Why religion is dumb - reason 6 (Wasted Life)

Originally posted by RatX
[b]I fail to see why god's being known to us should follow from us asking him for something. Again, why should it be that, knowing everything, god cannot make himself known without prayer?

I could spend a lot of time and type on this, but as I said, prayer isn't about asking, but communicating. Getting to know God. You get to know God by how he answer ...[text shortened]...

As far as I'm concerned, the half-bakedness is pandemic.

There I agree with you...[/b]

What you have utterly failed to take into account is that the list you have displayed is not "people who had the greatest influence for good", but a list of people who have had a positive influence on the world. The two are not the same. Amongst your list, the level of benefit varies dramatically, as does the appertaining of their act to their religion. Gallileo for example went against what many believed to be in the course of correct religious motive. And Joan of Arc? She was probably mental, what good did she bring the world exactly? Apart from being involved in the killing of several thousands of people of course.

Did you cut and paste that list from somwhere?

EDIT: Some of the people on your list can hardly even be considered to have had a 'good' effect at all. Literary; yes, cultural; certainly. Good?

Originally posted by Starrman
What you have utterly failed to take into account is that the list you have displayed is not [b]"people who had the greatest influence for good", but a list of people who have had a positive influence on the world. The two are not the same. Amongst your list, the level of benefit varies dramatically, as does the appertaining of their a ...[text shortened]... be considered to have had a 'good' effect at all. Literary; yes, cultural; certainly. Good?[/b]

Ok... Who have had the greatest influence for good on the world in your opinion? I've mentioned people who created scientific inventions that saved millions of lives (eg. Pasteur) and created humanitarian organisations that continue to save millions and benefit those who suffer (eg. Booth).

In this list are people who changed the world as we know if for the better (and had IMO the greatest influence for good on the planet).

So give me your contesting list.

Originally posted by RatX
Ok... Who have had the greatest influence for good on the world in your opinion? I've mentioned people who created scientific inventions that saved millions of lives (eg. Pasteur) and created humanitarian organisations that continue to save millions and benefit those who suffer (eg. Booth).

In this list are people who changed the world as we know if for th ...[text shortened]... (and had IMO the greatest influence for good on the planet).

So give me your contesting list.

I would not be so presumptious as to nominate anyone for greatest positions of influence. I am happy to give you a list of people I admire and whom I think have had a positive influence on the world, if you so desire.

Originally posted by Starrman
I would not be so presumptious as to nominate anyone for greatest positions of influence. I am happy to give you a list of people I admire and whom I think have had a positive influence on the world, if you so desire.

Sure... have at it. Name the guys you think had the greatest (or great) influence for good for the world.

Originally posted by Starrman
What you have utterly failed to take into account is that the list you have displayed is not [b]"people who had the greatest influence for good", but a list of people who have had a positive influence on the world. The two are not the same. Amongst your list, the level of benefit varies dramatically, as does the appertaining of their a ...[text shortened]... be considered to have had a 'good' effect at all. Literary; yes, cultural; certainly. Good?[/b]

Some of the people on your list can hardly even be considered to have had a 'good' effect at all.

Goodness presupposes some external standard of measuring it. What pray is the atheist standard of goodness?

Originally posted by Halitose

Goodness presupposes some external standard of measuring it. What pray is the atheist standard of goodness?

Yes, goodness is a ridiculous concept, implying a constant effort to be good. Why bother attempting to measure it?

Originally posted by RatX
Sure... have at it. Name the guys you think had the greatest (or great) influence for good for the world.

Yes. Oh, and Starrman...please don't simply copy n' paste that list, mmmmkay?

Originally posted by David C
Yes. Oh, and Starrman...please don't simply copy n' paste that list, mmmmkay?

That wouldn't be the exact same list that....the other day...no....

Originally posted by Halitose
Goodness presupposes some external standard of measuring it. What pray is the atheist standard of goodness?

The atheist can appeal to the same ethical theory as the theist, with the exception of Divine Command. But of course, everyone already knows that the Divine Command Theory is the most ridiculously absurd thing ever. Halitose, since you support the DCT: upon which horn of the Euthyphro Dilemma should I look in order to inspect your impaled, bloodied remains?

Originally posted by LemonJello
The atheist can appeal to the same ethical theory as the theist, with the exception of Divine Command. But of course, everyone already knows that the Divine Command Theory is the most ridiculously absurd thing ever. Halitose, since you support the DCT: upon which horn of the Euthyphro Dilemma should I look in order to inspect your impaled, bloodied remains?

The atheist can appeal to the same ethical theory as the theist, with the exception of Divine Command.

Ah, an expert. Which ethical theory does the theist appeal to?

But of course, everyone already knows that the Divine Command Theory is the most ridiculously absurd thing ever.

Argumentum ad populum? I knew I could count on you to bring the DCT up.

Halitose, since you support the DCT:

You assume too much...

upon which horn of the Euthyphro Dilemma should I look in order to inspect your impaled, bloodied remains?

Argumentum in terrorem? I hope I'm not biting off more than I can chew, but state your version of the dilemma and we might yet make an interesting thread of this one, eh HG?

Originally posted by LemonJello
The atheist can appeal to the same ethical theory as the theist, with the exception of Divine Command. But of course, everyone already knows that the Divine Command Theory is the most ridiculously absurd thing ever. Halitose, since you support the DCT: upon which horn of the Euthyphro Dilemma should I look in order to inspect your impaled, bloodied remains?

Darn! You played me like a fiddle! Touche! A fell for your red herring (once again), hook, line and sinker. Before we get into the DCT debate, I first want you to make an ironclad defence for objective morals in an atheistic world. Once we've wrestled through that one, you can impale me with the Euthyphro Dilemma.

Originally posted by Halitose
[b]The atheist can appeal to the same ethical theory as the theist, with the exception of Divine Command.

Ah, an expert. Which ethical theory does the theist appeal to?

But of course, everyone already knows that the Divine Command Theory is the most ridiculously absurd thing ever.

Argumentum ad populum? I knew I could count on you to b ...[text shortened]... tate your version of the dilemma and we might yet make an interesting thread of this one, eh HG?[/b]

Which ethical theory does the theist appeal to?

It doesn't matter. Those ethical theories that are simultaneously available to the theist and unavailable to the atheist also happen to be loads of dung (e.g., the DCT).

You assume too much...

Oh really? Then please explain this great ethical theory of yours that simultaneously 1. does not depend on your belief in God AND 2. is unavailable to the atheist.

state your version of the dilemma and we might yet make an interesting thread of this one, eh HG?

bbarr has already put together a nice formulation in this forum before:
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=25771

The dilemma lies in the following (modernized) question: “Are morally good acts willed by God because they are morally good, or are they morally good because they are willed by God?”

Originally posted by LemonJello
[b]Which ethical theory does the theist appeal to?

It doesn't matter. Those ethical theories that are simultaneously available to the theist and unavailable to the atheist also happen to be loads of dung (e.g., the DCT).

You assume too much...

Oh really? Then please explain this great ethical theory of yours that simultaneously 1. d ...[text shortened]... by God because they are morally good, or are they morally good because they are willed by God?”[/b]

My resolution of the DCT is essentially the same as Thomas Aquinas's: God commands something because it is good, but the reason it is good is that good is an essential part of God's nature. So goodness is grounded in God's character and merely expressed in His commands. Therefore whatever a good god commands will always be good. Its a marriage between the two horns to create one big one...

So you agree that the atheist has no basis for objective morals, or will I still be getting your response?

Originally posted by Halitose
Darn! You played me like a fiddle! Touche! A fell for your red herring (once again), hook, line and sinker. Before we get into the DCT debate, I first want you to make an ironclad defence for objective morals in an atheistic world. Once we've wrestled through that one, you can impale me with the Euthyphro Dilemma.

I first want you to make an ironclad defence for objective morals in an atheistic world

It would be difficult to be any more objective than a priori principles and pure reason when approaching a discussion concerning the Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals.

Are you suggesting that objective morals cannot exist in the absence of His Greatness and Excellency, God Almighty?

Originally posted by Halitose
My resolution of the DCT is essentially the same as Thomas Aquinas's: God commands something because it is good, but the reason it is good is that good is an essential part of God's nature. So goodness is grounded in God's character and merely expressed in His commands. Therefore whatever a good god commands will always be good. Its a marriage between th ...[text shortened]... ee that the atheist has no basis for objective morals, or will I still be getting your response?

You call that a "resolution"?