazing, it must be the result of superior, divine, alien or paranormal agency. Your logical fallacy is personal incredulity

“In reasoning to argue a claim, a fallacy is reasoning that is evaluated as logically incorrect and that undermines the logical validity of the argument and permits its recognition as unsound. Regardless of their soundness, all registers and manners of speech can demonstrate fallacies. Faulty inferences in deductive reasoning are common formal or logical fallacies. As the nature of inductive reasoning is based on probability, a fallacious inductive argument or one that is potentially misleading, is often classified as “weak”. The conscious or habitual use of fallacies as rhetorical devices are prevalent in the desire to persuade when the focus is more on communication and eliciting common agreement rather than the correctness of the reasoning. The effective use of a fallacy by an orator may be considered clever but by the same token the reasoning of that orator should be recognized as unsound, and thus the orator’s claim, supported by an unsound argument, will be regarded as unfounded and dismissed.” ref

Divine fallacy (argument from incredulity) – The Skeptic’s Dictionary

Here is a List of fallacies

Truth Navigation: Techniques for Discussions or Debates

Truth Navigation and the fallacy of Fideism “faith-ism”

“If not for God, there would be no science. Do you understand logic or just number logic? Either way. If not for God you wouldn’t be here period to learn either.” – Challenger

My response, What is a god? How do you know what god could be, accurately? What makes you think that the something you want to claim as god is limited to just your claim of god?

“Damien Marie AtHope I love science, so don’t get me fucked up please. I also believe in God. I have seen miracles that science cannot explain.. I have questioned God hated God and volunteered to burn in hell. You don’t know me. I like your fb page regardless of your closed mind.” – Challenger

My response, Ok, so you don’t have an answer?

The Earth about 4.54 billion years old to Humans at least 200,000 years ago or more.

While the earth is about 4.54 billion years old and the first life dates to at least 3.5 billion years ago, the first primates did not appear until around 50-55 million years ago. But by 50 million years ago, dinosaurs were extinct from the Earth. Continental fragments collided, pushing up mountain ranges still existing today. The collision of Africa into Europe gave rise to the Alps in Europe, and the collision of India into Asia formed the Himalaya. Birds and mammals began to expand in number and diversity. Genetic studies show that primates diverged from other mammals about 85 million years ago, in the Late Cretaceous period, and the earliest fossils appear in the Paleocene, around 55 million years ago. Within the Hominoidea (apes) superfamily, the Hominidae family diverged from the Hylobatidae (gibbon) family some 15–20 million years ago; African great apes (subfamily Homininae) diverged from orangutans (Ponginae) about 14 million years ago; the Hominini tribe (humans, Australopithecines and other extinct biped genera, and chimpanzee) parted from the Gorillini tribe (gorillas) between 9 million years ago and 8 million years ago; and, in turn, the subtribes Hominina (humans and biped ancestors) and Panina (chimps) separated about 7.5 million years ago to 5.6 million years ago and humans are around 200,000 years ago. ref, ref, ref

If you are a religious believer, may I remind you that faith in the acquisition of knowledge is not a valid method worth believing in. Because, what proof is “faith”, of anything religion claims by faith, as many people have different faith even in the same religion?

Who determines what’s reasonable?

“Damien, who determines what’s reasonable? You? I guess that makes you Super special.” – Challenger

My response, “facts determine what’s reasonable you have none thus its unreasonable. Here is a simple definition of unreasonable ray, exceeding the bounds of reason, not conformable to reason, and not governed by or acting according to reason. Reason just to be clear is the capacity for consciously making sense of things, applying logic, establishing and verifying facts, and changing or justifying practices and beliefs based on new or existing proven information. Facts should lead your beliefs not your beliefs leading your facts.”

Science Facts Should Make Religious Belief Impossible

Epistemically Rational with Beliefs?

No longer an Unthoughtful Afterworldsman

“Damien, why is atheism a life freeing revelation as you state?” – Questioner

My responce, “no more sin, and a new connectedness to this world and all people as I was no longer an unthoughtful afterworldsman. Science is the thing people do when they require evidence. Whereas faith is the thing people do when they do not require evidence. To me religions are conspiracy theories of reality, that we once were not sure about but now know are just make-believe.”

Here is why “Reason is my only master”

The most Base Presupposition begins in reason. Reason is needed for logic (logic is realized by the aid of reason enriching its axioms). Logic is needed for axiology/value theory (axiology is realized by the aid of logic). Axiology is needed for epistemology (epistemology is realized by aid of axiology value judge and enrich its value assumptions as valid or not). Epistemology is needed for a good ontology (ontology is realized by the aid of epistemology justified assumptions/realizations/conclusions). Then when one possesses a good ontology (fortified with valid and reliable reason and evidence) they can then say they know the ontology of that thing. Thinking is good and one claiming otherwise is indeed a person erroring in reason. Which may I remind you is terrible since the most Base Presupposition in our understanding of everything begins in reason.

So, I think, right thinking is reason. Right reason is logic. Right logic, can be used for mathematics and from there we can get to science. And, by this methodological approach, we get one of the best ways of knowing the scientific method. Activating experience/event occurs, eliciting our feelings/scenes. Then naive thoughts occur, eliciting emotions as a response. Then it is our emotional intelligence over emotional hijacking, which entrance us but are unavoidable and that it is the navigating this successfully in a methodological way we call critical thinking or as In just call right thinking. So, to me, could be termed “Right” thinking, that is referring to a kind of methodological thinking. Reason is at the base of everything and it builds up from pragmatic approaches. And, to me, there are three main approaches to truth (ontology of truth) from the very subjective (Pragmatic theory of truth), to subjective (Coherence theory of truth), then onto objective (Correspondence theory of truth) but remember that this process as limited as it can be, is the best we have and we build one truth on top another like blocks to a wall of truth.

In a general way, all reality, in a philosophic sense, is an emergent property of reason, and knowing how reason accrues does not remove its warrant. Feelings are experienced then perceived, leading to thinking, right thinking is reason, right reason is logic, right logic is mathematics, right mathematics is physics and from there all science.

Science is quite the opposite of just common sense. To me, common sense is experience related interpretation, relatively, as it generally relates to the reality of things in the world, which involves “naive realism” as well as possible psychological certainty and low epistemic certainty. Whereas, most of those who are scientific thinkers, hold typically more to scientific realism or other stances far removed from the limited common sense of naive realism. Science is a multidisciplinary methodological quest for truth. Science understands what is, while religion is wishing on what is not. Scientific realism sees external reality as described by science is what is REAL and thus TRUE with the highest epistemic certainty regardless of possible psychological certainty. Facts are labels, just like truth, that we put on claims we think are proven somehow, in that assertions are believed to match the state of affairs (if you are making realistic assumptions from science then likely supported by the beliefs in science realism), that generally promote the Correspondence theory of truth “similar to both Rationalism and Empiricism” or coherence theory of truth “similar to just Rationalism” its all still epistemic property of beliefs, whether one’s claim is of knowledge or certainty.

Getting Real with Logic

Logic is the result of rationalism, as what do you think gets you to logic if not starting at reason? I want to hear your justification for your claims, all the presuppositions you are evading to explain the links in your claims of truth. As it is invalid to just claim this without a justification for your professed claims and the presupposing you do to get there, that is not trying to use rationalism to refuse rationalist thinking. How are you making the statement and not appearing to what is the rationale behind it? If not, you must want to think “Logic is self-generating as valid” and this understood value is to you not reducible to reason? You are devoid of an offer of your burden of proof, first just try to keep up with the thinker’s responsibility to provide more than unjustified claims. Logic is derived by axioms and thus using rationalism to validate them, think otherwise provide your proof. My Rationalism: is two things externalistic “scientific rationalism” a belief or theory that opinions and actions should be based on reason and knowledge rather than on religious belief or emotional response. And internalistic “philosophic rationalism” the theory that reason is the most base presupposition before all others, rather than simply trying to rely on experience is the foundation of certainty in knowledge. Activating experience occurs we then have thinking, right (methodological) thinking (critical thinking) is reason, right reason is logic, right logic can be used for math, right math in response to the natural world is physics, and from there all other Sciences, physics is the foundation for chemistry and chemistry is the foundation of biology. May reason be your only master and may you also master reason.

A basic outline of scientific epistemology: Science: Hypotheses (Rationalism/Deductive, Inductive, or Abductive Reasoning etc.) + Testing (Empiricism/Systematic Observation) – Checking for errors (Skepticism/Fallibilism) + Interpret/Draw a Conclusion (Rationalism/Deductive, Inductive, or Abductive Reasoning etc.) *if valid* = Scientific Laws (describes observed phenomena) or Scientific Theory (substantiated and repeatedly tested explanation of phenomena) = Justified True Belief = Scientific Knowledge = Epistemic Certainty supportive of correctability *being epistemically certain, is believing a truth has the highest epistemic status, often with warranted psychological certainty but it may not, neither is it a requirement*

“Damien, I have a question: Who/what gives humans value?”

My response, We give value, as value is an awareness and judgment, it is an emergent property of validation; the ability to use critical thinking and logic in a useful way, to conclude worth, benefit, or good.

Where would we be without religion?

“Damien, where would we be without religion?” – Questioner

My response, “well, we would be free from the biggest supporters of pseudoscience, pseudohistory, and pseudomorality. Thus, humanity could move on as one, because nothing separates humanity as religion, for at its core it is just fear and tribalism.”

I can’t stand when people try to say that atheism and religion use faith.

We atheists, have archaeology that proves religion is a lie, so no faith is needed. Moreover, We atheists, have science which shows that every mystery has ever turned out to be nature and not magic. There is nothing that the only explanation is magic or supernatural anything, so for religion it has no evidence at all. All religion has is faith without any proof and do not try to say that atheism is anything like that. I proudly reject gods and religions. It should be understood, that religion as well as its love of gods, must be seem for what they are, which beyond their pomp and circumstance are exposed as little more than indoctrinated cultural products, the conspiracy theories of reality no one should believe today in our world of science. Simply, religion and its gods are the leftovers of an ignorant age trying to explain and control a fearful world which seems now favored by the uninformed, misinformed, emotional/physical/social support seekers and conmen.

Hell yes, I am against the fraud that is the world religions.

Why not be against the promotion of woo-woo pseudo-truth, when I am very against all pseudo-science, pseudo-history, and pseudo-morality and the harm they can produce. Along with the hate, such as sexism and homophobia are too often seen or the forced indoctrination of children. And this coercive indoctrination of the world religions, with their pseudo-science, pseudo-history, and pseudo-morality mainly furthered by forced Hereditary Religion (family or cultural, religious beliefs forced on children because the parent or caregiver believes that way). This is sadly done, even before a child can be expected to successfully navigate reason; it’s almost as if religious parents believe their “woo-woo pseudo-truth” lies will not be so easily accepted if they wait on a mind that can make its own choice. Because we do see how hard it is for the ones forced into Hereditary Religion. It seems difficult for them to successfully navigate reason in relation to their woo-woo pseudo-truth, found in a religion they were indoctrinationally taught to prefer, because after being instructed on how to discern pseudo-truth as truth than just wishing that their blind servitude belief in a brand of religious pseudo-truth devoid of justified, valid or reliable reason and evidence. I care because I am a rationalist, as well as an atheist.

Thus, this religious set of “woo-woo pseudo-truth” pushed on the simple-minded as truth bothers me greatly. So, here it is as simple as I can make it you first need a good thinking standard to address beliefs one may approach as a possible belief warranted to be believed. I wish to smash that lying pig of religion with the Hammer of Truth: Ontology, Epistemology, and Axiology Questions (a methodological use of philosophy). Overall, I wish to promote in my self and for others; to value a worthy belief etiquette, one that desires a sound accuracy and correspondence to the truth: Reasoned belief acquisitions, good belief maintenance, and honest belief relinquishment. May we all be authenticly truthful rationalists that put facts over faith.

I have made many mistakes in my life but the most common one of all is my being resistant to change. However, now I wish to be more, to be better, as I desire my openness to change if needed, not letting uncomfortable change hold me back. May I be a rationalist, holding fast to a valued belief etiquette: demanding reasoned belief acquisitions, good belief maintenance, and honest belief relinquishment.

The Harm of Conspiracies

It saddens me when proponents of atheism also seem to be proponents of anti-intellectualism either in rejecting philosophy or science. I am against all pseudoscience, pseudohistory and pseudomorality and the harm they can produce. We, myself included enjoy some partisan hummer (I am a Leftist) but we must always be careful with not to make it some internal motivation to unjustifiably villainize a person or people. It is ethical to point out harm, it is not ok to become an alternative unjustified harm as we don’t want to welcome “The Harm of Conspiracies” with pseudoscience, pseudohistory and pseudomorality. And, if you are a religious believer, may I remind you that faith in the acquisition of knowledge is not a valid method worth believing in. Because, what proof is “faith”, of anything religion claims by faith, as many people have different faith even in the same religion?

Here are the five dangerous conspiracy theories of 2016 By JOSEPH USCINSKI though I reworked them. Ref

Mexicans and refugees are murderers, rapists and terrorists

(Danger: Jingoism Extreme nationalism/Mass paranoia, Violence, Racism/Ethnocentrism/Xenophobia)

“There’s something going on”

Danger: Jingoism (Extreme nationalism)/Mass paranoia, Violence, Racism/Ethnocentrism/Xenophobia)

“government is ridged against republicans”

Everything is “rigged”

Danger: Disenfranchisement and alienation/ Jingoism/Mass paranoia, Violence, Racism/Ethnocentrism/Xenophobia)

There is a Vast right/left-wing conspiracy

Danger: Lack of accountability/Mass paranoia, Violence)

Ok, I am a kind of “Militant” Atheist

I want a war of ideas where the loser is ignorance or hate and the victor is kindness and a rational mind. Not another religious war with people where the loser is always humanity no matter the victor. What I hope for with my discussions or expressed ideas is not so much to strive to change people’s mind. But instead, I wish to inspire your mind to reason and to thrive on the search for valid and reliable evidence as well as a high standard n your ethics of belief. This ethics of belief I hope everyone adopts is something like this: reasoned belief acquisitions, good belief maintenance, and honest belief relinquishment. Sadly the professed thing of hope, “Religion” can be an and too often is an easy excuse to do horrible things, which is clear throughout history.

Quit Trying to Invent Your “God of the gaps,” From the Scraps of Science.

And, Yes, Your Male God is Ridiculous too!!!

Truth Navigation and the fallacy of Fideism “faith-ism”

Why not Find Out if what you believe is True?

The Atheist-Humanist-Leftist Revolutionaries Shows in the prehistory series:

Damien Marie AtHope (Said as “At” “Hope”)/(Autodidact Polymath but not good at math):

Recent Posts

Archives

Categories

Pages

Meta

Advertisement

Pin It on Pinterest