Spirituality
02 Apr 13
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116939
03 Apr 13
Originally posted by wolfgang59No I didn't say anyone shared anything.
... yet you say they share a philosohy?
Apart from a non-belief in a supernatural being what is this shared philosophy?
I've just given you examples of the philosophical mind-set of some atheists here and their motivations. I've also already stated that atheism is not a homogenous group.
Are you actually reading what I say or just assuming it means what you want/expect it to?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116939
Originally posted by LemonJelloNo I didn't say that at all.
No, you haven't been coherent. You started off by saying that atheism implies no morality.
If you want to engage with me, try reading what I've said or at least asking for clarification, instead of putting words in my mouth and then firing off your criticism of them.
Originally posted by divegeesterI refer you back to your first post in this thread. Try keeping better track of the things you say.
No I didn't say that at all.
If you want to engage with me, try reading what I've said or at least asking for clarification, instead of putting words in my mouth and then firing off your criticism of them.
EDIT: that "atheism implies no morality" is a pretty faithful rendering of what you said when you said that "...atheism really says...there is no 'morality'", don't you think?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116939
04 Apr 13
3 edits
Those were indeed the words I used, I apologise for jumping on you.
Here is what I meant by those words:
to believe that their is no god is to deny the moral code which is laid down by god i.e. the relevant 10 commandments and therefore we can make our own morality or indeed do as we please, whatever seems right to us.
What I thought you were accusing me of saying was atheists (atheists) cannot be moral.
The former is a mind-set which (and I went on later to explain) denies there is a god therefore any associated laws and moral code is obsolete/null. The later (what I thought you were saying I said) is that someone with that mind-set (an atheist) cannot be moral. That is what I meant, and I do accept twhitehead's comment that some atheists are more 'moral' than some Chrisitans - and I think I actually said that in a subsequent post.
Originally posted by divegeesterWell then it was a very odd way of putting it. Its as if you think 'morality' is owned by your religion. So when you say 'morality' you mean 'the moral code which is laid down by god i.e. the relevant 10 commandments'.
Here is what I meant by those words:
to believe that their is no god is to deny the moral code which is laid down by god i.e. the relevant 10 commandments and therefore we can make our own morality or indeed do as we please, whatever seems right to us.
Its also interesting that you restrict it to the 10 commandments. We clearly have very different understandings of the word.
And how did you decide which of the 10 commandments are moral code and which are not?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116939
04 Apr 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadI think the morality we have now is a construct that with the core element of Mosaic law, I provided a brief list of those as evidence of it's documentation but you dismissed it and failed to provide your own evidence of how atheism has contributed to the construction of our moral code. As I explained above this is not saying that an atheist cannot be moral, nor indeed cannot be more moral than a Christian.
Well then it was a very odd way of putting it. Its as if you think 'morality' is owned by your religion. So when you say 'morality' you mean 'the moral code which is laid down by god i.e. the relevant 10 commandments'.
Its also interesting that you restrict it to the 10 commandments. We clearly have very different understandings of the word.
And how did you decide which of the 10 commandments are moral code and which are not?
Originally posted by divegeesterI still want clarification as to whether you consider say the commandment not to make a graven image of God to be part of morality. If not, why not? It is not at all clear what your definition of morality really is.
I think the morality we have now is a construct that with the core element of Mosaic law, I provided a brief list of those as evidence of it's documentation but you dismissed it and failed to provide your own evidence of how atheism has contributed to the construction of our moral code. As I explained above this is not saying that an atheist cannot be moral, nor indeed cannot be more moral than a Christian.
I clearly stated that I do not consider atheism to be a philosophy nor do I believe atheism has contributed to the construction of our moral code. In fact I would go so far as to say you are deliberately misrepresenting me here. (I refer you to post 7 on page 2 of this thread).
That the Mosaic law documents some moral codes is not in dispute - which is why I dismissed it out of hand. Are you claiming that Mosaic law is the origin of these moral codes? What does the fact that Mosaic law documents them indicate? What is your actual argument?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116939
04 Apr 13
2 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadI believe morality can only originate from God; I believe this because I'm a theist and that is my view based on the 'religion' I follow. I accept the Biblical record of this as some evidence that there was a social moral construct in place by the adherents of the religion which I now I follow and it is this which has influenced much of the 'common morality' exhibited today. It is my view and my opinion; I have no doubt you disagree and whilst you are entitled to do so, your disagreement has no bearing on what I believe. I don't think atheism contributes anything at to society, let alone to morality and I accept that you accept the latter (at least).
I still want clarification as to whether you consider say the commandment not to make a graven image of God to be part of morality. If not, why not? It is not at all clear what your definition of morality really is.
I clearly stated that I do not consider atheism to be a philosophy nor do I believe atheism has contributed to the construction of our moral ...[text shortened]... codes? What does the fact that Mosaic law documents them indicate? What is your actual argument?
Originally posted by divegeesterSo what are your views on the Chinese and their morality? Did they too get it from your religion? Or are the Chinese largely immoral?
I accept the Biblical record of this as some evidence that there was a social moral construct in place by the adherents of the religion which I now I follow and it is this which has influenced much of the 'common morality' exhibited today.
It is my view and my opinion;
But at least some of it is also a concrete statement about the world, and should, at least in theory, be verifiable one way or the other.
I have no doubt you disagree and whilst you are entitled to do so, your disagreement has no bearing on what I believe.
And if I present facts contrary to your beliefs? Will you simply ignore them?
I don't think atheism contributes anything at to society, let alone to morality and I accept that you accept the latter (at least).
I accept the former too. I do not believe atheism is a philosophy and do not expect it to contribute to society. Atheists on the other hand are another matter. I also believe that secular morality is superior to theistic morality and contributes more to society.
I also believe theism contributes both positively and negatively to society and that the overall contribution is negative.
04 Apr 13
Originally posted by divegeesteratheism is a way of thinking in the exact manner as not being a canibal is a philosophy and a way of thinking.
I think I've been completely coherent in this thread; unlike your little rant here where you claim I'm saying things which in fact I haven't.
However, I do think atheism is a philosophy and way of thinking; you may disagree of course.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116939
Originally posted by twhitehead[/b]I have no views on the Chinese per-se, except that the government has a history of persecuting Christians, which is of course immoral.
So what are your views on the Chinese and their morality? Did they too get it from your religion? Or are the Chinese largely immoral?
[b]It is my view and my opinion;
But at least some of it is also a concrete statement about the world, and should, at least in theory, be verifiable one way or the other.
I have no doubt you disagree and whils ibutes both positively and negatively to society and that the overall contribution is negative.
I don't see why I should verify my view of the world to you or anyone else. I live a life inside the law of the land and within the social norms of the UK. Perhaps you should provide some verification of your concrete atheistic position? Although I'm not really interested, I'm just making a point.
I do think that atheism is or at least for some can be a philosophy. you have still not addressed my evidence(4 times now) for this regarding posters here stating that they come here to convert theists and have done so and are proud of it. Surely this is a mind-set and proselyting philosophy.
I disagree with you about 'secular morality'; although I am more than happy to look at [short] facts that you deem contrary to my beliefs. You should remember though that your personal opinion means very little to me, as I'm sure mine does to you.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116939
04 Apr 13
Originally posted by ZahlanziThere are several atheists who have stated in this forum that their purpose in being here is to contend with theists and hopefully turn them to atheists. How would you classify this mind-set and behavior?
atheism is a way of thinking in the exact manner as not being a canibal is a philosophy and a way of thinking.
Originally posted by divegeesterSo when you said "the 'common morality' exhibited today" you were really talking about predominantly Christian nations? Or possibly predominantly Muslim nations to? So maybe about 2/3 rds of the world?
I have no views on the Chinese per-se, except that the government has a history of persecuting Christians, which is of course immoral.
I don't see why I should verify my view of the world to you or anyone else.
And nobody has said you should. Its really up to you.
I live a life inside the law of the land and within the social norms of the UK.
And I totally fail to see the relevance.
Perhaps you should provide some verification of your concrete atheistic position? Although I'm not really interested, I'm just making a point.
And I don't get your point at all.
I do think that atheism is or at least for some can be a philosophy.
It think it is entirely possible, but it is hardly widespread. I have never met or talked to anyone for whom it is.
you have still not addressed my evidence(4 times now) for this regarding posters here stating that they come here to convert theists and have done so and are proud of it.
What needs addressing? I fully admit that I would de-convert theists given a chance. I clearly stated in this thread that I believe theism is detrimental to society.
Surely this is a mind-set and proselyting philosophy.
Maybe so, but it is not atheism. If I convince you that Christianity is wrong, I am not preaching atheism nor proselytising atheism as a philosophy/religion, I am rather showing that the Christian religion is false.
I have a neighbor (teenager) who had been told by his pastor that the earth was about 6000 years old, and evolution was all lies etc etc. I explained some of the problems with young earth creationism. Several months later he said to me he had given it some thought and was considering 'believing in evolution'. My response was that I don't want him to believe in evolution. I want him to study science, and one of the things he will learn about in science is evolution. I don't even want him to believe his teachers when they teach it. I want him to understand it, and decide for himself whether it makes sense. If I am proselytising anything it is the scientific method and critical thinking.
But even if you convince me that my proselytising can correctly be called a atheist philosophy, it is still unrelated to my morality.
Originally posted by divegeester
Those were indeed the words I used, I apologise for jumping on you.
Here is what I meant by those words:
to believe that their is no god is to deny the moral code which is laid down by god i.e. the relevant 10 commandments and therefore we can make our own morality or indeed do as we please, whatever seems right to us.
What I thought you were ac ...[text shortened]... re more 'moral' than some Chrisitans - and I think I actually said that in a subsequent post.
to believe that their is no god is to deny the moral code which is laid down by god i.e. the relevant 10 commandments and therefore we can make our own morality or indeed do as we please, whatever seems right to us.
No, to believe that there is no god is to believe that the concept 'god' is not instantiated; has no referent; fails to pick out anything actual. This implies nothing about morality.
Of course, an atheist will not have recourse to say that morality hinges on the existence of some god(s). But so what? If your claim is that any ethical theory that does not appeal to some god as an inherent feature is bankrupt, then you need to present an actual argument for that if you want to be taken seriously. As I mentioned in another current thread, though, this claim is ludicrous, as anyone with any educational background in secular ethics knows. As I also mentioned in the other thread, just the opposite is more likely the case (i.e., it is more likely that your theory that hinges on a divine agent is bankrupt), pace the Euthyphro dilemma.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116939
Originally posted by LemonJelloI am reading what you are writing here, (although I am certainly not as well read in 'secular ethic' theory as you are - however you should not assume that that means I will defer to your opine views which are dependent upon it. I am interested in your pov; however my theistic pov informs me that God determines (if you like) the molecular components of ethics and "morality" and that all we see nowadays, all we exhibit in our daily lives is a socialism primarily constructed from the ingredients which my God provided. Your firmly held lack of belief in my God does not dilute my pov, but I accept your right to hold it of course.to believe that their is no god is to deny the moral code which is laid down by god i.e. the relevant 10 commandments and therefore we can make our own morality or indeed do as we please, whatever seems right to us.
No, to believe that there is no god is to believe that the concept 'god' is not instantiated; has no referent; fails to pi ...[text shortened]... ikely that your theory that hinges on a divine agent is bankrupt), pace the Euthyphro dilemma.