A sampling of my blog posts on God and religion:
My comment on FB: THERE ARE ONLY TWO FUNDAMENTAL HYPOTHESES: AND ONLY ONE OF THEM IS TRUE.
The basic philosophical question is this: Whether we (as individuals) have arisen from inanimate matter or we are "souls" (non-material) which have "entered" into a material body. If the latter is true, then matter is merely a vessel for the non-material soul. Matter is mere 'maya'.
CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE FOR ONE OF THESE HYPOTHESES: WE ARE A PRODUCT OF CHEMICAL REACTIONS OF INANIMATE MATTER. THE SOUL HYPOTHESIS IS TOTALLY FALSE
1) If we were a soul, it was not necessary for our body to have the shape and structure of an animal. That we are animals is 100 per cent clear: from DNA in the cells, our digestive system and its unpleasant products, and a range of bodily ailments. If we were souls, there was no need to create this highly defective body. Instead, an elegant "pure energy"-based model would have suited best: a body that never wore out, never required food, water, etc.
2) If we were a soul, there was no need to wait 14 billion years before entering into a suitable "body". We could have created a body immediately. And this 14 billion years was full of risks of non-existence. There were thousands of random events during these 14 billion years which could have wiped out our ancestors, leaving us with no "vessel" to enter into. No material body. Just 75,000 years ago, the entire humanity had come down to 5000 individuals. Why take such risks – of non-existence of suitable bodies – if we were actually souls?
3) If we were a soul, there was no need to have cockroaches and flies. With a soul foundation, what we would be doing is soul-games, i.e. finding who is a good soul and who is bad. This game of souls didn't need an independent life form – of cockroaches – that lived independently of us. Life would be like a virtual reality game.
4) Apart from these obvious truisms, EVERYTHING in our body, cells, atoms, points to a MATERIAL basis. We are matter, 100 per cent. All interactions are molecular, and chemical (i.e. not nuclear/fusion, but possibly some quantum interactions in the brain cells).
Sorry, folks, there is NO SOUL. Get over it.
Be happy to be alive in a time of great progress. But also be clear that life has NO intrinsic meaning. We have to give it meaning, ourselves.
Also be clear that there is no video camera operating in God's control room which records all your thoughts/ actions. You are NOT going to be rewarded/punished in any after life (there is NONE).
You will, however, get just deserts in this life – subject to random variation.
Sir, I really liked your approach of explaining God with big G. I respect your knowledge and hard work but as a curious young man, I want to ask you about the one thing that you mention- SOUL. According to you if souls exist it should create a vessel of pure energy, not this meat suit which leads us to the conclusion of non-existence of soul. But if soul created a vessel that is pure energy it can not be destroyed as energy can neither be created nor destroyed, we humans would become cockroaches walking over each other because of reproduction as it is the only way of evolution. So, respected sir i want to say that we should not rule out the possibility of us having a soul. I would be glad if you put some light on my thought.
There is fundamentally no difference in the physiology of the cells of a human and a cockroach. The argument of soul must start by explaining why cockroaches don’t have souls. And in fact, the Upanishads state that even insects have a soul.
Let’s just say that this whole idea of soul is an illogical, non-verifiable hypothesis.
Some questions arise after reading this article. If life has no meaning, living morally and fighting for a moral cause would also be meaningless.
It is incorrect to say that life has no meaning. Life itself is the meaning. Thereafter, for humans, there is an opportunity to both experience the beauty (and sadness) of this life and to contribute to bringing material prosperity and knowledge to the people.
I support your arguments on Soul. These are all man made agenda for selfish end. After started language and speaking only these ideas surfaced. Human are as per science a n animal under Mammals with languages and the science developed hardly within 200 or 300 years back only. The necessity forced human for finding new things. Under these situation we as Hindus claim many millions of years before Vedas were brought out. 88 Vyasas were formalised the Vedas over many million years. Where is proof. with out proof any body can claim anything out of fancy. Those very close to gods (Claiming) also died like a ordinary person animal. help others, love people do not segregate people and made them to suffer.
i) Empiricist Presupposition
ii) Materialist Presupposition and believes that the immaterial should only be proved using the scientific method (How do you explain the transcendentals then ? :| )
iii) Only disproves the pre-existent soul that has the choice of choosing the body, leaves out the rest of historic beliefs like Platonic, Aristotelian, Epicurean or Christian views of the Soul