Frotiw

Why is it that apparently noone(few at most) seem not be able to actually break free of religion and dogma. I am not speaking of dogmatic in the narrow sense. My point is that yes we are can now easily break free of e.g. cristian religion but to what? What are the options? Physicalistic dogmatism lacking any foundation? The religious optimism of historical progress? Progress through what and by what means? How can anyone even speak of progress it is naive.
THERE IS NO RELIGION
THERE IS NO MORAL
THERE IS NO MENING
THERE IS NO ORDER

These are easy words to utter by mouth but when are they actually accepted by heart. What narrow almost comical sense naturalism speak of the mentioned statements. Why even presume that there is order to discover? What optimism.
When will naturalism ever accept the noctrine of secularity and not just secularity in disguise.
Then there is the atheists I am among but what phoneyness among them how few of them have actually rejected god? Naturalism still naively believing in beatiful stucture and system organized in nature it self? Based on what?
How few did actually ever REALLY reject GOD. Who will put themselves out of moral? Who will put themselves out of order? Who will put themselves out of science? Who will put themselves out of philosophy? Who will reject rationality and optimism. For what reason must we justify?

King Rat

We don't really need cars either, but just try to get anything done in L.A. without one.

Frotiw

LOL, humor we need though.

btw. emu and tapir seems to be extremly relevant animals.

GunnerJ

This really is more of a general religious issue.

-Rimstalker, SL&S Mod

Bumble Bee Tuna

I tried and tried and reread the OP multiple times, but I honestly can't understand what this is about. Care to clarify?

-B

jj

It would appear that this guy is trying for the doofus manouever of "no religion" implies:

No Morals
No Meaning
No Order

Obviously he can't accept that one can be true and the others don't necessarily follow.

Eudaimonist

REMEMBER, I AM NOT BEING DOGMATIC! I AM NOT! I'M NOT, I SAY! I AM ABSOLUTELY NOT DOGMATIC! ......

Infidelettante

Now you all know that I don't get into the logic of things here. It is just how my brain works [or doesn't if you like] and I can't make head nor tail out of this post. Is it just me or is anyone else having the same trouble?

Eudaimonist

He sounds like someone who thinks that denying religion means one must deny everything that goes with it, such as morality. What he doesn't understand is that this is hardly a requirement of being an atheist. While he may reject such things, and possibly for good reasons (though I doubt this), none of us are obligated simply by our atheism to do so.

Frotiw

I hope you do not get offended for the reasons for making this post. That was definately not the purpose.

A. -In a late night rambling been haveing a few drinks with friends I found myself in a need to burst out expressing somehing not very rational and not concerned with logic and structure.

B. -In a rambling mood I felt like expressing some heidegger and Nietzsche(mostly) pessimism against the possibility of breaking free from dogmatism and optimism. In particular the optimism of finding order and structure in the world. Also is was perhaps meant as response of the phoneyness or inconsequently rejection of religion and order. Not that people should go back to religion but instead truely free themselves from religion and the optimism of order. Religion is to be understood in a very wide sense e.g. some naturalists is to be considered religious in this view. The outburst was not meant as beeing logic and rational it is not even a stanse I would take(considering it a stanse would be too optimistic and against it's own doctrine). The point with religion was an attempt to demonstrate the dificulties of rejecting religion with exchanging it with a new one(being it political ideology, scientifical optimism of philosophy). Psychoanalysis is an example of a new religion with forgivingness of sins and everything. "All your sins are now forgiven -you parents and upbringing is responsablel for your current sin not you". Instead of Adam and Eve being responsable for you sin. The optimism than one can change it self, history and demtermination by merely knowing one psychologican background and so forth.
Socialism the religious optimism that people can reject there own egoistic motivations. "God is mophine for the peopl" -Yes in socialism there is no room for God as he would be competing with the god stalin and his religious biddings.

My original intention was positioned somewhere loose among A and B. You may put you mark wherever between A and B as you feel like.