I am a DPD Schizophrenic Atheist - will I go to heaven?

If you’re an atheist why would you even care? Or is this just a hypothetical question?

DeafAtheist wrote: If you’re an atheist why would you even care? Or is this just a hypothetical question?

Get out of here dude. You are too intelligent for this site. Damn interlopers and their logical questions.

DeafAtheist wrote: If you’re an atheist why would you even care? Or is this just a hypothetical question?

I have to continually question the basis of the reality I perceive - Is that person looking at me reading my mind? Are they about to attack me? Is the medicines I take, really poison?

Logic dictates one answer, belief’s another. It is a way of life for me. I am a logical and emotive atheist, but what if I am wrong?

More ever, it is a question for me to understand the relationship between faith, logic, delusion and reality, not as a religious construct but as a perception of reality.

there is a difference between suspecting/caring about what people think of you and paranoia. Suspiscion you can control...paranoia you cannot. I have some paranoia from time to time and it doesn’t help my negative attitude towards people but since it isn’t as frequent as yours I can percieve reality with a sense of realism about the imperfections of myself and other people... in a way the paranoia strengthens my perception of the world once i have recovered from the intense fear.

But since you are truely schizophrenic your chronically afflicted with paranoia (don’t get me wrong, once your fully enveloped in an episode you have no control, it is the recovery time that helps you which i doubt you have a recovery time)and all you have to do is try to think logically, though the basis of paraoi is the absecence of logic.

I am bipolar and i have experienced hearing voices (only once though) and paranoia?

Do you ever experience wordsalad?

No, but that’s mainly because when talking to people I tend to be monosyllabic. I don’t suffer word salad when writing.

AS to the paranoia, its more illusional thinking rather than full paranoia based on hallucinational thinking, as would be in the case of a paranoid schizophrenic.

silverspirit2001 wrote: I have to regularly use logic to prevent self harm, or to make myself aware of common dangers.
I am also an atheist, mainly because I have to use my logical side because giving into my emotional side would be dangerous.

Wasn’t it you (or perhaps it was riptorn) who said that religious people think with emotion whereas non-religious people think logically. That goes back to the discussion about subjective morality that Atheists have. If thats the case than if anything has a rational logical scientific explaination its justified. Thats pretty much the direction we’re going in society.

Sound DBZ logic cannot be destroyed; the efforts of the so-called super elite will always be in vain. Have at thee Krom!

some one new wrote:

silverspirit2001 wrote: I have to regularly use logic to prevent self harm, or to make myself aware of common dangers.
I am also an atheist, mainly because I have to use my logical side because giving into my emotional side would be dangerous.

Wasn’t it you (or perhaps it was riptorn) who said that religious people think with emotion whereas non-religious people think logically. That goes back to the discussion about subjective morality that Atheists have. If thats the case than if anything has a rational logical scientific explaination its justified. Thats pretty much the direction we’re going in society.

Ironically enough though, the morals we atheists have comes from empathy.

Khorib wrote:

some one new wrote:

silverspirit2001 wrote: I have to regularly use logic to prevent self harm, or to make myself aware of common dangers.
I am also an atheist, mainly because I have to use my logical side because giving into my emotional side would be dangerous.

Wasn’t it you (or perhaps it was riptorn) who said that religious people think with emotion whereas non-religious people think logically. That goes back to the discussion about subjective morality that Atheists have. If thats the case than if anything has a rational logical scientific explaination its justified. Thats pretty much the direction we’re going in society.

Ironically enough though, the morals we atheists have comes from empathy.

Exactly

Sound DBZ logic cannot be destroyed; the efforts of the so-called super elite will always be in vain. Have at thee Krom!

some one new wrote:

Khorib wrote:

some one new wrote:

silverspirit2001 wrote: I have to regularly use logic to prevent self harm, or to make myself aware of common dangers.
I am also an atheist, mainly because I have to use my logical side because giving into my emotional side would be dangerous.

Wasn’t it you (or perhaps it was riptorn) who said that religious people think with emotion whereas non-religious people think logically. That goes back to the discussion about subjective morality that Atheists have. If thats the case than if anything has a rational logical scientific explaination its justified. Thats pretty much the direction we’re going in society.

Ironically enough though, the morals we atheists have comes from empathy.

Exactly

Curious. When you said “subjective”, did you mean “objective”?

Khorib wrote:

some one new wrote:

Khorib wrote:

some one new wrote:

silverspirit2001 wrote: I have to regularly use logic to prevent self harm, or to make myself aware of common dangers.
I am also an atheist, mainly because I have to use my logical side because giving into my emotional side would be dangerous.

Wasn’t it you (or perhaps it was riptorn) who said that religious people think with emotion whereas non-religious people think logically. That goes back to the discussion about subjective morality that Atheists have. If thats the case than if anything has a rational logical scientific explaination its justified. Thats pretty much the direction we’re going in society.

Ironically enough though, the morals we atheists have comes from empathy.

Exactly

Curious. When you said “subjective”, did you mean “objective”?

I meant nonconcrete

Sound DBZ logic cannot be destroyed; the efforts of the so-called super elite will always be in vain. Have at thee Krom!

some one new wrote:

Khorib wrote:

some one new wrote:

Khorib wrote:

some one new wrote:

silverspirit2001 wrote: I have to regularly use logic to prevent self harm, or to make myself aware of common dangers.
I am also an atheist, mainly because I have to use my logical side because giving into my emotional side would be dangerous.

Wasn’t it you (or perhaps it was riptorn) who said that religious people think with emotion whereas non-religious people think logically. That goes back to the discussion about subjective morality that Atheists have. If thats the case than if anything has a rational logical scientific explaination its justified. Thats pretty much the direction we’re going in society.

Ironically enough though, the morals we atheists have comes from empathy.

Exactly

Curious. When you said “subjective”, did you mean “objective”?

I meant nonconcrete

Even more so if emotional reasoning isn’t used.

Sound DBZ logic cannot be destroyed; the efforts of the so-called super elite will always be in vain. Have at thee Krom!

some one new wrote:

some one new wrote:

Khorib wrote:

some one new wrote:

Khorib wrote:

some one new wrote:

silverspirit2001 wrote: I have to regularly use logic to prevent self harm, or to make myself aware of common dangers.
I am also an atheist, mainly because I have to use my logical side because giving into my emotional side would be dangerous.

Wasn’t it you (or perhaps it was riptorn) who said that religious people think with emotion whereas non-religious people think logically. That goes back to the discussion about subjective morality that Atheists have. If thats the case than if anything has a rational logical scientific explaination its justified. Thats pretty much the direction we’re going in society.

Ironically enough though, the morals we atheists have comes from empathy.

Exactly

Curious. When you said “subjective”, did you mean “objective”?

I meant nonconcrete

Even more so if emotional reasoning isn’t used.

But emotional reasoning IS used.

Khorib wrote:

some one new wrote:

some one new wrote:

Khorib wrote:

some one new wrote:

Khorib wrote:

some one new wrote:

silverspirit2001 wrote: I have to regularly use logic to prevent self harm, or to make myself aware of common dangers.
I am also an atheist, mainly because I have to use my logical side because giving into my emotional side would be dangerous.

Wasn’t it you (or perhaps it was riptorn) who said that religious people think with emotion whereas non-religious people think logically. That goes back to the discussion about subjective morality that Atheists have. If thats the case than if anything has a rational logical scientific explaination its justified. Thats pretty much the direction we’re going in society.

Ironically enough though, the morals we atheists have comes from empathy.

Exactly

Curious. When you said “subjective”, did you mean “objective”?

I meant nonconcrete

Even more so if emotional reasoning isn’t used.

But emotional reasoning IS used.

Tell him that

silverspirit2001 wrote: I have to regularly use logic to prevent self harm, or to make myself aware of common dangers.
I am also an atheist, mainly because I have to use my logical side because giving into my emotional side would be dangerous.

Sound DBZ logic cannot be destroyed; the efforts of the so-called super elite will always be in vain. Have at thee Krom!

To my mind, empathy follows logical rules.

The logic side can discern those rules, while your empathy side can follow those rules without seeing the rules.

I would suggest that atheists are people who have discerned the rules of empathy logically, and in discerning them, they have altered the empathy side of the brain to accommodate those rules.

It is also done by everyone to some extent, otherwise slavery would still be common place.

My problem seems to be that, the logical side cannot alter the emotional side to any significant degree.

I can imagine that having logic pre-programming the emotional side is a great time saver, a short-cut in what is expected behaviour and responses, rather than having to figure out the expected response.

silverspirit2001 wrote: To my mind, empathy follows logical rules.

The logic side can discern those rules, while your empathy side can follow those rules without seeing the rules.

I would suggest that atheists are people who have discerned the rules of empathy logically, and in discerning them, they have altered the empathy side of the brain to accommodate those rules.

It is also done by everyone to some extent, otherwise slavery would still be common place.

My problem seems to be that, the logical side cannot alter the emotional side to any significant degree.

I can imagine that having logic pre-programming the emotional side is a great time saver, a short-cut in what is expected behaviour and responses, rather than having to figure out the expected response.

Not necessarily (whats with atheists and bringing up issues like this? )
Part of the reason slavery was abolished was because the nation wanted to become more industrial and slavery was used for agricultural purposes. It would have been logical to end it anyways.

What about Jewish slaves used in building the V2 rocket?

or maybe this?

http://www.antislavery.org/

or

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/world/slavery/default.stm

or

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/slavery/modern/modern_1.shtml

Slavery is logical in some ways, as it enables the slave owner to gain money, from forced child labour, sex slavery, bonded labour. That it offends modern sensibility, but it still continues today. The last link points out, that they may be more slaves today, than in the 17th century!

I am sorry, but your agreement that slavery was partially abolished because the USA wanted to become more industrial fails in every conceivable way.

I am a gym sock that has gained sentience and an axe.

Will I got to Valhalla?

it is human to feel emotion,it is your logic that validates it or not (i am reffering to the afformentioned 'emotions’as well which tool you use to make a decision) you don’t have to be a christian to have emotion driven decisions and you don’t have to be an atheist to think logically after all we are humans.

God isn’t emotion...he is the feeling or 'presecence’that christians feel when their emotions are validated within the moral compass of things

obviously atheists and christians can be a mix of emotion and logic. If your mentally ill you tend to be on one pole or the other (especially schizophrenics) obviously he can be purely logiccal or emotional but i am sure he has some emotion cause he isn’t a psycho.

Atheists (the majority of them) are a mix between logic and emotion but tend to be more logical

Christains (the majority of them)are a mix as well bu more emotion based.

The real argument hear is which one is more credible or ethical? and that is up to the individual to decide

see the logos, pathos,and ethos of my statement?

bonesboy08 wrote: it is human to feel emotion,it is your logic that validates it or not (i am reffering to the afformentioned 'emotions’as well which tool you use to make a decision) you don’t have to be a christian to have emotion driven decisions and you don’t have to be an atheist to think logically after all we are humans.

God isn’t emotion...he is the feeling or 'presecence’that christians feel when their emotions are validated within the moral compass of things

obviously atheists and christians can be a mix of emotion and logic. If your mentally ill you tend to be on one pole or the other (especially schizophrenics) obviously he can be purely logiccal or emotional but i am sure he has some emotion cause he isn’t a psycho.

Atheists (the majority of them) are a mix between logic and emotion but tend to be more logical

Christains (the majority of them)are a mix as well bu more emotion based.

The real argument hear is which one is more credible or ethical? and that is up to the individual to decide

see the logos, pathos,and ethos of my statement?

Ah literary devices, I see kairos as well mein friend.
For most Christians raw belief in God is mostly emotion based. Following Gods word is more logic based, when selfish emotions get in the way people (christians) tend to lean to their own understandings. Thats how denominations get started (and also how people move away from the faith.)

Sound DBZ logic cannot be destroyed; the efforts of the so-called super elite will always be in vain. Have at thee Krom!

some one new wrote:

bonesboy08 wrote: it is human to feel emotion,it is your logic that validates it or not (i am reffering to the afformentioned 'emotions’as well which tool you use to make a decision) you don’t have to be a christian to have emotion driven decisions and you don’t have to be an atheist to think logically after all we are humans.

God isn’t emotion...he is the feeling or 'presecence’that christians feel when their emotions are validated within the moral compass of things

obviously atheists and christians can be a mix of emotion and logic. If your mentally ill you tend to be on one pole or the other (especially schizophrenics) obviously he can be purely logiccal or emotional but i am sure he has some emotion cause he isn’t a psycho.

Atheists (the majority of them) are a mix between logic and emotion but tend to be more logical

Christains (the majority of them)are a mix as well bu more emotion based.

The real argument hear is which one is more credible or ethical? and that is up to the individual to decide

see the logos, pathos,and ethos of my statement?

Ah literary devices, I see kairos as well mein friend.
For most Christians raw belief in God is mostly emotion based. Following Gods word is more logic based, when selfish emotions get in the way people (christians) tend to lean to their own understandings. Thats how denominations get started (and also how people move away from the faith.)

lol i knew somebody would understand... yet another harsh truth for the catholic church