Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Rousseau_CHN · 12-01-2002, 04:44 AM

When I was in college, I was some sort of a Kantian devotee <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> I believe I still am. Now the problem is Kant said that even if God does not exist, it would still be wrong to awaken these fools from their "philosophical slumber."
"Because," says Kant, "it would deprive them of their zest for life."

Kant believed that if we, atheist, succeeded in convincing them that there is no God. They would start committing mass suicide. "Life is absurd! God does not exist

What else am I living for?

" They would lament before taking the rat poison.

All I am just saying, maybe we shouldn't overdo it. Maybe fairy tales and myths and burning bushes have their purpose.

Zadok001 · 12-01-2002, 05:28 AM

They most certainly do have a purpose. And God forbid (no pun intended) we ever convince Christians en masse to come over to the dark side. But we literally can't do that.

See, what Kant neglected to mention is that waking someone from a philosophical slumber is nearly impossible. Unless they're sleeping very lightly, chances are they just won't wake up when you hit them with sledgehammers. As a result, arguing with Christians online only seems to wake up those already willing to doubt their religon. Those who look to the Bible as the first and only truth, as a matter of course, cannot be convinced otherwise. (They're logic is wonderfully circular. The Bible says it is the Word of God, therefore it is.) Those already in doubt, however, can be 'saved' in a non-traditional sense, and brought over to agnosticism or atheism.

The result is that those people become useful, openminded members of society in general. They have a viewpoint on both sides of the issue, and can think for themselves. I almost feel I have a duty to bring these questions up to Christians.

Btw, you're a Kantian fellow. How, in the name of all that is(n't) Holy, do you use the categorical imperative? I understand HOW it works, but how does one APPLY that monstrosity of a ethical theory to an everyday situation?

Rousseau_CHN · 12-01-2002, 06:25 AM

1. The Categorical Imperative

Simply put, categorical imperative means universal law. What is true, according to Kant, must pass the test of universality.

2. Is it practical?

I couldn't see otherwise. Let's say you owe someone money, You could a) lie to him, or b) kill him.

2.a. Lying

Could lying pass the test of universality? Well, let's put it this way, say there's a city where telling the truth is a crime. A tourist came and asked one of the local, "excuse me sir, do you know this street. " The local said, "yes I do...I mean I don't...I mean I do but..." Let's suppose a cop came by "You're under arrest for telling the truth...I mean you're not under arrest...I mean..."

2. b. Killing

If there ever was a law like "You can kill everyone

" In a few months, there'd be no one left to implement the law. Therefore, it to fail the test of universality.

2. c. So if you plan to be a Kantian, you better start thinking about paying what you owe.

Does it sound practical? Yes, in fact, going against it, sounds impractical and absurd.

3. What forced me to write this Kantian Philosophy?

Well I wrote it because a Catholic friend of mine told me that she cried when she heard a friend said that there is no God.

I felt that somehow we should know when and when not to assert our beliefs.

To Zadook, man, I think we can find solace in the fact that we can't convert everyone.

Man this is the first time I heard someone finding solace in incompetence.

Zadok001 · 12-01-2002, 07:05 AM

When competence results in mass suicide, I'd say I'm pretty happy being ineffective.

Keith Russell · 12-01-2002, 12:29 PM

Greetings:

It isn't about them.

I don't owe 'them' anything, anyway.

It's about me.

I would benefit from living in a rational world, populated by rational people--as opposed to an arbitrary, dogmatic, faith-based one.

Devilnaut · 12-02-2002, 10:42 AM

Keith:

It isn't about them to you maybe.

Many people value the lives and well being of their fellow man.

Quote:

I would benefit from living in a rational world, populated by rational people--as opposed to an arbitrary, dogmatic, faith-based one.

If it breeds the sort of self-interest you're espousing, I'm not sure you would, and I'm sure I would not.

[ December 02, 2002: Message edited by: Devilnaut ]</p>

Rousseau_CHN · 12-03-2002, 02:07 AM

Above me, i forgot the name, there is a post which I believe goes to show you that being an atheist doesn't make you necessarily a humanist.

Now to Kant once again:

It is said that this theory of Kant "kicks God out of the front door but let him in the back door."

Trust me I am not letting God in the back door.

I would also like to clarify before someone misinterpreted what I post. I am not saying that we shouldn't speak our minds, in fact, I believe that we should...what I am saying is that we shouldn't overdo it (we shouldn't hit below the belt) because to some people...Religion means a lot to them...and if religion makes them a better person...by God I will let them be.

P.S. Like a true Kantian, I am first and foremost a humanist...and everything else is secondary including my being an atheist.

Rousseau_CHN · 12-03-2002, 04:46 AM

Is Kant an atheist?

Hell no...but he might as well been one.

Keith Russell · 12-03-2002, 08:52 PM

Devilnut:

Sorry, I would much rather live in a world where more people minded their own business.

The Taliban cared greatly about their fellow man, so much they couldn't stand living with people who might just possibly believe differently than they.

Osama also cares about people, so much that he couldn't stand to allow some people more than an ocean away, to continue to live.

Yes, caring about others is overrated.

MYOB, please and thank you.

Keith.

Rousseau_CHN · 12-04-2002, 04:06 AM

"Act in such a way that you treat humanity whether in your own person or in the person of any other never simply as a means but always at the same time as an end."
Immanuel Kant

Whenever we persuade others to convert to our disbelief, we should, if we be true kantian, always keep in mind that what we are doing is also for their benefit.

12-01-2002, 04:44 AM	#1
Rousseau_CHN Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 441	Kantian Atheism When I was in college, I was some sort of a Kantian devotee <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> I believe I still am. Now the problem is Kant said that even if God does not exist, it would still be wrong to awaken these fools from their "philosophical slumber." "Because," says Kant, "it would deprive them of their zest for life." Kant believed that if we, atheist, succeeded in convincing them that there is no God. They would start committing mass suicide. "Life is absurd! God does not exist What else am I living for? " They would lament before taking the rat poison. All I am just saying, maybe we shouldn't overdo it. Maybe fairy tales and myths and burning bushes have their purpose.

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

12-01-2002, 05:28 AM	#2
Zadok001 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Two Steps Ahead Posts: 1,124	They most certainly do have a purpose. And God forbid (no pun intended) we ever convince Christians en masse to come over to the dark side. But we literally can't do that. See, what Kant neglected to mention is that waking someone from a philosophical slumber is nearly impossible. Unless they're sleeping very lightly, chances are they just won't wake up when you hit them with sledgehammers. As a result, arguing with Christians online only seems to wake up those already willing to doubt their religon. Those who look to the Bible as the first and only truth, as a matter of course, cannot be convinced otherwise. (They're logic is wonderfully circular. The Bible says it is the Word of God, therefore it is.) Those already in doubt, however, can be 'saved' in a non-traditional sense, and brought over to agnosticism or atheism. The result is that those people become useful, openminded members of society in general. They have a viewpoint on both sides of the issue, and can think for themselves. I almost feel I have a duty to bring these questions up to Christians. Btw, you're a Kantian fellow. How, in the name of all that is(n't) Holy, do you use the categorical imperative? I understand HOW it works, but how does one APPLY that monstrosity of a ethical theory to an everyday situation?

12-01-2002, 06:25 AM	#3
Rousseau_CHN Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 441	1. The Categorical Imperative Simply put, categorical imperative means universal law. What is true, according to Kant, must pass the test of universality. 2. Is it practical? I couldn't see otherwise. Let's say you owe someone money, You could a) lie to him, or b) kill him. 2.a. Lying Could lying pass the test of universality? Well, let's put it this way, say there's a city where telling the truth is a crime. A tourist came and asked one of the local, "excuse me sir, do you know this street. " The local said, "yes I do...I mean I don't...I mean I do but..." Let's suppose a cop came by "You're under arrest for telling the truth...I mean you're not under arrest...I mean..." 2. b. Killing If there ever was a law like "You can kill everyone " In a few months, there'd be no one left to implement the law. Therefore, it to fail the test of universality. 2. c. So if you plan to be a Kantian, you better start thinking about paying what you owe. Does it sound practical? Yes, in fact, going against it, sounds impractical and absurd. 3. What forced me to write this Kantian Philosophy? Well I wrote it because a Catholic friend of mine told me that she cried when she heard a friend said that there is no God. I felt that somehow we should know when and when not to assert our beliefs. To Zadook, man, I think we can find solace in the fact that we can't convert everyone. Man this is the first time I heard someone finding solace in incompetence. <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

12-01-2002, 07:05 AM	#4
Zadok001 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Two Steps Ahead Posts: 1,124	When competence results in mass suicide, I'd say I'm pretty happy being ineffective.

12-01-2002, 12:29 PM	#5
Keith Russell Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Overland Park, Kansas Posts: 1,336	Greetings: It isn't about them. I don't owe 'them' anything, anyway. It's about me. I would benefit from living in a rational world, populated by rational people--as opposed to an arbitrary, dogmatic, faith-based one.

12-03-2002, 02:07 AM	#7
Rousseau_CHN Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 441	Above me, i forgot the name, there is a post which I believe goes to show you that being an atheist doesn't make you necessarily a humanist. Now to Kant once again: It is said that this theory of Kant "kicks God out of the front door but let him in the back door." Trust me I am not letting God in the back door. I would also like to clarify before someone misinterpreted what I post. I am not saying that we shouldn't speak our minds, in fact, I believe that we should...what I am saying is that we shouldn't overdo it (we shouldn't hit below the belt) because to some people...Religion means a lot to them...and if religion makes them a better person...by God I will let them be. P.S. Like a true Kantian, I am first and foremost a humanist...and everything else is secondary including my being an atheist.

12-03-2002, 04:46 AM	#8
Rousseau_CHN Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 441	Is Kant an atheist? Hell no...but he might as well been one.

12-03-2002, 08:52 PM	#9
Keith Russell Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Overland Park, Kansas Posts: 1,336	Devilnut: Sorry, I would much rather live in a world where more people minded their own business. The Taliban cared greatly about their fellow man, so much they couldn't stand living with people who might just possibly believe differently than they. Osama also cares about people, so much that he couldn't stand to allow some people more than an ocean away, to continue to live. Yes, caring about others is overrated. MYOB, please and thank you. Keith.

12-04-2002, 04:06 AM	#10
Rousseau_CHN Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 441	"Act in such a way that you treat humanity whether in your own person or in the person of any other never simply as a means but always at the same time as an end." Immanuel Kant Whenever we persuade others to convert to our disbelief, we should, if we be true kantian, always keep in mind that what we are doing is also for their benefit.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.