K

Again, decisions can be made without fear. While I might not find it prudent to jump in without more information, that doesn't mean I'm afraid of it. Like I asked before, do you do everything that you aren't afraid to do?

Zentraedi

No, I am saying an atheist morality is dependant. Their are no doctrines stating what an atheist morals should be like. The "goodness" can not be answered.

I think compassion and fairness are conditioned to some extent. No one has the same level of compassion and fairness. One can be more fair than another. One can have more compassion than another. One could have so little compassion that you could say none exists, therefore these concepts do not have commonality among all humanity.

Mageth

No, I am saying an atheist morality is dependant. Their are no doctrines stating what an atheist morals should be like. The "goodness" can not be answered.

There's something very basically wrong here. Atheism is merely a claim (in my case, anyway) that I lack belief in god(s). There is not, and perhaps shouldn't be, anything called "atheist morality". Whatever moral system I have is "outside" of my atheism (e.g. secular humanism). You are correct in that my moral system may "borrow" moral concepts which are perceived as "theistic" morals and are useful and "reasonable" (e.g. the Golden Rule). But there's no reason why it has to, and there's no reason why I can't adopt morals that are not found in any theistic system into my moral system. Once I borrow them, they are no longer theistic morals anyway - they are part of whatever moral system (e.g. secular humanism) that I adhere to.

If something's a "good idea" and useful for a healthy society, it's a good idea in whatever moral system it's in. In that sense, it's independent of its origin.

[ November 01, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>

Zentraedi

This was basis for a point made. Some people need the obvious stated, some try to make an arguement against this point under this very topic.

Mageth

This was basis for a point made. Some people need the obvious stated, some try to make an arguement against this point under this very topic.

And my initial argument against it was satirical and intended to make a point.

I function quite well without reassurance from an imaginary or real "foreign intelligence" in my life. I submit that as an argument against your "point."

Rusting Car Bumper

So then why don't you fear the UNKNOWN giant dragon waiting on your roof to eat you when you exit the house?

DC

Rusting Car Bumper

Nowhere in Christianity is the idea of self-determination of the governed in the structure of government. Dmocracy was a Greek idea which was put aside when Christianity began to rise in Europe. In fact the governments during the Christian rise of Europe were generally totalitarian monarchies.

It was enlightenment and post enlightenment thinkers, some of whom openly opposed Christianity, who revived democratic traditions.

DC

[ November 01, 2002: Message edited by: DigitalChicken ]</p>

Jamie_L

Well, I for one have functioned well enough through the loss of a child, the panic of terrorism and anthrax around the corner, and local sniper murders without any reassurance from any supernatural "foreign intelligence". My only emotional support has come from myself and my support network (friends and family).

Probably about the way it works now, only people would have more free time on Sundays.

Except for all the people doing bad things to other people, yeah.

In the history of the human race, many civilizations have formed independely of each other with many different religions. A good number of those religions had to have been false. They all had a moral framework that more or less worked for them.

So, if some culture developed a morality independent of other cultures based on gods that were not real, then that means they got no outside moral reference. They based their morality on little more than how best to get along with each other. If an ancient culture can do that, why can't modern man?

You are somewhat correct in the sense that as long as humans have existed in groups, they have had to form moral frameworks to get along with each other, and every new framework is based in some part on those basic tennent of "getting along". However, this basic morality probably pre-dates religion, so one could just as well say religion could not have formed its moral standards without drawing on the moral standards of pre-religious people.

Unless, of course, you want to argue that people did not evolve, but rather were created by God with a religion already in place.

Jamie

[ November 01, 2002: Message edited by: Jamie_L ]</p>

Hawkingfan

No. Not "full of atheists", but America was a DIVERSE land, respecting multiple beliefs (as it does today). You cannot claim it was founded ENTIRELY on Christianity either. Want proof? Go to <a href="http://www.theology.edu/journal/volume2/ushistor.htm" target="_blank">www.theology.edu/journal/volume2/ushistor.htm</a>
just to give you a taste:

Thomas Jefferson writes in his book "Notes on Virginia": "But it does me no injury to my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket or breaks my leg."(Dumas Malon, "Jefferson the President: First Term 1801-1805." Boston: Little Brown and Company, 1970, p.191)

Thomas Paine (he was a founding father incase you don't know) states in "The Age of Reason" (you may want to read this pamphlette as it is one of the most important documents in American history): "I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Chruch, nor by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any church that I know of. My mind is my own church."

John Adams writes in the Senate-ratified Treaty of Peace and Friendship with Tripoli, Article XI:
"America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."

And by the way, 20% of Americans were found to be atheists at the last US Census. It's growing.

Hawkingfan

[quote]Originally posted by Zentraedi:

Can a man war-torn, on the brink of death, reaching his hand out toward help for days-on-end come up with a theory of godlessness that will settle his fears?

Yes, speaking for myself as an atheist, when I lie on my deathbed, I will be satisfied with the life that I have led and the things that I have done. And be afraid of what? Dying? I will be content in knowing that all living things must die sometime. It is a natural, scientific process. It is the believer in the afterlife who must be afraid of were they will be going, not me, I'll be dead. Christians are the ones who use the Bible to deal with the things they fear, not atheists.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Zentraedi:Is Atheism productive?

I have led a productive life so far, yes.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Zentraedi:My belief is that no man/woman can function without some sort reassurance from a foreign intelligence, be it imaginary or not.

I have yet to lose any of my "functions".

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Zentraedi:What does an atheist do when the reassurance is not present in a physical manner?

I don't know. Turn to reason? Logic? Get over it?

No we wouldn't. Ever hear of the Code of Hammurabi? May want to consult a history textbook. A functional society did not arise from the belief in God. Early in the years of evolution, morals evolved from the behavior exhibited by those who were the most successful at passing on their genes (i.e. reproducing). To keep it simple, if you behaved badly, your chances were not so good. Even though it did not completely prevent evil acts, it brought everyone together as a moral, functional society.