This is where I completely disagree with you. I have never felt that being a theist filled some need as atheists are wont to imagine just must be the case with theists.
This doesn't address my objection. I said that your reasoning is analogous to that used in creationist
arguments and therefore flawed for the same reasons.
My theism has always, for as long as I can remember, been based on my absence of belief in the idea that objective reality is just some self-sustaining thingy or other and my absence of belief that my mind/conciousness is solely down to a couple of pounds of protein in my skull.
In other words, the argument from personal incredulity.
Quite frankly, the type of thinking you seem to be following here is the logic that we should all by now have moved away from theism and beliefs about consciousness being a distinct phenomenon and all that stuff.
You could not be more off base. My objection is with very specific beliefs, ideas, and arguments that happen to fall under theism, and sometimes I see nonbelievers practicing the same bad judgment. I wasn't making a generalization about theism, I was attacking something far more specific. If you want to appeal to persecution and claim to speak for all theists, go right ahead, but you probably don't need more things to be wrong about.
The problem here is that atheists/materialists are very, very wrong to blame some latent belief in these things in society (as if it is all just sentimental needs people have) on the reason why we're not all living in some glorious atheist utopia like in John Lennon's "Imagine".
Now you're attacking something I never even argued. Typical. When you're done setting fire to those bales of straw, maybe you'd like to consider some of the actual claims on the table.
We're not the one's doing anything to prevent this. Atheists have failed so much and so completely at showing the Universe to be self-perpetuating and self-sustaining and that consciousness is just information processing or whatever that they've basically given up trying and just prefer to nowadays point the finger at others.
What, if anything, does this have to do with anything I said? You're arguing with imaginary voices here. If you're using this as an excuse to turn the strawman on its head and thus blame atheism for hindering progress, an argument I
never made in reverse, then you're only digging a deeper hole.
I never said that materialism was devoid of assumptions. I explained several times how these assumptions were reasonable to make, and yes, how the conclusions we draw from them are pragmatic. Whether real, illusory, simulated, or otherwise, it's a very bad idea to, for example, ignore the laws of physics and try to leap from tall buildings. The minor implications may change slightly depending on how one wants to model reality, but the major applications of our knowledge and evidence remain the same. Regardless of what the universe is made of, regardless of God or the nature of reality, the scientific method is the most reliable means of approximating said reality as closely as possible.
The bottom line is until you do succed at showing the above (and I very, very, much doubt you ever will) then belief in God and Psi and/or the distinction of consciousness isn't going anywhere fast.
Your inability to look up things you don't understand is not a verdict against the people who disagree with you.
This, coupled with good solid research into low levels of Psi ability showing positive results, doesn't put you in a good stead.
Oh crap--
Well, now that you know my secret, I guess there's no point in hiding it anymore. I'm implanting an irresistible suggestion that makes my opponents ridiculous--
Whoops, houseplants spontaneously caught fire again. This might take a minute.
