Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Blasphemy Challenge
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 46 of 134 (382677)
02-05-2007 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by anastasia
02-05-2007 6:37 PM


anastasia writes:
If morality is learned from generation to generation, it is indeed relative to that generation, and not retro-active.
I have not said that morality is "retroactive". Why do you harp on that?
I have had no explanation in any other thread, save that of 'mal-function' which is quickly denied.
That's the explanation. Your denial doesn't make it go away.
Mosquitoes are irrelevent to any discussion of atheism....
They are entirely relevant.
Again: Your claim was that "morality comes first, then immorality". I countered that amorality comes first - witnessed by the fact that "lower" forms of life have no "moral sense".
Morality is learned. You have not countered that.
"Immorality" is nothing but a malfunction in the learning process. You have not countered that.
I'm claiming that amorality/morality is analogous to atheism/theism. You have done nothing but handwaving to counter the validity of the analogy.
Again: I'm claiming that atheism is the natural state - witnessed by the fact that "lower" forms of life have no "god sense".
I'm claiming that theism is learned. You have not countered that.
Edited by Ringo, : Spelling.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 6:37 PM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 7:33 PM ringo has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5953 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 47 of 134 (382689)
02-05-2007 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by ringo
02-05-2007 7:08 PM


Ringo writes:
I have not said that morality is "retroactive". Why do you harp on that?
Because you keep insisting that things that happened in the past were immoral? Either they were, and we hadn't realized it yet, or they weren't, because we hadn't learned this yet. If you choose the latter, you admit that there IS something to be learned which is beyond wht HAS BEEN learned.
Which is better;
Slavery USED TO BE right, now is not, and may be again, or;
Slavery NEVER was right, and never will be, no matter what we learn?
That's the explanation. Your denial doesn't make it go away.
It was never my denial, it was a denial on the part of the proclaimant. Sooooooooooooo, immorality is a mal-function, yet morality is not real. There is no way to actually tell who is 'mal-functioning' except by some weird general concensus about what is 'normal'. and 'normal' changes from generation to generation. A hero is not normal, and is therefore mal-functioning extremely, yet can not claim any more glory for his mal-function than a criminal can claim guilt.
Again: I'm claiming that atheism is the natural state - witnessed by the fact that "lower" forms of life have no "god sense".
And higher forms do? Well, duh. That means that atheism is not the natural state for humans, because we DO have 'god sense'. If you are comparing atheists to mosquitoes, as lower form of life, well, that is on you. As it stands, atheists have a 'god-sense' or they couldn't begin to deny God any more than a mosquito could.
Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by ringo, posted 02-05-2007 7:08 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by ringo, posted 02-05-2007 7:55 PM anastasia has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5953 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 48 of 134 (382691)
02-05-2007 7:38 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Doddy
02-05-2007 6:43 PM


Good lord. Theism acknowledges God, atheism must use 'God' to say it does not believe in God. I am only asking for someone to come up with a word for people who don't need to put God in the equation at all. Ringo has...they are 'lower forms of life'. Things which have no 'god sense'.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Doddy, posted 02-05-2007 6:43 PM Doddy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by kuresu, posted 02-05-2007 7:46 PM anastasia has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 49 of 134 (382692)
02-05-2007 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by anastasia
02-05-2007 7:38 PM


you're asking forthe inane. how does a person who doesn't play the bass relate that to others? he is "not a bassist". or "don't play any instruments".
how do I tell someone I don't believe in god? just like that. you have to use the word. it's like trying to say you don't like sugar, without saying "i don't like sugar".
do you just not like us (who don't believe) saying god?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 7:38 PM anastasia has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 50 of 134 (382693)
02-05-2007 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by anastasia
02-05-2007 2:30 PM


quote:
So, how does one blaspheme against the gods of atheism? I really wouldn't worry too much.
Er, what about all of the other gods of all the other religions of the world, ana?
Aren't you indoctrinating children to blaspheme all those other gods when you teach them any religion from a very young age, before they are cognitively able to really choose what to believe, or if to believe at all?
quote:
We all have time to un-believe, and if we don't, we haven't missed much.
That is a very disdainful attitude towards all of the people who have been damaged by religious upbringing.
I'd also say that a lot of people who believe for much of their life actually do miss out on a great deal of what life has to offer.
quote:
It takes a life-time to reach even a tenth of the perfection christianity asks of us, and only one moment to give it up. And it is not really challenging to teach atheism. Most so called 'christian' parents are doing a fine job of that already.
The point you are avoiding, ana, is the indoctrination of very young children in a religious belief before they are old enough to make a real choice.
What do you think would happen if religious instruction began at age 13 when a child is capable of critical thinking, instead of at age 2, when they are not?
Religious indoctrination of children is just like any other indoctrination, like racism or sexism.
To imply that it only "takes a moment" for a person raised to think blacks are inferior to whites or that women are inferior to men to "give it up" shows that you have no idea of the incredible power such indoctrination has over the psyches of people.
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 2:30 PM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 8:05 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 51 of 134 (382695)
02-05-2007 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by anastasia
02-05-2007 5:13 PM


quote:
An atheist is what you call a person who can't describe themselves without first acknowledging God. The name says it all.
No, an atheist is every person on the planet right up until they are taught to believe in the supernatural by somebody else, usualy when they are a defenseless child.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 5:13 PM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 8:11 PM nator has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 52 of 134 (382697)
02-05-2007 7:55 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by anastasia
02-05-2007 7:33 PM


anastasia writes:
... "lower" forms of life have no "god sense".
And higher forms do?
No, I don't think they do. But some of them think they do.
That means that atheism is not the natural state for humans, because we DO have 'god sense'.
I am saying that theism is something "unnatural" that is learned - like, say, drinking alcohol. Those who never learn are atheists.
I think that makes sense because learning is a process that we understand fairly well.
You are saying that atheism is "unnatural" in that there is something "missing". I think that doesn't make sense unless you can explain what the "god sense" is and how it is removed from some people.
As it stands, atheists have a 'god-sense' or they couldn't begin to deny God any more than a mosquito could.
But most of them don't deny God, any more than a mosquito does.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 7:33 PM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 8:27 PM ringo has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5953 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 53 of 134 (382699)
02-05-2007 8:05 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by nator
02-05-2007 7:46 PM


nator writes:
Er, what about all of the other gods of all the other religions of the world, ana?
Yes, the 'blasphemy challenge' has a long way to go. God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the tip of the iceberg, and not even recognized as gods in every form of christianity.
Aren't you indoctrinating children to blaspheme all those other gods when you teach them any religion from a very young age, before they are cognitively able to really choose what to believe, or if to believe at all?
Indoctrinating someone to blaspheme? Blasphemy is not a doctrine in any religion. You are a great example of the ability to choose after-the-fact. Choice is always available. What we choose should never be the final answer.
That is a very disdainful attitude towards all of the people who have been damaged by religious upbringing.
I'd also say that a lot of people who believe for much of their life actually do miss out on a great deal of what life has to offer.
Like what? Fornication without guilt? I say people who don't believe miss out on the most beautiful expressions of art, poetry, music, and language that the human mind has ever been capable of.
The point you are avoiding, ana, is the indoctrination of very young children in a religious belief before they are old enough to make a real choice.
What do you think would happen if religious instruction began at age 13 when a child is capable of critical thinking, instead of at age 2, when they are not?
I would think it was normal, about the age of bar and bat mitzvah's, confirmations, etc, not the age of potty-training.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by nator, posted 02-05-2007 7:46 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by crashfrog, posted 02-05-2007 8:12 PM anastasia has replied
 Message 59 by nator, posted 02-05-2007 8:30 PM anastasia has not replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5953 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 54 of 134 (382701)
02-05-2007 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by nator
02-05-2007 7:49 PM


nator writes:
No, an atheist is every person on the planet right up until they are taught to believe in the supernatural by somebody else, usualy when they are a defenseless child.
That makes noooooo sense because every person on the planet has had enough 'god-sense' to make a religion since the beginning of recorded time. You can't find a single culture that has not recognized some type of deity, and still claim to be human.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by nator, posted 02-05-2007 7:49 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by crashfrog, posted 02-05-2007 8:15 PM anastasia has replied
 Message 57 by nator, posted 02-05-2007 8:23 PM anastasia has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 55 of 134 (382702)
02-05-2007 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by anastasia
02-05-2007 8:05 PM


I say people who don't believe miss out on the most beautiful expressions of art, poetry, music, and language that the human mind has ever been capable of.
Really? I've had the privilege to travel the world and see, first hand, much of Europe's greatest masterpieces of art, music, and architecture; as an English major I studied the great poets of my language (and translations of others.)
Not a single time do I recall a sign at the door saying "you must believe this much to enter." Your assertion that the beauty and meaning of art are inaccessible to any but the religious is demonstratively false. Indeed, if anything is true, the beauty of art is heightened for the atheist, because we believe those works to be the creations of humans every bit as flawed and ephemeral as ourselves; not breathed from high heaven by a God who surely could be doing something better with his time than telling Michaelangelo how to paint a ceiling.
Religion does not have the corner on experiencing beauty, and your arrogant presumption to the contrary is wrong-headed, ignorant, and quite frankly, deeply insulting. I suspect you've never really known any atheists at all, have you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 8:05 PM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 8:36 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 56 of 134 (382703)
02-05-2007 8:15 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by anastasia
02-05-2007 8:11 PM


That makes noooooo sense because every person on the planet has had enough 'god-sense' to make a religion since the beginning of recorded time.
It doesn't take "god-sense." Making up a deity is how the ignorant make sense of phenomena they don't understand (an effort starkly pointed out by the emerging religion of "Ana", the goddess of anorexics. Of course, make up a goddess of anorexia, you're labeled "crazy." Make up a god, and you're labeled "holy.")
Of course, making up a religion is how the unscrupulous make money. "God-sense" has nothing to do with it. I'd say most religions have a lot more to do with OCD.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 8:11 PM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 8:40 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 99 by Jazzns, posted 02-06-2007 11:58 AM crashfrog has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 57 of 134 (382707)
02-05-2007 8:23 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by anastasia
02-05-2007 8:11 PM


quote:
That makes noooooo sense because every person on the planet has had enough 'god-sense' to make a religion since the beginning of recorded time. You can't find a single culture that has not recognized some type of deity, and still claim to be human.
Racism has always existed in every human society too.
Does that mean that we are all racists when we are born and we would all be racists even if nobody ever taught us to be?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 8:11 PM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 8:48 PM nator has not replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5953 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 58 of 134 (382709)
02-05-2007 8:27 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by ringo
02-05-2007 7:55 PM


Ringo writes:
No, I don't think they do. But some of them think they do.
You claim to be human. You have a 'god-sense' or we wouldn't be having this discussion. There is no 'thinking' we do about it. Whether you think humans have a god-sense or not is bunk, because you are discussing one.
I am saying that theism is something "unnatural" that is learned - like, say, drinking alcohol. Those who never learn are atheists.
So, is christianity a crutch or an indulgence, huh? You know, alcoholism is not learned, but genetic, so they say. If only they could find a gene which explains all of this 'unnatural' tendency towards religion, and quit focusing on the unnatural tendencies towards homosexuality. So, atheism is normal. Asexuality is normal. Amorality is normal. We are all mal-functioning minorities. I will remember this.
But most of them don't deny God, any more than a mosquito does.
But the ones in this topic DO, and if atheism wants to have a name for itself, it will speak out against these outrages. Where are all the atheists who denounce having to mention a God they don't believe in?
Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by ringo, posted 02-05-2007 7:55 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by crashfrog, posted 02-05-2007 8:38 PM anastasia has replied
 Message 62 by ringo, posted 02-05-2007 8:40 PM anastasia has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 59 of 134 (382710)
02-05-2007 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by anastasia
02-05-2007 8:05 PM


quote:
Like what? Fornication without guilt?
No, like not having their genitals mutilated, or freedom from self-hatred because they are homosexual, or a woman. Or freedom from the fear of eternal damnation. Or freedom from the fear of knowledge.
What do you think would happen if religious instruction began at age 13 when a child is capable of critical thinking, instead of at age 2, when they are not?
quote:
I would think it was normal, about the age of bar and bat mitzvah's, confirmations, etc, not the age of potty-training.
So that means no claims about the existence of God, no attendance at temple or church, no celebrations of any religious holidays, no endorsement of any religion at all, until the age of 13.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by anastasia, posted 02-05-2007 8:05 PM anastasia has not replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5953 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 60 of 134 (382711)
02-05-2007 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by crashfrog
02-05-2007 8:12 PM


Crashfrog writes:
Not a single time do I recall a sign at the door saying "you must believe this much to enter." Your assertion that the beauty and meaning of art are inaccessible to any but the religious is demonstratively false. Indeed, if anything is true, the beauty of art is heightened for the atheist, because we believe those works to be the creations of humans every bit as flawed and ephemeral as ourselves; not breathed from high heaven by a God who surely could be doing something better with his time than telling Michaelangelo how to paint a ceiling.
Ok, so now the Bible is not the only thing inspired by God, but also art?
I do make a claim for art...it is an expression of an ideal. The human mind has to leave its petty survival instincts behind to contemplate something which is beautiful. You may not recognize God, but you surely must recognize something beyond reality to fully appreciate art.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by crashfrog, posted 02-05-2007 8:12 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by nator, posted 02-06-2007 8:33 AM anastasia has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024