As an athiest, I think lucky and unlucky are subjective.

But in saying that, I also believe luck is a real thing. Which makes me think, maybe I'm not an athiest.

So am I really an athiest?

"The harder I work, the luckier I get."

remery said..
"The harder I work, the luckier I get."

Lucky for some, not others.

remery said..
"The main gate to the Auschwitz I-Main Camp was the only one in the whole Auschwitz complex to be built by Polish political prisoners under German orders. These were prisoners deported from Wi?nicz in one of the early transports, in late 1940 or early 1941. The gate was erected at the same time as the installation of the permanent camp perimeter fencing, on reinforced concrete posts and under high voltage, in place of the earlier, provisional fencing consisting of barbed wire strung on wooden posts. The motto above the gate, Arbeit macht frei (Work Sets You Free), is one of the symbols of the camp. It was made by prisoners in the metalworking labor detail headed by Jan Liwacz (camp number 1010). The prisoners deliberately reversed the letter "B" as a camouflaged mark of disobedience."

I don't think they were lucky, but interesting story.

I stand with decrepit.

If you say you don't belive in God then you are saying you understand exactly what God is, such that you can make an assessment that it does not exist.

If your understanding of God is an old bloke with a big white beard sat on a cloud surrounded by angels playing harps booming decrees down to some Bishops in funny hats, then yeah, I'd agree not true. but that is a pretty dumb understanding of God, and just about the only thing I can believe God isn't.

But otherwise I cannot (and I have never heard anyone else) define what God is, thus I am unable to say that I don't believe that this thing does not exist. This of course doesn't default to saying I believe in God, just that I don't understand anyone who can say they don't. The only way you can claim to be an aetheist is to have faith that God has a potential to exist but you believe it doesn't. Which seems to me to mean you have far more faith in God than many people who claim to be believers.


Besides that, I don't know that luck and God must be mutually inclusive. Why can't they both exist as separate entities. If you believe God does not exclude individuals from have self-will then why would God exclude luck ?

Kinda interesting that luck is probably easier to define than God, yet many people would be more self assured about the non-existance of God, than the existance of luck.

Thus I'd conclude you can be an atheist and also believe in luck, not least because being an atheist means you are very lucky to actually be able to understand what is God.

That's an interesting take on the definition of atheism.

I wouldn't have thought you'd have to know all the intricate the specifics and mysteries of any god to be able to say "I don't believe in an omnipotent and omniscient being".

myscreenname said..


What car is this?

What about the hands? Something might have been edited just a little poorly.

The Earth is 4.5 billion years old. People who believe in creation are fools.

The universe is about 13.7 billion years old.

What went on before the universe? A god is as good an explanation as any at this stage. However I don't believe he/she/it has any current interest in what's going on here on Earth.

We won't damage the Earth, just the environment that suits us. Once we wipe ourselves out, a new bunch or organisms will evolve. Maybe they will take better care of their environment.

Is it bad luck
or
is the world out to get you
or
did you just FLICK up

We're getting quite metaphysical here aren't we.

How about:

I don't believe our universe was created or shaped by an intelligence or entity

remery said..
I agree. But at this time there is no better explanation than some old guy in the sky waving a magic wand an creating the universe. We have a choice whether to believe on not believe. Science on the other hand, works with evidence, data collection, analysis, peer review, reproducibility. Science is not a belief system. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Science doesn't explain luck.

According to current science dudes now can be Sheila's and Sheila's can now be blokes.

Believe it or not?

myscreenname said..
Science doesn't explain luck.

There's a lot of stuff, that science can't get into. If you can't make a prediction about it, and prove that prediction, it isn't science.
But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There's some stuff that doesn't respond to experimentation.

I have proved things to my own satisfaction, but there's no way I can claim it to be scientific.

You do understand the phrase 'the harder I work, the luckier I get'? It relates nothing to luck and suggests that hard work actually creates the positive outcome.

Nope!
Working hard can establish a platform where luck is possible. Can't win a great contract without working hard to build a good business.