Originally posted by dj2becker
A friend of mine had the following to say: "Religion dooms you atheism saves you. I'm not being philosophical here. I don't have all the answers, but something tells me that if christians, jews, and muslims agreed there was no god, poof! WORLD PEACE."
My question is" "From an atheistic point of view, why would war be wrong in the first place? If ...[text shortened]... ng? War is perfectly compatible with atheistic evolutionary "survival of the fittest"."
“....War is perfectly compatible with atheistic evolutionary "survival of the fittest"." ...”
there is just so much wrong with that above statement:
atheists don't have an “evolutionary survival of the fittest" attitude any more than theists.
When we talk about “evolution”, we mean biological Evolution by default for that is the correct default scientific meaning.
The theory of biological Evolution is NOT to be confused with social Darwinism as you are doing here and social Darwinism is NOT even a scientific theory and it is also rejected and condemned by the overwhelming majority of atheists including myself.
Contrary to popular belief, Hitler was a theist and it was mainly theists that came up with this “social Darwinism” nonsense.
Evolution says NOTHING about how we SHOULD nor SHOULD NOT behave (“SHOULD” in the moral sense).
The theory of Evolution is just a theory of the origins of the diversity of species and NOTHING MORE and NOT a theory about morality nor how we should behave (morally) towards each other so it says and implies nothing about what is moral and what we should (morally) do. It has no say on the issue on human warfare and most atheists including myself, just like most theists, generally would like to discourage warfare. So, contrary to what you said above, warfare is NOT “compatible” with “ atheistic evolutionary” anything. Warfare certainly is not generally agreeable to my outlook!
Also, Evolution is not so much about "survival of the fittest" because that would be far to simplistic a statement; it is about survival of the most adapted traits. If it was simply and literally about "survival of the fittest" then, for example, the “fittest” bees in the hive would not sacrifice their lives defending their hive as to cause the inheritable traits of the hive genes to be passed on.
Contrary to popular opinion, Charles Darwin himself NEVER used the term "survival of the fittest" and for good reason; it would have been a highly misleading quote and a misrepresentation of his theory!
And in any case, how many times have theists explicitly and verbally used their religion to justify their warfare? Answer, many.
How times have theists explicitly and verbally used atheism to justify their warfare? Answer, never!
Also, what about those theists that flew planes into tall buildings? would that be due to their “atheism”?
The evidence of history shows atheism is CLEARLY not the cause of warfare.