Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Problems with being an Atheist (or Evolutionist)
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 76 of 276 (538778)
12-10-2009 2:40 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by Perdition
12-09-2009 3:55 PM


Re: The end is the end, kinda sad eh
On the flip side, I've had people ask me, in all seriousness, why I don't believe in an afterlife if it makes me sad to think thee isn't one, and I can only answer, "Because my wanting it doesn't make it so. I wish I had enough money that I could quit work and explore the world. I wish no one had to suffer. I wish there was an afterlife where I could keep watch on the world. But every single one of these wishes has the exact same effect on reality, and I can't make myself believe in something."
I also do not believe in the supernatural nor in an afterlife. I don't absolutely deny the possibility; I just cannot give the ideas much credence.
As I have tried to deal with the sudden death of a member of my immediate family seven years ago, my counselor and friends had tried to get me to believe in an afterlife so that I could generate within myself the false hope of being with him again. Sorry, but such self-delusion is very difficult to achieve through conscious effort. I would always know that I was trying to fool myself, so I would not be able to. I think that someone even tried to convert me to Christianity so that I could believe in meeting him again in the afterlife, but since that theology would have him damned for eternity, the thought of conversion is made infinitely more repulsive.
Now, as I understand it, the reason why the Mormons are so keen on genealogy is because in their theology you can convert your ancestors posthumously, that religion would in this case have more appeal to me. Though I had to suffer through the results of their having taken over Boy Scouts of America (BSA), Inc, so becoming a Mormon is extremely low on my list -- I would much rather become a rabid fundamentalist than a Mormon; for one thing, if I were to become a fundamentalist, I would constantly take my fellow fundies to task most severely for relying on the lies and deceptions of "creation science". In fact, Romney was the first time that I would have let the candidate's religion be a deciding factor in rejecting him -- knowing how much the Mormons have screwed up Scouting in the USA, it's horrifying to think of how much a Mormon President could screw up this country.
But still, the bottom line is that since I do not believe in the supernatural, I would need to deceive myself in order to believe in the afterlife. I can't see how I could pull it off.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Perdition, posted 12-09-2009 3:55 PM Perdition has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 77 of 276 (538779)
12-10-2009 3:39 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Bolder-dash
12-10-2009 1:52 AM


Re: If one really ponders...
I do realize that time-zone differences come into play here. You're undoubtedly starting your day whereas I'm staying up way too late, especially since I must get up even earlier tomorrow than usual. So this is based on a cursory reading of your very recent response, a more careful reading having to wait until I've had a night of sleep.
Herein we see a very common sentiment from atheists. That the "Christian" community has attacked them unfairly, and thus we see the moral superiority of the athiest.
Uh, no attempt was made to try to establish any moral superiority. Rather, my point was that Christian doctrine does not even promote any moral sense. An atheist must deal with reality, whereas the Christian only has what he's being taught by his religious leaders.
And, yes, Christians do attack atheists unfairly. All the time. Because they really have no idea what atheism is about.
Taken alongside his previous comments about Christians ...
OK, precisely which comments are you talking about? In this thread? In others? Please be specific. Otherwise, how could I possibly respond if I have no idea what you are talking about?
. . . or being able to escape the consequences of morality, it . . .
Sorry, but it's something that we repeatedly witness Christians doing. It's not my choice, but rather the Christians'. I cannot speak for why they persist in doing it; I can only observe them doing it and futilely asking them why.
. . . , it shows a clear picture of one believing that atheism is more palatable based on the distaste one has for their perception of a particular religion.
Honesty is much more palatble than lies. Honesty is much more palatable than deception. Since fundamentalist Christianity (which is a somewhat different beast than is "mainstream Christianity"; it is fundamentalist Christianity that employs "creation science" and other such fringe beliefs that places them on the fringe where they can only exist through lies and deceptions.
I have no problem with honest religions. What kind of religion is yours? Considering that you're keeping it secret in order to manufacture some kind of advantange. That reveals you as being deceptive and manipulative. You must immediately reveal it (as I will develop further below).
The problem with this (amongst other problems) is that I haven't even made ONE single reference to Christianity in my previous posts, nor have I professed anything about my own spiritual beliefs,
OK, so tell us here and now! Just what exactly is your religious position? If not Christian then exactly what?
Most of the grief that atheists get in the USA is from Christians, therefore, that is the very first source that we suspect of such grief that gets dished out to us. If you are not a Christian, then what exactly are you and why does that make you say false such things about atheists?
Please understand that I have been involved in the so-called "creation/evolution controvery" (so-called because it is almost purely a creationist fabrication) for about three decades now. I have seen your exact same protestation of "but I haven't even revealed my own personal religious leanings yet" several times in the past. In each and every other time that individual turned out to a fundamentalist Christian. So then, my friend, just what the frak are you?
... and most importantly nor have I made even one single assertion about any atheists morality
Uh, no! You have rather specifically indicated that atheists should not have any basis for morality. That is very directly and vehemently impugning us!
. . . -but have instead posed a question that based on an atheists belief that all of life is just a random occurrence of proteins, where do they believe their morality is inspired from.
But atheists do not in fact believe that "all of life is just a random occurrence of proteins". We do tend to accept evolution, but that is not by any stretch of the imagination a belief that "all of life is just a random occurrence of proteins".
So just where did you get that nonsense from? If nothing else, it demonstrates that you have absolutely no understanding about atheism, let alone evolution. Just exactly from where did you get your misunderstanding of atheism? Please identify your religious community! Failure to do so immediately will signal your intent to deceive us further.
That he would be so defensive and fabricate assertions about my own believes based on nothing ("I do realize that you got a lot of help from your religious community in forming that wildly distorted and utterly false view"-well, interesting that you do realize this, because I hadn't realized that my relgious community which doesn't exist, gives me false views that also don't exist!) shows a clear origin of his own stance-which is probably not unique only to this one atheist.
Again, we are many different cultures and many different political situations. I am an American who lives in the USA. You are in China who lives as ... what exactly? You have never told us that and so far want to keep that a secret from us! In the society of the USA, Christians have an inordinate amount of influence, to the degradation of atheists (the second most hated group in the USA; we used to be the most hated, but since 9/11 the Muslims have taken that slot, with the three most hated groups being Muslims, atheists, and Mormons, in that order). Furthermore, even though US Constitutional law forbids it, fundamentalists in the USA have been trying since the early 1980's to secure more political power for themselves. And most of the attacks against atheists come from Christians. Including attacks exactly identical to your own postings In the USA, we have a saying: "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, sounds like a duck, then it's a duck! You have so far looked, walked, and sounded like a Christian. So then if you are not a Christian, then just what the frak are you? Immediate disclosure is imperative. Failure to answer that question immediately will signal you as a liar and a deceiver.
Also, further discussion of atheism and morality needs to be moved to another thread.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by dwise1, : Oops, wrong button
Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-10-2009 1:52 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 78 of 276 (538848)
12-10-2009 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Bolder-dash
12-09-2009 1:59 PM


Is it just a practical consideration, that by being moral in your own mind, maybe its harder to get in trouble, legal or otherwise. Why have principal if you believe life is just a random mix of proteins? I really can't understand that.
Are you saying you only have morality because you are being watched by God?
How pathetic. Are you a child that doesn't know better?
- Oni
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-09-2009 1:59 PM Bolder-dash has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-10-2009 11:20 PM onifre has not replied

  
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 3630 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


Message 79 of 276 (538854)
12-10-2009 11:20 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by onifre
12-10-2009 9:08 PM


Yes, right, that's what I said, I only have morality because I am being watched by God...I didn't say all of those other things that I actually said, I said what you are telling me that I said, because clearly, complex thoughts are too much for some people to spend time on, so yes, for your level of comprehension, that is exactly what I said (even thought its not at all what I said).
So why do you have morality, it is just a remnant of an ancient survival technique-do you really think you need it to survive? Do you ever cut your hair? There is no difference between you and a rock is there?
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by Bolder-dash, : No reason given.
Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by onifre, posted 12-10-2009 9:08 PM onifre has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by AdminPD, posted 12-11-2009 7:00 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 80 of 276 (538865)
12-11-2009 7:00 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Bolder-dash
12-10-2009 11:20 PM


Off Topic
Your line of discussion is off topic.
Please start another topic if you wish to discuss morality for the religion-free or religious or why anyone has morality.
Thanks for your cooperation
AdminPD

Usually, in a well-conducted debate, speakers are either emotionally uncommitted or can preserve sufficient detachment to maintain a coolly academic approach.-- Encylopedia Brittanica, on debate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-10-2009 11:20 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-11-2009 11:07 PM AdminPD has replied

  
Briterican
Member (Idle past 3949 days)
Posts: 340
Joined: 05-29-2008


Message 81 of 276 (538917)
12-11-2009 2:42 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Stile
12-03-2009 3:38 PM


Re: The end is unknown, kinda exciting
Stile writes:
The fear of death being the end is a subjective problem. Therefore, it is rational to accept subjective (or irrational) answers. As long as we don't forget to acknowledge that we're doing so.
I'd have to disagree, whilst simultaneously thanking you for your reply.
Firstly I don't really fear death as such, or fear that it is the end. I am simply convinced that it is the end. No amount of "second law of thermodynamics" arguments has persuaded me that my counsciousness will continue to exist in ANY shape or form after my death (apart from memories in others minds and in things I might create and leave behind such as art or literature, neither of which constitutes a continued existence for me).
The act of taking an irrational viewpoint so long as I acknowledge I am doing so is a sort of intellectual dishonesty.
In other words, it's a nice thought, but it doesn't work for me.
Stile writes:
It makes me feel better to understand that I'm not "missing knowledge" that is available to me and that I find important. I know I am missing the knowledge, but the fact that this knowledge is unavailable to everyone makes me feel better.
This made me smile hehe. I wish more people acknowledged that they just "don't know". There are exceptions to this rule who purportedly do have access to parts of this unattainable knowledge, Psychics, Prophets, etc

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Stile, posted 12-03-2009 3:38 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Stile, posted 12-23-2009 10:13 AM Briterican has replied

  
Briterican
Member (Idle past 3949 days)
Posts: 340
Joined: 05-29-2008


Message 82 of 276 (538919)
12-11-2009 2:51 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Perdition
12-09-2009 3:55 PM


Re: The end is the end, kinda sad eh
Perdition writes:
I want to know how the world is in a thousand years. I want to know if the human race has solved its pressing issues of the dya so it can finally move on to new pressing matters.
I can relate to this. I am absolutely gutted when I realise that there is no way I will get to know what things are like in 1,000 years. Likewise, there is no direct way to glimpse the distant past. Having said that, we live in interesting times where, within a single generation there are enormous advances in understanding. I'm glad my consciousness has arrived now rather than back when i'd have spent my time as a hunter-gatherer.
Perdition writes:
Because my wanting it doesn't make it so.
Precisely. Most sorts of "afterlife" don't sound like something I would want anyway (especially that icky hell place).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Perdition, posted 12-09-2009 3:55 PM Perdition has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Straggler, posted 12-11-2009 3:05 PM Briterican has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 83 of 276 (538923)
12-11-2009 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Briterican
12-11-2009 2:51 PM


Re: The end is the end, kinda sad eh
I can relate to this. I am absolutely gutted when I realise that there is no way I will get to know what things are like in 1,000 years. Likewise, there is no direct way to glimpse the distant past. Having said that, we live in interesting times where, within a single generation there are enormous advances in understanding. I'm glad my consciousness has arrived now rather than back when i'd have spent my time as a hunter-gatherer.
Ah you cynical pessimist.
I am gonna backup my entire conscious brain to a chip and then have it put in a humanoid robot at a later date. I'll see you in a thousand years.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Briterican, posted 12-11-2009 2:51 PM Briterican has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Briterican, posted 12-11-2009 3:09 PM Straggler has not replied

  
Briterican
Member (Idle past 3949 days)
Posts: 340
Joined: 05-29-2008


Message 84 of 276 (538924)
12-11-2009 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Straggler
12-11-2009 3:05 PM


Immortality via external storage
Straggler writes:
I am gonna backup my entire conscious brain to a chip and then have it put in a humanoid robot at a later date. I'll see you in a thousand years.
Now we're talking. I'll sign up for that. Unfortunately I don't think it will be available within my lifetime and if it was I probably couldn't afford it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Straggler, posted 12-11-2009 3:05 PM Straggler has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Taz, posted 12-11-2009 5:30 PM Briterican has seen this message but not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 85 of 276 (538945)
12-11-2009 5:30 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Briterican
12-11-2009 3:09 PM


Re: Immortality via external storage
Briterican writes:
Now we're talking. I'll sign up for that. Unfortunately I don't think it will be available within my lifetime and if it was I probably couldn't afford it.
Cryonics Institute

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Briterican, posted 12-11-2009 3:09 PM Briterican has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 86 of 276 (538964)
12-11-2009 11:07 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by AdminPD
12-11-2009 7:00 AM


Re: Off Topic
I'm not sure why this is off-topic. The OP, after all, was not about real problems that atheists actually have, but about imaginary problems that some dopey theist made up. I don't see, then, why it should be off-topic to discuss delusions of this nature.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by AdminPD, posted 12-11-2009 7:00 AM AdminPD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by AdminPD, posted 12-12-2009 7:18 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 87 of 276 (539006)
12-12-2009 7:18 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by Dr Adequate
12-11-2009 11:07 PM


Re: Off Topic
quote:
The OP, after all, was not about real problems that atheists actually have, but about imaginary problems that some dopey theist made up. I don't see, then, why it should be off-topic to discuss delusions of this nature.
I agree, but that's not what I see happening.
I don't see participants discussing an imaginary problem made up by theists. I see participants debating the theist about his position on morality. IMO, it's the same as the difference between the Great Debate and the Peanut Gallery.
I see no problem discussing the "No God, No Morals" delusion, but I do see a problem with debating the position of "No God, No Morals".
It has already escalated to rudeness. A new thread needs to be started if they want to get into a morality debate.
Thanks
AdminPD

Usually, in a well-conducted debate, speakers are either emotionally uncommitted or can preserve sufficient detachment to maintain a coolly academic approach.-- Encylopedia Brittanica, on debate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-11-2009 11:07 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 88 of 276 (540232)
12-22-2009 8:25 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee
12-09-2009 10:07 AM


Honour in the unknowable
Jumped Up Chimpanzee writes:
Sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you on this point.
I took longer Work... life... whatever. That's the nice thing about such forums as this. The text doesn't disappear.
"Honour" is an interesting concept. I think that a person can only be "honourable" if others are aware of them and their actions. Otherwise there would be nothing to honour.
An interesting and very strange concept indeed. I agree that otherwise, there would be no one around to judge the honour. However, I find it the most honourable when people do good deeds when they know that no one is going to be aware of their actions. Of course, a conspiricist may say that "honour" was only created to get the gullible to act good for free I suppose it all depends on what you decide your priorities are going to be.
Can honour exist without others being aware to make that judgement? Maybe, maybe not. Does it matter? I don't think so. Pondering too much about whether such-and-such an action is honourable or not removes one from pondering about whether or not they are being good. In which case... it starts to become counter-productive if one is looking to be honourable
Interesting and very strange.
That would imply that the person who makes the most objective and unselfish decisions would have to act purely on what they think is the right decision, completely regardless of what anyone else would think.
What if "being good" is entirely based on what other people think? That is, I believe that good/bad actions are determined by how the people affected by those actions feel afterward. Therefore, in order for me to be good, I cannot do anything "regardless of what anyone else would think."
A truly objective moral decision doesn't seem possible to me. So you may well be right that only subjective decisions can be honourable, although I think we may be coming at it from different angles.
I agree that a truly objective moral decision doesn't seem possible. One, because there doesn't seem to be any absolute morality that anyone can point to and say "there... that's moral!" Even if they did, it would still be a personal, subjective decision to follow such a list or not. Two, in my belief of good/bad, what is moral/good/honourable is entirely dependent on the subjective feelings of those being affected. Since different people react to the same situation in different ways... it is obvious that an objective moral situation is basically impossible.
But, of course, that's just what I think. I cannot prove it. But no one (that I know of) has ever been able to prove any single standard of morality as "the best." Such a thing in itself is also subjective.
I'll ponder it some more!
Please do. I enjoy these conversations. I'm always on the look-out for learning anything that may be "better" or "more good" than what I currently believe to be honourable/good/moral.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee, posted 12-09-2009 10:07 AM Jumped Up Chimpanzee has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee, posted 12-23-2009 9:36 AM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Jumped Up Chimpanzee
Member (Idle past 4942 days)
Posts: 572
From: UK
Joined: 10-22-2009


Message 89 of 276 (540280)
12-23-2009 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Stile
12-22-2009 8:25 PM


Re: Honour in the unknowable
I'll ponder it some more!
Please do. I enjoy these conversations. I'm always on the look-out for learning anything that may be "better" or "more good" than what I currently believe to be honourable/good/moral.
And I'll ponder it some more...
I hope to have this whole issue of morality/honour/good/bad completely tied up very soon - may not be before Christmas though!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Stile, posted 12-22-2009 8:25 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 90 of 276 (540284)
12-23-2009 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Briterican
12-11-2009 2:42 PM


Re: The end is unknown, kinda exciting
Briterican writes:
Firstly I don't really fear death as such, or fear that it is the end. I am simply convinced that it is the end.
If it is a simple "I do not like it" with no fear attached, then the answer is a simple "tought potatoes." And, with all things in life that we cannot control, it is simply a matter of maturity that is required to deal with things we cannot control yet do not like. Are you sure there is no fear attached with your problem of death being the end?
The act of taking an irrational viewpoint so long as I acknowledge I am doing so is a sort of intellectual dishonesty.
I do not mean to say that you must take an irrational viewpoint, for I agree that would be intellectually dishonest. I only say that if you find solace in an irrational viewpoint, then it is okay to do so in this instance (that is, if fear - an irrational issue - is your problem, which it may not be) as long as you acknowledge that it is irrational.
This method is honest in the way that it is also honest to acknowlede that your favourite colour is an irrational choice. It would not be honest to believe that your choice of favourite colour was not a subjective choice dependant on your personal experience/history/inclinations. However, it doesn't sound like you fit the criteria for such a method to get around this issue anyway:
In other words, it's a nice thought, but it doesn't work for me.
Of course, if you do not find solace with such a resolution, then yes, it would be intellectually dishonest for you to force such a position upon yourself, and yes, I agree that such a method for dealing with this issue is not for you.
To me, it sounds like you first need to define what, specifically, your problem is with death being the end. If you are not afraid of it, what is wrong? Do you simply just not like it? Are you extremely attached to some other alternative you can imagine and desire? Wouldn't that be some form of an irrational fear of not-being-able-to-get-what-you-want?
I am having a hard time thinking of a reason why you cannot accept death being the end, and be okay with that, unless you are somehow irrationally averse to that outcome. That is, I do not think it is possible for you to have an objective issue with death being the end. If that is simply the rules of this reality... the way things are, how can there possible be a reality-based, rational objection?
Granted, the irrational aversity may not be fear-based, but then the first step would be to identify what the aversity is based on before trying to tackle how to solve it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Briterican, posted 12-11-2009 2:42 PM Briterican has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Briterican, posted 12-23-2009 2:27 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024