Now it's only third world countries and USA that are still religious

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by johnsweeting, Jun 30, 2013.

  1. JoeB131
    Online

    JoeB131 Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    111,032
    Thanks Received:
    9,177
    Trophy Points:
    2,055
    Location:
    Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
    Ratings:
    +28,441

    It wasn't a majority that the slaveholders decided to cite to rationalize their holding of slaves. In fact, quite the contrary, the plead states rights and tried to find every dodge to avoid the will of the majority on this subject.

    you know what they did cite? The Fucking Bible. God gave a whole shitload of rules rationalizing slaver, such as when it was okay to beat your slave, when it was okay to sell your daughter into slavery, and so on .


    As opposed to a religionist, who tries to pretend that all the bad shit they ever did wasn't their own fault.

    The Pope Collaborating with Hitler. Well, he had a good reason.
    Inquisitions, crusades, witch-burnings, torture of heretics, molesting altar boys, etc.

    Well, that's no reflection on God. The "NO True Scotsman Fallacy" applies.
     
  2. thewanderer
    Offline

    thewanderer The Wanderer

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2013
    Messages:
    61
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Southeast
    Ratings:
    +13
     
  3. JoeB131
    Online

    JoeB131 Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    111,032
    Thanks Received:
    9,177
    Trophy Points:
    2,055
    Location:
    Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
    Ratings:
    +28,441
    I would argue that Atheism has a superior morality because the Atheist has to rationalize his position to reasonable people.

    As opposed to the religionist, who can just point to his book of Bronze Age Fairy Tales and say, "See, says so right here. Stone the Gays!!!"

    Of course, the way Religionists get out of it is they pretend the really bad stuff isn't actually in the bible. 12 years of Catholic Education, I didn't hear about the juicy parts like Jephthah butchering his own daughter until I became an atheist. (In fact, Catholic Schools avoided the whole book of Judges for some reason, and it's the best part of the book!)
     
  4. thewanderer
    Offline

    thewanderer The Wanderer

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2013
    Messages:
    61
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Southeast
    Ratings:
    +13
    In kindergarten I was taught that when I pointed my finger at someone else I was also pointing three fingers back at myself, and that has turned out to be a good lesson over the years.

    Take a minute, back up, and read the exchanges we've had with as objective a perspective as you can. You are doing exactly what you (rightly) observe religious people doing.

    I've been attempting to get you and another poster to deal with a very real, historically acknowledged logical problem of atheism. When a very shallow surface answer (complete with snide remark about a Sky Pixie) was exposed as such, you began to pretend the problem isn't there just like religious people pretend parts of the Bible are not there. The other poster did too. When faced with a difficult question, you both chose to focus on what religious people do rather than deal with the question regarding atheism. That's a classic non-confront.

    IME atheists tend to like to view themselves as being measured and analytical. The truth is that when it comes down to brass tacks I don't find that to be any more common among atheists than I do religious people. I still see people reacting emotionally and using logic to justify the emotional decision.

    I can understand the reaction and the emotion; I live in the deep south and around here an atheist is considered only a very small step up from an Islamic terrorist. I personally can't reconcile the logistical problem with atheism that I've referred to, which is why I do not consider myself an atheist. On the other hand, I don't believe in talking snakes and resurrected zombies either.

    Just because I reject one, however, does not mean it's in my best interest to accept the other whole-cloth. If I find a problem in either I must at least attempt to reconcile it, or else my only honest answer is, "I don't know, neither one seems 100% accurate and I can't figure it out," which is the only answer I've got right now. One thing I do know, and that is: it is to no benefit to your side that the other side also has problems.

    And so, the problem referenced here remains.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2013
  5. KevinWestern
    Offline

    KevinWestern Hello

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    4,145
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Ratings:
    +541
    Not sure I agree with a “sizable amount of the time”. I would argue that my explanation could apply to most everything, including why stealing is bad, or why rape is bad, or even why you should love thy neighbor. I think most all “good” actions (like being honest, courageous, sharing, etc) are all pretty straightforward in their helpfulness to both the individual and the community. Personally, I think you’d be rather hardpressed to find a Biblical “moral” that can not be explained through common sense.

    The only ones I can think of that cannot be explained through "common sense" - so to speak - are the morals such as loving God, avoiding blashphemy, etc.

    I don’t know wanderer. I think the idea of a benevolent dictator is squashed by the common sense notion that the dictator will eventually die and that ultimate power may fall into the wrong hands. The model simply doesn’t work and therefore it makes the most sense to choose a “democracy” and a sort of living, breathing gov’t based on the will of the people of the day.

    Yea, but why can’t morality be nothing more than a “selfish” utility for both the individual and society - what’s wrong with that? What’s “right” becomes essentially the action that produces the best outcome for all parties involved.
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2013
  6. westwall
    Offline

    westwall Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    58,665
    Thanks Received:
    12,717
    Trophy Points:
    2,180
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +44,823





    What's amusing is you militant atheists proselytize just as hard, and just as annoyingly as the deists. Atheism is every bit the same as religion in that respect. I'm an agnostic and have been for my whole life. I RESPECT all viewpoints and expect my viewpoints to be respected as well.

    Just like I am annoyed by deists trying to convert me to their way of thinking I am just as annoyed by you supposedly more "moral" atheists spewing your nonsense.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. thewanderer
    Offline

    thewanderer The Wanderer

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2013
    Messages:
    61
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Southeast
    Ratings:
    +13
    The thread button says my reply is too short...HA!
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2013
  8. KevinWestern
    Offline

    KevinWestern Hello

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    4,145
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Ratings:
    +541
    Just about to dip here but want to make a few points.

    1.) Obviously it's difficult to assign values to the Utilitarianism system, however (I believe) we are advanced spiritual beings that are far more intelligent, wise and intuitive than we believe and see on just the surface. I believe we are all connected - in a sense - so that when faced with a decision, we can quickly rifle through all of the possible actions and know the one that derives the most utility overall.

    We may not select that option (because we want INSTANT utility now), but deep down we know generally what the best choice should have been. Note that I know this is getting highly opinionated, as these are my own personal beliefs.

    I believe there is (at the highest level) no "self", as we are all part of the same thing.

    2.) Say you are religious, does the bible list out values to all of our daily decisions (ie is one thing worse than another, etc) in a comprehensive manner. We're still going to be guessing anyways in most cases. The point I'm making is what sort of alternative do any of the world's religions offer to our basic Utilitarianistic view?

    3.) You mention Justice and the apartheid. Perhaps temporarily white rule would mean better conditions for the Africans, however, is that necessarily the best "end state" taking all factors into account? Perhaps the civil unrest, war, would be temporary and necessary to forming the best society? Also, perhaps the fact that the Africans were experiencing famine, war, etc in the absence of white rule was not due to the absence of white rule itself - but instead the fact that the Africans have been brutally repressed and exploited by the whites for centuries (and would continue to be exploited whether or not a white figure head was in place).

    4.) Definitely there are conflicts to self/society, but the fact of the matter is that we DO have the people who jump on the grenade (why is this if no utility is gained?). Perhaps it's because people do derive a great deal of utility and honor from saving the lives of others. Again, I'm a spiritual person and believe strongly in "oneness" of all. I think our actions are both consciously and subconsciously driven to reach an equilibrium benefiting both self and whole.

    5.) As far as I'm concerned, the democracy in America has brought its citizens more wealth and a better quality of life than virtually any other society in history. Even our poor have running water, refrigerators, cell phones, and access to cheap entertainment. Sure, democracies might crumble more easily, but is stability the key defining factor in what makes the best form of government? I certainly don't believe so.
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2013
  9. JoeB131
    Online

    JoeB131 Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    111,032
    Thanks Received:
    9,177
    Trophy Points:
    2,055
    Location:
    Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
    Ratings:
    +28,441
    Guy, I ain't going to play this sissy-ass High School debate club nonsense with you.

    You asked me why I think my morality as a Atheist is superior to a religionists, and I gave you two very succinct answers.

    1) When I do something, it's not because I'm afraid the Sky Pixie is going to punish me.

    2) In my life, I've never did... (whole list of stuff religions people did.)

    To me, that's a good enough argument.






    I used to use this cop-out for a while. "Well, yeah, I don't believe in XXXX, but gosh darn, there has to be a purpose or a reason for creation, etc. etc. "

    So let's get down to what probably keeps you on the superstition reservation. Pascal's Wager, or as it often called "Fire Insurance". We are all afraid of death, as we should be. We are all afraid of what come after, especially when you have more years behind than ahead. (The situation I find myself in now.)
     
  10. MaryL
    Offline

    MaryL Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    Messages:
    12,941
    Thanks Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Midwestern U.S.
    Ratings:
    +8,691
    No, sorry kid. Superstition rules the world. It seems to always rule, they hunt down endangered Rhinos and take their horns. All those Chinese wankers KNOW it's all bullshit. How do we convince them other wise?
     

Share This Page