Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

I am an Atheist...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    Then they made it up.
    That does seem to be how most religions get started. Judaism and Christianity included.

    I do give props to Buddhism though for the amount of time they spend meditating and focusing inwardly upon their own mind and own existence, and so have some respect for them when they then make declarations about what the mind is and how it functions. From a scientific point of view, its demonstrable that their meditative techniques do worthwhile things and psychologists commonly recommend Buddhist meditative techniques to everyone to improve happiness, decrease anger, and improve one's sense of well-being.

    So while science tends to consistently disprove Christianity and show that Christianity is a false and made-up religion, to the extent that any Buddhist claims are scientifically testable (most of them are not of course) they tend to be confirmed by scientific testing.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Starlight View Post
      That does seem to be how most religions get started. Judaism and Christianity included.
      Of course we would say that it is revelatory.

      I do give props to Buddhism though for the amount of time they spend meditating and focusing inwardly upon their own mind and own existence, and so have some respect for them when they then make declarations about what the mind is and how it functions. From a scientific point of view, its demonstrable that their meditative techniques do worthwhile things and psychologists commonly recommend Buddhist meditative techniques to everyone to improve happiness, decrease anger, and improve one's sense of well-being.
      Prayer has much of the same effect.Even more so:

      Journal of Behavioral Medicine, Vol. 28, No. 4, August 2005 (C2005)DOI: 10.1007/s10865-005-9008-5Is Spirituality a Critical Ingredient of Meditation?Comparing the Effects of Spiritual Meditation, Secular Meditation, and Relaxation on Spiritual, Psychological,Cardiac, and Pain Outcomes

      https://resspir.org/wp-content/uploa...Meditation.pdf

      A randomized trial of the effect of prayer on depression and anxiety

      https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20391859/

      So while science tends to consistently disprove Christianity and show that Christianity is a false and made-up religion, to the extent that any Buddhist claims are scientifically testable (most of them are not of course) they tend to be confirmed by scientific testing.
      Really? Science proved that Jesus was made up, wasn't the Son of God, and did not rise from the dead?
      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
        It's bizarre you accuse your opponents of having individual opinions and arbitrary views, while holding extremely arbitrary and individual opinions yourself. You're a very creative an unorthodox thinker for a Christian poster, and very much hold your own opinion on different issues rather than toeing the Christian line.
        Did I say anything here about arbitrary? I said: there is no standard atheistic view on morality or nihilism. Do you disagree?

        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Starlight View Post
          It might be that there are some sort of natural laws akin to physical laws, where just as gravity pulls downward, so certain types of behaviors pull spiritually upward or are more 'enlightening' than others on the mental plane.
          What the hell are you talking about? What are these natural laws? And what do you mean by spiritually?

          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

          Comment


          • #50
            Seer,

            If I may make an appeal to authority here, but the idea that I was talking about, this unconscious synthesis is not mine. It is written about in a book entitled The Crack in The Cosmic Egg, written by Joseph Chilton Peirce. Perhaps I am not articulating it as well as he did...obviously not. I've read this book about 5 times now, as well as the follow up book, Exploring the Crack in the Cosmic Egg. This is my map of reality at the present moment.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Machinist View Post
              Seer,

              If I may make an appeal to authority here, but the idea that I was talking about, this unconscious synthesis is not mine. It is written about in a book entitled The Crack in The Cosmic Egg, written by Joseph Chilton Peirce. Perhaps I am not articulating it as well as he did...obviously not. I've read this book about 5 times now, as well as the follow up book, Exploring the Crack in the Cosmic Egg. This is my map of reality at the present moment.
              Sorry, any one who rejects logic-based systems and rational thought is a non-starter with me.
              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by seer View Post
                I said: there is no standard atheistic view on morality or nihilism. Do you disagree?
                There will be a plurality view on any topic, by the definition of plurality. On any question you care to ask, there would always be an answer to the question of "what is the most common viewpoint among atheists on the topic of X?"

                If your claim is that there is not a majority view on some particular topic, the onus would be on you to prove that with polling data.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                  There will be a plurality view on any topic, by the definition of plurality. On any question you care to ask, there would always be an answer to the question of "what is the most common viewpoint among atheists on the topic of X?"

                  If your claim is that there is not a majority view on some particular topic, the onus would be on you to prove that with polling data.
                  Well can you show me a common moral view among atheists? That includes atheists in the Communist countries that have the highest populations of atheists?
                  Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by seer View Post
                    Well can you show me a common moral view among atheists?
                    The two universally held moral concepts seem to be 1. fairness/justice and 2. caring for/about others.

                    Individually these two principles have gotten the most attention recently as:
                    1. John Rawls' works Justice as Fairness, and A Theory of Justice
                    2.
                    The Ethics of Care, expounded by Carol Gilligan in her works, but widely adopted by others

                    Some people view these two ideas as opposed (e.g. 'justice vs mercy'), but others view both of these as two sides of the same coin and think that a concern for fairness and a concern for others are just two similar outworkings of the same underlying idea of love for others.

                    That tends to be my viewpoint, and hence I don't really mind whether you call it "valuing others" or "benevolence" or "the golden rule" or "love" etc as its all fundamentally the same thing. I tend to think people who take utilitarian viewpoints - e,g, Peter Singer who suggests trying to maximize happiness - are also similar outworkings of the same underlying idea - maximizing everyone's happiness is obviously something you would want to do if you valued everyone.

                    But, if you as a theist wanted to interact with a specific moral theory then any of these are good options for you:
                    a. Rawls' Theory of Justice/Fairness
                    b. Gilligan's Ethic of Care
                    c. Singer's Utilitarianism
                    d. Haidt's Moral Foundation theory (that Fairness and Care as two of the foundations

                    I think its fair to say that much of the debate in moral philosophy among atheists centers not around whether these theories make good and valid points - very few people would want to say they were wrong - but rather how it is best to combine them. e.g. one can think that they're all true and decently accurate models, but differ as to which one is the approximation and which the underlying reality.
                    Last edited by Starlight; 04-10-2021, 07:26 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                      The two universally held moral concepts seem to be 1. fairness/justice and 2. caring for/about others.

                      Individually these two principles have gotten the most attention recently as:
                      1. John Rawls' works Justice as Fairness, and A Theory of Justice
                      2.
                      The Ethics of Care, expounded by Carol Gilligan in her works, but widely adopted by others

                      Some people view these two ideas as opposed (e.g. 'justice vs mercy'), but others view both of these as two sides of the same coin and think that a concern for fairness and a concern for others are just two similar outworkings of the same underlying idea of love for others.

                      That tends to be my viewpoint, and hence I don't really mind whether you call it "valuing others" or "benevolence" or "the golden rule" or "love" etc as its all fundamentally the same thing. I tend to think people who take utilitarian viewpoints - e,g, Peter Singer who suggests trying to maximize happiness - are also similar outworkings of the same underlying idea - maximizing everyone's happiness is obviously something you would want to do if you valued everyone.

                      But, if you as a theist wanted to interact with a specific moral theory then any of these are good options for you:
                      a. Rawls' Theory of Justice/Fairness
                      b. Gilligan's Ethic of Care
                      c. Singer's Utilitarianism
                      d. Haidt's Moral Foundation theory (that Fairness and Care as two of the foundations
                      So these are theories that the majority of atheists agree with? The Atheists in North Korea, China, and other Communist countries that have large a majority of atheists? And I could just claim that men are following their God given moral intuition.
                      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        In case you're not aware, there's been some surveys of philosophers. Those are interesting on the subject of God and morality. By about a 5:1 ratio most philosophers think God doesn't exist. But by a 2:1 ratio most philosophers endorse Moral Realism.

                        So the most common viewpoint among philosophers seems to be that morality really exists, but God doesn't. The experts don't seem to think that God's existence is necessary for morality. As one of the Craig debate videos you linked me to starts off:
                        I spoke to one of my colleagues, another moral philosopher, and gave him the topic [of this debate] "Is God necessary for morality?" and his answer was "well of course not". ...It does reveal a common outlook among moral philosophers, that I share, that people have been doing moral philosophy without appeal to God for thousands of years... it's not at all obvious to us who take a secular approach to doing moral philosophy what the 'problem' is supposed to be.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by seer View Post
                          So these are theories that the majority of atheists agree with? The Atheists in North Korea, China, and other Communist countries that have large a majority of atheists?
                          One can brainwash people into having any given set of incoherent and illogical beliefs that have no rational or factual basis. I have no interest in what brainwashed populations in North Korea believe. Their beliefs are not an indication of what it is rational to belief or what conclusions are logical. I am only interested in what individuals who were free to develop their own ideas in the context of a free society thought, because what they see as rational and logical is likely to be rational and logical, unlike indoctrination programs.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                            In case you're not aware, there's been some surveys of philosophers. Those are interesting on the subject of God and morality. By about a 5:1 ratio most philosophers think God doesn't exist. But by a 2:1 ratio most philosophers endorse Moral Realism.
                            Good then make the case for moral realism. That is actually logical.

                            So the most common viewpoint among philosophers seems to be that morality really exists, but God doesn't. The experts don't seem to think that God's existence is necessary for morality. As one of the Craig debate videos you linked me to starts off:
                            I spoke to one of my colleagues, another moral philosopher, and gave him the topic [of this debate] "Is God necessary for morality?" and his answer was "well of course not". ...It does reveal a common outlook among moral philosophers, that I share, that people have been doing moral philosophy without appeal to God for thousands of years... it's not at all obvious to us who take a secular approach to doing moral philosophy what the 'problem' is supposed to be.
                            And if are going to watch a debate watch the Erik Wielenberg one since he is a moral realist. And tell me where Craig is off.

                            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iVyVJAMiOY

                            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                              One can brainwash people into having any given set of incoherent and illogical beliefs that have no rational or factual basis. I have no interest in what brainwashed populations in North Korea believe. Their beliefs are not an indication of what it is rational to belief or what conclusions are logical. I am only interested in what individuals who were free to develop their own ideas in the context of a free society thought, because what they see as rational and logical is likely to be rational and logical, unlike indoctrination programs.
                              Right so you are only speaking of Atheists who were raised, generally, in the Western Christian tradition. Got it...
                              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                                Um... not sure where the disconnect is here.

                                P1: If atheism is true, then there are no objective standards of right and wrong, and no objective source of moral obligation.
                                P2: Atheism is true.

                                Since you agree with both of those premises, then you must necessarily accept the logical conclusion:

                                C: Therefore, there are no wrong choices in life.
                                Nope. That's a non sequitur.

                                It should be:

                                C. Therefore, there are no objective standards of right and wrong, and no objective source of moral obligation.


                                Try again.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by seer, Today, 06:57 AM
                                1 response
                                22 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post lee_merrill  
                                Started by lee_merrill, 06-03-2021, 11:57 AM
                                1 response
                                38 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Christian3  
                                Started by Machinist, 05-26-2021, 10:52 AM
                                97 responses
                                522 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by seer, 05-12-2021, 05:35 AM
                                557 responses
                                3,499 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 05-09-2021, 09:43 AM
                                21 responses
                                189 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X