Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mike · 08-26-2002, 01:24 PM

So crimes have been committed both in the name of gods (the crusades) and in the name of Darwin (the holocaust). And because of this, I agree that the government should not legislate beliefs about either God or Darwin. But what about the meaning of life? The quoted essay attempted to demonstrate that there was no inherent political advantage to atheism, but that wasn't the most significant point of the article. The main point seems to be that since there are no inherent political (or material) benefits either to a belief or to a non-belief in God, what then may be the psychological benefits relating to a belief in God. Psychology is indeed finding evidence that spiritual belief correlates significantly with physical health. Speaking of the holocaust, Victor Frankl suggested that many of the survivors had the tenacity to survive (given the option) in part because of a strong sense of meaning in their lives. As Darwin might put it: The reason there are so many believers is that belief in God (for whatever reason) has been naturally selected--longer life resulting from spirituality increases the chances of reproduction. As God might put it: People believe because it is their God given nature to do so--and to go contrary to divine nature is physically unhealthy. Either way there seems to be a distinct advantage to belief. Atheists may be far outnumbered on this planet for more reasons than simply historical precedence.

Ab_Normal · 08-26-2002, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by WJ:
Please share with us Christian's how the enlightenment fundamentally changed the 'human condition'?

Oh, I dunno... just off the top of my head I can think of: a resurgence of democracy... advances in medicine leading to longer life... the rediscovery of the classical philosophers...

Mark_Chid · 08-26-2002, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DarkBronzePlant:
WJ,

See if you can find the flaw with this proof:

1. Only if god created us can things like "art, poetry, justice, morals, love and beauty", and even our own existence, be meaningful.

2. Atheists don't think that god created us.

3. Therefore, atheists promote a world without meaning.

Thats not evenly remotely close to true. All of those things are meaningful TO ME, and thats all the meaning I need. What atheists say is that ABSOLUTE meaning is an illusion - there's no such thing. If jazz music means nothing to you, then its meaningless to you, if you love it, its very important and beautiful. Subjective things are, well, they are subjective - its the religious whoa ttempt to make there own subjective judgements objective so that other people can be depised or dismissed for not sharing them!

WJ · 08-26-2002, 01:34 PM

Bible!

Of course, you matter. The question is, why would you care to hear my opinions? Actually, I went back to read your posts and only saw a few questions.

You said:

"Well, I wonder if the author of this has considered the fact that according to his philosophy, he should make no effort to prolong his own life. Exercise, medical treatment, personal safety, all these things are just keeping you theists away from your fairy land paradise at the right hand of the Great Magical Sky-Juju. This goes for your children also, you theists should hope that your child dies early before it has a chance to damn itself to hellfire, right?"

"It seems to me that it isn't us that lack the "intestinal fortitude" to persue our beliefs to their logical conclusions, the message here seems to be "nihilism is so bleak, therefore God exists!"

Bible, are you suggesting then, that nihilism is consistent with atheism, and inconsistent with theism?

Then you said:

"Does this seem to anyone else to suggest that we should just shut up, because life is meaningless without the existence of The Great Magic Sky-Juju?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personally I think most atheists though not thinking a god exists have little reason or concern to persuade others of their own disbelief.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I personally don't try to de-program the theists I know, The Great Magic Sky-Juju only ever comes up when they bring it up. This forum is the only place I ever really talk about it, if the theists here didn't want their faith challenged they wouldn't be here so what's the problem?

__________end quote

Bible, shouldn't that read: if atheists were so sure about their belief, that the 'freethinkers' EOG would not exist?

phlebas · 08-26-2002, 01:35 PM

Well, this devolved along a predictable path.

Off to RRP.

GunnerJ · 08-26-2002, 01:42 PM

Quote:

So crimes have been committed both in the name of gods (the crusades) and in the name of Darwin (the holocaust).

This bullshit tripe would be so funny if it weren't so sad.

DarkBronzePlant · 08-26-2002, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark_Chid:


Thats not evenly remotely close to true. All of those things are meaningful TO ME, and thats all the meaning I need. What atheists say is that ABSOLUTE meaning is an illusion - there's no such thing. If jazz music means nothing to you, then its meaningless to you, if you love it, its very important and beautiful. Subjective things are, well, they are subjective - its the religious whoa ttempt to make there own subjective judgements objective so that other people can be depised or dismissed for not sharing them!

Mark,

You know that's the case; I know that's the case; I was just curious as to whether WJ did too.

DarkBronzePlant · 08-26-2002, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by WJ:
"If a tree cries for attention in the forest and no one is around to care..."

...

EDIT: oops,...and why would you "care" at all? Darkbronze, any answer?

[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: WJ ]

Uhh... trees are people too? I don't follow a two-thousand-year-old book that tells that animals and plants are ours for the abusing? Or how about that Vibr8gKiwi was humorously stating that your methods are becoming too tiresome for many here to care?

DarkBronzePlant · 08-26-2002, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by WJ:
I see several flaws:

"Therefore, atheists promote a world without meaning."

How can that be? For one, don't atheists believe in, say, love? Does (love and hate) that not provide for meaning?

Wow. I mean, I was thinking that you might want to focus on the #1, but that you found a flaw like that astounds me.

doubtingt · 08-26-2002, 02:24 PM

First, WJ you confound two completely separate issues here. Whether there is a God is entirely separate from whether belief in a God is a prerequisite for some kind of "meaning" or "morality".
My lack of belief in God stems from the fact that the rational, evidence-based approach of science is the only known method that can allow us to separate what is actually true from what we would like to be true. Thus, without scientific support a claim can never be anything except a empty assertion whose truth value is unknown.
The God concept in general has no scientific support, thus it can only be accepted irrationally. All of the major monotheistic God concepts are directly refuted by the observable facts of nature.

As for the second issue of "meaning" and "morality".... Such notions are purely products of the human mind, thus their existence depends upon the existence of human brains, and has nothing to do with God's existence. Your assertion that human minds are incapable of maintaining notions of meaning and morality in the absence of a belief in God has no logical or empirical basis.
The only sound assertion you could make is that atheists must reject the notion that meaning and morality have an "objective" foundation outside of human psychology. No problem, I fully acknowledge this. I sincerely doubt there are many atheist who do not acknowledge that meaning and morality are products of the subjective human mind. Who cares. Subjective desires and preferences are more than enough to motivate and guide human behavior. Theists are simply people who project their subjective desires onto an imaginary super-human, because they are unwilling to take responsibility for creating their own meaning and for their morality.
Is vanilla objectively more "beautiful tasting" than chocolate?
No, yet millions of people have no problem at all holding a subjective preference and guiding their behavior to satisfy it.
The same is true for all preferences in the areas of art, love, beauty, morality, etc.

In addition, all of the available evidence regarding theism and morality suggests that theism does not provide a stable or internally consistent basis for morals, and its inherent authoritarianism almost always results in moral codes that are inhumane and intolerant according to the universal moral preferences across time and culture.

Quote:

Originally posted by WJ:
Hi all!

Most recently, in trying to understand the justification behind atheism, we have seen the logical inconsistency that many, atheist's seem to share in their thinking or approach towards, say, arguing the EOG. While it seems that logical positivism is indeed still alive, let's now attack the so-called 'psychology' behind the atheist's thought process as it relates to the human condition or 'real world'.

As taken from Andrew's "Challenging Atheism" site:

If the claims of many atheists are true there is no God, we are not here by design and natural forces alone can account for why we exist and why there is a place for us to exist then it is not dangerous and is in fact helpful. If it can be certain such is the case no matter the philosophic consequence it is always better to know the truth than to believe a lie even if the lie may have more positive attributes. If the reality is we are just the result of chance and we are just accidental by-products of nature which have evolved relatively recently on an infinitesimal speck of dust lost somewhere in a hostile and mindless universe and which are doomed to perish individually and collectively in a relatively short time we should know that nothing really matters. That all things such as art, poetry, justice, morals, love and beauty [and even 'mathematical'intelligence and the ability to comprehend the laws of nature] are nothing more than arbitrary conventions of no significance and that our lives are meaningless and purposeless. After all what difference does it make if we perpetuate some sort of herd mentality, which we have no lasting stake in for the sake of perpetuating the gene pool? [And what biological advantage does understanding the laws of gravity have when they were not needed to dodge falling objects?] It would be important to know that even the most heinous of injustices are insignificant and meaningless since we are as sentient humans are the by products of fortuitous laws of physics and have no ‘right’ to be alive in the first place. I find that many atheists don’t subscribe to the notions I have underscored above. It is a strange dilemma that they want people to dismiss and reject the notions of God as nothing more than hearsay and yet don’t find the intestinal fortitude to live by the philosophical ramifications of their own philosophy.

However, unless the atheists can be certain of these claims and know with at least some certainty this is so then I think it can be dangerous. An example is the tyranny of governments that have operated under the assumption that atheism is true. Examples are the former Soviet Union and China where human rights and dignity are nearly non-existent. Particularly the woman of China who have for all practical purposes no right to be born and no sovereignty over their own bodies. They are told to procreate or terminate at will.

What about theism? The same thing holds for theism if it is true. It doesn’t matter whether we like it or not or wish it wasn’t so the reality is if true we are here by design and for a purpose. Our lives are not our own to do as we please either are other peoples lives. We are here at the behest of a creator and not the result of a mindless process. Since there would be something greater than humanity no longer can humans be regarded as the ‘measure of all things’. The notion that we could have inalienable rights granted from a creator would be a reality and not merely a platitude. Our actions, system of justice, love and mercy can actually have meaning. There can be ultimate justice in the universe if those who commit evil are not punished here. Our lives may well extend beyond the physical life we experience here and have meaning beyond this short existence.

The point is that the atheist has the greater responsibility to be right because of the ramifications of atheism if true. It is not enough to set themselves up as mere critics of theism and suppose that atheism has no effects in and of itself. Personally I think most atheists though not thinking a god exists have little reason or concern to persuade others of their own disbelief. I think some even indulge in some of the practices of various beliefs out of respect for the individuals who do. However not all are content with this, there are many websites that make an active mockery of belief in God. They don’t disagree with it for the sake of their own lives but feel compelled to point out the foolishness of those who do believe and act like they are performing a public service for the benefit of the people to ‘save’ them from thinking there is a God. They even go as far as to suggest that those who belief in God are the real danger to society. Yet when pressed to give an account of how the universe and sentient people came about apart from a creator they say they don’t have to give an account. They say they are making no claims. So they set themselves up as intellectual critics while offering no alternative in return. While promoting the bleakest philosophy imaginable they feel no compulsion to offer any evidence of its truth. Many feel that merely disparaging theism is sufficient to justify themselves.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-26-2002, 01:24 PM	#21
Mike Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 100	So crimes have been committed both in the name of gods (the crusades) and in the name of Darwin (the holocaust). And because of this, I agree that the government should not legislate beliefs about either God or Darwin. But what about the meaning of life? The quoted essay attempted to demonstrate that there was no inherent political advantage to atheism, but that wasn't the most significant point of the article. The main point seems to be that since there are no inherent political (or material) benefits either to a belief or to a non-belief in God, what then may be the psychological benefits relating to a belief in God. Psychology is indeed finding evidence that spiritual belief correlates significantly with physical health. Speaking of the holocaust, Victor Frankl suggested that many of the survivors had the tenacity to survive (given the option) in part because of a strong sense of meaning in their lives. As Darwin might put it: The reason there are so many believers is that belief in God (for whatever reason) has been naturally selected--longer life resulting from spirituality increases the chances of reproduction. As God might put it: People believe because it is their God given nature to do so--and to go contrary to divine nature is physically unhealthy. Either way there seems to be a distinct advantage to belief. Atheists may be far outnumbered on this planet for more reasons than simply historical precedence.

08-26-2002, 01:34 PM	#24
WJ Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 812	Bible! Of course, you matter. The question is, why would you care to hear my opinions? Actually, I went back to read your posts and only saw a few questions. You said: "Well, I wonder if the author of this has considered the fact that according to his philosophy, he should make no effort to prolong his own life. Exercise, medical treatment, personal safety, all these things are just keeping you theists away from your fairy land paradise at the right hand of the Great Magical Sky-Juju. This goes for your children also, you theists should hope that your child dies early before it has a chance to damn itself to hellfire, right?" "It seems to me that it isn't us that lack the "intestinal fortitude" to persue our beliefs to their logical conclusions, the message here seems to be "nihilism is so bleak, therefore God exists!" Bible, are you suggesting then, that nihilism is consistent with atheism, and inconsistent with theism? Then you said: "Does this seem to anyone else to suggest that we should just shut up, because life is meaningless without the existence of The Great Magic Sky-Juju? quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Personally I think most atheists though not thinking a god exists have little reason or concern to persuade others of their own disbelief. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I personally don't try to de-program the theists I know, The Great Magic Sky-Juju only ever comes up when they bring it up. This forum is the only place I ever really talk about it, if the theists here didn't want their faith challenged they wouldn't be here so what's the problem? __________end quote Bible, shouldn't that read: if atheists were so sure about their belief, that the 'freethinkers' EOG would not exist?

08-26-2002, 01:35 PM	#25
phlebas Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Metropolis Posts: 916	Well, this devolved along a predictable path. Off to RRP.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.