Rusting Car Bumper

Consistency does NOT make one an "authentic atheist." Not believing in god does... regardless of whether you are consistent or a raving crackpot.

First, when he says "atheists are not consistent" then what does this mean?

Does it means amongst atheists there is no consistent morality? Of course there isn't. There is no consistent morality amongst theists either. Further, there isn't consistent morality even amongst the members of one religion usually.

If he means that individual atheists aren't consistent then of course he's right. Why? Because rarely is anyone consistent regardless of religious affiliation.

That is simply how life is. Ethics is a messy and unclear business much of the time.

DC

[ September 26, 2002: Message edited by: DigitalChicken ]</p>

JerryM

For Amen-Moses and Sarpedon:

I think you're both on-track considering pain (or its avoidance) as the basis for a "fundamental" precept. I would phrase it as avoidance of bodily harm or injury. Science clearly shows us that in most all circumstances, sentient animal will act to avoid painful stimuli. And we know that what we call pain is generally (though not exclusively) a neurologic signal of bodily harm or injury. So I think we can rightfully say that evolution has selected organisms which are, at some level, "hard-wired" to avoid pain. Because, of course, this would serve to protect individuals from harm, and, in turn, increase the survival chances for the whole species. Thus, avoidance of pain is something that is "good," or desirable from a strict scientific/biologic standpoint. This doesn't mean that pain avoidance is the absolutely highest motivator (animals may endure pain to protect a mate, or their offspring, for example), but I think we can call it a foundational precept for an objective morality.

uhcord

"atheists are not consistent"

I do not think consistancy is an important thing in life or morality (to a point).

You should always be open to changes, and it just adds another reason to why I believe religion is a curse to humans.

As times change, we learn new things and our morals and views change. But religion calls for an absolute morality, an absolute view. These "absolutes" do change (slavery, gays=bad, etc.) but it takes them about 10 times longer than the rest of the world. This slows down progress tremendously. Not only does it slow down moral progress, it also slows down science and other things that the Church opposes.

People should be open to change, and (most) religions do not call for changes as they become apparent.

For me, consistency is unimportant is most areas.

*shrug* I hate people that are not willing to change.

Glory

Consistency in action:

Zero Tolerance Policies
"Your Mom gave put a plastic knife in your lunchbox so you coud peel your apple? Doesn't matter. You're expelled for bringing a weapon to school."

Glory

jlowder

This apparently well-intentioned compliment could also be an insult. Analogously, consider: "Professor, I think you are a very intelligent person, and I find that very rare among theists."

<strong> I'm not sure what his point is. Is his point that most atheists lack moral conviction? That most atheists do not do what is morally required? Sounds like an ad hominem to me.

[ September 28, 2002: Message edited by: jlowder ]</p>

Agnos1

Consistency doesn't necessarily equate with adaptability.

galiel

Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.
- Ralph Waldo Emerson