Truth Seeking--An Alternative to Theism Versus Atheism

[Unknown Soldier]

I might be very unusual, but I really have no ideological agendas in the normal sense of the term "ideological agenda." In other words, I have no set of ideas, beliefs, or dogmas that I love and defend. I just go with valid logic and evidence hoping that by doing so I will arrive at "the truth." Taking this approach I don't know where I will end up but only that I'm likely to get there. So regarding religious claims and counterclaims, I might end up as an atheist or--heaven forbid--a theist--even a Christian.

So what is "truth seeking"? How do you seek the truth? My approach is to first set aside my biases and my predispositions as much as I can starting with a clean slate, an open mind. I then proceed to study and learn as much as I can about sound thinking which involves learning valid logic and the facts especially the facts of science.

And that's essentially truth seeking. I like it although it's not obviously for everybody.

 

[bilby]

I might be very unusual, but I really have no ideological agendas in the normal sense of the term "ideological agenda." In other words, I have no set of ideas, beliefs, or dogmas that I love and defend.

Then I suggest you sue your posting history for slander.

 

[ideologyhunter]

H.L. Mencken, 1920 (letter to Burton Rascoe):
Few doctrines seem to me to be worth fighting for...Far from going to the stake for a Great Truth, I wouldn't even miss a meal for it. My notion is that all the larger human problems are insoluble and that life is quite meaningless -- a spectacle without purpose or moral. I detest all efforts to read a moral into it. I do not write because I want to make converts. In point of fact, I seldom make one -- and then it is embarrassing. I write because the business amuses me...

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Truth seeking? For religion one needs to study psychology, literature, and history... in addition to religion and critical thinking.

While "Logic" has its uses, it is often used by many as a parlor trick.

 

[steve_bank]

Are there any true truth seekers? Some say they are seeking truth but are they really?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Truth seeking? For religion one needs to study psychology, literature, and history... in addition to religion and critical thinking.

That's a good start.

While "Logic" has its uses, it is often used by many as a parlor trick.

I can understand your opinion here.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

H.L. Mencken, 1920 (letter to Burton Rascoe):
Few doctrines seem to me to be worth fighting for...Far from going to the stake for a Great Truth, I wouldn't even miss a meal for it. My notion is that all the larger human problems are insoluble and that life is quite meaningless -- a spectacle without purpose or moral. I detest all efforts to read a moral into it. I do not write because I want to make converts. In point of fact, I seldom make one -- and then it is embarrassing. I write because the business amuses me...

That's an interesting quotation, but what about it? How does it relate to the OP?

 

[Tiburon]

I might be very unusual, but I really have no ideological agendas in the normal sense of the term "ideological agenda." In other words, I have no set of ideas, beliefs, or dogmas that I love and defend. I just go with valid logic and evidence hoping that by doing so I will arrive at "the truth." Taking this approach I don't know where I will end up but only that I'm likely to get there. So regarding religious claims and counterclaims, I might end up as an atheist or--heaven forbid--a theist--even a Christian.

So what is "truth seeking"? How do you seek the truth? My approach is to first set aside my biases and my predispositions as much as I can starting with a clean slate, an open mind. I then proceed to study and learn as much as I can about sound thinking which involves learning valid logic and the facts especially the facts of science.

And that's essentially truth seeking. I like it although it's not obviously for everybody.

If you currently don't hold a belief in a God(Gods) then you are an atheist.

 

[DBT]

Are there any true truth seekers? Some say they are seeking truth but are they really?

It's a catchy phrase. A truth seeker. One who sorts fact from fiction, seeking the truth whatever it may be. But in practice.....?

 

[Spacetime Inhabitant]

Before you can seek the truth you should first seek facts.

 

[Gospel]

Certain truths possess more subjectivity than others. For example, while moral truths often hinge on personal beliefs and cultural norms, scientific truths can be empirically tested and verified. It's important to distinguish between objective truth (reality as it is) and subjective truth (how individuals perceive or interpret it). While the OP's approach to seeking truth through open-mindedness, logic, and evidence is praiseworthy, I find it problematic if the aim is to discern moral truths.

 

[steve_bank]

Imagine sitar background mus and a guru sitting crossed legged on a carpet....

Solider my son, the door to finding truth opens inward.

Or the scene in the movie A few Good Men.

'You want the truth? You can't handle the truth!'.

Like all religion and philosophy posts go, truth depends on how you define it.

Logical truth simply means a valid argument or syllogism free of logical fallacies. A syllogism alone does not prove anything in reality.

Religious truth is not the same for a Buddhist, Hindu, Jew, Christian, or Muslim.

Christians sects do not agree on Christian religious truth.

There is factual truth. An object weighs 1kg and has a blue color. A robber's face is seen on a camera. he did it. 1kg has an unambiguous definition as does the color blue.

Subjective truth vs objectve evidence.

'Truth Seeker' is another one of those murky terms that lead to endless debate.

An alternate to atheism? Yet again atheism is simply a rejection of gods. What an declared atheist actually believes and labels him or her self can be anything one chooses.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Before you can seek the truth you should first seek facts.

What's the difference?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I might be very unusual, but I really have no ideological agendas in the normal sense of the term "ideological agenda." In other words, I have no set of ideas, beliefs, or dogmas that I love and defend. I just go with valid logic and evidence hoping that by doing so I will arrive at "the truth." Taking this approach I don't know where I will end up but only that I'm likely to get there. So regarding religious claims and counterclaims, I might end up as an atheist or--heaven forbid--a theist--even a Christian.

So what is "truth seeking"? How do you seek the truth? My approach is to first set aside my biases and my predispositions as much as I can starting with a clean slate, an open mind. I then proceed to study and learn as much as I can about sound thinking which involves learning valid logic and the facts especially the facts of science.

And that's essentially truth seeking. I like it although it's not obviously for everybody.

If you currently don't hold a belief in a God(Gods) then you are an atheist.

I suppose I am an atheist depending on what you mean by that label. I might be described as a "rational atheist" because I doubt the existence of Gods based on sound reasoning. Compare that kind of atheism to the emotional atheism so prevalent here at IIDB. IIDB atheism is rooted in hatred for religion and a "do whatever it takes--right or wrong" attitude to weaken religious belief and oppose naysayers. As a seeker of truth I cannot practice that kind of atheism which so often opposes the truth.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Certain truths possess more subjectivity than others. For example, while moral truths often hinge on personal beliefs and cultural norms, scientific truths can be empirically tested and verified. It's important to distinguish between objective truth (reality as it is) and subjective truth (how individuals perceive or interpret it). While the OP's approach to seeking truth through open-mindedness, logic, and evidence is praiseworthy, I find it problematic if the aim is to discern moral truths.

Very "true"--pun intended. Yes, discerning "moral truths," if there are any, is tricky business. As I see it, morality should be based on thinking rather than standards. We can intelligently decide what we ought to do which is often an improvement over what others tell us to do.

 

[pood]

I suppose I am an atheist depending on what you mean by that label. I might be described as a "rational atheist" because I doubt the existence of Gods based on sound reasoning. Compare that kind of atheism to the emotional atheism so prevalent here at IIDB. IIDB atheism is rooted in hatred for religion and a "do whatever it takes--right or wrong" attitude to weaken religious belief and oppose naysayers. As a seeker of truth I cannot practice that kind of atheism which so often opposes the truth.

So far as I can tell this description describes no atheist here. Keep trying with your “truth seeking.”

 

[Tiburon]

Before you can seek the truth you should first seek facts.

Are these facts not true?

 

[Tiburon]

I might be very unusual, but I really have no ideological agendas in the normal sense of the term "ideological agenda." In other words, I have no set of ideas, beliefs, or dogmas that I love and defend. I just go with valid logic and evidence hoping that by doing so I will arrive at "the truth." Taking this approach I don't know where I will end up but only that I'm likely to get there. So regarding religious claims and counterclaims, I might end up as an atheist or--heaven forbid--a theist--even a Christian.

So what is "truth seeking"? How do you seek the truth? My approach is to first set aside my biases and my predispositions as much as I can starting with a clean slate, an open mind. I then proceed to study and learn as much as I can about sound thinking which involves learning valid logic and the facts especially the facts of science.

And that's essentially truth seeking. I like it although it's not obviously for everybody.

If you currently don't hold a belief in a God(Gods) then you are an atheist.

I suppose I am an atheist depending on what you mean by that label. I might be described as a "rational atheist" because I doubt the existence of Gods based on sound reasoning. Compare that kind of atheism to the emotional atheism so prevalent here at IIDB. IIDB atheism is rooted in hatred for religion and a "do whatever it takes--right or wrong" attitude to weaken religious belief and oppose naysayers. As a seeker of truth I cannot practice that kind of atheism which so often opposes the truth.

Hatred for religion and active opposition to it is something else. Many here may bundle it in with their atheism but in and of itself it doesn't constitute atheism.

 

[bilby]

I suppose I am an atheist depending on what you mean by that label. I might be described as a "rational atheist" because I doubt the existence of Gods based on sound reasoning. Compare that kind of atheism to the emotional atheism so prevalent here at IIDB. IIDB atheism is rooted in hatred for religion and a "do whatever it takes--right or wrong" attitude to weaken religious belief and oppose naysayers. As a seeker of truth I cannot practice that kind of atheism which so often opposes the truth.

So far as I can tell this description describes no atheist here. Keep trying with your “truth seeking.”

The only way that atheism can oppose the truth is if it's true that at least one god exists.

Obviously atheists can oppose the truth on pretty much any issue; But atheism cannot by definition unless the existence of a god is a truth - and at best, it's an hypothesis. To be accepted as a truth, it would need some compelling evidence.

 

[James Brown]

Compare that kind of atheism to the emotional atheism so prevalent here at IIDB. IIDB atheism is rooted in hatred for religion and a "do whatever it takes--right or wrong" attitude to weaken religious belief and oppose naysayers.

[citation needed]