Even Atheists Think That Atheists Are More Immoral.

[Bill the Cat]

A child thinks he can fly like Superman and jumps from a tall building to his death.

Or he lives to a ripe old age and dies anyway. Either way, he's dead, and it doesn't matter how.

This sort of thing has happened before. Nature does nothing to forbid these thoughts but acts against them, even though unintelligently and uncaringly. Nature does not know we are here; it is not interested in our survival or anything else.

Yet, you speak as if it has consciousness.

But the fact that it is based on natural laws and we have brains that watch the results of natural processes give us many advantages. The Christian God is nature personified. This idea is just as fatal to Christians as the idea that little boys can fly.

Both are wrong. God is not nature personified, and little boys can't fly.

All life is about regeneration.

No it isn't. "Regeneration" is just a random accident.

The individual is limited, the family and the nation less so and the species is long lived and so on. Everything, in the end, is finite but that does not matter to us at our individual scale.

Nothing matters. Nihilism is the logical consequence of atheism.

We are driven to care for our children. Spooky ideas interfere with this natural desire because it gives you the false idea that the self is cosmically significant (the hairs on your head are numbered by God Himself). No, you are a link, but there are many, many chains.

And the chain is itself completely insignificant. It could disappear completely tomorrow, and it wouldn't matter.

[Bill the Cat]

And how much did that "logic" influence your actual behaviour? And if the universe is "meaningless" why would you let it influence the love you have for your kids or anyone else? Do you need an objective love for your kids. Do they need objective value for you to love them?

Go by a cemetery and look for a family grave. Does it matter if they were loved or not? Or are they just as dead as those who are unloved?

[seer]

And how much did that "logic" influence your actual behaviour? And if the universe is "meaningless" why would you let it influence the love you have for your kids or anyone else? Do you need an objective love for your kids. Do they need objective value for you to love them?

Emotion, not logic, rule here...

[Teallaura]

This is the supplement page from the study. Note that this thing was done in 2013...

Methodologically, it looks okay so far. I have to admit, I laughed at the attention question. Atheism appears to be determined both by self-identification and extrapolation based on the country of origin. Both have issues so the combination is probably sound.

It doesn't appear much different from Jesse Jackson's famous admission that being followed by white youth was less intimidating than black. FYI: a related study found that virtually all respondents were happier knowing the youth following them were coming out of a Bible study, regardless of race.

Opinion: it's about what I'd expect - and what I would have expected as an atheist.

[Tassman]

No Charles, most of my adult life, even when I had kids, I was an agnostic. And of course I assigned worth to them because of my subjective love for them.

We "assign worth" to our children because the nurturing instinct is one of the strongest instincts there is, not because God tells us to love them. .

But logically we are biological accidents in a meaningless universe if atheism is correct.

Logically, atheism is the default position.

[stfoskey15]

You speak as if nature is thinking and in control... kind of like a god...

Are you advocating for pantheism? I'm not a pantheist but ever since I learned about it I thought it was a neat idea.

They are their own "celestial policeman", and have no reason to be benevolent or altruistic outside of their personal preference.

If you're altruistic, people will tend to think more highly of you. We are social creatures, so that is important to the vast majority of us.

Or he is selfish and lazy. And neither description matters a hill of beans in the end. When you are dead, there will be no reward for being self-reliant and no punishment for being greedy and selfish. So, there is no reason to choose to be self-reliant or self-motivating when the end result is the same.

Aren't people generally happier when they are self-reliant and self-motivating?

The atheist relies on supervising his own self with arbitrary and, ultimately, pointless goals and motivations.

Why must there be an ultimate point? I had a goal to finish the book 1632 today because it's a good book and I wanted to see how it would end. There was no ultimate point, but having the goal made me feel accomplished when I finished.

As a model of how God rules us.

I don't want to be subject to an authoritarian ruler. That's why I left Christianity.

No it isn't. It ultimately leads to nihilism and inconsequence. Any self-motivation or self-direction is an arbitrary distraction to the pointless nature of existence. There simply is no reason for any of it. As a result, any and all responses are equally valid, and equally pointless.

Can't you create your own meaning in life? And anyway, that's sort of why I want to pursue a career in the sciences. That way we can learn more about the Universe that God created and see how to make the best use of it.

And when we are dead, it won't matter in the least bit if you succeeded or failed.

But while we're alive it does matter. Pleasure and pain are powerful motivators.

[Tassman]

Go by a cemetery and look for a family grave. Does it matter if they were loved or not? Or are they just as dead as those who are unloved?

We all end up dead and rotting, even those with wish-fulfilment fantasies about living forever. But yes, it matters that they were loved whilst they were alive.

[Charles]

Emotion, not logic, rule here...

The problem being?

[Charles]

Go by a cemetery and look for a family grave. Does it matter if they were loved or not? Or are they just as dead as those who are unloved?

If life does not matter in and of itself then why does eternal life? It a continuation of something meaningles...?

[seer]

The problem being?

I didn't say there was a problem, it is just not a logical reason. And emotion can be turned to do more harm than good.

[seer]

If life does not matter in and of itself then why does eternal life? It a continuation of something meaningles...?

Really? If there is a heaven to be won, and a hell to be shunned I think that would make all our choices much more meaningful. And Bill is a Christian so he does believe that our lives are meaningful, intrinsically so. If nature is all there is then we are the mere accidental by product of those natural forces. And Charles, you said you were not an atheist - so what exactly are you?

To quote Richard Dawkins:

[seer]

Logically, atheism is the default position.

Prove it, logically. And of course one wonders why the majority of humans, for the majority of history, even today, have believed in some form of the divine. Atheism certainly has not been the default position in practice.

[seer]

I don't want to be subject to an authoritarian ruler. That's why I left Christianity.

That is why there is a hell... And how is God authoritarian? Is He forcing you to love Him? To follow Him?

[Bill the Cat]

We all end up dead and rotting, even those with wish-fulfilment fantasies about living forever. But yes, it matters that they were loved whilst they were alive.

No it doesn't.

[Bill the Cat]

Are you advocating for pantheism? I'm not a pantheist but ever since I learned about it I thought it was a neat idea.

No, but that's basically what FF was describing with his nature spiel.

If you're altruistic, people will tend to think more highly of you. We are social creatures, so that is important to the vast majority of us.

But if you aren't, you still exist and die. There is no value in any of it. If someone grew up on a deserted island and never had any human contact, they'd matter just as little as any of us in a godless universe.

Aren't people generally happier when they are self-reliant and self-motivating?

Happiness is irrelevant. It's just an emotion. Again, when you are long dead, no one will care if you were happy or not.

Why must there be an ultimate point? I had a goal to finish the book 1632 today because it's a good book and I wanted to see how it would end. There was no ultimate point, but having the goal made me feel accomplished when I finished.

That's the point. There is no ultimate point in a godless universe. Points are actually pointless. Hence nihilism is the natural end result of atheism.

I don't want to be subject to an authoritarian ruler. That's why I left Christianity.

Then you must live on an island by yourself.

Can't you create your own meaning in life?

Sure you can. You can assign meaning to anything. But will it ACTUALLY mean anything? Not in a godless universe.

And anyway, that's sort of why I want to pursue a career in the sciences. That way we can learn more about the Universe that God created and see how to make the best use of it.

A noble endeavor. Good luck to you.

But while we're alive it does matter. Pleasure and pain are powerful motivators.

Again, I go to my cemetery response. Go to an old cemetery and pick a random grave. Does it matter if that person experienced pleasure? Pain? No it doesn't.